德勒兹和鲍德里亚的拟像论差异  

The Distinction Between Deleuze's and Baudrillard's Theories of Simulacra

作　　者：吴静[1] 

机构地区：[1]河海大学马克思主义学院,教授210098

出　　处：《江苏社会科学》2016年第2期11-18,共8页Jiangsu Social Sciences

基　　金：国家社科基金青年项目"德勒兹与鲍德里亚现代性批判比较研究"(项目编号13CKS032)阶段性成果;中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金(2013/B13020334和2013/B14020223)资助

摘　　要：德勒兹和鲍德里亚都肯定了拟像在现代世界中的绝对统治的地位。这两种主张在表面形态上都体现为反表征主义,但就其本质而言,却来源于他们各自对待真理的不同态度,来自于他们对尼采的不同理解。与德勒兹对表面世界的无保留的肯定相比,鲍德里亚更像古典悲剧中的一个主人公,不断地哀叹着真实的死亡。由此出发,他们最终对表面世界的态度也完全不同:德勒兹提出了建构主义的单义存在理论来对抗柏拉图主义,而鲍德里亚虽然以"超真实"来取代真实,却从未放弃过对真实的怀旧态度。这一理论态度上的差异同时导致了他们在"自由"与"解放"问题上的不同思考路径。Both Baudrillard and Deleuze confirm the absolute domination of simulacra in modern world. The similar claims on this issue anti-representationhowever, have resulted from their different posi- tions toward truth. Nietzsche is a key figure to bridge the two contemporary thinkers. Compared to Deleuze＇ s unreserved affirmation of surface world, Baudrillard is more like dramatis personae in classical tragedy, mourning the death of reality. Deleuze develops his theory against Platonism with the constructive uni-vocity of being while Baudrillard never gives up his nostalgia for the real. This distinction also leads to their diverse ways of striking for freedom.

关 键 词：拟像 真实 存在 主体性 

分 类 号：B565.59[哲学宗教—外国哲学]