{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"24db3d42-72f5-4236-8255-80f6ff3283d0","title":"回到福柯 暴力性构序与生命治安的话语构境","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787208136014","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"24db3d42-72f5-4236-8255-80f6ff3283d0","id":"24db3d42-72f5-4236-8255-80f6ff3283d0","uuid":"24db3d42-72f5-4236-8255-80f6ff3283d0","title":"回到福柯 暴力性构序与生命治安的话语构境","normalized_title":"回到福柯暴力性构序与生命治安的话语构境","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787208136014","isbns":["9787208136014"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":611,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/24db3d42-72f5-4236-8255-80f6ff3283d0","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%E5%9B%9E%E5%88%B0%E7%A6%8F%E6%9F%AF%20%E6%9A%B4%E5%8A%9B%E6%80%A7%E6%9E%84%E5%BA%8F%E4%B8%8E%E7%94%9F%E5%91%BD%E6%B2%BB%E5%AE%89%E7%9A%84%E8%AF%9D%E8%AF%AD%E6%9E%84%E5%A2%83","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/24db3d42-72f5-4236-8255-80f6ff3283d0/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/24db3d42-72f5-4236-8255-80f6ff3283d0/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/24db3d42-72f5-4236-8255-80f6ff3283d0","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/24db3d42-72f5-4236-8255-80f6ff3283d0/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/24db3d42-72f5-4236-8255-80f6ff3283d0/search"},"page":{"printed_page":250,"pdf_page":305,"physical_index":305,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"634767c76a5a49e264ed0a5f2170a003fdfc7aa4b369992174996e806a8117bd"},"chapter":"第七章 塑形：从认识型到话语事件场的转变","content":"青年福柯断言，在原创性的意义上看，被我们视为同质物的所有文本其实都“不能自我表白,它只能建立在一种话语的复杂场境(champcomplexede discours)之上”[3]。我注意到，福柯在此文本中160次使用 champ 一词，远远超出他在《词与物》一书中的频次。这说明champ在福柯此时的思想构境中的重要地位。据马舍雷的辨识，康吉莱姆最早在科学史研究中说明场(champ)的方法论观念的重要性，并讨论过“技术场、想象场、科学场之间或科学场与非科学场—比如实践的、技术的或意识形态的非科学场—之间的交涉”[4]。还应该指出,福柯此处使用的这个话语场(champ de dis-cours)极为重要！我以为，超出作者的微观层面，它将取代福柯在《词与物》一书中起关键作用的那个认识型！多斯和哈贝马斯关于“福柯在《认知考古学》一书中放弃了认识型的概念”[5]的判断是不准确的，其实，福柯在该书里只是弱化了认识型概念的作用。书中，福柯仍然14次使用épistémè一词。这让我们联想到福柯在《什么是作者?》那个演讲中的相近观点，如果那里是在讨论主体性的作者在言说和写作中的消失，那么这里则进一步推进到文本的非主体性了，文本的自为性在于它背后的构境式的话语场。这也说明我们在前面的附文中对《什么是作者？》演讲的定位是基本准确的，那个演讲正是此书此处的深刻构境式转换的预热。\n\n回到福柯\n\n250","previous_page":249,"next_page":251}