查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 由阿甘本折返德勒茲:無形式生命與「流變-分子革命」
- 克萊斯特〈關於傀儡戲〉裡的移動與生命
- 歷代成年禮的特色與沿革--兼論成年禮衰微的原因
- 《2046》:一種異質錯誤的生命
- The Imagination of Matter: Childhood and Cosmos Reveries in Jimmy Liao's Visual Art
- 權力意志與生命科學:尼采與德勒茲
- 如何延遲世界末日?--經《一座島嶼的可能性》窺看《風暴之書》與《西夏旅館》中的後人類視域及重返生命之途
- 緣定與善:阿甘本的潛勢倫理
- Creative Immanence, Affects and Cetacean Imagination: A Deleuzian Reading of Hung-Chi Liao's Ocean Writing
- 綿延之群:以德勒茲-柏格森生命哲學重思生態學之初探
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 由阿甘本折返德勒茲:無形式生命與「流變-分子革命」=From Agamben Back to Deleuze: The Informal Life and "Becoming-Molecular Revolution" |
---|---|
作者 | 楊凱麟; 楊凱麟; Yang, Kai-lin; Yang, Kai-lin; |
期刊 | 中山人文學報 |
出版日期 | 20150700 |
卷期 | 39 2015.07[民104.07] |
頁次 | 頁21-37 |
分類號 | 146.79 |
語文 | chi |
關鍵詞 | 德勒茲; 阿甘本; 流變; 流變-分子; 生命; Gilles Deleuze; Giogio Agamben; Becoming; Becoming-molecular; Life; |
中文摘要 | 阿甘本提出生命形式的概念作為生命政治的解答,然而事實上,他在理論平面深陷的困境距離一九七六年傅柯在《性特質史》卷一最後所面臨的僵局並沒有想像中的遠。 相對於此,德勒茲與瓜達希透過流變概念提出無形式與非組織的「一個生命」(une vie),在「分子層級」解放生命的特異性。生命等同流變,但流變並不是成為某物,不是不同形式的轉換或取代,而是流變者與所流變之物的相互解疆域化。在德勒茲的問題中,流變不是單純的變化、演化或變動,亦不是日常意義下的運動或流動,而是首先意味著從形式與系統中裂解、逃逸,因為在形式或體制中不存在真正的運動。 |
英文摘要 | Agamben proposes the concept of form-of-life as an answer to the problem derived from bio-politics. Indeed, it is not as far as he thinks, if compared with the theoretical impasse that Foucault suffered in 1976, the year when History of the Sexuality I was published. In contrast, both Deleuze and Guattari offer a concept of informal and inorganic life, a concept releasing the singularity of life at the molecular level. Life is tantamount to becoming, but becoming does not mean that it becomes something. Becoming always suggests the inter-deterritorialization between the one who becomes and the other it becomes. In the problematic of Deleuze and Guattari, becoming is not the simple change or evolution. Instead, it is the flight from the form and the organization, since there is no movement in the form. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。