{"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":310,"pdf_page":329,"physical_index":329,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"fecfe22da258279763f216dc61b2766aa2c402d22659c9b9a223cf8339ff11f6"},"chapter":"第四章 差异的理念综合","content":"※\n\n理念与繁复体\n\n[236]理念即繁复体，每个理念都是一个繁复体、一种流行(variété)。在“繁复体”一词的黎曼式用法中(这一用法被胡塞尔和柏格森继承了），①人们应当赋予这一名词形式②无与伦比的重要性：繁复体不应当指“多”与“一”的组合，而应当指一种专属于“多”本身的、绝不须要借助统一性来形成一个系统的组织。“一”与“多”是知性概念，它们形成了通过对立来运作的变质的辩证法那过于宽大的网眼。就连个头最大的鱼都穿过网眼溜走了。当人们为了弥补一个抽象物的不足而诉诸于它的对立物的不足时，我们难道会认为这样做就把握了具体之物吗？长久以来，人们说着“一即多，多即一”①——人们像柏拉图的那些甚至不会看护家禽饲养棚的年轻人那样讲话。人们组合了对立面，制造了矛盾；但人们却从来没有说到过重要的东西：“多少”、“如何”、“在什么情况下”。然而，一旦本质或一般性与这种度量、这种方式、这种细致分离，本质便是空虚、一般性便是空无。人们组合了谓词却错过了理念，剩下的只是缺少实质内容的空洞话语、空洞组合。真正实质性的东西或实体本身是使“一”与“多”一并失效的“繁复体”。可变的繁复体是“多少”、“如何”、“每种情况”。每个事物都是一个繁复体，因为每个事物都体现了理念。甚至连“多”和“二”都是繁复体。“一’是一个繁复体”这一事实(正如柏格森和胡塞尔已经表明的那样)足以将“一—多”和“多—一”这些类型的形容词命题一并驳回。无论在哪里，繁复体之差异和繁复体之中的差异都替代了那些过分简单的粗劣对立。存在的不是“一”与“多”的宏大对立，而只是繁复体之变异性，亦即差异。不过，说“一切皆是繁复体，甚至‘一’、‘多’亦如此”可能是个反讽。但是，反讽本身就是一个繁复体，或者不如说是繁复体的技艺，是在事物之中把握理念、把握它们所体现的问题的技艺，将事物把握为化身、把握为理念问题的解决实例的技艺。\n\n310\n\n差异与重复\n\n①【译按】暗指怀特海(Alfred North Whitehead,1861—1947)的著作 Adventures of I-deas, New York: New American, 1933。","previous_page":309,"next_page":311}