{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2","title":"什么是批判","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787303287741","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2","id":"dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2","uuid":"dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2","title":"什么是批判","normalized_title":"什么是批判","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787303287741","isbns":["9787303287741","0120214113"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":490,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%E4%BB%80%E4%B9%88%E6%98%AF%E6%89%B9%E5%88%A4","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2/search"},"page":{"printed_page":317,"pdf_page":337,"physical_index":337,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"cbb62ef2ef26052db1d3c91d7382c44b1015eb5798c6d3af83c5c21c15376b29"},"chapter":"什么是批判","content":"但是，谱系学的文本只有基于以下动机才能实现生存论的和伦理学的效果，即不仅仅关联于其内容关于起源(Ursprünge)和来源(Herkünfte)的假设和思辨，而且也关联于其展现形式。除了前引的意蕴(Implika-tions)和讲话结构之外，谱系学最重要的修辞或者文体特征无疑是其夸张特征。谱系学的写作自身一般而言被理解为一种夸张的艺术，它依赖于对其处理对象的戏剧化和“超额认购”(Überzeichnung)：在主体之中的权力的历史性印迹。尼采和福柯启用了修辞学手段的整个武器库，这赋予他们的文本和论题一种不可抵御的锋利。凭借压缩和强调技术、统一化和简单化机制、划时代事件和匿名权力集团激发作用的帮助，谱系学的起源场景以一种赤裸的方式得到塑造，在这种方式下采用的是关于支配的思想图像和寓言，而非冷静的历史学论证。①\n\n①关于尼采的谱系学风格，参见：Bernd Magnus，Jean-Pierre Mileur undStanleyStewart, Nietzsche's Case: Philosophy as/ and Literature, London 1992, undMartin Saar, Genealogie als Kritik. Geschichte und Theorie des Subjekts nach Nietzsche und Foucault,Frankfurt/M., New York2007,S. 130-142. 关于哲 学、批判和夸张的关系的一般性讨论，参见：Bert van den Brink， »Gesellschaftstheorie und Übertreibungskunst. Für eine neue Lesart derDialektik der Aufklärung«, in: Neue Rundschau 108:1, 1997, S. 37-59, und Alexander García Düttmann, » Denken als Geste. Übertreibung und Philosophie«, in: ders. , Philosophie der Übertreibung, Frankfurt/M.2004,S. 32-53.\n\n谱系学的批判\n\n317","previous_page":316,"next_page":318}