【电子书】法国现代哲学是时尚单品吗?

近年来，越来越多的读者喜欢在网络上探讨西方哲学作品，分享自己的阅读心得。法国哲学因其话题度高，常常被大家幽默地称为“时尚单品”。福柯、德勒兹以及加缪等法哲大师也成为了社交媒体上的“网红”，围绕他们的话题源源不断。

然而，一些哲学专业的学者对此颇有微词。他们认为，阅读哲学作品需要门槛，即便法国哲学的部分内容与德国哲学等其他分支相比更加“接地气”，过多博眼球的网络梗也会在一定程度上削弱专业研究的严肃性与严谨性。

您对此怎么看呢？是希望哲学更接近主流文化，还是偏爱其小众、独特的气质呢？

The Oxford Handbook of Modern French Philosophy这本书旨在成为大众读者与专业学者之间的桥梁，深受业内好评。书中内容跨越百年历史，介绍从19世纪至今的法国哲学，涵盖其代表人物、重要思想，以及时代背景。本期文章将摘录书中精彩片段，希望能为您的哲思与研究带来帮助，祝您阅读愉快！

米歇尔·福柯（Michel Foucault）在法国现代哲学领域中占据着怎样的地位？本章指出，在20世纪50-60年代，马克思主义以及现象学作为当时的哲学主导框架，对福柯思想的形成产生了重要影响。正是在这样的背景下，福柯得以对权力与主体这两个主题做出创新性阐释。

Michel Foucault’s precise position in the canon of modern French philosophy might be disputed, but there is no question that he belongs to it. However, this has not always been so obvious. The question of whether his work should be read and studied as philosophy, history, or as something else entirely has been repeatedly posed since the publication of his first major work, Folie et déraison in 1961.

In 2015, Foucault’s works were included in the collection of the Pléiade, a prestigious French publisher traditionally reserved for acclaimed literary works. The director of the Pléiade publication, Frédéric Gros (2015), seized this opportunity to revisit the question of Foucault’s status within academic scholarship: was Foucault a philosopher, a historian, or a literary author?

🎁片段试读：

Gilles Deleuze and Jean-François Lyotard met in the immediate post-war period on the benches of the Sorbonne. Deleuze had been presented in certain Parisian intellectual circles as a ‘new Sartre’ (Dosse, 2010: 92): many were dazzled by his precociousness, and Lyotard himself could say that, at 19, Deleuze had read and understood everything: ‘I always thought he was one of the two geniuses of our philosophical generation’ (2000: 194, my translation). ‘From Hume to Bergson’ (Deleuze, 2003: 291)—it was under this rubric that Deleuze would later classify his very first works, for at this period he was undertaking his ‘Diplôme d’études supérieures’ on Hume under the supervision of the Hegelian Jean Hyppolite, while Bergson’s Matière et mémoire [Matter and Memory] had been added to the Agrégation programme. It was at this period that he tried, in vain, to convince François Châtelet and Olivier Revault d’Allonnes of the greatness of Bergsonism (Dosse, 2010: 97–98).

二十世纪，法国哲学家对斯宾诺莎的兴趣大幅高涨。当时，德国哲学家海德格尔的现象学遍地开花。法国哲学家认为，他们需要找出一种理性主义的替代方案。本章特别关注路易·阿尔都塞（Louis Althusser）。他对马克思的思想进行了斯宾诺莎式的解读，这一解读具有代表性，且常被冠以结构主义之名。

On the one hand, Spinoza’s role is deemed fundamental, if not determinant. Without Spinoza, it would be hard to conceive of Enlightenment materialism or its legacy in later Marxist currents. On the other hand, this influence has a marginal quality. In Lire le Capital [Reading Capital], Althusser identified Spinoza as Marx’s ‘only direct ancestor’ (Althusser and Balibar, 1970: 102), but why would he then go on to intimate that Spinoza, by any reckoning a giant of modern European philosophy, was so little known?

谈及二十世纪的法国哲学，怎么能不提及德国哲学家海德格尔呢？法国众多哲学流派在很大程度上是在与海德格尔思想的对话中建构起来的。尽管在形形色色的诠释中，挪用乃至误用很常见，但其中也不乏精彩而富有创见之作，萨特便是一个典型的例子。本章将探讨萨特、列维纳斯和德里达对海德格尔思想的接受方式。

That influence began with the commentaries of Emmanuel Levinas, who introduced Heidegger to France as early as 1931 (Levinas, 1931: 403–414). Levinas ranked Heidegger among the great philosophers of the tradition, “[l]ike Plato, like Kant, like Hegel, like Bergson” (Levinas in Poirié, 1987: 74). Other thinkers of note read Heidegger in the 30s, including Gurvitch, Koyre, Wahl, Corbin, and Aron, but a new phase in Heidegger’s reception was initiated by Jean-Paul Sartre, whose L’Être et le Néant [Being and Nothingness] constitutes a magisterial (mis)appropriation of Heidegger’s 1927 Being and Time (see Janicaud, 2015: 37 and Dastur, 2008: 268).

随着1961年梅洛·庞蒂（Merleau-Ponty）去世，存在主义哲学热潮逐渐退去。在随后的二十年间，“法国结构主义”主导了法国哲学界。直到二十世纪八十年代初，随着结构主义霸权地位瓦解，现象学才迎来某种意义上的复兴。在过去二十年中，青年哲学家的现象学著作大量涌现，现象学也不断向艺术、人类学和社会学等领域拓展，这些发展共同彰显了法国现象学运动的蓬勃生命力。

When ‘structuralism’ began to lose its hegemony there occurred in France a kind of renaissance of phenomenology. There arose a ‘new phenomenology in France’, as Hans-Dieter Gondek, German philosopher and translator, and Laszlo Tengelyi, professor of philosophy at the University of Wuppertal, put it in their ambitious 2011 synthesis of the phenomenological research carried out in France since the beginning of the 1980s (Gondek and Tengelyi, 2011). This book was the subject of a conference organized at the Ecole Normale Supérieure in 2012, the proceedings of which were published in 2014 as Nouvelle phénoménologie en France (Sommer, 2014). The fundamental figures of this revival are, alongside Ricœur—whose entire work consisted in uniting phenomenology, reflective philosophy, and hermeneutics (see Dastur, 1988)—Emmanuel Levinas, Michel Henry, Jean-Luc Marion, and Marc Richir.