德勒兹《感觉逻辑》中的物质与感觉——对思辨实在论中的“主义”的批判

IF 0.3 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
J. Williams
{"title":"德勒兹《感觉逻辑》中的物质与感觉——对思辨实在论中的“主义”的批判","authors":"J. Williams","doi":"10.3366/dlgs.2021.0454","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I argue against the use of general ‘ism’ terms such as ‘speculative realism’ and ‘correlationism’ by Harman. This use is contrasted with more nuanced readings of philosophers, referring to Bryant and DeLanda’s more subtle versions of materialism that do not fit the general label. Instead of general categories I defend Deleuze’s use of the concept of problem as studied by Bell. This argument is then developed through a close reading of Logic of Sense, against Harman’s denial of the reality of relations and processes. I demonstrate that Deleuze is not a correlationist as defined by Harman, by following Sauvagnargues, Smith and Beistegui on the concepts of event and simulacrum in Logic of Sense. I then consider Deleuze’s study of language and his argument that designation, signification and manifestation rely on the concept of sense. This argument leads to a position which is neither idealism, nor materialism, because the differential processes at work in sense cannot be reduced to matter or to the subject, working instead between them and denying their independent reality.","PeriodicalId":40907,"journal":{"name":"Deleuze and Guattari Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Matter and Sense in Gilles Deleuze’s Logic of Sense: Against the ‘Ism’ in Speculative Realism\",\"authors\":\"J. Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.3366/dlgs.2021.0454\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"I argue against the use of general ‘ism’ terms such as ‘speculative realism’ and ‘correlationism’ by Harman. This use is contrasted with more nuanced readings of philosophers, referring to Bryant and DeLanda’s more subtle versions of materialism that do not fit the general label. Instead of general categories I defend Deleuze’s use of the concept of problem as studied by Bell. This argument is then developed through a close reading of Logic of Sense, against Harman’s denial of the reality of relations and processes. I demonstrate that Deleuze is not a correlationist as defined by Harman, by following Sauvagnargues, Smith and Beistegui on the concepts of event and simulacrum in Logic of Sense. I then consider Deleuze’s study of language and his argument that designation, signification and manifestation rely on the concept of sense. This argument leads to a position which is neither idealism, nor materialism, because the differential processes at work in sense cannot be reduced to matter or to the subject, working instead between them and denying their independent reality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40907,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Deleuze and Guattari Studies\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Deleuze and Guattari Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3366/dlgs.2021.0454\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Deleuze and Guattari Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/dlgs.2021.0454","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我反对哈曼使用一般的“主义”术语,如“推测现实主义”和“相关性主义”。这种用法与哲学家们更微妙的解读形成了对比,他们指的是布莱恩特和德兰达对物质主义更微妙的版本,这些版本不符合一般的标签。与一般范畴不同,我为德勒兹使用贝尔研究的问题概念辩护。这一论点是通过仔细阅读《理智的逻辑》而发展起来的,反对哈曼否认关系和过程的真实性。我遵循索瓦格纳格、史密斯和贝斯特圭在《理智的逻辑》中关于事件和拟像的概念,证明了德勒兹不是哈曼所定义的关联主义者。然后,我考虑德勒兹对语言的研究,以及他关于指定、意义和表现依赖于意义概念的论点。这一论点导致了一种既不是唯心主义也不是唯物主义的立场,因为在意义上起作用的差异过程不能被简化为物质或主体,而是在它们之间工作,并否认它们的独立现实。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Matter and Sense in Gilles Deleuze’s Logic of Sense: Against the ‘Ism’ in Speculative Realism
I argue against the use of general ‘ism’ terms such as ‘speculative realism’ and ‘correlationism’ by Harman. This use is contrasted with more nuanced readings of philosophers, referring to Bryant and DeLanda’s more subtle versions of materialism that do not fit the general label. Instead of general categories I defend Deleuze’s use of the concept of problem as studied by Bell. This argument is then developed through a close reading of Logic of Sense, against Harman’s denial of the reality of relations and processes. I demonstrate that Deleuze is not a correlationist as defined by Harman, by following Sauvagnargues, Smith and Beistegui on the concepts of event and simulacrum in Logic of Sense. I then consider Deleuze’s study of language and his argument that designation, signification and manifestation rely on the concept of sense. This argument leads to a position which is neither idealism, nor materialism, because the differential processes at work in sense cannot be reduced to matter or to the subject, working instead between them and denying their independent reality.
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
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
×
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