{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"938ffece-6e9d-4ccb-a834-1221ead96536","title":"[人文科学译丛]德勒兹概念  哲学,殖民与政治","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787564922757","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"938ffece-6e9d-4ccb-a834-1221ead96536","id":"938ffece-6e9d-4ccb-a834-1221ead96536","uuid":"938ffece-6e9d-4ccb-a834-1221ead96536","title":"[人文科学译丛]德勒兹概念  哲学,殖民与政治","normalized_title":"人文科学译丛德勒兹概念哲学殖民与政治","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787564922757","isbns":["9787564922757"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":413,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/938ffece-6e9d-4ccb-a834-1221ead96536","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%5B%E4%BA%BA%E6%96%87%E7%A7%91%E5%AD%A6%E8%AF%91%E4%B8%9B%5D%E5%BE%B7%E5%8B%92%E5%85%B9%E6%A6%82%E5%BF%B5%20%20%E5%93%B2%E5%AD%A6%2C%E6%AE%96%E6%B0%91%E4%B8%8E%E6%94%BF%E6%B2%BB","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/938ffece-6e9d-4ccb-a834-1221ead96536/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/938ffece-6e9d-4ccb-a834-1221ead96536/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/938ffece-6e9d-4ccb-a834-1221ead96536","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/938ffece-6e9d-4ccb-a834-1221ead96536/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/938ffece-6e9d-4ccb-a834-1221ead96536/search"},"page":{"printed_page":26,"pdf_page":40,"physical_index":40,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"fd493b1553606d07cfb0851c1b4f9680757d3077a86cb8503659afb4a347d570"},"chapter":"豫著许可备字-2016-A-0168","content":"许多其他概念再现于不同的语境中，再现于与其他概念不同的关系中，再现于不同的问题中，可以说这些概念同上面所说的一样：比如他对弗洛伊德和拉康的不同应用；他对斯宾诺莎的内在因果性，对实体、属性和样式之间的关系所做的不同说明；或者他关于尼采的“不合时宜的”及其与历史的关系的不同理解。①在第四章第173页注释①中，我简短地评论了他在《意义的逻辑》中对菲茨杰拉德的《崩溃》所作的分析和在《千高原》中对同篇小说所作的分析之间的不同。有些人说德勒兹与其早期的思想不再一致，他对这些说法的回应有时是毫无歉意的。比如，在1972年瑟里西拉萨尔研讨会上他宣读完论文之后的讨论中，有人问他，他关于讽刺和幽默的评论是否表明他不再对二者进行他在《意义的逻辑》中所作的那种区分。他回答说：“我已经变了。我不再关心表面一深度这一对立。现在让我感兴趣的是一个完全的身体，一个无器官身体，与移动的诸流之间的关系。”(ID364,261)\n\n26\n\n德勒兹概念：哲学、殖民与政治\n\n① 关于拉康，参见 Slavoj Žižek，Organs without Bodies (Žižek 2004); Dan Smith, \"The Inverse Side of the Structure: Žizek on Deleuze on Lacan\" (Smith 2004);和 Gregg Lambert 2006，67-101。关于斯宾诺莎，参见ThomasNail， \"Expression, Immanence, and Constructivism: Spinozism' and Gilles Deleuze”(Nail 2008)。关于尼采，参见 Craig Lundy, “Deleuze's Untimely: Uses and Abuses in the Appropriation of Nitzsche\"(Lundy2009).","previous_page":null,"next_page":null}