SAE Marriage Theory Paper 2: Each Their Own / SAE 婚姻论 Paper 2: 各自

SAE Marriage Theory Paper 2. This record holds the Chinese text and its English edition. The English edition is an independent rewrite of the Chinese text, not a translation; where the two differ, the Chinese governs. This paper reads the "we" in marriage. People in a marriage say "we" every day: our household, we decided, our money, we love each other. This series first lays down one sentence: you are you, I am I, and only then is there an us. When "we" is said in marriage, it is divided, as in Relation Theory, into two branches: doing things together, and mutual recognition; which branch occurs is checked case by case. Neither branch comes before the two people, nor stands above them; neither legislates, nor passes final judgment on either party's own law; the binding force of rules the two have agreed on passes separately through each one's own law, or comes from a procedure both have already acknowledged. Each person's commitment is still entered separately, by each one's avowal, where each stands and the effects already left, and does not form a third branch of "we." The attribution of meaning lies with each person; the outlet of a direction can lie outside oneself. Where the two are headed in the 15DD direction, the meaning of each of the two people in a marriage belongs to each, and the outlet of the direction falls outside oneself: on the other, letting the other grow into the other's own self; on someone who has not yet come, creating conditions for him together. The directions of two people can cross in one matter done together, while each relation remains anchored in its own bearer, and they do not merge into one; "we" and "the household" do not take in, nor replace, each person's meaning. Whether "the household" can come to stand separately as a bearer, this series does not judge. Recognizing the other as an end too: the other has his own cannot-not, which I only recognize as there, and whose content I cannot read out; I do not make for the other the decisions he can make himself; feelings the other voices I can fail to understand, and I do not deny that he really has them. Even the most intimate marriage has places that cannot be entered: the other's internality, solitude, external relationships and past are the other's own. Non dubito in marriage has both sides: not doubting that oneself is an end, and not doubting that the other is an end; both sides are choices each person makes anew, time after time, not a state a marriage arrives at; non dubito does not require the absence of doubt, nor is it the same as trust. The directions of colonization read from this item are several: entering in the name of intimacy; taking in and replacing one party's direction in the name of "this household" or "for our sake"; borrowing mutual recognition to pass final judgment on something done together; handing one's own meaning to the other for safekeeping, and then demanding it of the other. This paper interfaces with Hegel and Montaigne, and, at the layer of marriage, picks up Nozick, Kant and Baier. This paper does not prove that intimacy requires mutual transparency, nor that keeping places that cannot be entered shows that one loves too little. SAE 婚姻论 Paper 2。本记录收中文正文与英文版;英文版是独立重写,不是翻译,两版不一致处以中文为准。 这一篇读婚姻里的「我们」。婚姻里的人天天说「我们」:我们家,我们决定,我们的钱,我们相爱。这个系列先立一句:你是你,我是我,然后才有我们。婚姻里一说「我们」,照关系论分两支:一起做的事,与相认;哪一支发生,逐件另核。两支都不先于两个人,也不高于两个人,不立法,不终审各自的法;两人说定的规则,约束力分别经过各自的法,或者来自双方已经承认的程序。各人的承诺,仍按各人的认领、站与已经留下的作用分别记,不构成第三支「我们」。 意义的归属在各人,方向的出口可以在自己之外。在 15DD 方向上,婚姻里两个人的意义各归各人,方向的出口落在自己之外:落在对方身上,让对方成长成对方自己;落在一个还没有来的人身上,一起为他创造条件。两个人的方向可以在一件共同做的事上交错,各自的关系仍锚在各自身上,不合成一个;「我们」「家」不收下、也不替下各人的意义。「家」能否另行成立为一个承担者,这个系列不判。 认对方也是目的:对方有对方的不得不,我只认它在,读不出它的内容;不替对方做他能自己做的决定;对方说出的感受,可以不理解,不否定它确实有。再亲密的婚姻也有进不去的地方:对方的内在、独处、外部关系与过去,是对方自己的。婚姻里的不疑两面都在,不疑自己是目的,也不疑对方是目的;两面都是各人一次次重新做出的选择,不是婚姻到达的状态;不疑不要求没有疑惑,也不等于信任。从这一件上读到的殖民方向有几样:以亲密之名进入;以「这个家」「为了我们」之名收下并替下一方的方向;拿相认去终审一件一起做的事;把自己的意义交给对方保管,再向对方要。这一篇与黑格尔、蒙田对接,并在婚姻这一层接诺齐克、康德与拜尔。这一篇不证明亲密就要彼此透明,也不证明保留进不去的地方说明爱得不够。 Related works Relation: Cites · Resource type: Publication / Preprint · Scheme: DOI 10.5281/zenodo.19328662 10.5281/zenodo.22191071 10.5281/zenodo.22313628 10.5281/zenodo.22802041 10.5281/zenodo.22652134 10.5281/zenodo.22731235 10.5281/zenodo.22970783 10.5281/zenodo.23545115 10.5281/zenodo.23545047 10.5281/zenodo.23541778 10.5281/zenodo.23545023 10.5281/zenodo.23545057 10.5281/zenodo.23627762 10.5281/zenodo.23627776 10.5281/zenodo.23627779 10.5281/zenodo.23627781 10.5281/zenodo.23819212