第213期……德勒兹解读尼采（差异、喜悦、肯定）

大家好。

Hello, everyone.

我是史蒂文·韦斯特。

I'm Steven West.

这是哲学化这个。

This is philosophize this.

所以这一集是在前两集关于尼采和肯定生活本来面目的基础上展开的。

So this episode's building off the last two episodes on Nietzsche and affirming life as it is.

如果你听了尼采的话，感到震撼。

And if you're someone that hears what Nietzsche has to say and goes, wow.

哇，哲学被将了一军。

Wow, checkmate philosophy.

我的意思是，这个叫弗里德里希的人，彻底击败了你们所有人。

I mean, this guy, Frederick, just destroyed all of you.

去拿你们的群体成员卡，聚在一起，在田野里互相哞哞叫过完余生吧，让弗里德里希这样的文化精英从此接管一切。

Go grab your herd membership cards, get together, find a place to moo at each other in a field for the rest of your lives, and let the cultural elites like Frederick take over from now on.

好吧，如果你有这种感受，那很遗憾，这场派对你可能撑不了多久。

Well, if that's how you're feeling, then unfortunately, gonna be a very short lived party for you.

但我认为，从长远来看，这反而是好事。

But that's a good thing, I think, ultimately.

我的意思是，你大概早就能预料到这一点。

I mean, you could probably see it coming.

比如，如果你是尼采，并且像我们刚才讨论的那样，全面抨击整个哲学史，即使你对其中一些观点是正确的，但你这样说话，无异于放出了猎犬来追咬自己。

Like, if you're Nietzsche and you say the kind of things we've been talking about dunking on the entire history of philosophy, Even if you're right about some of these things, you're just unleashing the hounds on yourself when you talk like this.

未来的哲学家们会来挑战你。

Future philosophers are gonna come after you.

当他们这么做时，他们会非常聪明，找出你所有的错误所在——而尼采本人无疑也会欣赏这一点。

And when they do, they're gonna be very smart and find where you made all your mistakes, which Nietzsche no doubt would have appreciated by the way.

但关键是，就在他著作发表后的几年里，就已经有大量人反对他了。

But the point is there are a ton of people disagreeing with him even just a few years after his work.

其中一位，我们上一次提到的是马丁·海德格尔。

One of which we talked about last time was Martin Heidegger.

你知道，在海德格尔看来，尽管尼采自认为是憎恨柏拉图思想、超越了理念与现实之形而上学的人，但海德格尔认为尼采实际上只是颠倒了柏拉图主义，犯了和柏拉图同样的错误，无端地偏爱现实而贬低理念。

You know, to Heidegger, despite Nietzsche seeing himself as someone that despised Plato's work, as someone that had moved beyond the metaphysics of the ideal versus the real, To Heidegger, Nietzsche in his work had really just created the inversion of Platonism, where he makes the same kind of mistake that Plato does and needlessly favors the real over the ideal.

我的意思是，在海德格尔看来，每当尼采在他的著作中提出‘权力意志’这个概念时，他实际上仍深陷于他声称要超越的同一形而上学传统之中。

I mean, to Heidegger, whenever Nietzsche brings up the concept of the will to power in his work, by doing that, he's embedding himself in the same metaphysical tradition that he was claiming to try to move past.

换句话说，他仍然假定‘存在’本身必须从主客二元的视角来理解，即主体在客体世界中游走。

He was still operating on the assumption, in other words, that being itself always needs to be viewed from the dualistic perspective of being a subject that's navigating a realm of objects.

正是基于这一点，海德格尔提出了一个在他自己哲学中极为重要的问题，而这个问题显然是针对尼采的。

And it's building on this that Heidegger comes up with what would eventually become a highly important question in his own work, definitely with Nietzsche in mind.

问题是：是否有可能在没有意志的情况下进行思考？

The question is, is it possible to think without the will?

这正是典型的海德格尔式提问。

This is a classic Heidegger style question.

我的意思是，如果你想谈论一个彻底打碎前人偶像的哲学家，

And, I mean, you wanna talk about a philosopher that smashes the idols that came before him.

海德格尔在他的著作中认为自己正在从零开始重建人类全部的思想。

Heidegger in his work thought he was rebuilding all of human thought from the ground up.

我的意思是，他甚至拒绝使用以往哲学家所用的术语或范畴，因为在他人看来，所有这些工作都必须被质疑，因为它们都建立在一系列错误的本体论假设之上。

I mean, he even refuses to use terms or categories that former philosophers had used because to him, all their work has to be called into question because it's all built on top of a bunch of faulty ontological assumptions.

那你怎么还能相信其中任何一部分呢？

How do you trust any of it then?

无论如何，海德格尔对尼采的回应，以及他对现代世界中我们以技术方式看待彼此的批判，留到下一次再说。

Anyway, Heidegger's response to Nietzsche, his critique of the technological way that we view each other in the modern world, That's for another day.

如果你对此感兴趣，告诉我一声。

Let me know if it's something that you'd be interested in.

我一向承诺要做一期关于他后期思想的节目，以及这些思想如何塑造了当今哲学界的许多讨论。

I've always promised to do an episode on his later work and how it shapes a lot of the conversations that are going on today in philosophy.

如果你希望我做这个，也告诉我一声。

Let me know if that's something you want.

但话说回来，今天的这期节目是另一位回应尼采思想的人物。

But that said, today's episode is another one of these people that responded to Nietzsche's work.

同样令人兴奋，但这个人对尼采的回应方式与海德格尔截然不同。

It's just as exciting, but it's someone who responded to it in a very different way than Heidegger did.

我谈论的是对尼采作品的一种解读，许多人认为这是迄今为止对尼采最出色的诠释。

I'm talking about interpretation of Nietzsche's work that many people out there believe to be the best interpretation of his work that's ever been done.

人们说，这种解读反映了尼采如果没生病、没有那么早去世，他本可能走向的方向。

People say it's the one that reflects the direction Nietzsche probably would have been headed in had he not gotten sick and died as early as he did.

这本书写于1962年，名为《尼采与哲学》，作者是如今世界闻名的哲学家吉尔·德勒兹。

It's a book written in the year 1962 called Nietzsche and philosophy by the now world famous philosopher named Gilles de Luce.

无论你是尼采的粉丝，还是对他的整个理论体系感到厌倦，我相信你都能从了解尼采作品的这一新层面中获益良多。

And whether you're a fan of Nietzsche or whether you're someone that's getting tired of the whole act he's got going on, I think you'll get a lot from hearing about another layer to Nietzsche's work.

活着的一个特权就是，你依然能够不断学习。

That's one of the privileges of being alive, you know, still able to learn.

世界上总还有另一层可以剥开，去发现不同的视角，而今天我们正是要以此方式探索尼采的作品。

There's always another layer you can peel back of the world and find a different perspective in, And that's what we're going for here today with the work of Nietzsche.

对吉尔·德勒兹而言，是的，尼采在许多方面是他那个时代的产物。

See, to Gilles Deleuze, yes, Nietzsche was in many ways a product of his time.

