真實烏托邦？有沒有搞錯？沒錯！本課程的主要目的即是要探討未來真實烏托邦的追尋及其基進的社會學想像。烏托邦一詞，自從Moore的《烏托邦》一書以來，即成為對未來不可能實現理想的海市蜃樓之代名詞，因而烏托邦一詞乃帶有荒誕不經、空中樓閣的貶斥意味，甚至到George Orwell 《1984》一書中更出現「反烏托邦」（dystopia）一詞。「烏托邦」這個詞由兩個希臘語的詞根組成：「沒有」（ou）和「地方、所處」（dopos），在拉丁文中是「子虛烏有之鄉」或「不存在的地方」之意。同時，因為「ou」與「eu」（美好）諧音，所以烏托邦一詞就兼有理想、美好、虛幻、飄邈兩方面的涵義，而展開了烏托邦論述的傳統。此傳統著眼於人的集體存在模式，是「真理」、「正義」、「自由」、「善良」、「幸福」等等的化身，深刻表達了人類企求解決矛盾，建立一個穩定、統一的理想社會之願望。然而，烏托邦一詞也同時具有批判和嘲諷之意，成了「空想」、「不切實際」的代名詞。如我們所知的，Marx即以「烏托邦的社會主義」來嘲諷同時代的社會主義者，並宣稱他自己的理論學說才是「科學的社會主義」。因此，烏托邦一詞就像希臘的雙面神Janus一樣，表達了「美好的願望而沒有現實基礎」之困惑，揭示了理想與現實，此一人類始終面對的基本矛盾。
烏托邦論述形構的系譜學考察，最遠可回溯至公元前八世紀的希伯來先知，和古希臘哲學家的Plato的《理想國》，至Moore的《烏托邦》（1516）達到一個高峰之後，如Rabelais的《巨人傳》、Swift《格列佛遊記》等也都具有烏托邦的要素。另一方面，則有Huxley的《美麗新世界》（1932）及《美麗新世界的再訪》，George Orwell 《1984》（1949）等書所構成的反烏托邦傳統。如果說烏托邦作家以構想美好的社會理論為特點，那麼反烏托邦作家通常不是從社會集體理想，而是從個人理想出發，強調個體性，以維護人的基本人權和拯救人性尊嚴為目的，反烏托邦作家能冷靜地、理智地直面理想與現實的落差，並且企圖拉進和弭合幻想世界與現實世界的時空距離。本課程的中心主旨「真實的烏托邦」，試圖在烏托邦和反烏托邦的對立、並置、矛盾的內在張力中，以社會學的基進想像去追尋一個更符合公義、更平等、更具有「進步」價值的未來社會，此為「真實烏托邦」的烏托邦面向。再者，之所以稱此烏托邦為真實之原因，即在於此烏托邦之基進想像並非無根或空談的浪漫夢囈，而是植基於我們所身處當下的現實為出發點，進行大膽和有創意的社會創新與制度安排／設計，一方面擘畫出未來的遠景；另一方面則提出可行的、可企及的、「由此至彼」的實踐綱領。
循此，本課程將由兩個主要的部分構成：前半部是價值層次的釐清，並以「正義」作為焦點去探討政治哲學中諸神交戰般的道德兩難（譬如自由優位性或平等優位性之論爭、自由主義或社群主義之攻防等）。從政治哲學面切入，探討當今我們所面對的法律或政治上的論戰，要強調的是，價值層面的討論涉及每個人所自覺或不自覺的成見和信念。為了免於參與同學流於立場表述的意氣之爭，本課程希望能打造出彼此互相尊重的道德對話，把理性帶進公共領域，本課程的目的之一正是要參與者進行自我檢視，釐清自己抱持哪些價值信念，和何以抱持這些信念。在此理性思辯下，一個開放和平等的民主對話方有可能和提升，而非僅停留在彼此互嗆的硝煙中。在釐清政治哲學中對正義不同學派之爭論後，本課程將進一步討論Erik Olin Wright在其所編輯的The Real Utopia Project中所提出的系列方案綱領之可行性、其價值根源之所在等議題。
Real utopia? Was there any mistake? That's right! The main purpose of this course is to explore the pursuit of a real utopia in the future and its radical sociological imagination. Since Moore's book "Utopia", the word utopia has become synonymous with the mirage of an impossible future ideal. Therefore, the word utopia has a derogatory connotation of absurdity and castles in the air, even to George Orwell's "1984" The word "dystopia" even appears in one book. The word "Utopia" is composed of two Greek roots: "nothing" (ou) and "place, location" (dopos). In Latin, it means "nowhere" or "a place that does not exist." At the same time, because "ou" and "eu" (beautiful) are homophonic, the word utopia has two meanings: ideal, beautiful, illusory, and ethereal, thus launching a tradition of utopian discussion. This tradition focuses on the collective existence of human beings and is the embodiment of "truth", "justice", "freedom", "kindness", "happiness", etc. It profoundly expresses human beings' desire to resolve conflicts and establish a stable and unified ideal. society's aspirations. However, the word utopia also connotes criticism and ridicule, and has become synonymous with "utopia" and "unrealistic". As we know, Marx used "utopian socialism" to ridicule socialists of his generation, and claimed that his own theoretical doctrine was "scientific socialism". Therefore, the word Utopia, like the Greek double-faced god Janus, expresses the confusion of "good wishes without a basis in reality" and reveals the basic contradiction between ideals and reality, which mankind has always faced.
