摘要
海德格尔出于存在论差异的立场,认为在西方形而上学历史上,尼采的生命哲学尽管具有革命性的意义,但是他的生命解释仍然恪守着传统形而上学的基本筹划。德里达立足于"生与死"的差异为尼采的辩护,显示出海德格尔"存在论"化了的尼采解释的局限。然而德里达所给出的生与死的差异解释,忽略了尼采生命"阐释"根本的"强力意志"规定性。尼采本人的哲学立场与海德格尔、德里达的尼采解释都有着微妙的差别,这集中地体现在三者对于"阐释"问题的理解上:德里达忽略了生与死的差异中所包含的"强力意志"阐释性决断,海德格尔将存在自身等同于存在"阐释"的解释学真理,尼采将存在-生命阐释规定为服务于作为强力意志的生命的价值。
From the standpoint of ontological difference, Heidegger argued that Nletzsche＇s explana- tion to life still followed the basic draft of metaphysics, even though Nietzsche＇s philosophy of life had a revolutionary meaning in metaphysical history. Derrida argued for Nietzsche＇s philosophy of life from the standpoint of the difference between life and death, which showed the limit of Heidegger＇s ontological ex- planation to Nietzsche＇s philosophy. While Derrida＇s explanation to the difference between life and death ignored the definition of Nietzsche＇s will to power in the concept of life. Nietzsche had a subtly different standpoint from Heidegger and Derrida, and the difference reflected in different attitude towards ＂explica- tion＂： Derrida neglected the hermeneutical resolution of ＂will to power＂ in the concept of the difference be- tween life and death; Heidegger regarded being-self the same as the ＂explication＂ to being; Nietzsche de- scribed the ＂explication＂ to life-being as value, which served for the life of ＂will to power＂.
出处
《中北大学学报（社会科学版）》
2016年第2期20-25,共6页
Journal of North University of China：Social Science Edition