极端的个人主义，以及所有的群体心态之类的东西。

Hyper individualism, all the herd mentality stuff.

我们会讨论为什么，当你认真对待他思想的内涵时，这些观点作为概念并不一定站得住脚。

We'll talk about why these ideas don't necessarily hold up as concepts when you take the implications of his work seriously.

但德勒兹不会花一秒去纠结这些事，因为对他而言，尼采真正有趣的地方，恰恰是我们能肯定他思想中的内容，而非批判它。

But Deleuze is not gonna spend a second dwelling on any of these things because to him, the real interesting piece of Nietzsche, ironically, is what we can affirm about his work, not what we can critique about it.

德勒兹始终致力于摆脱仅仅对事物进行批判的模式。

See, Deleuze is always in the business of getting away from just critiquing things.

他在写作时，总是对构建新东西感兴趣。

He's always interested in constructing something new when he writes something.

他对尼采的评价是，尼采是一位成功为‘肯定’与‘差异’这两个概念奠定了全新思考方式基础的哲学家。

And what he said about Nietzsche is that he's a philosopher that managed to lay the groundwork for an entirely different way of thinking about affirmation and difference as concepts.

在尼采的著作中，最重要的是，他以一种前所未有的激进方式彻底肯定了差异，这不仅让我们能够摆脱黑格尔及其大多数追随者的辩证法，也让我们得以逃离西方哲学史上几乎整个传统为我们的思维所设的狭隘框架。

Where the most important thing about Nietzsche's work is that by truly affirming difference at this radical new level that he introduces, it not only allows us to escape the dialectic of Hegel and most of his admirers, but it also allows us to escape from the narrow boxes that philosophers have had us thinking in for basically the entire history of Western philosophical thought.

这可是他提出的一个大胆主张。

Now that's a big claim he's making.

当德勒兹这么说时，他究竟指的是什么？

And what did Deleuze mean when he said this?

我们不是已经讨论过尼采如何打破西方社会历史上的唯心主义了吗？

And didn't we already talk about Nietzsche smashing the idealism from the history of Western society?

这是不是只是在重复我们已经听过的内容？

Is this the lose just repeating something we've already heard here?

嗯，不是的。

Well, no.

如果你从这个角度出发，那么当你真正认真对待尼采的思想时，他的作品所蕴含的含义实际上比尼采本人写作时所意识到的还要深远。

If you're coming at it from this perspective, then the implications of Nietzsche's work, if you really take him seriously, actually go farther than even Nietzsche himself realized as he was writing them.

这就引出了本集的第一部分，也是多年来这个播客最受欢迎的环节之一。

Which brings me to the first part of this episode, one of people's favorite segments on this podcast over the years.

这个环节的标题是：解构两千多年来一直存在的哲学假设。

The title of the segment is dismantling philosophical assumptions that have been going on for over two thousand years or so.

老实说，如果我仔细想想，这个标题可以更好一些。

Honestly, I could use a better title if I'm thinking about it.

德勒兹在他的著作中提出的一个最具颠覆性的观点，是他对西方哲学的批判，以及他称之为贯穿整个西方哲学史的‘思想图像’。

One of the most world shifting points that Deleuze brings up in his own work is his critique of Western philosophy and what he calls the image of thought that's gone on all throughout it.

要解释思想图像及其含义，一个经典的例子是观察柏拉图的理念世界。

Classic example to start explaining the image of thought and what he means by it is to look at Plato's world of forms.

当我们谈论这个时，通常是怎么说的？

How does it generally go when we talk about it?

比如，存在一个理想的树的形态，所有具体的树都只是对它的不完美复制品。

There's an ideal version of a tree, for example, that all particular trees are just imperfect copies of.

这意味着，当你在家得宝的园艺区走过，看到一排排带树苗的花盆时，对柏拉图而言，这些东西之所以被称为树，是因为它们与那个通过理性思考可以达到的更理想化的树之形式相似或代表了它。

Meaning when you're walking through the garden section of the Home Depot and you'd see that line of flower pots with the trees coming out of them, To Plato, those things are trees only because they resemble or represent the more ideal form of a tree that we can arrive at through reason if we just think about stuff well enough.

这就是德勒兹所称的表征性思维的例子。

This is what Deleuze calls an example of representational thinking.

为了更清晰起见，同样的道理也适用于正义的理想形式——你可以通过理性推导出它，而法官在法庭上敲下法槌时所体现的，则是正义的具体表现。

Just And for the sake of full clarity here, the same thing goes for the ideal form of justice that you can reason to versus a particular representation of justice when a judge bangs a gavel in a courtroom somewhere.

勇气的理想形式与具体表现也是如此，比如当你克服恐惧去行动时，就是一种勇气的体现。

Same thing goes for the ideal form of courage versus a particular representation of courage if you push your fears with something.

总之，具体事物都是对某种理想形式的表征。

Point is particular things are representations of an ideal.

现在，从这种表征性思维中衍生出的一个假设是，如果你阅读过柏拉图的任何对话录，就会注意到：比如，你对树或正义是什么有自己的理论。

Now one of the assumptions that comes out of this representational thinking that you'll notice if you read any of Plato's dialogues is that say you have a theory about what a tree is or what justice is for that matter.

当你为自己的正义理论辩护时，它的有效性仅取决于它与哲学家们先前确立的正义理想形式的契合程度。

Well, that theory you have about justice when you argue for it is only made valid to the degree that it corresponds to that ideal form of justice that's been previously established by philosophers.

这里德勒兹的关键点在于，这种表征性思维中，一个人思想的有效性总是取决于它与某种既定标准的吻合程度。

The move here for Duluth, it's gonna be important to notice, is that in this representational thinking, how valid someone's thoughts are always comes down to how well they correspond to some preexisting set of criteria.

而这种情况并不仅仅发生在柏拉图的著作中。

And this hasn't just happened in Plato's work.

你可以在笛卡尔的著作中看到完全相同的现象：思想只有符合笛卡尔所定义的‘清晰且分明’的标准，才被视为有效。

You can notice the same exact thing going on in the work of Descartes where thoughts are valid only if they're clear and distinct as defined by the criteria Descartes lays out.

你也可以在康德的著作中看到这一点：知识只有符合康德所提出的我们理解的范畴，才被认为是有效的。

You can notice this in the work of Kant where knowledge is only valid if it can conform to the categories of our understanding as laid out by Kant.

但先快速回想一下，尼采如何看待这些哲学家的著作，以及他对他们所谓追求‘真理’的看法。

But real quick, just for a second, remember how Nietzsche viewed the work of all these philosophers and what he thought about their attempts at arriving at the truth, quote, unquote.

当一位哲学家或任何人拥有某种世界观时，这种世界观更多反映的是他们个人的偏见、历史或性格，而非宇宙的真相。

When a philosopher or anyone has a worldview, that worldview says a whole lot more about them personally, their own bias, history, or personality, than it does anything about the truth of the universe.

所以，想想这种情境在哲学史上为杜鲁特创造了什么。

So think of the kind of situation this creates in the history of philosophy for Duluth.