The genealogical examination of utopian discourse can be traced back as far as the Hebrew prophets of the eighth century BC and the ancient Greek philosopher Plato's "Utopia" to after reaching a peak in Moore's "Utopia" (1516) , such as Rabelais's "Giant" and Swift's "Gulliver's Travels" also have utopian elements. On the other hand, there is the dystopian tradition composed of books such as Huxley's Brave New World (1932) and Brave New World Revisited, and George Orwell's 1984 (1949). If utopian writers are characterized by conceiving beautiful social theories, then anti-utopian writers usually do not start from the social collective ideal, but from the personal ideal, emphasizing individuality, with the purpose of safeguarding people's basic human rights and saving human dignity. Anti-utopian writers Writers can calmly and rationally face the gap between ideals and reality, and try to narrow and bridge the time and space distance between the fantasy world and the real world. The central theme of this course is "Real Utopia", which attempts to use the fundamental imagination of sociology to pursue a more just, more equal, and more "progressive" amidst the inner tension of the opposition, juxtaposition, and contradiction between utopia and dystopia. A future society of value, this is the utopian aspect of "real utopia". Furthermore, the reason why this utopia is called real is that the radical imagination of this utopia is not a rootless or empty romantic dream, but a bold and creative society based on the reality we live in now. Innovation and institutional arrangement/design, on the one hand, outline a vision for the future; on the other hand, they propose a feasible, achievable, "from here to there" practical program.
Following this, this course will be composed of two main parts: the first half is about clarifying the level of value, and using "justice" as the focus to explore the moral dilemmas in political philosophy like the war between gods (such as the superiority of freedom or the superiority of equality). polemics, attacks and defenses of liberalism or communitarianism, etc.). From the perspective of political philosophy, we discuss the legal or political debates we face today. It should be emphasized that discussions on the value level involve everyone’s conscious or unconscious prejudices and beliefs. In order to avoid participating in the disputes of opinions among classmates who focus on expressing their positions, this course hopes to create a moral dialogue that respects each other and bring reason into the public sphere. One of the purposes of this course is to allow participants to conduct self-examination and clarify What values and beliefs do you hold and why do you hold these beliefs? Under this rational thinking, an open and equal democratic dialogue is possible and improved, instead of just staying in the smoke of fighting each other. After clarifying the debates between different schools of justice in political philosophy, this course will further discuss the feasibility of the series of programs proposed by Erik Olin Wright in The Real Utopia Project, edited by him, and the origin of their value.
● Erik Wright著，陸先恒、馬家輝譯，1994，＜墜入馬克思主義、選擇留在馬克思主義陣營＞，收錄於＜當代雜誌＞104期。
● Wright, Erik Olin. 2010. Envisioning Real Utopias. Lodon·New York：Verso Press.（中譯本：Erik Olin Wright著，黃克先譯，2015，《真實烏托邦》。新北市：群學。
● Wright, Erik Olin. 2019. How to Be an Anticapitalist in the Twenty-First Century. Lodon·New York：Verso Press.（中譯本：Erik Olin Wright著，陳信宏譯，2020，《如何在21世紀反對資本主義》。新北市：群學。
電影
● 《寄生上流》
● 《摩登時代》
● 《大都會》
紀錄片
● 《56 up》
● 《美國工廠》
● Erik Wright, translated by Lu Xianheng and Ma Jiahui, 1994, "Falling into Marxism, Choosing to Stay in the Marxist Camp", included in "Contemporary Magazine" Issue 104.
● Wright, Erik Olin. 2010. Envisioning Real Utopias. Lodon·New York: Verso Press. (Chinese translation: Written by Erik Olin Wright, translated by Huang Kexian, 2015, "Real Utopias". New Taipei City: Qunxue.
● Wright, Erik Olin. 2019. How to Be an Anticapitalist in the Twenty-First Century. Lodon·New York: Verso Press. (Chinese translation: Written by Erik Olin Wright, translated by Chen Xinhong, 2020, "How to Be an Anticapitalist in the Twenty-First Century" ". New Taipei City: Qunxue.
Movie
● "Parasite"
● "Modern Times"
● "Metropolis"
Documentary
●《56 up》
● "American Factory"
| 評分項目 Grading Method | 配分比例 Grading percentage | 說明 Description |
|---|---|---|
| 課堂口頭報告課堂口頭報告 Class oral report |
20 | |
| Weekly issue memoWeekly issue memo weekly issue memo |
40 | |
| 期末報告期末報告 Final report |
40 |
