透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.93.59.171
  • 學位論文

政治想像與基進啟蒙:史賓諾沙式本體論的當代詮釋

Political Imagination and Radical Enlightenment:Contemporary Interpretations of Spinozian Ontology

指導教授 : 陳思賢

摘要


在當代政治哲學思潮中,史賓諾沙「復興」是一個重要的智識背景。此一復興有兩個重要的線索,第一,它重新處理了啟蒙理念中理性與想像的張力問題,史賓諾沙式的本體論將理性與想像之間的過渡設想為一個平順的本體論歷程,這存在三個不同面向的理解,首先,它要求承認想像的唯物性格,不能將之視為認識上的錯認,而是作為一種個體性之間具體的互動,阿圖塞在這個脈絡提示了隱藏在史賓諾沙形而上學體系下的顛覆質素。第二個面向是主動情感對於被動情感的置換,此一基進啟蒙命題不在於理性對想像的宰制,而是身體的正面培力與自我治理。第三個面向是由德勒茲所論述更基進的立場,他將去影響的力量等同於受影響的力量。史賓諾沙式本體論轉向構成當代「內在性」思潮的哲學傳統。奈格里總結了此一內在性哲學傳統同時將之應用於實際的政治分析,並將平順的本體論歷程延伸至集體的政治結社,從個體到諸眾的歷程,這是史賓諾沙復興的第二個線索。史賓諾沙著作中對摩西式政體、馬基維利的共和國與霍布斯的利維坦的反思所提供對諸眾的政治想像,挑戰了自由主義與共和主義共享的制憲權典範。諸眾對帝國的反抗可說是使徒與摩西先知主權對立的現代版本。對於史賓諾沙式本體論與conatus之「表現」的質疑則針對此一平順歷程,阿岡本的「潛能」與紀傑克「超驗的創傷」則分別代表不同的回應。

關鍵字

史賓諾沙 本體論 想像 基進啟蒙 諸眾

並列摘要


In contemporary political thoughts, the “Spinoza renaissance” is an important intellectual background. There are two indications in this “Spinoza renaissance”, firstly, it rehashes the tension between reason and imagination in the Enlightenment tradition. Spinozian ontology envisages the transition from imagination to reason as a plain ontological itinerary, from epistemology to ontology, which has three aspects: The first aspect is the recognition of the “materiality” of imagination, not a epistemic misunderstanding, imagination reveals the concrete interaction between individualities, in this context Althusser as a harbinger indicated the subversive elements in Spinoza’s metaphysical system. The second aspect is the displace of passive affect with active affect, this radical Enlightenment thesis is not reason’s mastery of imagination, but a body’s positive empowerment and self-government. The third aspect is demonstrated by Gilles Deleuze, who equated the power to affect with the power to be affected. Spinozian ontological turn constructs an important background of contemporary philosophy of immanence. Antonio Negri summarized the immanence thought and applied it to actual political analysis with the extension of plain ontological itinerary to the collective political association, the process from individual to multitude, which is the second indication in this “Spinoza renaissance”. The reflection of Mosaic regime, Machiavelli’s Republic and Hobbes’s Leviathan in Spinoza's writings provides a political imagination of multitude which challenges paradigms of "constituent power" shared by liberalism and republicanism. The resistance of multitude to Empire is the modern portratal of apostle’s opposition to Mosaic’s prophetic sovereign. The critique of Spinozian Ontology and expression of conatus is the contest against this plain itinerary, Agamben’s “potentiality” and Žižek’s “trauma of transcendence” are different responses to Spinozian ontology.

並列關鍵字

Spinoza ontology imagination radical enlightenment multitude

參考文獻


Agamben, Giorgio. 2000. Means without Ends:Notes on Politics. trans. Vincenzo Binetti and Cesare Casarino. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press.
Balibar, Etienne. 1998. Spinoza and Politics. Trans. Peter Snowdon. New York:Verso.
Foucault, Michel. 1984. "Nietzsche, Genealogy, History." in The Foucault Reader. ed. Paul Rabinow. New York:Pantheon Books, pp.76-100.
Han, Beatrice. 2003. “Foucault and Heidegger on Kant and Finitude” in Foucault and Heidegger:Critical Encounter. ed. Alan Milchman and Alan Rosenberg. Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press, 127-62.
Agamben, Giorgio. 2005. State of Exception. trans. Kevin Attell. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.

延伸閱讀