我们有一段关于思考的历程，哲学家们为此制定了一套严格的准则，定义什么是有效的思考，这被称为‘思想图像’。

We have a history of thinking about stuff where philosophers have come up with a set of rigid protocols for what valid thinking is, an image of thought as it's called.

随着这些准则，哲学家们还做出了许多其他假设，数量众多。

Where along with these protocols come a bunch of other assumptions philosophers have made, lots of them.

比如，每个人都天生具备清晰思考的能力，只要他们努力锻炼思维，就能减少犯错。

From the fact that everybody has a natural ability to think clearly, where if only they work on their thinking, they'll be less prone to error.

或者，假设问题通常出在对事实的误解上，而不是出在我们用来过滤一切的僵化准则上？

Or how about the assumption that it's error about the facts that's usually the problem that's leading to bad thinking, not the rigid protocols that everything's being filtered through?

哲学家们对‘思考’本身做出了大量假设。

Lot of assumptions philosophers have been making about what thinking even is.

但对他而言，这个体系最主要的问题之一是，它从设计上就是一种被动的过程。

But to him, one of the main problems he would wanna point out about this whole setup is that it's always by design a reactive process.

也就是说，它总是试图应对我们从未见过的新状况，或新的划分和理解世界的方式。

Meaning it's always trying to take new states of affairs that we've never seen before or new ways of chopping up and making sense of the world.

而我们总是被要求根据这些事物在多大程度上符合另一位哲学家在不同情境下、用其自身标准所确立的先前标准来衡量其价值。

And And we're always supposed to measure the worth of these things based on how well they represent some previous standard arrived at by another philosopher in a different state of things using their own criteria.

但如果一切总是以它与世界某个过往快照的契合程度来理解，而世界本身却始终在运动和变化之中，那么我们岂不是严重限制了自己从完全不同的视角构建新的、有价值的看法的能力？

But if everything is always understood in terms of how well it matches up to some former snapshot of the world in a world that's always moving and in a state of becoming, then aren't we severely limiting our ability to construct new valuable ways of looking at things arrived at from an entirely different perspective?

如果这听起来令人困惑，不妨想想将其应用到电影领域，这样更容易理解。

If it's confusing as to why this would ever be a problem, just think of this applied to the realm of movies to give a relatable example.

想象有人声称：‘我是电影界的柏拉图。’

Imagine someone saying, hey, I'm something like the Plato of the movie industry.

除非一部电影符合我设定的这个理想标准——比如必须有三幕结构、一个英雄、一个高潮和一个结局——否则那还算不上真正的电影，对吧？

And unless a movie conforms to this ideal standard I've set up, unless if it's got three acts, a hero, a climax, and a resolution, well, then that's not really a movie then now, is it?

类似地，想象有人这么说：‘除非这部电影的剧情是以清晰明确的方式写成的——但谁来决定什么是清晰明确的？’

Similar to that, imagine someone saying, you know, unless if the plot of this movie is written in a way that is clear and distinct and who decides that?

我来决定什么是清晰明确的。

I decide what's clear and distinct.

你会怎么回应这样的人？

What would you say to someone who said something like that?

你会说：别自以为是了，你这个怪人。

You'd say, get over yourself, you weirdo.

一部电影远不止是否符合你设定的某种规范。

A movie is a lot more than whether it follows some protocol you've set up.

为了能不断看到真正新颖的作品，我们需要对超越你所提出的标准保持开放态度。

And for the sake of ever having anything truly new to watch, we need to remain open to more than just your standard you've come up with.

而且，或许更重要的是，我们要考虑这个过程在相反方向上是如何进行的。

And for to lose, maybe the more important thing here is to consider how this process goes in the other direction as well.

当人们坐下来写电影时，如果总是以这种代表性的思维方式来思考，他们会想：好吧。

When people sit down to write a movie and they're always thinking in this representational way, they're thinking, okay.

如果我要写一部电影，那它就必须有三幕结构。

Well, if I'm gonna write a movie, then it's gonna need three acts.

它必须有一个主角。

It's gonna need a hero.

它必须像那个人说的那样清晰明确。

It's gotta be clear and distinct like that guy said.

关键是，总是需要遵循一套固定协议，也会限制艺术家的创造力。

Point is always needing to conform to a set of protocols limits the creativity of the artist as well.

它限制了人们去探索生活究竟可以呈现出什么新形态的能力。

It limits people's ability to arrive at new forms of what life even looks like.

这就是为什么德勒兹后来在自己的著作中批判精神分析等理论，两者有着相似的关系。

This is why Deleuze would later go on in his work to critique things like psychoanalysis, same sort of relationship.

想象一下，你活着，对世界有着心理体验，然后你去见一位精神分析师，而他全部的手段就是用自己所受教育中那套术语和理论，来解释你正在经历的体验。

Imagine living your life, having a psychological experience of the world, and then you go to see a psychoanalyst whose whole bag of tricks is to find ways to explain the experience you're having through how it corresponds to or represents the terminology and theory that they're educated in.

换句话说，就是用某种预先存在的、过于理性的人类心理运作框架来解释。

In other words, to some preexisting overly rational framework of how human psychology operates.

关键是，如果你总是被引导着用别人构建的框架来理解自己的体验，这固然会给你一种僵化的思考方式，毫无疑问，但也可能阻止你创造出新的心理路径，去应对你所处的、不断变化的世界，以及你自身正在变化的心理状态。

Point is if you were always primed to understand your experience through a framework that somebody else arrived at, It may give you a rigid way to think about it, no question, but it might also prevent you from coming up with new psychological tracings for navigating the changing world that you're actually living in with a changing psychology that's a part of it.

现在，如果你注意到这里有一个模式：德勒兹关注的是我们组织思维的被动方式，以及它们如何阻碍人们采取更主动的、参与创造新事物的方式，那么你确实正走在正确理解他的道路上。

Now, if you're noticing a pattern here that Duluth is concerned about the reactive ways that we organize our thinking and how they may prevent people from a more active approach where they're involved in the creation of the new, well, then you're definitely on the right track towards understanding them.

你可以看到，这里与我们之前讨论的尼采的‘超人’概念形成了对比：超人不会顺从他人强加给他们的那些被动、反应式的生存方式。

And you can see the comparison here to the Ubermint of Nietzsche that we've been talking about, where it's a person that doesn't conform to one of these passive reactive approaches to life given to them by other people.

不。

No.

相反，他们接受世界始终在变化、不断向未来涌现这一事实，当一个人直面这种混沌并从中创造出新的项目和价值时，这是一种积极的生活方式，它在一种更深层次上肯定了事物，而那些更具反应性的方式通常试图逃避这种层面。

Instead, they embrace the fact that the world's always changing, emerging into the future, and that when a person engages with that chaos head on and then creates new projects and values out of what they find there, this is a type of active approach to life that affirms things at a level that the more reactive approaches are usually trying to run away from.

换句话说，超人成为一个很好的宏观人类层面的例子，我们可以借此开始解释德勒兹在几乎所有地方、每个不同层面上持续进行的过程。

Well, this Ubermensch becomes a nice macroscopic human level example that we can relate to to start explaining a process that's going on for Deleuze practically everywhere all the time and at every different level.

