‫ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺍﻣﺘﻴﺎﺯ‪ :‬ﺧﺎﻧﻪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‬ ‫ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬

‫ﺳﺮﺩﺑﻴﺮ‪ :‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻭﺟﺒﻰ‬

‫ﻫﻴﺌﺖ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﺮﻳﻪ ‪ :‬ﺩﻛﺘﺮ ﻏﻼﻣﺤﺴﻴﻦ ﺍﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻤﻲ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻧﻲ )ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ(‪ ،‬ﺩﻛﺘﺮ ﺭﺿﺎ ﺩﺍﻭﺭﻱ ﺍﺭﺩﻛﺎﻧﻲ )ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ(‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﻛﺘﺮ ﺿﻴﺎء ﻣﻮﺣﺪ )ﺍﻧﺠﻤﻦ ﺣﻜﻤﺖ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ(‪ ،‬ﺩﻛﺘﺮ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺳﻌﻴﺪﻱﻣﻬﺮ )ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺗﺮﺑﻴﺖ ﻣﺪﺭﺱ( ﻭ ﺩﻛﺘﺮ ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺭﺿﺎ ﺍﺳﺪﻱ‬
‫)ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﻋﻼﻣﻪ(‪ ،‬ﺩﻛﺘﺮ ﺍﺣﺪ ﻓﺮﺍﻣﺮﺯ ﻗﺮﺍﻣﻠﻜﻰ )ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ(‬
‫ﻣﻌﺎﻭﻥ ﺳﺮﺩﺑﻴﺮ‪ :‬ﺩﻛﺘﺮ ﻓﺎﻃﻤﻪ ﻓﻨﺎ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻜﺎﺭ ﻭﻳﮋﻩ‪ :‬ﺑﻬﻨﺎﺯ ﺩﻫﻜﺮﺩﻯ‬
‫ﻣﺪﻳﺮ ﺩﺍﺧﻠﻲ‪ :‬ﺍﻟﻬﺎﻡ ﺁﻫﻮﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻭﻳﺮﺍﺳﺘﺎﺭ ﻭ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺧﻮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻋﻠﻴﺮﺿﺎ ﺭﺿﺎﻳﻲ‬

