4/14/09

an ancient theory of governmentality

抱朴子曰:

一人之身,一国之象也。胸腹之位,犹宫室也。四肢之列,犹郊境也。骨节之分,犹百官也。神犹君也,血犹臣也,气犹民也。知治身则能治国也。
夫爱其民,所以安其国;惜其气,所以全其身。民散则国亡,气竭则身死,死者不可生也,亡者不可存也。是以至人消未起之患,治未病之疾,医之于无事之前,不追于既逝之后,夫人难养而易危也,气难清而易浊也。
故能审威德所以保社稷,割嗜欲所以固血气,然后真一存焉,三一守焉,百病却焉,年寿延焉。

not entirely consistent... but the metaphors are kind of interesting.

14 comments:

trecento said...

两年前,为系里一个讲座筹款去找社会学的老师,老师和蔼地同意co-sponsor. 但他看见讲座的标题,鲜明表示:governmentality is a bad word. 他加了一句:It's Foucault, of course. But it's a bad word. 我笑问,那您怎么说呢?他说:politics.

eyesopen said...

I used this word deliberately... to juxtapose Foucault with a quote remote from him, both in time and space. It then somehow inflates and obscures the Foucaudian tone of the word and force me to think what exactly do we mean when we talk about the state, the governing of the people, the necessity to prevent political crisis from happening, etc. Btw, I'm curious about what was the title of the symposium?

IsabelleWU said...

然伤我者,百官之一,屯于戍边也;纵有安国全身之志,然则身囚陋室,上不及宫室之君,下不达万民之气;嗟夫,我之奈何

eyesopen said...

熊!你好好地歇着不要乱动:)
btw波士顿有一个很好的美术馆,对所有叫Isabelle的女性访客免费开放哦。

Ariel^arendtmm said...

中国的思维方式,包括中文的语言方式本身,都是有大把比喻。现代政治学则是对比喻刻意回避。

trecento said...

macro和micro不同层次的对应,在西方话语里也非常发达,支配了西方政治哲学宗教思想。body politic是显著的身体比喻,无法回避。教堂的建筑,就是根据人身的形状(当然也是十字架的形状)。很早人们就拿member作文章,既是人的肢体,也是成员。教会文章不乏这一类修辞。

trecento said...

嗯,我觉得governing就可以了啦。
我发誓不用transgressive, problematize, particularism,re-negotiate之类穷极无聊的人发明的搪塞之词。上次看了滥用authenticity的衰文,对这个词也反感起来了。。。我可讨厌-ity结尾的词了,不必要的桎梏嘛,tempority,visuality,exemplarity这样的词太多滥用了。还有让人毛骨悚然的rhetoricity...

eyesopen said...

最近耳边充斥各种temporality, spatiality, affectionality, ...呜呜。
我猜Hippocrates和Galen的作品里应该有类似的论述。Vesalius的解剖学图册里充满了宗教和世俗道德的说教。其实即使现代生物医学里面,也有很多微观人体和宏观社会的对应,比如免疫学,充满了战争的隐喻。。
我再好好想想:)

Lijing Jiang said...

Unschuld认为中医关于国家的隐语起源于战国对于国家体制的广泛思考。但看中医也许还算合理,但是如兔兔所说,如果现代生物医学都有这样的隐喻,这样的body politics也许有更深层次的根源。

trecento said...

赫赫,我想古希腊思想家一定说过,然后一直延续到今。可惜我没怎么读过Aristotle。
我对文科行业买卖隐喻和修辞的风气是有些不屑的,摸不着学科的边,挖出些浅显词句来做文章,迅速上升到社会政治结构和权力的论述,冠之以思想史之名。你们学历史的人踏实掌握材料才是我应该学习的正途啊。。

trecento said...

Rorty: I think that the English departments have made it possible to have a career teaching English without caring much about literature or knowing much about literature but just producing rather trite, formulaic, politicized readings of this or that text. This makes it an easy target. There's a kind of formulaic leftist rhetoric that's been developed in the wake of Foucault, which permits you to exercise a kind of hermeneutics of suspicion on anything from the phonebook to Proust. It's sort of an obviously easy way to write books, articles, and it produces work of very low intellectual quality. And so, this makes this kind of thing an easy target from the outside. It permits people like Roger Kimball and D'Souza to say these people aren't really scholars, which is true. I think that the use made of Foucault and Derrida in American departments of literature has been, on the whole, unfortunate.

trecento said...

a kind of hermeneutics of suspicion on anything from the phonebook to Proust
说得多好啊

eyesopen said...

这个是Richard Rorty么。。确实够狠。
话说历史学界又何尝不浮躁呢,好在现在似乎已经又在慢慢转回来。上了一学期讲critical theory的课才逐渐意识到真正想好好治史的话,应当在理论的风潮之下如何自处。

Hebe said...

Good