我的意思是，吉尔·德勒兹是一位过程哲学家。

What I mean is Gilles Deleuze is a process philosopher.

他在自己的著作中有时将自己描述为一名形而上学家，意味着他主要视自己为从事形而上学研究的人。

He describes himself in his work sometimes as just a metaphysician, meaning he sees himself as primarily someone that's doing metaphysics.

他不是在做粒子分析。

He's not getting particle analysis.

他不是生物学家。

He's not a biologist.

他谈论的是超越或存在于物理学、形而上学之内的东西，这或许能为我们提供一种解释世界正在发生什么的视角。

He's talking about what's going on within or beyond physics, metaphysics, so that it may give one explanation as to what's going on in the world.

对他而言，现实的基本构成要素是差异。

And to him, the fundamental component of our reality is difference.

这是早期哲学家在他们的工作中忽视的东西，因为他们总是试图将现实简化为某种固定且稳定的东西。

This is the thing earlier philosophers have missed in their work because they've always been trying to distill reality down into something fixed and stable.

我们之前做了七集关于这个话题的讨论。

We got seven episodes we did on the loose.

我不会在这里详述所有内容，但简而言之，如果你是那种一生中都将自己视为静态身份的人。

I'm not gonna go into all of it here, but the short version of this is that if you're one of these people that go throughout your life thinking of yourself as a static identity.

比如，我是弗里德里希·尼采。

You know, I am Friedrich Nietzsche, for example.

而尼采是一个人类，人类有一种本质，我可以思考这种本质并得出它的定义。

And Nietzsche is a human being and that there's an essence to what a human being is, and I can think about that essence and arrive at a definition of it.

弗里德里希·尼采是一个理性生物，我头脑中会面对某些选择，然后在权衡所有选项后，挑选出最佳决策。

And Friedrich Nietzsche is a rational creature where I am presented with certain options up in my head, and then I pick and choose what the best decision is after weighing out all those options.

如果你是这样思考的，那么这种思维方式或许在你生活中运作起来很实用，但若要接受他整个宇宙观，就会彻底瓦解我们刚才所做的一切假设。

If that's the way you're thinking, well, this might be a nice pragmatic way for you to operate as you go throughout your life, but to lose his entire picture of the universe would pull basically every one of these assumptions we just made completely apart at the seams.

如果你想更贴近德勒兹在其著作中描绘的图景，就不要把世界看作由一堆固定本质构成，比如树是一种东西，人是一种东西，石头是一种东西，而应该把现实理解为由一系列通过相互作用定义的力量所组成。

If you want to think more along the lines of the picture Deleuze lays out in his work, instead of thinking of the world like there's a bunch of fixed essences to things, like a tree is a thing, a person's a thing, rock is a thing, think instead of reality as being made up by a collection of forces that are defined by their interactions with each other.

在世界不断展开走向未来的过程中，有数万亿种不同的力量在每一刻都争相表达自己。

Trillions of different forces that are all vying for expression in each moment as the world unfolds into the future.

在这样的世界里，弗里德里希·尼采并不是一个静态的自我。

Well, in that kind of world then, Friedrich Nietzsche is not a static identity.

我们所认为的尼采——至少在他生前——不过是特定地点上一系列力量的相互作用。

What we think of as Nietzsche, when he was alive at least, was the interaction between a collection of forces at a specific location.

他最终是一个生成之场所。

He was ultimately a site of becoming.

他是由许多不同的力量构成的，这些力量彼此竞争、相互超越、争相显现。

He was many different forces, all vying for expression, overcoming each other, gaining expression.

换句话说，不要像通常那样把尼采看作一个拥有固定本质的人。

In other words, think of Nietzsche not as a person with an essence like we might typically think of him.

尼采是一组历史性的力量集合，直到今天仍在对世界中的其他力量产生影响。

Nietzsche is a historical collection of forces that are still having impacts on forces in the world to this day.

当你以这种方式看待他们时，尼采同样不是一个静态的同一性。

When And you look at them in that way, again, Nietzsche is not a static identity.

在任何特定时刻失去我们所称的尼采，只是某些相似力量在这一时刻获得表达的暂时性组合，但这些力量尚未发生足够剧烈的变化，以至于静态同一性的幻觉消失。

To lose what we call Nietzsche in any given moment is a temporary formation of just a repetition of certain similar forces that gained expression during this particular moment, but haven't changed drastically enough for the illusion of a static identity to go away.

因此，同样地，试着从这个角度看待你自己。

So on that same note, think of what you are along these same lines.

任何看似你现在本质的身份，其实都只是某些力量通过重复表达而形成的暂时性模式，这种重复会让你觉得它们是稳定的同一性。

Any identity where it seems like it's what you are right now is really just a temporary pattern of forces that have found expression that through repetition can seem to you like they're a stable identity.

但显然，我们也意识到，如果你体内其他力量获得了表达，你就会成为完全不同的人。

But, I mean, obviously, we also recognize that if other forces that are a part of you found expression, then you would be a different person.

如果足够多的力量以另一种方向长期重复变化，那么你的整个身份在他人眼中就会感觉截然不同。

And if enough of them changed and had repetition in another direction for a long enough period of time, then your whole identity would feel like it was something different to people.

但你从来就没有一个静态的本质或同一性，你始终具备成为完全不同的存在、探索全新生存方式的可能性。

But never was there a static essence or identity to what you were and always was there the ability for you to become something totally different and explore new modes of existence.

现在，这是一种看待人的本质的全新方式。

Now, is just a totally different way of looking at what a person is.

经典的主观身份在这里根本不适用。

Classic subjective identity just doesn't apply here.

回到柏拉图，你也可以理解，这是一种完全不同的看待一棵树的方式。

And to take this back to Plato, you can understand this is a totally different way of looking at what a tree is as well.

我的意思是，当你走进家得宝，看到那些树木时，从实用角度来说，把它们都归为同一个属种确实很有道理。

I mean, you go into the Home Depot and you see all those trees and on one hand, yes, it's all very pragmatic to call all these trees the same genus and species.

它们看起来有点相似，但在另一个层面上，这否定了这里真正存在的差异。

They look kind of similar, but on a different level, this denies the true level of difference that's going on here.

每一棵树都是不断变化、适应着一个始终在变动的世界和宇宙中的不同力量的重复。

Every single one of these trees is a different repetition of forces that are all constantly shifting and adapting within a world and universe that is always shifting and adapting.

这种将现实理解为不同力量之间互动的观点，正是德鲁斯认为尼采的著作所奠定的基础。

And this view of reality in terms of it being an interaction between different forces is one of the things Duluth thinks Nietzsche's work lays the foundation for.

所以，如果这一点还不完全清楚，那么在这种现实观下，任何试图将身份或现实固定化、静态化的做法，虽然在你家得宝结账时无疑非常有用——这一点绝不能轻视——但在另一个层面上，它始终在否认世界始终处于变化之中的真实状态。

So if it's not entirely clear yet, under this view of reality, any attempt at making identity or reality into something fixed and static while it's undeniably useful when you're checking out at the Home Depot, which is nothing to gloss over by the way, it's at another level always in denial of the true state of change that the world is always in.

