{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"1cd40951-874b-4d06-9eea-f6afadf57c08","title":"德勒兹关键概念","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787568912952","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"1cd40951-874b-4d06-9eea-f6afadf57c08","id":"1cd40951-874b-4d06-9eea-f6afadf57c08","uuid":"1cd40951-874b-4d06-9eea-f6afadf57c08","title":"德勒兹关键概念","normalized_title":"德勒兹关键概念","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787568912952","isbns":["9787568912952","9781844652884"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":409,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/1cd40951-874b-4d06-9eea-f6afadf57c08","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%E5%BE%B7%E5%8B%92%E5%85%B9%E5%85%B3%E9%94%AE%E6%A6%82%E5%BF%B5","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/1cd40951-874b-4d06-9eea-f6afadf57c08/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/1cd40951-874b-4d06-9eea-f6afadf57c08/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/1cd40951-874b-4d06-9eea-f6afadf57c08","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/1cd40951-874b-4d06-9eea-f6afadf57c08/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/1cd40951-874b-4d06-9eea-f6afadf57c08/search"},"page":{"printed_page":38,"pdf_page":52,"physical_index":52,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"ff74889c6bbd3b499b2a382760d7e93f1629749419538e383b0f38cba4e1bdd2"},"chapter":"德勒兹：关键概念 （原书第2版）","content":"因此，对于德勒兹而言，这种反资本主义制宪权的本体论必须采取一种力的概念的谱系学形式。不管怎样，它必须以这个谱系学开始，因为尼采和斯宾诺莎是力的“社会物理学”(social physics)之范围与性质的伟大发现者。斯宾诺莎和尼采勾勒的这门“社会物理学”的谱系，在哲学上增强了位于《资本主义与精神分裂》计划之核心的资本主义批判；甚至可以说，如果没有前者，后者将是不可能的。\n\n注释\n\n在紧接着这条引文的前文中，德勒兹说：“在某些方面，歌德甚至黑格尔已经被认为是斯宾诺莎主义者了，但他们并非真正的斯宾诺莎主义者，因为他们从未停止把这项计划和形式的组织及主体的形成联系起来。倒不如说，荷尔德林、克莱斯特、尼采才是斯宾诺莎主义者”(SPP：128-9)。德勒兹论尼采的书是《尼采和哲学》(NP)。\n\n这里要对“力量一权能”这组概念进行区分。斯宾诺莎的用语potentia，法译为puissance，中译为“力量”;斯宾诺莎的另一用语 potestas，法语译为pouvoir，这里译为“权能”。这两个词在斯宾诺莎《伦理学》中译本中未作明确区分，但在德勒兹对斯宾诺莎的解读中，这种区分却有重要意义。德勒兹认为，“力量”是最根本的，它无须意志的参与，而是神的一种本然状态，也就是说，神的“力量”是不具有意向性和目的性的，神就是“力量”本身；“权能”则不然，“权能”(或“性能”)是一种隐而不发的能力或资质，它的实现需要意志的参与，需要在意志的作用下朝着某一个日的或方向展开。德勒兹对此论述如下：\n\n38\n\n30\n\n德勒兹：关键概念(原书第2版)","previous_page":37,"next_page":39}