作为伦理学的生存美学
摘要
本文通过对福柯生存美学的研究,得出了这样一个结论:即福柯的生存美学是伦理学。这主要是从两方面进行论证:第一,从福柯生存美学的理论渊源上来说,福柯的生存美学来源于古希腊罗马时期的伦理学、文艺复兴时期和近代的自身文化、尼采的酒神哲学,这从某种程度上证明了福柯的生存美学是伦理学;第二,从福柯的生存美学的主要内容上来说,福柯生存美学的核心就是关怀自身,虽然与传统的关注个人与他人关系的伦理学有所不同,但我们如果关注“关怀自身”与他人的关系,以及“关怀自身”追求的目的——自由,就会发现福柯的生存美学确实是伦理学。最后,通过对福柯生存美学意义的考察,笔者阐述了福柯的生存美学不仅具有理论意义,同时还具有很强的现实意义,人们可以借此把自己的生活塑造成一件艺术品。
Foucault’s aesthetics of existence is a theory model of the modern poetic existence which is based on the art of Greek and Roman’s philosophers’way of conduction themselves and treating people, and his own experience as well. It is not only a series of skills of existence, art of death and life, profound life styles and flexible living strategy. For which, his aesthetics of existence has a theoretical value. It is practical and can be a practical principle for one who wants to surpass himself.
This thesis mainly discusses about Foucault’s aesthetics of existence as ethics. His theory was a kind of ethic considered its theoretical origins and content and value.
Chapter one introduces the four theoretical origins of Foucault’s aesthetics of existence, which includes: the aesthetics of existence of Greek, Roman Christian’s the technology of oneself,self-culture from Renaissance time to the modern and Dionysus philosophy of Nietzsche.
Foucault’s aesthetics of existence originated from that of Greek directly. The difference went that he believed the cultivation of self is the most important part in Greek’s aesthetic of existence, to which he paid special attention. This chapter also discusses the differences of“cultivation of self”between Socrates’s theory, Scotistists and that of the early Christian’s religion.
The second theoretical originated from Christian religion’s the technology of oneself. The Christian religion is nearly ascetic, which emphasizes“the technology of oneself”and cares for self by denying oneself. As for a kind of aesthetic of existence, Christian’s religion’s the technology of oneself is of great significance in helping one cultivate a habit of speaking honestly and frankly. Foucault believed that one would be a free subject if he spoke whatever honestly and frankly.
During the European Renaissance time in 16th century when people were trying to create new culture on the basis of ancient culture, philosophers explored the real value of ancient cultivation of self’s fundamental principles. So the cultivation of self in this time was actually a kind of ethics.
As Foucault’s spiritual guide, Nietzsche’s influence toward him was profound, especially Nietzsche’s Dionysus philosophy which influenced his aesthetic of existence greatly. Nietzsche defined Dionysus spirit as the following statement:“I call it‘Dionysus spirit’which affirms life. One with such a spirit enjoys the procedure of scarifying his willpower that is endless,even when he faces the toughest problems.”
Foucault’s aesthetics of existence not only drew quintessence from Greek theory, but also got some inspiration form modern ethics critically. In chapter two, we will talk about the main content of his theory which includes: the core of aesthetics of existence is care for self; the relationship between care for self and others; the pursuit of care for self is freedom.
Foucault found that the core of aesthetics of existence was care for self during the study of art of life and aesthetic existence. Aesthetic existence is“the technology of oneself”,is the aesthetics of caring for self, is the practical intelligence of promoting one’s existence to a happy and pleasant state. Foucault believed that there was a priority when one was dealing with the relation between himself and others.
As for culture of self, Foucault studied the definition of“self-rescue”which is quite an important term in the study of care for self.
Self-rescue has an active meaning, which mainly refers to that one’s own destination should be determined by himself. This term hints that one should create his own happiness with his own confidence, ability, creativity within his living activities.