因此，你可以看到，这种批判为何开始在哲学史和哲学家们所提出的所谓思维图景中变得合理。

So you can see here where the critique starts to make sense for the history of philosophy and the supposed image of thought put forward by philosophers.

对达卢斯而言，我们对思考的概念也始终处于变化之中。

To Duluth, even our concept of thinking is always subject to change.

为什么不会呢？

And why wouldn't it be?

思想中不存在静态的类别。

There are no static categories of thought.

宇宙有无限多种方式可以被哲学家概念化和描绘，而以这种有限的方式思考，会阻碍我们发现新的思维方式或生命的新形式。

There are an infinite number of ways the universe could be conceptually framed and mapped out by philosophers, and thinking in this limited way sabotages our ability to arrive at new ways of thinking or new forms of what life is.

你也可以开始明白，当你肯定自己是现实不断展开到未来中的微小一环时，总是回望过去来验证当下，实际上否定了存在本身的某种重要本质。

You can also start to see how when you're affirming your place as one small piece of this constant unfolding of reality into the future, how always looking to the past to verify the present starts to deny something very important about what existence is altogether.

换句话说，你可以开始看到我们哲学中的倾向与人们生活方式中的倾向之间存在的相似之处。

In other words, you can start to see the similarities we're building to here between the tendencies in our philosophy and the tendencies in the way people live their lives.

为了避免在节目进行中突然打断，我想感谢今天支持本节目的所有赞助商。

And just so we don't kinda interrupt the show at any point beyond this, I wanna thank everyone that goes to the sponsors of the show today.

为了获得无广告的体验，请在 patreon.com/philosophize this 上以任何级别订阅。

For an ad free experience, sub at any level at patreon.com/philosophize this.

首先，本集由BetterHelp赞助。

First up, this episode is sponsored by BetterHelp.

你知道，十月通常是戴面具和穿服装的季节，但有时候感觉我们全年都在戴面具。

You know, October is usually the season that we're wearing masks and costumes, but sometimes it can feel like we're wearing masks all year round.

我的意思是，你有多少次觉得在工作时，或者在和新人交谈时，甚至在家人面前，都不得不隐藏自己的一部分？

I mean, how often do you feel like you have to hide parts of yourself at work or when you're talking to new people, even around family?

如果你连在家人面前都不能做自己，那在哪里才能做自己呢？

And if you can't be yourself around family, where can you be yourself?

心理咨询可以帮助我们学会接纳自己所有的方面，从而摘下面具，向他人展示底下那些真实而令人恐惧的部分。

Therapy can help us try to learn to accept all the sides of who we are so we can take off that mask and show people the real scary stuff that lies underneath.

这不仅仅适用于经历过重大创伤的人。

It's not just for those who experienced major trauma.

心理咨询是一种宝贵的工具，能帮助我们学习积极的应对技巧、设立界限，并赋予自己成为最好版本的力量。

Therapy is a valuable tool for learning positive coping skills, setting boundaries, and empowering ourselves to be the best versions of ourselves.

如果你正考虑开始心理咨询，不妨试试BetterHelp。

If you're thinking of starting therapy, give BetterHelp a try.

完全是在线的，设计得方便、灵活，适合你的日程。

It's entirely online, designed to be convenient, flexible, and suited to your schedule.

只需填写一份简短的问卷，就能匹配到持证治疗师，并且随时可以免费更换治疗师。

Just fill out a brief questionnaire and get matched with a licensed therapist, and you can switch therapists at any time for no additional charge.

用BetterHelp摘下面具。

Take off the mask with BetterHelp.

立即访问 betterhelp.com/fillthis，享受首月10%折扣。

Visit betterhelp.com/fillthis today to get 10% off your first month.

网址是 betterhelp, help.com/fillthis。

That's betterhelp, help.com/fillthis.

接下来是AG1。

Next up is AG1.

有时候你需要在生活中做一些调整。

Sometimes you gotta tighten some things up in your life.

过去几个月我一直在做这件事。

That's where I've been the last couple months.

其中一部分就是每天早上都喝我的AG1。

And part of that is drinking my AG1 every single morning.

AG1是一种基础营养补充剂，提供每日所需的营养并支持肠道健康。

AG1 is a foundational nutrition supplement that delivers daily nutrients and gut health support.

它还得到了多项研究的支持，让你可以放心摄入。

It's also backed by multiple research studies so you can trust what you're putting into your body.

我信任AG1，因为与许多其他产品不同，它的整个配方都有研究支持，而不仅仅是其中的成分。

I trust AG one because unlike so many other products, the entire formula is backed by research studies, not just the ingredients.

生活中能少操心一件事真好。

It's nice having one less thing to research in my life.

你看。

Look.

良好的营养始于肠道。

Good nutrition starts in the gut.

在最近的一项研究中，AG1被证明能将肠道中有益菌的数量增加一倍，特别是两种最显著的、有助于肠道和整体健康的人体菌种。

In a recent research study, AG one was shown to double the amount of healthy bacteria in the gut, specifically the two most prominent species known to support gut and whole body health.

如果我要推荐一种产品来支持全身健康，那就是AG1，这也是为什么我很高兴欢迎他们成为新的合作伙伴。

If I had to recommend one product to support whole body health, it's AG1, and that's why I'm excited to welcome them as a new partner.

在drinkag1.com/filo首次购买AG1，即可免费获得一年量的维生素D3K2和五份AG1旅行装。

Try AG1 and get a free one year supply of vitamin D3K2 and five free AG one travel packs with your first purchase at drinkag1.com/filo.

网址是drinkag1.com/filo。

That's drinkag1.com/filo.

去看看吧。

Check it out.

今天最后一位是曼多。

Last up today is Mando.

出门旅行时打包行李有时真是一件麻烦事。

Packing for a trip where you're traveling can be a real hassle sometimes.

你会带一大堆小瓶的洗发水、洗面奶、沐浴露和止汗剂吗？

Do you bring a bunch of different tiny bottles of shampoo, face wash, body wash, deodorant?

你会不会试着把这些东西都倒进小号的旅行装容器里？

Do you try to pour all those things in a little travel size containers?

谁真有时间做这些事呢？

Who has time for any of this stuff, really?

没有。

No.

用Mando的四合一酸化清洁皂，简化你的旅行和生活。

Simplify your travel and your life with Mando's four in one Acified Cleansing Bar.

听好了。

Listen to this.

这是一块五盎司的肥皂，可以当洗发水、洗面奶、沐浴露和止汗剂使用。

It's a five ounce bar that works as a shampoo, face wash, body wash, and deodorant.

你甚至可以用它来剃须。

You can even use it for shaving.

所以严格来说，它是一款五合一产品。

So technically it's a five in one.

它经过临床验证，能长时间有效控制异味。

It's clinically proven to control bad smells for a long, long time.

它含有温和的α-羟基酸。

It's formulated with a gentle alpha hydroxy acid.

它从源头上抑制异味。

It stops odor at the source.

