「可居之類」形上學的開放性問題

Open Questions in the Metaphysics of Habitable Categories

本文試圖對當前最新的社會性類別形上學爭議，描繪出一個整 體的路徑圖。「可居之類」的形上學爭議所處理的是，何種事實決 定了一個人屬於某個社會類別？譬如：怎樣的事實使得一個人是墨 西哥人、是同志、或是富裕的？本文將這些爭議中不同的立場分為 三大理論陣營，即：常識理論、社會歷史解釋理論，以及展演理論。 文中描述了三者間的主要差異，更指出其各自面臨的關鍵困難與優 勢。作者認為，在說明那些與「可居之類」融合得很好的人時，這 三大理論陣營的差異其實微乎其微；反之，在解釋那些和「可居之 類」無法完美融合的人時，三者間的差異卻有關鍵的影響。本文因 此試著提出一個多元式的進路來調和這三大理論陣營，此分析也能 更適切地處理如：mestizaje (拉美涵化)、變遷、跨界、遷移等間歇 性現象。

My purpose in this text is to offer a general roadmap for navigating most current debates in the metaphysics of social categories regarding what sort of fact it is for a person to inhabit one social category or another-for example, what makes a person Mexican, or gay, or rich. With this goal in mind, I propose classifying the debating positions into three broad camps: common sense theories, socio-historical accounts, and performative theories. I characterise their main differences, identifying the main challenges and achievements of each. I show that for persons well integrated into their categories, the differences between these three broad camps are minuscule, yet become crucial when we try to account for people not so well integrated. Then, I sketch a pluralist proposal that reconciles the three camps I have identified, while doing justice to the challenges presented by interstitial phenomena such as mestizaje, transition, passing, migration, etc.