{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"de9b4263-c277-4979-9f00-91fe8d8660f7","title":"差异与重复","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787567591363","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"de9b4263-c277-4979-9f00-91fe8d8660f7","id":"de9b4263-c277-4979-9f00-91fe8d8660f7","uuid":"de9b4263-c277-4979-9f00-91fe8d8660f7","title":"差异与重复","normalized_title":"差异与重复","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787567591363","isbns":["9787567591363"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":538,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/de9b4263-c277-4979-9f00-91fe8d8660f7","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%E5%B7%AE%E5%BC%82%E4%B8%8E%E9%87%8D%E5%A4%8D","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/de9b4263-c277-4979-9f00-91fe8d8660f7/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/de9b4263-c277-4979-9f00-91fe8d8660f7/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/de9b4263-c277-4979-9f00-91fe8d8660f7","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/de9b4263-c277-4979-9f00-91fe8d8660f7/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/de9b4263-c277-4979-9f00-91fe8d8660f7/search"},"page":{"printed_page":27,"pdf_page":46,"physical_index":46,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"59d9ab2ee1a6bececaa19cd73f988ef7c4f3cfe5ddc6d2997a52dc9c11d301bc"},"chapter":"差异与重复","content":"概念的内涵与“阻断”的现象\n\n但是，概念在它的任何一个规定的层面上，在它所包含的任何一个谓词的层面上都可以被阻断。作为规定，谓词的特性是在概念中固定不变，而在事物中变为完全不同的东西(“动物”变成了不同的“人”和“马”；①“人”变成了不同的“皮埃尔”和“保罗”)。甚至正是由于这个原因，概念的内涵才是无限的：在事物中变为不同东西的谓词乃是概念中另一谓词的对象。而每一个规定也出于同样的原因保持着一般性或界定着类似性。作为概念中的固定不变者，每一个规定从原则上说都适用于无穷多的事物。所以，由于概念是以这样的方式构成的，这就导致它的内涵在其实在的使用中趋向无限，但在其逻辑的使用中总是会遭到人为的阻断。一切对概念内涵的逻辑限制都赋予了概念一种外延，其大于1，且在原则上是无限的。因此这也就是赋予了概念以一般性，这样一来，没有哪个实存着的个体能够和概念hic et nunc[拉：此时此地]地对应（内涵与外延的反比例规则)。所以，作为概念之中的差异，差异原则不但不与类似性的领会对立，而且还向它许可了可能的最大限度的游戏。从那些谜语的视角看，“有什么样的差异？”这个问题已经总是能够被转换为“有什么样的类似性？”尤其在分类活动当中，对种的规定隐含和假定了一种对类似性的连续评估。类22]似性当然不是部分的同一性；但这单纯是由于概念中的谓词，其在事物中变成了不同的东西。据此，它并非这个事物的一部分。\n\n导论：重复与差异\n\n27\n\n①【译按】参亚里士多德，《形而上学》，前揭，1058a5—10,页236。","previous_page":26,"next_page":28}