权力、真理、斗争与风险:尼采与福柯的伦理政治视角

Alonso Zengotita
{"title":"权力、真理、斗争与风险:尼采与福柯的伦理政治视角","authors":"Alonso Zengotita","doi":"10.5209/REV_FOIN.2015.V16.53892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The ethical and political views expressed by Foucault on cura sui (self-concern), which involve the practice of parrhesia, have been criticized as being a purely solipsistic act that only seeks to resist power from an aesthetic and individual disposition. Starting with the Foucauldian notion of parrhesia, which resembles the way Nietzsche conceived truth as risk-based, this work aims to point out two issues: the first is that this resemblance arises from a comparison of the concepts of power relations in Foucault and of struggle in Nietzsche, which in turn, allow a wider conception of cura sui; the second is that the differences in the understanding of these power and struggle relations can be brought together from what is respectively antagonistic in both ethical and political terms, i.e., Foucault’s view of power as domination in contrast with Nietzsche’s view of power as a civilization inheriting Christian values.","PeriodicalId":40606,"journal":{"name":"Foro Interno-Anuario de Teoria Politica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5209/REV_FOIN.2015.V16.53892","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"El poder, la verdad, la lucha y el riesgo: Perspectivas ético-políticas en Nietzsche y Foucault\",\"authors\":\"Alonso Zengotita\",\"doi\":\"10.5209/REV_FOIN.2015.V16.53892\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The ethical and political views expressed by Foucault on cura sui (self-concern), which involve the practice of parrhesia, have been criticized as being a purely solipsistic act that only seeks to resist power from an aesthetic and individual disposition. Starting with the Foucauldian notion of parrhesia, which resembles the way Nietzsche conceived truth as risk-based, this work aims to point out two issues: the first is that this resemblance arises from a comparison of the concepts of power relations in Foucault and of struggle in Nietzsche, which in turn, allow a wider conception of cura sui; the second is that the differences in the understanding of these power and struggle relations can be brought together from what is respectively antagonistic in both ethical and political terms, i.e., Foucault’s view of power as domination in contrast with Nietzsche’s view of power as a civilization inheriting Christian values.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40606,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Foro Interno-Anuario de Teoria Politica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-11-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5209/REV_FOIN.2015.V16.53892\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Foro Interno-Anuario de Teoria Politica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5209/REV_FOIN.2015.V16.53892\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foro Interno-Anuario de Teoria Politica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5209/REV_FOIN.2015.V16.53892","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

福柯关于自我关怀(cura sui)的伦理和政治观点,涉及直言的实践,被批评为纯粹的唯我主义行为,只是从审美和个人的倾向中寻求抵抗权力。从福柯的直言概念开始,这类似于尼采将真理视为基于风险的方式,这本书旨在指出两个问题:首先,这种相似性源于福柯的权力关系概念和尼采的斗争概念的比较,这反过来又允许更广泛的cura sui概念;其次,对这些权力和斗争关系的不同理解可以从伦理和政治上的对立中结合起来,也就是说,福柯将权力视为统治的观点与尼采将权力视为继承基督教价值观的文明的观点形成对比。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
El poder, la verdad, la lucha y el riesgo: Perspectivas ético-políticas en Nietzsche y Foucault
The ethical and political views expressed by Foucault on cura sui (self-concern), which involve the practice of parrhesia, have been criticized as being a purely solipsistic act that only seeks to resist power from an aesthetic and individual disposition. Starting with the Foucauldian notion of parrhesia, which resembles the way Nietzsche conceived truth as risk-based, this work aims to point out two issues: the first is that this resemblance arises from a comparison of the concepts of power relations in Foucault and of struggle in Nietzsche, which in turn, allow a wider conception of cura sui; the second is that the differences in the understanding of these power and struggle relations can be brought together from what is respectively antagonistic in both ethical and political terms, i.e., Foucault’s view of power as domination in contrast with Nietzsche’s view of power as a civilization inheriting Christian values.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
50 weeks
期刊最新文献
Cinco siglos de un debate: rebelión y reforma frente a revolución en las Comunidades de Castilla en su V Centenario Editorial Nudo borromeo y teoría del discurso. Contribuciones para el análisis de identidades, fenómenos y procesos políticos y sociales Carlos Allones Pérez, Liberalismo, nacionalismo, socialismo, feminismo. Una interpretación sociológica, prólogo de Carlos Moya, Catarata, Madrid, 2021. 142 páginas. ISBN: 978-84-1352-256-2. Crítica al fundamentalismo electoral a través del mecanismo del sorteo: propuestas democráticas de Burnheim y Goodwin desde una perspectiva utópica
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1