重省《耶路撒冷的艾希曼》——当下美国学界关于“恶之平庸”的论战

Reflections on Eichmann in Jerusalem——Actual Debates on “Banality of Evil” in American Academia

近年在美国学界,诸种因素促使围绕阿伦特《耶路撒冷的艾希曼》的论战再次升温。争论主要围绕"恶之平庸"这一观点。以马克·里拉、斯坦格内丝以及理查德·沃林为代表的批评者们质疑"恶之平庸"在事实及理论层面的合理性。他们认为,虽然这一观点非常有助于人们思考现代科层制中的人性问题,但以"平庸""无思"来理解艾希曼,却是阿伦特对艾希曼的历史真实面貌的误读。里拉和沃林指出,误读的原因,是阿伦特未能摆脱海德格尔思想的影响,以及她对纳粹之恶"过于复杂的简化"。笔者认为,从"根本恶"转向"恶之平庸",阿伦特的问题在于她大大地缩减了人们理解恶、应对恶——或者说思考人类责任——的问题框架。

During recent years in U.S.A., the controversy over Hannah Arendt＇s book Eichmann in Jerusalem has been beating up again, prompted mainly by Margarethe Von Trotta＇s film Hannah Arendt and the publication in English of Bettina Strangnetb＇s Book Eichmann before Jerusalem. The focus of these debates is the ＂banality of evil.＂ On this issue, The scholars who are critical of Arendt such as Mark Lila, Bettina Stangneth and Richard Wolin casted doubts on the plausibility of the ＂banality of evil＂ in both historical and theoretical aspects. According to these scholars, although Arendt＇s thesis is very inspiring in exploring the problem of humanity in modern bureaucratic society, to understand Eichmann as representing ＂banality of evil＂ and ＂thoughtless＂ is a misjudgment on Eichmann in history. Lila and Wolin considered this misjudgment as the result of Heidegger＇s influence on Arendt and her ＂overly complicated simplification＂ of Nazi＇s evil. This article suggests that Arendt＇s problem lies in the shift of her framework concerning the reflection of the problem of evil.