Yao Lin 林垚

@linsantu.bsky.social

957 Followers 281 Following

Philosophy. Political Theory. Comparative Politics. Law. https://philpeople.org/profiles/yao-lin-1/publications

Philosophy as a Normative Discipline Yao Lin Bernard Williams contends that philosophy is part of a broader humanistic enterprise of ‘making sense of’ ourselves and our activities, including the activity of science. Whereas the scientific enterprise purports to offer an absolute conception of the world as it is (independently of any local perspective on it), the humanistic enterprise cannot disengage itself from the contingent history of our ideas upon which it operates. While I agree with Williams that philosophy should be more attentive to history, his account of philosophy, from which he derives this conclusion, is fatally flawed, being unable to meet three perennial challenges to any principled defense of philosophy as a discipline: i.e., the questions of authority, incubativity and peculiarity. Those challenges can be met only if we understand philosophy not as a humanistic discipline that is part of the broader humanistic enterprise, but as a distinctively normative discipline that tasks itself with finding answers to explicitly or implicitly normative questions, in contrast to various scientific and humanistic disciplines of descriptive inquiry. In this paper, I argue for the equivalence of philosophicality with normativity, explicate the theoretical and practical implications of the normative account of philosophy, and defend it against potential objections.
Daniel Bell, The China Model: Political Meritocracy and the limits of democracy. Princeton university press, 2015
My_Penbroke 2mo ago It’s a fitting term, but it’s also a little misleading… We all know Kavanaugh does not, in fact, stop. Even when asked.
TRUMP on soccer vs. football: "When you think about it, shouldn't it really be called, I mean, this is football, there's no question about it. We have to come up with another name for the NFL stuff. It really doesn't make sense when you think about it. This is really football."
ABSTRACT This article redresses the neglect of interregimatic solidarity – solidarity between collective anti-oppression struggles in purportedly antithetical regimes – in transnational feminist scholarship. I argue that authoritarian and demostatist regimatic contexts of oppression give rise to regimatically distinct oppressive kinds, which track their regimatic subjects of oppression respectively, and that this fact significantly increases the risk of interregimatic missolidarization in lieu of interregimatic solidarity. In response, we need to cultivate antiauthoritarian resilience, which is both an epistemic and a moral virtue. Epistemically, it helps us to navigate a world characterized by the dynamics of authoritarian spillover, demostatist sellout, imperial standoff, and capitalist scaleup, to comprehend how regimatic oppressions are interconnected, and to appreciate the practical import of interregimatic solidarity. Morally, antiauthoritarian resilience helps us to discern and discard moral parochialism and cynical moralism, both of which impede the exercise of interregimatic solidarity. I conclude with tentative thoughts on when, for whom, and to what extent interregimatic solidarity is morally obligatory, if its realization depends on cultivating the virtue of antiauthoritarian resilience.
Philosophy as a Normative Discipline Yao Lin Philosophy (forthcoming) Abstract Bernard Williams contends that philosophy is part of a broader humanistic enterprise of “making sense of” ourselves and our activities, including the activity of science. Whereas the scientific enterprise purports to offer an absolute conception of the world as it is (independently of any local perspective on it), the humanistic enterprise cannot disengage itself from the contingent history of our ideas upon which it operates. While I agree with Williams that philosophy should be more attentive to history, his account of philosophy, from which he derives this conclusion, is fatally flawed, being unable to meet three perennial challenges to any principled defense of philosophy as a discipline: i.e. the questions of authority, incubativity and peculiarity. Those challenges can be met only if we understand philosophy not as a humanistic discipline that is part of the broader humanistic enterprise, but as a distinctively normative discipline that tasks itself with finding answers to explicitly or implicitly normative questions, in contrast to various scientific and humanistic disciplines of descriptive inquiry. In this paper, I argue for the equivalence of philosophicality with normativity, explicate the theoretical and practical implications of the normative account of philosophy, and defend it against potential objections.
Is Blood Thicker Than Water(-and-Earth)? Partisanship Geography in Imperial China and the Limits of Quantitative History (Forthcoming in American Political Science Review)
This paper redresses the neglect of interregimatic solidarity—solidarity between collective anti-oppressive struggles in purportedly antithetical regimes—in transnational feminist scholarship. I argue that authoritarian and demostatist regimatic contexts of oppression give rise to regimatically distinct oppressive kinds, which track their regimatic subjects of oppression respectively, and that this fact significantly increases the risk of interregimatic missolidarization in lieu of interregimatic solidarity. In response, we need to cultivate antiauthoritarian resilience, which is both an epistemic virtue and a moral virtue. Epistemically, it helps us navigate a world characterized by the dynamics of authoritarian spillover, demostatist sellout, imperial standoff and capitalist scaleup, comprehend how regimatic oppressions are interconnected, and appreciate the practical import of interregimatic solidarity. Morally, antiauthoritarian resilience helps us discern and discard moral parochialism and cynical moralism, both impeding the exercise of interregimatic solidarity. I conclude with tentative thoughts on when, for whom and to what extent interregimatic solidarity is morally obligatory, if its realization depends on cultivating the virtue of antiauthoritarian resilience.
《催稿拉黑》的听众朋友们好，今年1月22日，我和播客《残言片语》的主持人、残障议题研究者谢仁慈连线，聊了聊安乐死与残障权益之间错综复杂的关系。这期节目已经在《残言片语》上线，我在这里做个备份。《残言片语》是一档从残障视角观察和探讨社会话题的播客，在当代中文公共讨论中极为稀缺，强烈推荐大家关注收听。