{"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":325,"pdf_page":345,"physical_index":345,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"1c54cdafbe8f9ef7e8887d7ac0e141b5672999b396a9873f2ff96e51bbfc6bf2"},"chapter":"什么是批判","content":"第三，最终，尼采和福柯利用了相近的、尽管是有区别的展示手段和书写方式，通过对自己或者他们的“自我”之权力历史的叙述，这些展示手段和书写方式应获得动摇(Destabilisierung)自我理解和自我关系的有意效果。这种对于激情(Pathos)和个体的惊愕状态(Be-troffenheit)具有直接针对性和指向性的形式特征，凸显了两者的文本。在尼采这里，它甚至采取了一种向读者讲话(Leseransprache)的明确形式，它通过诸多的风格手段，如直接谈话、惊叹和设置问题，合乎情理地融入场景之中。福柯的文本在事实的层面进行展示，但它们也是按照以下方式组织的：它们准确地指向特定读者群体的自我理解。为了让其历史书写能够显得像是社会科学所描绘的权力的真实历史，福柯抛弃了尼采谱系学中明显虚构的或者假设的要素。但同时，这一历史叙事也是创造性的、建构性的和内在假说性的；它的目标是从权力理论的角度，让人们习以为常的价值和理念图像变得陌生化。无论是尼采，还是福柯的谱系学书写，其效力都构成性地依赖于其特殊的文本形式，如果没有这些形式，文本中所阐述的论题就变得软弱无力了。权力分析和自我-批判都要求一种特殊的形式和展示，它们明确进入一个领域之中，这个领域与可能的权力纠葛中“自我”(Selbst)的历史性生成相关，与当前的生活、自我图像及其身份(Identität)相关。谱系学的批判性核心在于，通过基于权力以阐述自我之生成的文本，对怀疑和对分解性反思进行情绪动员(affektivenMobilisierung)。①\n\n① Mark E. Warren, Nietzsche and Political Thought, Cambridge 1988, S. 1-12, und Michael Mahon, Foucault's Nietzschean Genealogy : Truth , Power, and the Subject, Albany 1992.\n\n② Michel Foucault, » Subjekt und Macht « (1982), in: ders., Schriften in vier Bänden. Dits et Ecrits, Band IV, Nr. 306, Frankfurt/M. 2005, S. 269-294, hier: S. 269.\n\n谱系学的批判\n\n325","previous_page":324,"next_page":326}