‫ﻃﺮﺍﺡ ﮔﺮﺍﻓﻴﻚ‪ :‬ﻳﻮﺭﻳﻚ ﻛﺮﻳﻢﻣﺴﻴﺤﻲ‬

‫ﻧﻈﺎﺭﺕ ﭼﺎپ‪ :‬ﺭﺣﻤﺎﻥ ﻛﻴﺎﻧﻲ‬

‫ﻟﻴﺘﻮﮔﺮﺍﻓﻲ‪ ،‬ﭼﺎپ ﻭ ﺻﺤﺎﻓﻲ‪ :‬ﭼﺎپ ﺳﺮﻭﺵ‬
‫ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻲ‪ :‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺧﻴﺎﺑﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﻦ ﺻﺒﺎ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻄﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ ‪1080‬‬
‫ﺻﻨﺪﻭﻕ ﭘﺴﺘﻲ‪13145 - 313 :‬‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎﺕ ﻣﻘﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﺭﺳﺎﻟﻰ‬
‫ﺗﻠﻔﻦ‪66415244 :‬‬ ‫‪ .1‬ﻣﻘﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺴﺖ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺑﺮﻧﺎﻣﻪ ‪ word‬ﺗﺎﻳﭗ‬
‫ﺩﻭﺭﻧﮕﺎﺭ‪66414750 :‬‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .2‬ﻣﻘﺎﻻﺕ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﭼﻜﻴﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻠﻔﻦ ﺑﺨﺶ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻙ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ‪88342985 - 88318653 :‬‬
‫‪ .3‬ﻣﻘﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﺣﺪﺍﻛﺜﺮ ‪ 2500‬ﻛﻠﻤﻪ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺎﻻﺕ‬
‫‪k.m.falsafeh@gmail.com‬‬ ‫ﻧﻘﺪ ﺣﺪﺍﻛﺜﺮ ‪ 5000‬ﻛﻠﻤﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪www.ketabmah.ir‬‬ ‫‪ .4‬ﻧﺎﻡ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺘﻦ ﺍﻳﺘﺎﻟﻴﻚ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .5‬ﺁﺩﺭﺱ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﻧﻘﻞ ﻗﻮﻝﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﭘﻰﻧﻮﺷﺖ ﺷﻮﺩ‪) .‬ﻫﻴﭻ‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﻩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻣﺎﻫﻨﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﺨﺼﺼﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻮﺯﺓ ﺍﻃﻼﻉﺭﺳﺎﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﻭ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺪﻑ ﺭﻭﻧﻖ ﺑﺎﺯﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻋﻰ ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﻣﺘﻦ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪(.‬‬
‫ﻧﻘﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻻ ﺑﺮﺩﻥ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻛﻴﻔﻲ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻬﺎﻱ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺸﺒﺮﺩ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﺨﻮﺍﻧﻲ ﻭ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺧﻼﻕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﺷﺮﺍﻥ‪،‬‬ ‫‪ .6‬ﺩﺭ ﻓﻬﺮﺳﺖ ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻭ ﻣﺂﺧﺬ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪ :‬ﻧﺎﻡ ﺍﺛﺮ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﻡ‬
‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺁﻭﺭﻧﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺣﻮﺯﺓ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻧﺸﺮ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻲ‪،‬‬ ‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺁﻭﺭﻧﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻞ ﻧﺸﺮ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﺷﺮ ﻭ ﺳﺎﻝ ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭ ﺩﺭﺝ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺳﺖﺍﻧﺪﺭﻛﺎﺭﺍﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻮﺯﻩ ﺭﺍ ﻳﺎﺭﻱ ﻣﻴﻜﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺴﺌﻮﻟﻴﺖ ﻧﻘﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻲ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ـ ﺍﺻﻞ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻭﺟﻪ ﻣﺴﺘﺮﺩ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﻋﻬﺪﺓ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺭﺳﻤﻲ ﺧﺎﻧﺔ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ـ ﻣﺠﻠﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻭﻳﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﻭ ﺗﻠﺨﻴﺺ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
 ‫ﺳﺨﻦ ﺳﺮﺩﺑﻴﺮ‬
‫‪2‬‬ ‫ﺳﺨﻦ ﺁﻏﺎﺯﻳﻦ‬

‫ﺷﺮﺡ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ‬

‫‪3‬‬ ‫ﭼﺮﺍ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ؟‪ /‬ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺔ ﻛﻠﺮ ﻛﻮﻟﺒﺮﻭﻙ‪ /‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻣﺼﻄﻔﻲ ﺍﻣﻴﺮﻱ‬

‫ﻧﻘﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻲ ﻭ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻲ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻲ‬

‫‪7‬‬ ‫ﭼﺮﺍ »ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟«؟ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ؟‪ /‬ﻋﻠﻲ ﺧﺪﺍﺩﺍﺩﻱ‬
‫‪16‬‬ ‫ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ /‬ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺣﺴﻴﻦ ﺩﻻﻝ ﺭﺣﻤﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫‪20‬‬ ‫ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ‪ :‬ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ »ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ« ﺩﺭ ﺿ ّﺪ ﺍﻭﺩﻳﭗ ﻭ ﻫﺰﺍﺭ ﻓﻼﺕ ِﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‪ /‬ﺍﻳﻤﺎﻥ ﮔﻨﺠﻰ‬
‫‪29‬‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‪-‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ /‬ﻣﻴﻼﺩ ﺭﻭﺷﻨﻰ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ‬
‫‪39‬‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺘﺶ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ‪-‬ﻃﻠﺴﻢ‪/‬ﻣﺮﺗﻀﻲ ﻛﺮﺑﻼﻳﻲﻟﻮ‬
‫ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﺲ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‪ِ :‬‬
‫‪45‬‬ ‫ﺳﻪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ‪ /‬ﺷﺎﭘﻮﺭ ﺑﻬﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫‪50‬‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‪ /‬ﻋﺎﺩﻝ ﻣﺸﺎﻳﺨﻰ‬
‫‪62‬‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ‪ /‬ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺔ ﻧﻴﻜﻮﻻﺱ ﺗﻮﺑﺮﻥ‪ /‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺟﻤﺸﻴﺪﻯ‬
‫‪64‬‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ /‬ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺔ ﻣﻠﻴﺴﺎ ﻣﻚﻣﻬﻮﻥ‪ /‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺳﻴﺪ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺳﻴﺪﻯ‬

