论文部分内容阅读
近代欧洲文化,转化了基督教之理性主义,把以主体为内核的意义置于历史中心,从而开辟了现代性之“创造性破坏”历程。就此而言,在形而上学层次上,对生存意义的追求压抑了“有”(关系)而突出“在”(以主体为中心的绝对的同一性)。被尼采视为欧洲文化命运的虚无主义即是指这一过程。后来的思想,包括现象学和结构主义在内的20世纪探索,都为打开虚无分析做出了重要贡献,不过,在其中也都隐含着更深刻的倒退:在主体和客体两极化操作中,作为抵抗颓废虚无主义根据的客体优先性被能指的和欲望的优先性(这都是主观唯心主义的当代表现)剥夺了。与之相反,德里达的“解构”恰恰以破坏性的形式再度将虚无主义反思推到前沿。与尼采、海德格尔不一样的是,他不再试图在形而上学层次上颠倒优先权的归属,而是把矛头指向优先权逻辑和传统思维方式,通过对表述意义的传统方式的批判而打开彻底的开放性。
The modern European culture transforms the rationalism of Christianity and places the meaning of the subject as the core in the historical center, thus opening up the course of “creative destruction” of modernity. In this regard, at the metaphysical level, the pursuit of the meaning of subsistence suppresses “in ” (relations) and highlights “in ” (subjective-centered absolute identity). Nihilism as the fate of European culture, nihilism refers to the process. Later ideas, explorations in the 20th century including phenomenology and structuralism all made important contributions to the opening of the analysis of nothingness, however, all of which also implied a deeper retrogression: In the course of the polarization of subject and object , The priority of the object as the basis for resistance to decadent nihilism is denied by the precepts of the accused and the desires (which are all contemporary representations of subjective idealism). In contrast, Derrida’s “deconstruction” is again pushing the nihilistic reflection to the forefront in a destructive form. Unlike Nietzsche and Heidegger, instead of trying to reverse the ownership of priority at the metaphysical level, he instead spearheads the logic of priority and the traditional way of thinking, opening up thoroughly through the critique of the traditional way of expressing meaning Openness.