普通肥皂做不到这一点，因为它的pH值太高了。

Regular soap can't do that because the pH is way too high.

这就是现实，朋友们。

That's just reality folks.

这款香皂简化了你的清洁流程。

This bar simplifies your hygiene routine.

这是你真正需要携带的唯一物品。

It's the only thing you really need to pack.

它不含铝、不含小苏打、无动物实验、无染料，且为纯素产品。

It's also aluminum free, baking soda free, cruelty free, dye free, and vegan.

你可以选择三种不同香水级香型。

You can get it in three different cologne quality scents.

你有富士山款，清新木质香调。

You got Mount Fuji, fresh and woodsy flavor.

你有波本皮革款，更甜美且优雅。

You got bourbon leather that's more sweet and sophisticated.

还有运动款。

And then there's Pro Sport.

你闻起来像清新的柑橘类水果。

You smell like a clean citrus fruit.

我个人非常喜欢富士山款。

Personally, I really like the Mount Fuji.

说实话，其实是我妻子喜欢这款。

Actually, if I'm being honest, it's the one my wife liked.

我让她赢了这一局，这样我就能随时想用遥控器就用。

I gave her that small victory so that I can use the remote control whenever I want to.

现在谁在笑呢？

Who's laughing now?

Mando的入门套装非常适合新客户。

Mando's starter pack is perfect for new customers.

它包含一支固体止汗剂、一支乳膏型止汗剂、两种您自由选择的免费产品（如迷你身体洗液和止汗湿巾），以及免费配送。

It comes with a solid stick deodorant, cream tube deodorant, two free products of your choice, like mini body wash and deodorant wipes, and free shipping.

幸运的是，我有一个折扣码，能帮你爱上市场上我最爱的全身止汗剂。

Luckily, I have a discount code to help you get hooked on my favorite smelling whole body deodorant on the market.

新客户使用我们的专属代码可享受5美元优惠。

New customers get $5 off a starter pack with our exclusive code.

这相当于入门套装打超过六折。

That's over 40% off your starter pack.

请在shopmando.com使用代码PT。

Use code PT at shopmando.com.

shopmando.com。

Shopmando.com.

请使用代码PT。

Use code PT.

现在回到播客。

And now back to the podcast.

稍后我们会进一步讨论，但目前，既然我们已经对德勒兹对尼采的宇宙观有了一个基本的理解，现在正是提出理由的好时机：为什么他认为尼采的作品实际上是黑格尔和辩证法的对立面。

More on that in a second, but for now, since we have a basic picture here of the universe in Deleuze's interpretation of Nietzsche, this is a good place to start to make a case for why he thinks Nietzsche's work is actually the enemy of Hegel and dialectics.

他将指出，辩证法在试图消除差异时做出了过多的假设。

He's gonna say that the dialectic is making too many assumptions to try to eliminate difference.

这很有趣，因为通常人们想到辩证法时，会认为它是一种当你真正承认复杂性时才会使用的方法——比如，正义并不是某种外在的、具有本质的东西，他们会这么说。

And it's interesting because usually people will think of the dialectic, and they'll see it as something you use if you're actually acknowledging the true complexity of You know, justice isn't something out there with an essence, they'll say.

它只是更复杂对立网络中的一环。

It's just one piece of an opposition within a more complex network of oppositions.

在更偏向马克思主义的辩证法中，当我们谈论社会关系时，就像我们在那期齐泽克节目中讨论过的那样，一种非常简单的世界观是把学校看作一个单纯的学校。

In the more Marxist type of dialectics when it comes to social relations, like we talked about in that Zizek episode we did, One very simple way of looking at the world is to see something like a school and to think, well, a school is just a school.

它只是一个孩子们去的地方。

It's a place where kids go.

你送他们去那里接受教育。

You send them there to get an education.

但正如我们之前讨论的，从更具辩证思维的角度来看，这可能被视为一种过度简化。

But as we talked about, somebody thinking more dialectically might look at that and say that's an oversimplification.

当你真正深入探究学校在特定意义结构中对任何人而言意味着什么时，学校之所以对我们具有这样的意义，是因为它与特定社会或对立网络中的其他一切事物密切相关。

That when you truly dig into what a school is to anyone in a particular structure of meaning, a school is something that has the meaning it does to us only because of its relationship to all the other things around it in a given society or in a network of oppositions.

例如，学校的含义依赖于它与社会中企业的含义、政府的含义、经济结构或学校教职员工的含义之间的关系。

For example, the meaning of a school requires how it relates to what a company is in that society or what the government is or what the economic setup is or the faculty of the school.

这些事物并不像本质主义的世界观所暗示的那样彼此分离。

These things are not as separate as an essence driven view of reality might suggest they are.

正如辩证法所说，这意味着事物的形式成为其内容的重要组成部分。

As And it said in dialectics, what this means is that the form of what something is becomes an important piece of what the content of the thing is.

正如我刚才所说，这通常被视为一种摆脱过度简化的做法。

Now, as I was just saying, this is typically seen as moving away from oversimplifying things.

但如果我们通过德勒兹对尼采的解读认真对待这些观点，那么辩证法就变成了又一个不必要的理性框架，是我们强加给一个实际上比辩证法所能容纳的更加复杂和动态的现实之上的东西。

But if we take the ideas of Nietzsche seriously through this interpretation by Deleuze, then the dialectic becomes yet another example of one of these needless rational scaffoldings that we're projecting onto a reality that's actually more complicated and dynamic than the dialectic can allow for.

让我举个例子。

Let me give an example.

德勒兹使用的一个例子是主人与奴隶之间的辩证关系。

One of the ones Deleuze uses is the dialectic between master and slave.

在辩证法中，主人和奴隶这两个看似不同的身份，实际上不过是同一枚硬币的两面。

Now in dialectics, these two seemingly different things of being a master or being a slave are in reality two sides of the same coin.

它们彼此对立。

They are oppositions to each other.

它们的意义是统一的。

The meaning of them is unified.

如果不预设另一个的存在及其意义，你就无法理解其中任何一个的意义。

You can't understand the meaning of one of them without presuming the existence and the meaning of the other.

但在尼采的世界观中，他认为没有理由将现实割裂成这些需要被解决的对立，因为对尼采而言，差异本身就解释了所有这些现象。

But under Nietzsche's worldview, he says there's no reason to chop up reality into these oppositions that need to be resolved because difference to Nietzsche accounts for all of these things.

例如，对尼采来说，主人和奴隶并不是同一枚硬币的两面。

For example, master and slave to Nietzsche are not two sides of the same coin.

主人和奴隶源自完全不同的谱系。

Masters and slaves come from two completely different genealogies.

它们由两种完全不同的历史所解释。

They're explained by two completely different histories.

它们通常源于两种完全不同的道德观来对待现实。

They often come from two completely different moral approaches to reality.

所以，如果这些力量各自独立且截然不同，我们为何非要将它们视为同一事物呢？

So if each one of these forces are distinct and very different from each other, why do we gotta make them the same thing?

什么？

What?

只是为了消除差异，用否定取而代之吗？

Just to remove difference and replace it with negation?

