{"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":77,"pdf_page":132,"physical_index":132,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"f190f910e9f390d5eb276124cd22a6ee2ea35b4f916b9527603e8af0f2cfe8e3"},"chapter":"第一章 暴力性构序:对客体的存在论命名","content":"福柯的全新构境无疑是深刻的。可是，他这里对于物(choses)的思考却也是存在问题的。第一，他无法像从康德、黑格尔直到海德格尔的这个传统那样，区分看起来与人无关的物(Ding)和与人相关的事物(Sache),这一点，受制于法语本身的局限性;第二，正因第一个局限的存在，使他就更无法进一步将那些看起来与人无关的物(Ding)本身确认为向我们存在的“涌现”了。[17]所以,青年福柯在此处与海德格尔的联结仍然是表层化的。福柯在此书中使用这个chose共计363处。这既是这一文本的研究对象之一，也是高频关键词之一。德勒兹也说过，福柯“用物与词这两个词汇来表示知识的两极仍过于模糊”[18]。我觉得，不仅仅是模糊，可以算是有明显的失误。因为，“物”无法涵盖全部存在；并且，“词”既代表不了认识型，更无法透视认识型背后的现实实践力量。\n\n在青年福柯的回忆中，博尔赫斯之所以令他大笑不止，是因为后者提及的这种中国的分类法中显见的无序。“皇帝所有”、“有香味的”、“驯服的”“传说中的”、“数不清的”、“刚刚打破水罐的”这样的动物分类，“丧失了场所和名称共有’的东西”，或者说，恰恰缺失了那张这些动物被摆置其上的同一手术台(共同场所)。如果说，西方有序分类的共同场所建构了一种暴力构序的乌托邦，那么，这种无序的分类法则导致了一种没有空间的思想，没有家园(feu)和共同场所的词与范畴，这就是祛序的“异托邦”\n\n第一章 暴力性构序:对客体的存在论命名\n\n77","previous_page":76,"next_page":78}