{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"9b88d2f2-8eab-4576-8a52-82d9265ef4da","title":"技术与时间：1.爱比米修斯的过失","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787544726863","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"9b88d2f2-8eab-4576-8a52-82d9265ef4da","id":"9b88d2f2-8eab-4576-8a52-82d9265ef4da","uuid":"9b88d2f2-8eab-4576-8a52-82d9265ef4da","title":"技术与时间：1.爱比米修斯的过失","normalized_title":"技术与时间1爱比米修斯的过失","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787544726863","isbns":["9787544726863"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":329,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/9b88d2f2-8eab-4576-8a52-82d9265ef4da","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%E6%8A%80%E6%9C%AF%E4%B8%8E%E6%97%B6%E9%97%B4%EF%BC%9A1.%E7%88%B1%E6%AF%94%E7%B1%B3%E4%BF%AE%E6%96%AF%E7%9A%84%E8%BF%87%E5%A4%B1","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/9b88d2f2-8eab-4576-8a52-82d9265ef4da/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/9b88d2f2-8eab-4576-8a52-82d9265ef4da/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/9b88d2f2-8eab-4576-8a52-82d9265ef4da","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/9b88d2f2-8eab-4576-8a52-82d9265ef4da/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/9b88d2f2-8eab-4576-8a52-82d9265ef4da/search"},"page":{"printed_page":201,"pdf_page":215,"physical_index":215,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"cee0e43b8bf6774bf1222358da8ded74a286c3bff2cfab99fc319866f1381580"},"chapter":"第一章普罗米修斯的肝脏","content":"第一章普罗米修斯的肝脏\n\n“什么？我好奇地疾声自问。\n\n“谁？你应当这样问才对。狄奥尼索斯就是这样说的。[………]”尼采\n\n“存在者是一个谁’(生存)或者是一个什么'(广义的在手存在)。这两种形式的存在之间的联系是什么？”\n\n海德格尔\n\n1. 遗忘者的遗忘\n\n古希腊的技术神话给欧洲语言留下两个得自神的共同的概念：普罗米修斯原则和爱比米修斯原则。古希腊神话几乎是用“生存分析”的语言表述这两个概念的。当时，这种分析基本上还可以在悲剧的形式下——即在前柏拉图、前哲学和前形而上学的形式下—展开，在这样的环境中，悲剧尚可通过技术来感受(对技术的惊奇)。这个神话同形而上学是根本冲突的。我们已经在勒鲁瓦-古兰的理论中看到了类似的冲突，看到他是如何无法自圆其说，以至陷入第二起源，并不得不把外在化和社会分割，以便(从技术的动物性中)拯救精神;但是当他在区别特定性差异和种族性差异时，又将二者连接。他似乎先断定外在化先于社会化，然后又将二者合而为一。由此，他在语言和技术的关系问题上就十分模糊不清：既承认二者相互包含，但同时又招回形而上学的观点，从而提出这样的假设，认为真正(精神性)的语言必然摆脱(技术性的)运动机能。\n\n201","previous_page":200,"next_page":202}