你看，在现实世界中，当一个主人战胜奴隶，或奴隶起义推翻主人时，这并不是一种需要被解决的对立。

See, the Nietzsche in the actual world, when a master overcomes a slave or slaves rise up and overthrow a master, that's not an opposition that's being resolved.

在尼采看来，这是对差异的肯定。

In Nietzsche's view, this is the affirmation of difference.

这是一种意志力战胜另一种意志力，而将差异简单地视为对某种更统一事物的否定，这不过是多余的理性建构，否认了差异现实真正的动态性。

This is one will to power overcoming another will to power and subordinating difference to it simply being a negation of a more unified thing is, again, a needless rational scaffolding that denies how dynamic the reality of difference truly is.

所以想象一下那个世界。

So picture that world.

它并不是一堆彼此竞争、拥有不同本质的事物。

It's not a bunch of essences that are all competing with things that have other essences.

它也不是一堆寻求解决与澄清的对立。

It's not a bunch of opposition seeking resolution and clarification.

它仅仅是一个近乎无限的意志集合，都在竞争并追求差异化。

It's just a near infinite collection of wills that are all competing for and striving for differentiation.

在这种世界中，辩证法——据称——变得多余且极具误导性。

The dialectic in that kind of world then, the argument is, it becomes unnecessary and quite distorting.

现在，从更实际的角度来看，这一观点会让人将尼采哲学的最终结果称为一种基于喜悦、轻盈或游戏精神的生活方式。

Now the takeaway from this in a more practical sense will lead people to call the end result of Nietzsche's philosophy an approach to life that's based on a type of joy, lightness, or playfulness.

原因在于，如果我们认真对待尼采的观点，那么生活的图景就不是一生都遵循一套由神明制定的僵化准则。

The reason for this is because if we take what Nietzsche has to say seriously, then the picture of life is not one where you have this rigid set of protocols like a moral code from a god your entire life.

它也不是一种充满无数需要解决的辩证对立的生活图景，因此你最好赶紧去处理它们。

It's not a picture of life where there are these countless dialectical oppositions that need to be worked out, so you better go get to work on them.

不。

No.

对尼采而言，生活的图景几乎像一场游戏，你通过肯定生命本身，不断掷骰子，希望有朝一日能掷出七点。

The picture of life to Nietzsche becomes almost like a game you're playing where through affirmation of what life is, you're essentially rolling the dice over and over again, hoping to roll a seven one of these times.

但即使你永远掷不出七点，你至少仍在玩这场游戏。

But even if you don't ever get a seven, you're still at least playing the game.

换句话说，那种对生活应有的严肃性和期待感被消解了，取而代之的是，你开始更自然地肯定生命每一刻的差异，无论它是否与你过去设定的准则一致。

In other words, there's a seriousness and an expectation to what life is that just gets lifted, and instead it starts to make more sense to just affirm difference in each moment of your life heading into the future, whether it lines up with a set of protocols that you've created in the past or not.

而这种在宇宙展开的每一刻不断重复地肯定差异，正是洛斯所认为的尼采‘永恒轮回’的真正意义。

And this recurring affirmation of difference in each moment as it unfolds in the universe is what the lose believed was the true significance of Nietzsche's eternal recurrence.

那就是在每一刻肯定差异。

It was the affirmation of difference in each moment.

现在回到尼采的这些力量，宇宙中万亿种力量，如果你加以分析，可以分为两类：主动力量和被动力量。

Now for Nietzsche, back to these forces, the trillions of forces going on in the universe, if you were to analyze them, they can be broken down into categories of either active forces or reactive forces.

你可能会首先想到的是：他这不是又在构建一种辩证法吗？

And one of the first things you might think there is isn't he just creating a dialectic there?

但不是这样。

But no.

再次强调，这些主动和被动的力量并不是彼此的否定。

Again, these active and reactive forces are not negations of each other.

对尼采而言，每一种都是其自身权力意志的新表达，你当然会从我们之前关于主动或被动生活态度的讨论中认出‘主动’和‘被动’这两个术语。

Each is a new expression for Nietzsche of their own will to power, and you'll of course recognize the terms active and reactive from discussion we had around the active or reactive approaches to life.

主动的是超人，他们创造性地塑造自己的存在；被动的是群氓心态，倾向于批判、道德化，几乎只是坐着等待外界事件的认可。

The active being the Ubermensch who creatively differentiates their existence, The reactive being the approach of the herd mentality that critiques, moralizes, more or less sits around and seeks recognition in external events.

但需要指出的是，对尼采而言，这不仅仅体现在我们的行为上。

But it should be said that to Nietzsche, this goes beyond just how this shows up in our actions.

你也可以在现实的其他层面看到这些主动与被动的力量无处不在。

You can also see these active and reactive forces all over the place in other scales of reality.

那么，这些力量的一些例子是什么呢？

So what are some examples of what these might be?

我们以微观生物学层面为例。

We'll take an example at the level of microbiology.

想象一种病毒攻击人体，然后在体内四处扩散，攻击身体的不同部位。

Think of a virus that attacks a body and then spreads all around the body attacking different pieces of it.

这将是大量主动力量对身体内部力量施加某种意志的结果。

That would be the result of a collection of active forces asserting a type of will on the forces of the body.

另一方面，作为回应，通常会存在一些被动力量，比如人体的免疫系统。

Now on the other hand, in response to this, there are often reactive forces, like, say, the immune system of the body.

这些力量通过试图抵御病毒、努力使身体恢复到某种稳定状态，来缓解或控制主动力量。

These are forces that mitigate or govern the active forces by trying to fight off the virus, trying to return the body back to a level of stasis.

当然，我们知道这一切都是一种隐喻。

Now, of course, we know that all of this is a metaphor.

并不存在真正的稳定状态。

There is no stasis.

身体始终处于流动变化之中，而世界上其他主动力量也在不断试图施加自身影响，但即便如此，这仍然是一个我们可以用来说明微生物层面主动与被动力量持续互动的例子，我们可以在宇宙各处看到这种动态。

The body's always in a state of flux as are the other active forces in the world looking to impose themselves on the body next, But nonetheless, this is an example we can use of active and reactive forces in their constant interplay at the level of microbiology, and we can see this dynamic all over the universe.

让我们再看一个更大规模上的例子。

Let's look at another example of this on a bigger scale.

让我们从政治行动的层面来思考这个问题。

Let's think of this at the level of political action.

假设某个地方正在发生一场革命。

Say there's a revolution going down somewhere.

那场革命中的主动力量是什么？

What are the active forces in that revolution?

革命者们在传播理念、组织集会、战斗，并随着局势发展即时创造新的秩序。

Well, you have the revolutionaries who are spreading the word, the rallying, the fighting, creating new forms of order on the fly as the situation develops.

这些人在 asserting 自己的意志，积极创造新事物。

These are the people that are asserting their will and actively creating something new.

另一方面，你有被动力量，比如现有的政府。

Now on the other hand, you have the reactive forces and things like the existing government.

你有各种制度、政府的军队、以及旨在维持现有秩序的法律。

You have the institutions, the military of the governing body, the laws designed to maintain the existing order of things.