‫ﺟﺴﺘﺎﺭ‬
‫‪72‬‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻞ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ‪ :‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ /‬ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺔ ﺩﺍﻧﻴﻞ ﺩﺑﻠﻴﻮ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﻤﻴﺖ‪ /‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺳﻴﺪ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺳﻴﺪﻯ‬
‫‪82‬‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ /‬ﻣﻬﺪﻱ ﭘﺎﺭﺳﺎ‬
‫‪88‬‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺘﺔ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ‪ /‬ﺭﺿﺎ ﻧﺠﻒﺯﺍﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻯ ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻭ ﻛﺸﻒ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺧﻠﺪﻭﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﮕﻰ‪ :‬ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫‪95‬‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ :‬ﺗﺜﻠﻴﺖ ﻣﻘﺪﺱ‪ /‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺧﺪﺍﺩﺍﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺭﻏﻢ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﺍﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻻﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺗﺐ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﺧﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺯﺍﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺠﺎﻣﻊ ﺁﻛﺎﺩﻣﻴﻚ ﺭﺍﻩ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻧﻜﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻰﺳﺒﺐ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻰﺭﻏﺒﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺳﺘﻴﺰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺟﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻪﺳﺎﺯ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺬﺍﻕ ﭼﻴﺮﺓ ﺗﻔﻠﺴﻒ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺠﺎﻣﻊ ﺁﻛﺎﺩﻣﻴﻚ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﻫﻤﺨﻮﺍﻥﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺁﻣﻴﺨﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‪ ،‬ﺁﺭﻯﮔﻮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﺭﺿﺎ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻔﻊ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺳﺮﻛﻮﺏ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﺜﺮﺕﺳﺎﺯ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﻧﺒﺮﻯ ﻭﺍﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺫﻭﻕ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﻣﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ »ﻧﻪﮔﻮﻳﻰ ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻰ« ﺑﻪ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻭ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻨﺎ ﮔﺸﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ »ﻣﺸﻖ‬
‫ﻣﺮگ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﺧﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺆﺳﺴﺎﺕ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﻓﻪﻫﺎ ﺭﻭﻧﻖ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺟﺰ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺫﻭﻕ ﻛﺜﺮﺕﺧﻮﺍﻩ ﻭ ﺳﺘﻴﺰﻩﮔﺮ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻧﺴﻞ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﺸﺘﻐﻼﻥ ﻭ ﻋﻼﻗﻪﻣﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ‬
‫ﻭ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺭﻳﺸﻪﺩﻭﺍﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﻙ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺫﻭﻕ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﺤﺎﻓﻞ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻣﺎ ﻛﻪ »ﻭﺣﺪﺕ« ﻭ ﻛﻠّﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﭼﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺠﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺣﻜﻤﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﺄﻟّﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺯﺷﻤﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﻌﺮﺽ ﺁﻓﺖ ﺗﻨﮓﻧﻈﺮﻯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﻳﻚ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻓﺮﺍﺥﺣﻮﺻﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﻳﺎﺩﮔﺎﺭ ﺟﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ّ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﻭ ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺷﺨﺎﺹ ﻧﻴﺰ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺮ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺒﺔ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﻭ ﮔﺴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻣﻨﺪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻳﻢ ﻭ ﺍﻭ ﺩﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺑﻰ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺷﺎﻣﮕﺎﻩ ﺳﺎﻟﺨﻮﺭﺩﮔﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﻳﺴﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﻛﺴﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺧﺴﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺳﺎﻟﺨﻮﺭﺩﺓ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺰﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﻓﻬﻢ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺟﺰ ﭘﺮﻳﺸﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ‬
