话语、权力和自由的辩证空间:福柯主体系谱学的逻辑构成

发布时间：2019-01-20 08:39

【摘要】：在福柯的主体系谱学中,知识考古学通过多元话语秩序的确立意图超越传统主体模式,权力系谱学借由主体-权力的游戏实现了身体主体的转型,自我本体论批判则透过基于自我关切和自我治理的政治学-伦理学-美学力求创构性主体形式的塑造。从根本上看,它们的核心问题始终围绕在如何使主体进入真理游戏之中,都强调主体的全新内在性形式对自我的超越性原则与主体的先天理论的彻底排除,致力于建构一个决定"主体转型的未定条件与可能性"的批判哲学,因而只是一种我们直接面对自身并批判自身的态度。整体而言,福柯不为在恢复某种具备普遍价值的普遍结构形式之基础上重建一种新形而上学的可能,或在思想和生命中展示一个没有界线的绝对自由或纯粹的外在性,而是旨在界划我们自身的界线,并在其内部通过差异化因素的揭露来实施对它们的拆解,充分展示差异性、偶然性、流动性、不确定性和开放性的不断增值,避免普遍性、同一性、必然性和固定性的基础主义运作模式。因此,他对现代性的质问不为在区分现代同前现代和后现代的基础上提供现代性的替代之物,而是意在揭示现代性内部的反现代性因素。这自然与彻底消解普遍性立场的后现代主义事业有着根本不同。
[Abstract]:In Foucault's subject genealogy, knowledge archaeology transcends the traditional subject model through the establishment of multi-discourse order, and power genealogy realizes the transformation of body subject by the game of subject-power. On the other hand, the criticism of self-ontology is based on self-concern and self-governance. Fundamentally, their core problems revolve around how to get the subject into the game of truth, emphasizing the transcendental principle of self and the complete exclusion of the subject's innate theory from the new intrinsic form of the subject. We are committed to constructing a critical philosophy that determines "the uncertain conditions and possibilities of the transformation of the subject", so it is only an attitude in which we face ourselves directly and criticize ourselves. On the whole, Foucault is not concerned with the possibility of re-establishing a new metaphysics on the basis of the restoration of a universal structural form of universal value, or of showing absolute freedom or pure externality in thought and in life, Rather, the aim is to draw our own boundaries, and to uncover them through the disclosures of differentiation factors within them, to fully demonstrate the increasing value of differences, fortuitousness, mobility, uncertainty and openness, and to avoid universality. The basic operating mode of identity, inevitability and fixation. Therefore, his questioning of modernity is not to provide a substitute for modernity on the basis of distinguishing modern from pre-modern and post-modern, but to reveal the anti-modernity factors within modernity. There is a fundamental difference between this nature and the post-modernist cause, which completely dispels the universal position.
【作者单位】：河南大学哲学与公共管理学院;
【分类号】：B565.59

【相似文献】