反思思维:福柯、德勒兹与思维的可能性

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Wendyl Luna
{"title":"反思思维:福柯、德勒兹与思维的可能性","authors":"Wendyl Luna","doi":"10.22439/fs.v27i27.5891","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines how Foucault and Deleuze understand each other’s work, arguing that they are united in their common endeavour to make it possible to think again. Focusing on Foucault’s ‘Theatrum Philosophicum’ and Deleuze’s Foucault, it shows how each of Foucault and Deleuze considers the other as someone who opens anew the possibility of thinking. The first section examines Deleuze’s interpretation of Foucault’s work. It demonstrates that, despite sounding as if he is elucidating his own philosophy, Deleuze is correct in saying that Foucault re-thinks thought by positing the disjunction between the articulable and the visible, among other things. Turning to Foucault’s review of Deleuze’s works, the second section explains why Foucault deems Deleuze’s notion of thought as a disjunctive affirmation. By underscoring the disjunctive role ‘and’ plays in the disjunctive affirmation of ‘the event and the phantasm’ and/or of thought itself and its object, Foucault considers Deleuze as someone who re-thinks thought not by conceptualising it but by thinking difference. The paper concludes that, while each endeavours to consider thought in a new light, both Foucault and Deleuze believe that the other makes it possible to think again.","PeriodicalId":38873,"journal":{"name":"Foucault Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":"48-68"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Re-thinking Thought: Foucault, Deleuze, and the Possibility of Thinking\",\"authors\":\"Wendyl Luna\",\"doi\":\"10.22439/fs.v27i27.5891\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper examines how Foucault and Deleuze understand each other’s work, arguing that they are united in their common endeavour to make it possible to think again. Focusing on Foucault’s ‘Theatrum Philosophicum’ and Deleuze’s Foucault, it shows how each of Foucault and Deleuze considers the other as someone who opens anew the possibility of thinking. The first section examines Deleuze’s interpretation of Foucault’s work. It demonstrates that, despite sounding as if he is elucidating his own philosophy, Deleuze is correct in saying that Foucault re-thinks thought by positing the disjunction between the articulable and the visible, among other things. Turning to Foucault’s review of Deleuze’s works, the second section explains why Foucault deems Deleuze’s notion of thought as a disjunctive affirmation. By underscoring the disjunctive role ‘and’ plays in the disjunctive affirmation of ‘the event and the phantasm’ and/or of thought itself and its object, Foucault considers Deleuze as someone who re-thinks thought not by conceptualising it but by thinking difference. The paper concludes that, while each endeavours to consider thought in a new light, both Foucault and Deleuze believe that the other makes it possible to think again.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38873,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Foucault Studies\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"48-68\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Foucault Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22439/fs.v27i27.5891\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foucault Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22439/fs.v27i27.5891","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文考察了福柯和德勒兹是如何理解彼此的作品的,认为他们在共同的努力中是团结一致的,以使重新思考成为可能。以福柯的《剧场哲学》和德勒兹的《福柯》为中心,展示了福柯和德勒泽如何将对方视为一个重新开启思考可能性的人。第一节考察德勒兹对福柯作品的解读。这表明,尽管听起来像是在阐述自己的哲学,但德勒兹说福柯通过提出可表达和可见之间的脱节来重新思考思想是正确的。第二节从福柯对德勒兹作品的回顾入手,解释了福柯为什么认为德勒兹的思想观念是一种分离的肯定。通过强调“和”在“事件和幻影”和/或思想本身及其对象的析取肯定中所起的析取作用,福柯认为德勒兹是一个不是通过概念化而是通过思维差异来重新思考思想的人。文章的结论是,尽管福柯和德勒兹都努力从一个新的角度来思考思想,但他们都认为,另一个使重新思考成为可能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Re-thinking Thought: Foucault, Deleuze, and the Possibility of Thinking
This paper examines how Foucault and Deleuze understand each other’s work, arguing that they are united in their common endeavour to make it possible to think again. Focusing on Foucault’s ‘Theatrum Philosophicum’ and Deleuze’s Foucault, it shows how each of Foucault and Deleuze considers the other as someone who opens anew the possibility of thinking. The first section examines Deleuze’s interpretation of Foucault’s work. It demonstrates that, despite sounding as if he is elucidating his own philosophy, Deleuze is correct in saying that Foucault re-thinks thought by positing the disjunction between the articulable and the visible, among other things. Turning to Foucault’s review of Deleuze’s works, the second section explains why Foucault deems Deleuze’s notion of thought as a disjunctive affirmation. By underscoring the disjunctive role ‘and’ plays in the disjunctive affirmation of ‘the event and the phantasm’ and/or of thought itself and its object, Foucault considers Deleuze as someone who re-thinks thought not by conceptualising it but by thinking difference. The paper concludes that, while each endeavours to consider thought in a new light, both Foucault and Deleuze believe that the other makes it possible to think again.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Foucault Studies
Foucault Studies Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信