‫ﻭﺣﺪﺕﺳﺎﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﺎﭼﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﺍﻣﻦ ﺯﺩﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺗﻜﻴﻦ ﻭ ﻛﺜﺮﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺮﺟﻮﺷﻴﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﺩﺭﺑﻴﻔﺘﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﺩﻳﺪﻩﺍﺵ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻨﮓ »ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ« ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺮﺑﺎﺯ ﺧﻮﻳﺸﺎﻭﻧﺪ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻭ ﻛﻠّﻴﺖ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﻭﺭﺯﻯ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻢ ﻭ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﻬﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺪﻝﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺎﺣﺖ ﻋﻠﻮﻡ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻨﺒﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﻳﺒﺎﻳﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﺔ ﻣﺨﺘﺺ ﻫﻨﺮ ﻭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺣﺴﺎﺳﻴﺖ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﺒﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﮕﻰ ﻭ ﻛﺜﺮﺕﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻳﻚ ﺩﻋﻮﺕ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﺣﺮﻓﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﻭ ﺣﻮﺯﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺟ ّﺪﻯ ﻭ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﺳﺮﺍﻍ ﻛﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﻓﺘﻪﺍﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺄﻟﻴﻒ ﻛﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﻩ ﻓﻬﻢ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺩﻟﮕﺮﻣﻰ ﻭ ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﻣﺆﺳﺴﻪ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻬﺎﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﻗﺪﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺆﺛّﺮ ﻭ ﻃﺎﻗﺖﻓﺮﺳﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﻮﺷﺶ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺠﻰﮔﺮﻯ ﺑﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﭘﻴﭽﻴﺪﺓ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻣﺨﺎﻃﺒﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺗﻜﻴﻦ ﺧﻮ ﻧﻜﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﻫﻤﭽﻮ ﻣﺨﺎﻃﺒﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺪﺍﺭﺍ ﻭ ﺷﻜﻴﺒﺎﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻧﮓ ﻓﺮﺍ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﻻﺯﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻳﺎﺩﺁﻭﺭﻱ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﮕﻔﺘﻪ ﭘﻴﺪﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻠﺖ ﺣﺠﻢ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﻣﺠﻠﻪ ﻧﺘﻮﺍﻧﺴﺘﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺚ )ﺣﺘﻲ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻱ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ‬
‫ﺷﺪﺓ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺎﺭﺳﻲ( ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺑﭙﺮﺩﺍﺯﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﻩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻱ ﺑﻌﺪﻱ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﭘﺮﻭﻧﺪﻩﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻬﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﺎ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻗﺎﻯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺧﺪﺍﺩﺍﺩﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﻛﻤﻚﻫﺎﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﻣﻘﺎﻻﺕ ﺗﺸﻜﺮ ﻛﻨﻢ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺣﺴﻦ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻭ ﺍﻃﻤﻴﻨﺎﻥ ﺁﻗﺎﻯ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻭﺟﺒﻰ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺸﺘﻮﺍﻧﻪ ﻭ ﻗﻮﺕ ﻗﻠﺐ ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﮔﺮﺩﺁﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻗﺪﺭﺩﺍﻧﻰ ﻛﻨﻢ‪.‬‬

