文本的閱讀與詮釋－傅柯與德希達對笛卡爾的「瘋狂」問題之論辯

Reading and Interpretation of Text-the Debate on the Question of Madness in Descartes between Foucault and Derrida

黃雅嫺(Ya-Hsien Huang)

《哲學與文化》 38卷8期 (2011/08) Pp. 63-81

https://doi.org/10.7065/MRPC.201108.0063

摘要

本文嘗試由法國兩位當代哲學家傅柯與德希達對於笛卡爾在《第一哲學沉思集》中的《第一個沉思》對夢與瘋狂的討論，因閱讀策略差異，所引起論爭，進行分析與討論。哲學論述自笛卡爾之後，幾乎確立其內部的透明與單義性的寫作規則，然而這位理性主義之父卻因其敘事方式，引發了兩種哲學觀點的閱讀差異。限於篇幅，本文除分析笛卡爾的哲學論述之外，將問題討論集中於解構哲學家德希達如何裂解笛卡爾以及傅柯的論述，並分析其「話語－符號」的主張。

關鍵字

德希達 ； 傳柯 ； 笛卡爾 ； 瘋狂 ； 理性 ； 符號

並列摘要

This article attempts to analyze and comment on the controversy by the discussion on Dreams and Madness from Descartes' ”Meditations on First Philosophy” in the ”First Thought” between the French philosopher Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida, because of differences in reading strategies.The inner transparency and univocal meaning of the writing roles in philosophical discourse have been established since Descartes, however, by the way in his narration, the father of rationalism has had triggered two philosophical differences in reading. Due to space limitations, in addition to analysis of Descartes's philosophical discourse, the article will focus on the discussion of how the philosopher Derrida deconstruct Descartes and Foucault's discourse, and to analyze the proposition in ”discourse and sign”.

並列關鍵字

Derrida ； Foucault ； Descartes ； Madness ； Reason ； Sign

參考文獻

Descartes, René. Œuvres et letters, Paris: Pléiade, 1937

Boyne, Roy(1990).Foucault and Derrida, The other side of reason.London:Unwin Hyman.

Derrida, Jacques(1967).La voix et le phenomena.Paris:P.U.F..

Derrida, Jacques(1967).L'écriture de la difference.Paris:Seuil.

Derrida, Jacques(1972).Positions.Paris:Minuit.