額蘇拉•萊瑰恩與《老子》中的風險與習慣

隨著科技的進步，我們生活在所謂的風險社會中，該種社會被認為充滿了難以察覺的人造危險。風險社會所特有的風險常被與習慣相對立。它經常被認為是一種使人不安但人們必須與之共處的事物。這種風險的一個原型是卡夫卡的法庭，它似乎無處不在，但又不透明且邪惡。但是，若強調風險是我們永遠無法習慣的，會使人自我設限，並導致反動政治或不顧後果的行動。因此，我想找到認為風險和習慣並不完全矛盾的思維方式。我首先將注意力轉向美國小說家額蘇拉•萊瑰恩，評論家（例如詹明信）認為她試圖簡化她的虛構世界並避免處理諸如風險之類的事情。也就是說，她似乎在風險社會中表現出一種反動。但我發現在她的小說《黑暗的左手》中，風險被埋藏於習慣，並可被用來改變現狀。在該書中風險被具體化，並可被比喻成一條鬆脫的線，人們可以拉動它來拆散一塊織物。而宣稱喜愛中國古書《老子》的萊瑰恩，在她自製的《老子》和其它地方延續了這種觀點，因為她將道家之道視為用來得到力量的危險手段，而該力量的形式是事物的重組。評論家（例如高丁）說萊瑰恩把老子危險的那一面去掉了。但我覺得把她視為不顧後果比較適當。她在某種意義上就像一個賭徒，拒絕讓事物保持穩定。因此，儘管萊瑰恩的作品顯示風險與習慣之間可以存在非對立關係，她最終還是傾向於反對習慣。然而，她的愛書《老子》可以與斯賓諾莎一起閱讀，以將「道」理解為一種習慣和組合的狀態，而不是一種危險的手段或方法。當這種「道」被認為可以在所謂的混亂中製造或找到時，習慣和風險之間的區別亦可以通過實驗被進一步消除。

關鍵字

習慣；老子；萊瑰恩（勒瑰恩）；風險；斯賓諾莎

並列摘要

With the advancement of technology, we live in the so-called risk society, supposedly filled with imperceptible, artificial dangers. The risk featured by the risk society has often been set in opposition to habit. It has often been regarded as something we cannot be at ease with but have to live with. A prototype for this kind of risk is Kafka’s Court, which seems ubiquitous yet opaque and sinister. But emphasizing risk as what we can never get used to is debilitating and counter-productive. It gives rise to reactionary politics and recklessness (gambling). I therefore would like to find ways of thinking in which risk and habit are not totally at odds with each other. I first turn my attention to the American novelist Ursula K. Le Guin, whom critics (such as Jameson) think tries to simplify her fictional worlds and to avoid tackling things like risk. That is, she appears to practice reaction in the risk society. But I find that in her novel The Left Hand of Darkness risk is embedded in habit and can be used to change the status quo. It is reified into something like a loose thread that one can pull to unravel a piece of fabric. And Le Guin, who claims to love the ancient Chinese book the Laozi, continues this view of things by presenting the Daoist Way as a dangerous means to achieve power qua recomposition in her version of the Laozi and elsewhere. Critics (such as Goldin) say that Le Guin has made the politics of the Laozi safe. I think it is more appropriate to argue that she is on the reckless side. She is in a sense like a gambler who refuses to let things remain stable. So even though Le Guin points to the possibility of non-oppositional relationships between risk and habit, she tends to be against habit in the end. However, her favorite book the Laozi can be read with Spinoza to understand the Way as a state of habit and composition rather than a dangerous means or method. When this kind of Way is considered makable or findable in what is apparently chaos, the distinction between habit and risk can be further cancelled through experimentation.

並列關鍵字

Habit ； Laozi ； Le Guin ； Risk ； Spinoza

參考文獻

Silantsyeva, Tatsiana. “The Triads of Expression and the Four Paradoxes of Sense: A Deleuzean Reading of the Two Opening Aphorisms of the Dao De Jing.” Dao, vol. 15, no. 3, 2016, pp. 355-77. Springer, doi:10.1007/s11712-016-9500-3.

Adam, Babara, and Joost van Loon. “Introduction: Repositioning Risk; the Challenge for Social Theory.” The Risk Society and Beyond: Critical Issues for Social Theory, edited by Babara Adam, Ulrich Beck, and Joost van Loon, Sage, 2000, pp. 1-31.