Care for self covers two dimensions: on one hand, one should control his own soul and body and avoid being self-indulgent; on the other hand, one should care for others and avoid scarifying others’benefits to benefit himself. These two dimensions are closely related with each other because self-control itself embodies one’s attitude toward others. The aesthetic of existence having self-control a purpose not only considers the relations with others and meanwhile, but also studies each other’s responsible span deeply from the theoretical and practical points of view. Care for self must be realized with the help of others. So this also relates to others. One who cares for himself has to care for others or he will be more likely to dictate others. Aesthetics existence is a free practice. The freedom mentioned here means that one should be his own master or an aesthetic doer who can control his desire easily. The self studies in aesthetic existence is one who is free and creates whatever he wants to with his will, and continuously realizes aesthetic, surpasses life unit and existence process.
in chapter 3, we will discuss its value in detail. From the theoretical point of view, Foucault’s aesthetic existence provided us a new ethic sample, which is different from western modern ethics that emphasizes principles and displines, and Chinese traditional ethics, or even from Greek and Roman’s ethics that emphasizes action and practice.
From the practical point of view, Foucault’s aesthetics of existence is not only a theory, but also a series of principle. In Greek, people emphasized the cultivation of self and care for one’s own soul and as well. When it comes to modern time, which is material time with a high living standard, unfortunately, people no longer care their souls. But in fact, even at this time, Foucault’s aesthetics existence is still practical which is different form ordinary ethics.
At the end of the thesis, we come to the conclusion that Foucault’s aesthetic existence is a kind of ethics with the proofs given above. Foucault’s aesthetic existence helps a lot modern people who try to cultivate themselves through meditation and surpass themselves.
Foucault’s aesthetics of existence is a theory model of the modern poetic existence which is based on the art of Greek and Roman’s philosophers’way of conduction themselves and treating people, and his own experience as well. It is not only a series of skills of existence, art of death and life, profound life styles and flexible living strategy. For which, his aesthetics of existence has a theoretical value. It is practical and can be a practical principle for one who wants to surpass himself.
This thesis mainly discusses about Foucault’s aesthetics of existence as ethics. His theory was a kind of ethic considered its theoretical origins and content and value.
Chapter one introduces the four theoretical origins of Foucault’s aesthetics of existence, which includes: the aesthetics of existence of Greek, Roman Christian’s the technology of oneself,self-culture from Renaissance time to the modern and Dionysus philosophy of Nietzsche.
Foucault’s aesthetics of existence originated from that of Greek directly. The difference went that he believed the cultivation of self is the most important part in Greek’s aesthetic of existence, to which he paid special attention. This chapter also discusses the differences of“cultivation of self”between Socrates’s theory, Scotistists and that of the early Christian’s religion.
The second theoretical originated from Christian religion’s the technology of oneself. The Christian religion is nearly ascetic, which emphasizes“the technology of oneself”and cares for self by denying oneself. As for a kind of aesthetic of existence, Christian’s religion’s the technology of oneself is of great significance in helping one cultivate a habit of speaking honestly and frankly. Foucault believed that one would be a free subject if he spoke whatever honestly and frankly.
During the European Renaissance time in 16th century when people were trying to create new culture on the basis of ancient culture, philosophers explored the real value of ancient cultivation of self’s fundamental principles. So the cultivation of self in this time was actually a kind of ethics.
As Foucault’s spiritual guide, Nietzsche’s influence toward him was profound, especially Nietzsche’s Dionysus philosophy which influenced his aesthetic of existence greatly. Nietzsche defined Dionysus spirit as the following statement:“I call it‘Dionysus spirit’which affirms life. One with such a spirit enjoys the procedure of scarifying his willpower that is endless,even when he faces the toughest problems.”
Foucault’s aesthetics of existence not only drew quintessence from Greek theory, but also got some inspiration form modern ethics critically. In chapter two, we will talk about the main content of his theory which includes: the core of aesthetics of existence is care for self; the relationship between care for self and others; the pursuit of care for self is freedom.
Foucault found that the core of aesthetics of existence was care for self during the study of art of life and aesthetic existence. Aesthetic existence is“the technology of oneself”,is the aesthetics of caring for self, is the practical intelligence of promoting one’s existence to a happy and pleasant state. Foucault believed that there was a priority when one was dealing with the relation between himself and others.
