{"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":318,"pdf_page":326,"physical_index":326,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"78fc2b91c761352762658f828734ea91fae82e854d012c12386c9437682b474d"},"chapter":"现代性的哲学话语","content":"任何一个社会都有其自己的真理秩序，有自己的真理政治学；也就是说，任何一个社会都接受了一种被它当真的话语。②\n\n除了在时空层面上加以普遍化之外，福科还推行一种具体的中立化：他没有把这种求知意志与权力意志区分开来，后者应当是一切话语所固有的，而非仅仅属于特殊的真理话语，就像现代主体性的自制意志是一切人文科学所固有的一样。只有在消除掉这种转型的踪迹之后，求知意志才会再一次显示出来(《性史》的副标题，1976)。当然，它现在已经沦落为一个特例—“真理统治”现在只是诸多“权力统治”的一种。\n\n权力概念与形而上学批判意义上的求真意志和求知意志之间有着一种隐蔽的渊源关系，由此我们也就可以看到，“权力”范畴在使用过程中为何非常的模棱两可。也就是说，一方面，“权力”作为一个描述性的概念，它是纯洁的，主要用于对权力技术的经验分析：从方法论角度看，这种经验分析与功能主义和历史主义的知识社会学之间并不存在显著的区别。另一方面，“权力”范畴从其隐蔽的发生历史中获得了一种制度理论基本概念的意义，从而赋予对权力技术的经验分析以理论批判的意义，并且确保谱系学的历史写作具有一种揭露效果。\n\n① 福科：《规训与惩罚》，第53页。\n\n②同上，第51页。\n\n318","previous_page":317,"next_page":319}