{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd","title":"现代性的哲学话语","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787544715829","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd","id":"296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd","uuid":"296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd","title":"现代性的哲学话语","normalized_title":"现代性的哲学话语","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787544715829","isbns":["9787544715829"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":463,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%E7%8E%B0%E4%BB%A3%E6%80%A7%E7%9A%84%E5%93%B2%E5%AD%A6%E8%AF%9D%E8%AF%AD","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd/search"},"page":{"printed_page":163,"pdf_page":171,"physical_index":171,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"9358dab2f4aa6a0ae385b18b4ec3b1980f779e1de55c5130727374acf6711644"},"chapter":"现代性的哲学话语","content":"人是“存在的看护者”。思就是回忆性的“自我要求”，它“属于”存在。存在的思性记忆服从的是“恰当性法则”。思“关注着”存在的天命。存在“召唤”卑微的看护者来保护它的真理。因此，存在“确保”圣者变得仁慈，而不幸的冲动却报以愤怒。这是《关于人道主义的通信》中广为人知的思想，而且后来也在不断地重复。《存在与时间》中的语言同样流露出了空洞抉择的决定论。海德格尔的后期哲学表明，他对于克制也是作好了无意义的屈从准备。可以肯定，“思性记忆”的空洞形式同样也可以用其他的立场来加以填补，比如无政府主义者的颠覆性的拒绝立场。这种立场与其说是切合当下的情绪氛围，不如说是对某种更高事物的盲目屈服。①我们可以任意让同一个思想结构在时间历史中获得实现，但是，这种任意性依然具有迷惑性。\n\n我们如果认真思考一下这些结论，我们就可以对海德格尔后期哲学提出质疑：它超越了尼采的形而上学批判，而且事实上也脱离了现代性话语。海德格尔的后期哲学得益于一个“转向”，其目的是要走出《存在与时间》的困境。不过，只有当我们把海德格尔严格意义上的哲学论证放到其他思想史语境当中加以考察，而不是拘泥于海德格尔通过回忆为自己所设定的思想语境时，我们才能认为，海德格尔的这种严格意义上的论证研究是一条死胡同。\n\n① 请参阅 R. 舒曼：《论实践哲学的基础》(‘Questioning the Foundation ofPractical Philosophy')，载：《人文研究》(Human Studies)，第 1 卷，1980，第 357 页以下;及其《海德格尔的政治思想》(Political Thinking in Heidegger')，载：《社会研究》(Sxial Research),第45卷，1978,第191 页以下;以及《无政府主义的原则：海德格尔与行动问题》(le principe d'anarchie. Heidegger et la question de l' agir), Paris,1982。\n\n163","previous_page":162,"next_page":164}