As for culture of self, Foucault studied the definition of“self-rescue”which is quite an important term in the study of care for self.
Self-rescue has an active meaning, which mainly refers to that one’s own destination should be determined by himself. This term hints that one should create his own happiness with his own confidence, ability, creativity within his living activities.
Care for self covers two dimensions: on one hand, one should control his own soul and body and avoid being self-indulgent; on the other hand, one should care for others and avoid scarifying others’benefits to benefit himself. These two dimensions are closely related with each other because self-control itself embodies one’s attitude toward others. The aesthetic of existence having self-control a purpose not only considers the relations with others and meanwhile, but also studies each other’s responsible span deeply from the theoretical and practical points of view. Care for self must be realized with the help of others. So this also relates to others. One who cares for himself has to care for others or he will be more likely to dictate others. Aesthetics existence is a free practice. The freedom mentioned here means that one should be his own master or an aesthetic doer who can control his desire easily. The self studies in aesthetic existence is one who is free and creates whatever he wants to with his will, and continuously realizes aesthetic, surpasses life unit and existence process.
in chapter 3, we will discuss its value in detail. From the theoretical point of view, Foucault’s aesthetic existence provided us a new ethic sample, which is different from western modern ethics that emphasizes principles and displines, and Chinese traditional ethics, or even from Greek and Roman’s ethics that emphasizes action and practice.
From the practical point of view, Foucault’s aesthetics of existence is not only a theory, but also a series of principle. In Greek, people emphasized the cultivation of self and care for one’s own soul and as well. When it comes to modern time, which is material time with a high living standard, unfortunately, people no longer care their souls. But in fact, even at this time, Foucault’s aesthetics existence is still practical which is different form ordinary ethics.
At the end of the thesis, we come to the conclusion that Foucault’s aesthetic existence is a kind of ethics with the proofs given above. Foucault’s aesthetic existence helps a lot modern people who try to cultivate themselves through meditation and surpass themselves.