这些力量并不是在创造任何新事物。

These are not forces that are creating anything.

他们是在对外部事件做出反应，试图控制这些事件，让一切恢复到从前的状态。

They're reacting to external events, trying to govern them, trying to return things back to the way they were before.

正是通过将力量区分为主动的或被动的，他开始将我们日常生活的方方面面也视为主动或被动的。

And it's through seeing the forces as either active or reactive that he just starts to look at aspects of our everyday lives as active or reactive.

例如，对他来说，批评是一种被动的行为。

For example, criticism to him is a reactive thing to do.

如果别人正在积极地做某事或创造新事物，而你只是坐在一旁不断批评，那你就是在表现出一种被动的倾向。

If someone else is actively trying to do something or create something new and your whole contribution is to sit around and offer criticisms about it, you are engaging in a reactive sort of tendency there.

你只是在观察正在发生的事，并试图削弱或控制它们。

You're just looking at external things that are happening and trying to mitigate them or govern them down.

道德评判是另一个属于被动范畴的例子，因为当你自己并没有做什么时，你凭什么去道德评判别人？

Moral judgment is another one of these things that falls into the reactive category because what do you do when you aren't doing much yourself to be morally judged for?

你只是指责别人没有遵守某种僵化的行为准则。

You call out other people for not living up to some rigid set of protocols for their behavior.

通过杜鲁特的解读，你可以开始看清尼采所描绘的图景。

You can start to see the picture that's being painted for Nietzsche through the interpretation of Duluth.

他不仅指出，几乎整个人类思想史都存在一种被动的倾向。

Not only is he saying that there is a reactive bias to almost the entire history of human thought.

记住，这种表征性思维总是依赖过去的准则来为未来的思考辩护，但我们也正是从这种过剩的被动能量中构建了整个社会，而这些社会又进一步塑造了其成员强烈的被动倾向。

Remember, with that representational thinking, we're always looking to the protocols of the past to justify future thought, but then we also create entire societies out of this surplus of reactive energy that then go on to create very reactive tendencies in the people that make those societies up.

因此，现在正是提出尼采关于群氓心态的评论的绝佳时机。

So this is a perfect time to bring up the comments about the herd mentality from Nietzsche.

把世界上99%的人称为群氓，这正确吗？

Is it right to call 99% of people out there members of the herd?

当然，有一种对尼采的解读认为，你之所以称人为群氓，只是为了唤醒那些身陷自己尚未意识到的枷锁中的人。

Now, of course, there's a reading of Nietzsche that says the only reason you'd ever refer to people as members of the herd is to inspire those that are trapped in chains they don't realize that they're in.

但在尼采著作问世后的岁月里，批评者们会说：好吧，让我们认真对待你所说的。

But what critics will say in the years following Nietzsche's work is, okay, let's let's take what you're saying here.

假设宇宙中根本不存在善与恶，而假装它们存在，只会分散我们对真正需要完成的工作的注意力——即理解真正决定一切的力量动态。

Let's say there's no good and evil written into the universe, and pretending as though there is is just distracting us from the real work we need to be doing of understanding the power dynamics that really determine what's going on.

再假设大多数人陷入了一种类似群氓的心态，普遍采取一种被动的生活方式。

And let's say most people fall into this herd like mentality where they're all adopting a reactive approach to life.

那么，你首先得问一个问题：为什么这是自然的？

Well, then the first question you gotta ask is, why is that nature?

是因为他们天生软弱或邪恶，还是因为他们出生在一种经常让他们接触被动与反应性力量的权力结构中？

Is it because they were born weak or bad people, or is that because they're born into power dynamics that regularly expose them to forces that influence them to be passive and reactive?

比如，假设一个孩子出生在一个基督教家庭，我这里用基督教为例，因为尼采特别称其为奴隶道德。

Like, let's say there's a child born into a Christian home, and I use Christianity here because Nietzsche specifically calls it a slave morality.

当这个孩子长大后，倾向于尼采所说的弱者美德时，是因为他天生软弱，还是因为他成长于一种权力结构中，从出生起就被灌输并奖励这些美德？

When that child grows up and favors the virtues of the weak as Nietzsche calls them, was that because they were born weak or because they grew up in an environment, a set of power dynamics, where those virtues are nurtured into them and rewarded from the moment they're born?

换句话说，除非将某人称为群体一员是为了激励他人，否则这实际上犯了尼采所指责的同样错误——没有考虑真正决定人们世界观的权力结构。

In other words, calling someone a member of the herd, short of this being a way of inspiring people seems to be making the same mistake he's accusing people of, of not considering the power dynamics that really are determining people's worldviews.

对于许多评论尼采思想的思想家来说，尼采显然理解这关乎权力结构，这正是他花大量时间探讨权力结构的原因。

Now, to many thinkers who comment on Nietzsche's work, it's obvious Nietzsche did understand that this was a matter of power dynamics, which is why he spent so much time engaging with power dynamics in his time.

我的意思是，他的大量作品都在梳理诸如道德和平等主义政治这类事物，他认为这些常被用作控制人们、实现被动式统治的工具。

I mean, much of his work is spent untangling things like morality and egalitarian politics, things that he thought were often used as tools to be able to control people in that reactive governing sort of way.

而且，尼采本人根本没足够的时间来亲自完成这个领域的全部工作。

And look, it's not like Nietzsche anyway had enough time to do all the work in this area himself.

我的意思是，需要许多受他思想启发的后继者，才能将这一批判推向新的高度。

I mean, it would take many others coming after him inspired by his work to take this critique to the next level.

例如，卡尔·荣格深受尼采思想的影响。

For example, Carl Jung heavily influenced by Nietzsche's work.

我的意思是，如果善与恶的范畴并非宇宙中固有的东西，那我们该如何更好地解释人们在创造这类范畴时的行为呢？

I mean, if the categories of good and evil are not things that are written into the universe, then how can we begin to better explain what people are doing when they create these sort of categories?

它们是我们集体用来定向自身、理解世界的一种象征性方式。

Well, they're part of the symbolic way that we collectively orient ourselves towards the world.

让我们聚焦这一点。

Let's focus on that.

让我们理解这一观点的后果，从这种批判中发展出一些建设性的东西，而不是简单地把人称为群体的一员。

Let's understand the consequences of that develop something constructive out of this critique rather than just calling people members of a herd.

或者看看福柯的著作，他或许比任何人都更深入地延续了尼采的工作，揭示了权力如何以非显而易见的方式与人们的生活交织在一起。

Or how about the work of Foucault, who maybe more than anyone else followed up on the work that Nietzsche was doing in untangling how power actually intersects with people's lives in ways that aren't immediately obvious.

我们在这档播客中多次讨论过他对规训社会的看法：各种机构如何将人们导向学校、监狱、医院和军营，并控制人们用来理解自身在社会中位置的种种规范。

We've talked about it a bunch on this podcast about his take on disciplinary society, how the institutions funnel people into schools, prisons, hospitals, military barracks, and then control the very norms that people use to understand how they fit into a society.