{"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":328,"pdf_page":342,"physical_index":342,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"2cd57c4b5d94a9075aff08f560ef6327ff6211176d176f1fae8fe7df373c83c2"},"chapter":"第八章德勒兹与民主","content":"然而，问题是他引用的文本并不支持这样的结论。在用来解释“谈判”这一书名的图记中，德勒兹提出哲学不是一种权力，不能与诸如宗教、国家、资本主义、科学、法律、电视和意见等之类的掌权者交流或直接交流。他接着提出因为这些权力“并不是外在的东西，而是贯穿于我们每个人之中，因此多亏了哲学，我们都永远在与我们自己谈判，永远在对我们自己展开游击战”(P7)。他的理由是哲学至多提供了一种反抗这些权力—包括意见的权力——的间接形式。该文中没有任何内容表明哲学取代了政治活动或哲学与政治活动之间没有差别。哲学是对公共领域政治活动的辅助或补充，或许是必要的补充。本文没有为德勒兹将哲学瓦解为思想哲学这一说法提供任何依据，因此也没有为德勒兹贬低民主提供依据。\n\n《什么是哲学?》用了几页文字来区分意见和概念，并批评了“在寻求一种作为共识的普遍自由的意见时已经详尽讨论过”的传播哲学(QP139，146)。在这一背景中，德勒兹概括出一个严格的日常意见概念：它是一种功能，将事物的感性特征与特定的看法或感情联系起来，并将这二者都与某类主体联系起来(<狗的忠诚性，厌恶：恨狗者》；\n\n328\n\n德勒兹概念：哲学、殖民与政治","previous_page":327,"next_page":329}