引文
[1] 福柯:《生存的美学》,秦喜清译,《国外社会科学》,1994年 06 期,第 45 页。
[2] 福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005 年9 月, 第 472 页。
[3] 福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005年 9 月, 第 334 页。
[4] [美]L.德赖弗斯、保罗·拉比诺:《超越结构主义与解释学》[M].张建超、张静译,光明日报出版社,1992 年,第 306页。
[5] [法]M.福柯:《主体性和真理》,莫伟民译,《世界哲学》2005年第1期,第42页。
[6] [法]M.福柯:《主体性和真理》,莫伟民译,《世界哲学》2005年第1 期,第43页。
[7] 尼采:《偶像的黄昏》,光明日报出版社,1996,第 101 页。
[8] 福柯:《生存的美学》,秦喜清译,《国外社会科学》,1994年 06 期,第 45 页。
[9] 福柯:《权利的眼睛一一福柯访谈录》,严锋译,上海人民出版社,1997,第 120 页。
[10] 福柯:《权利的眼睛一一福柯访谈录》,严锋译,上海人民出版社,1997,第 32 页。
[11] 福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005年 9 月, 第 112 页。
[12] 福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005年 9 月,第 124 页。
[13] 福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005年 9 月,第 126 页。
[14] 高宣扬:《福柯的生存美学》,中国人民大学出版社,2005 年 9 月,第 419 页。
[15] 莫伟民:《莫伟民讲福柯》,北京大学出版社,2005 年 9 月,第 251 页。
[16] 福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005 年 9 月,第 160 页。
[17] 高宣扬:《福柯的生存美学》,中国人民大学出版社,200 年 9 月,第 424 页。
[18] 福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005 年 9 月,第 159 页。
[19] 福柯:《权利的眼睛——福柯访谈录》,严锋译,上海人民 出版社,1997,第 13 页。
[20] 尼采:《快乐的知识》,黄明嘉译,中央编译出版社,1999 年 1 月,第 203 页。
[1]余虹:《主体化的艺术——福柯的伦理谱系学与生存美学》,《新疆大学学报(哲学·人文社会科学版)》,2005 年 11 月第 33 卷第 6 期,第 38 页。
[2]陈奇佳:《理性局限与肉体权利——简论福柯的反理性思想及其快感伦理学》,《福建论坛·人文社会科学版》,2002 年第 6 期,第 69 页。
[3]高宣扬:《福柯的生存美学的基本意义》,《同济大学学报(社会科学版)》,2005 年 2 月第 16 卷第 1 期,第 21 页。
[4]于奇智:《福柯及其生平、著作和思想》,《国外社会科学》,1997 年第 1 期,第 41 页。
[5]李晓林:《福柯的“生存美学”》,《文史哲》,2003 年第 5 期(总第 278 期),第 114 页。
[6]田光远:《论福柯晚期伦理学中的“生存美学”思想》,《社会科学家》,2004 年 5 月第 3 期,(总第 107 期),第 18 页。
[7]黄 华:《试论福柯的“生存美学”思想》,《首都师范大学学报(社会科学版)》,2004 年第 2 期(总第 157 期),第 39 页。
[8]黄志奇:《论生活的艺术化——谈福柯的美学伦理学》,《贵州大学学报(社会科学版)》,2006 年 1 月第 24 卷第 1 期,第 96 页。
[9]何成洲:《“自我的教化”:田纳西·威廉斯和福柯》,《南京社会科学》,2005 年第 8 期,第 72 页。
[10]福柯:《生存的美学》,秦喜清译,《国外社会科学》,1994年 06 期,第 45 页。
[11]赵彦芳:《作为伦理学的美学:从康德到福柯》,《中国社会科学院博士学位论文》,2003 年 5 月。
[1] 姚大志:《现代之后》,东方出版社,2000 年 12 月。
[2] [法]福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005年 9 月。
[3][英]塔姆辛·斯巴格:《福柯与酷儿理论》,赵玉兰译,北京大学出版社,2005 年 3 月。
[4][美]艾莉森·利·布朗:《福柯》,聂保平译,张世英、赵敦华等编。中华书局,2002 年 8 月。
[5][法]吉尔·德勒兹:《德勒兹论福柯》,杨凯麟译,江苏教育出版社,2006 年 3 月。
[6][美]詹姆斯·米勒:《福柯的生死爱欲》,高毅译,上海人民出版社,2005 年 5 月。
[7] [德]马文·克拉达、格尔德·登博夫斯基:《福柯的迷宫》,朱毅译,商务印书馆,2005 年 10 月。
[8]余虹:《艺术与归家——尼采·海德格尔·福柯》,中国人民大学出版社,2005 年 8 月。
[9]高宣扬:《福柯的生存美学》,中国人民大学出版社,2005年 9 月。
[10]李晓林:《审美主义:从尼采到福柯》,社会科学文献出版社,2005 年 6 月。
[11]汪民安:《福柯的界线》,中国社会科学出版社,2002 年 7月。
[12]莫伟民:《莫伟民讲福柯》,北京大学出版社,2005 年 9 月。
[2] 福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005 年9 月, 第 472 页。
[3] 福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005年 9 月, 第 334 页。
[4] [美]L.德赖弗斯、保罗·拉比诺:《超越结构主义与解释学》[M].张建超、张静译,光明日报出版社,1992 年,第 306页。
[5] [法]M.福柯:《主体性和真理》,莫伟民译,《世界哲学》2005年第1期,第42页。
[6] [法]M.福柯:《主体性和真理》,莫伟民译,《世界哲学》2005年第1 期,第43页。
[7] 尼采:《偶像的黄昏》,光明日报出版社,1996,第 101 页。
[8] 福柯:《生存的美学》,秦喜清译,《国外社会科学》,1994年 06 期,第 45 页。
[9] 福柯:《权利的眼睛一一福柯访谈录》,严锋译,上海人民出版社,1997,第 120 页。
[10] 福柯:《权利的眼睛一一福柯访谈录》,严锋译,上海人民出版社,1997,第 32 页。
[11] 福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005年 9 月, 第 112 页。
[12] 福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005年 9 月,第 124 页。
[13] 福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005年 9 月,第 126 页。
[14] 高宣扬:《福柯的生存美学》,中国人民大学出版社,2005 年 9 月,第 419 页。
[15] 莫伟民:《莫伟民讲福柯》,北京大学出版社,2005 年 9 月,第 251 页。
[16] 福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005 年 9 月,第 160 页。
[17] 高宣扬:《福柯的生存美学》,中国人民大学出版社,200 年 9 月,第 424 页。
[18] 福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005 年 9 月,第 159 页。
[19] 福柯:《权利的眼睛——福柯访谈录》,严锋译,上海人民 出版社,1997,第 13 页。
[20] 尼采:《快乐的知识》,黄明嘉译,中央编译出版社,1999 年 1 月,第 203 页。
[1]余虹:《主体化的艺术——福柯的伦理谱系学与生存美学》,《新疆大学学报(哲学·人文社会科学版)》,2005 年 11 月第 33 卷第 6 期,第 38 页。
[2]陈奇佳:《理性局限与肉体权利——简论福柯的反理性思想及其快感伦理学》,《福建论坛·人文社会科学版》,2002 年第 6 期,第 69 页。
[3]高宣扬:《福柯的生存美学的基本意义》,《同济大学学报(社会科学版)》,2005 年 2 月第 16 卷第 1 期,第 21 页。
[4]于奇智:《福柯及其生平、著作和思想》,《国外社会科学》,1997 年第 1 期,第 41 页。
[5]李晓林:《福柯的“生存美学”》,《文史哲》,2003 年第 5 期(总第 278 期),第 114 页。
[6]田光远:《论福柯晚期伦理学中的“生存美学”思想》,《社会科学家》,2004 年 5 月第 3 期,(总第 107 期),第 18 页。
[7]黄 华:《试论福柯的“生存美学”思想》,《首都师范大学学报(社会科学版)》,2004 年第 2 期(总第 157 期),第 39 页。
[8]黄志奇:《论生活的艺术化——谈福柯的美学伦理学》,《贵州大学学报(社会科学版)》,2006 年 1 月第 24 卷第 1 期,第 96 页。
[9]何成洲:《“自我的教化”:田纳西·威廉斯和福柯》,《南京社会科学》,2005 年第 8 期,第 72 页。
[10]福柯:《生存的美学》,秦喜清译,《国外社会科学》,1994年 06 期,第 45 页。
[11]赵彦芳:《作为伦理学的美学:从康德到福柯》,《中国社会科学院博士学位论文》,2003 年 5 月。
[1] 姚大志:《现代之后》,东方出版社,2000 年 12 月。
[2] [法]福柯:《性经验史》,佘碧平译,上海人民出版社,2005年 9 月。
[3][英]塔姆辛·斯巴格:《福柯与酷儿理论》,赵玉兰译,北京大学出版社,2005 年 3 月。
[4][美]艾莉森·利·布朗:《福柯》,聂保平译,张世英、赵敦华等编。中华书局,2002 年 8 月。
[5][法]吉尔·德勒兹:《德勒兹论福柯》,杨凯麟译,江苏教育出版社,2006 年 3 月。
[6][美]詹姆斯·米勒:《福柯的生死爱欲》,高毅译,上海人民出版社,2005 年 5 月。
[7] [德]马文·克拉达、格尔德·登博夫斯基:《福柯的迷宫》,朱毅译,商务印书馆,2005 年 10 月。
[8]余虹:《艺术与归家——尼采·海德格尔·福柯》,中国人民大学出版社,2005 年 8 月。
[9]高宣扬:《福柯的生存美学》,中国人民大学出版社,2005年 9 月。
[10]李晓林:《审美主义:从尼采到福柯》,社会科学文献出版社,2005 年 6 月。
[11]汪民安:《福柯的界线》,中国社会科学出版社,2002 年 7月。
[12]莫伟民:《莫伟民讲福柯》,北京大学出版社,2005 年 9 月。