‫ﺑﻬﻨﺎﺯ ﺩﻫﻜﺮﺩﻯ‬
‫‪ 2‬ﺍﺭﺩﻳﺒﻬﺸﺖ ‪1393‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪2‬‬

‫ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ‪ :‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻓﺼﻞ ﺍ ّﻭﻝ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ژﻳﻞ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮﻯ ّ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ ﺭﺍﺗﻠﺞ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻠﻢ ﻛﻠﺮ ﻛﻮﻟﺒﺮﻭﻙ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝ ‪2002‬ﻡ ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﻩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬

‫ﭼﺮﺍ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ؟ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺟﻬﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺳﺆﺍﻟﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ‬

‫ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ )‪1925‬ـ ‪1995‬ﻡ( ﻫﻢ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺑﭙﺮﺳﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﻫﻴﭻ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﺪﻳﻬﻰ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺍﻭ ﺍﺻﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﻫﻤﻪ‬
‫ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﺸﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ‬
‫ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻣﻰﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺪ ﻧﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ‪ .‬ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺳﻠﻮﻝﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﻣﻮﺍﺝ ﺻﻮﺗﻰ ﻫﻤﮕﻰ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﭘﻴﭽﻴﺪﮔﻰ ﻭ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ »ﭘﺮﺳﺶﺳﺎﺯ« ﺣﻴﺎﺕ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻨﺮ ﻭ ﻋﻠﻢ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺼﺎﺩﻳﻖ‬
‫ﭼﺮﺍ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ؟‬
‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﭘﺮﺳﺶﺳﺎﺯ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻗﺪﺭﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺣ ّﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻮﭼﻚﺗﺮ ﻭ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻠﺸﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻄ ّﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻭ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ‬
‫ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﻧﺪ ّ‬
‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﭘﺴﺎﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻭﺍﺧﺮ ﻗﺮﻥ ﺑﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﻭ ّ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﭘﺴﺎﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍ‪،‬‬
‫ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ژﺍﻙ ﺩﺭﻳﺪﺍ ﻭ ﻣﻴﺸﻞ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﮔﺮﻭﻫﻰ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﮔﺎﻩ ﻧﺒﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺔ ﻛﻠﺮ ﻛﻮﻟﺒﺮﻭﻙ‬
‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﮕﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺤﺎﻱ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬ ‫*‬
‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻣﺼﻄﻔﻰ ﺍﻣﻴﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﺭﻭﻳﺪﺍﺩ ﻣﻬﻢ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻗﺮﻥ ﺑﻴﺴﺘﻢ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫‪mostafa_amiri@yahoo.com‬‬
‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﮔﻨﺠﺎﻧﺪﻩ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎﻡ ﺩﻭ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺁﻟﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺩﻣﻮﻧﺪ ﻫﻮﺳﺮﻝ )‪1859‬ـ ‪1938‬ﻡ( ﻭ ﻣﺎﺭﺗﻴﻦ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ )‪1889‬ـ‬
‫‪1976‬ﻡ( ﮔﺮﻩ ﺧﻮﺭﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﺎﺑﻖ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺭ ّﺩ ﻛﺮﺩ‬
‫ﻭ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻥ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ )ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺣﻜﻢ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ( ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻤﻮ ًﻻ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻧﺎﻡ ﺯﺑﺎﻥﺷﻨﺎﺱ ﺳﻮﺋﻴﺴﻰ ﻓﺮﺩﻳﻨﺎﻥ ﺩﻭ ﺳﻮﺳﻮﺭ )‪1857‬ـ‪1913‬ﻡ(‬
‫ﺗﺪﺍﻋﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺒﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻜﺮﻯ ﻗﺮﻥ ﺑﻴﺴﺘﻢ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻌﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻭ ﺯﺑﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺷﻰ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺷﻜﺎﻓﺎﻧﻪ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﻓﻜﺮﻯ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ »ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ« ﻭ ﻳﺎ »ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻨﺪﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ« ﻣ ّﺘﻜﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؛ ﻭ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﻭ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻣﺤﻜﻢﺗﺮﻯ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻧﻰ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻫﻴﭻ ﭘﻴﺶﻓﺮﺿﻰ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﭼﻪ ﻛﺴﻰ ﻭ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ‬
‫ﻟﺰﻭﻣ ًﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺭ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ :‬ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ‪ .‬ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻫﺎ ﺍﺻﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺩﺍﺭ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؛ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﺎ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﻣﺆﻟّﻔﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻳﻚ ﻟﻐﺖ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﭘﺴﺎﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﻣﺤﺾ )ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ( ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻣﻨﺪ‬
‫)ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ( ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺭ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪3 1393‬‬

‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ )ﻭ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ( ﺩﺭ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﺳﻴ ِﺮﻭﺍﺣﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺴﺎﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥﺩﻫﻰ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺡ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﮕﻞ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻳﻚ ﻋﻴﺐ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻘﺺ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺡ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰﺑﺨﺶ ﺗﻠﻘّﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﺒﺎﻝ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕﻫﺎ ﻏﻠﺒﻪ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻛﺜﺮ ﭘﺴﺎﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﺤﻜﻢ ﻭ ﺛﺎﺑﺘﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﺳ ّﻨﺖ ﻏﺮﺏ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﻫﮕﻞ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺧﻼﻗﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ‪ّ ،‬‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺳﺮﻛﻮﺏ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻞ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻓﺮﺻﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻐﺘﻨﻢ ﺑﺸﻤﺎﺭﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻨﻬﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻯ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ »ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻏﺮﺏ«‬ ‫ﭼﺎﻟﺶ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﻳﻢ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮﺍﻧﺶ ﻫﻤﺪﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻋﺘﻘﺎﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ؟ ﭼﺮﺍ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﻟﻰ ﭼﺮﺍ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩﻯ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﻏﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ )ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ( ﻭ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ )ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ( ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﭼﺎﻟﺶ ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﺮ ّ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﻜﻞ ّ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ ﺁﻭﺭﻧﺪ؟ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﺧﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﺳ ّﻨﺖ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺔ ﺁﺛﺎ ِﺭ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻤﻮ ًﻻ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻳﻰ ﻫﻨﺠﺎﺭﻯ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻈﻴﺮ‬
‫ﻼ ﺳ ّﻨﺘﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﻘ ّﻮﻩ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝﺗﺮﻯ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺑﺸﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﺽ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﻭ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺯﻭﺩ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺩﻳﻮﻳﺪ ﻫﻴﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﻻﺟﺮﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺑﺸﺮﻯ )ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻧﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺣﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﺳﻜﺎﺗﻠﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﺸﺮﺏ ﺭﻭﺷﻨﮕﺮﻯ ﻧﻮﺷﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝ ‪1953‬ﻡ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﻚ ﻭ ﺣ ّﺘﻰ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺁﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻳﻢ(‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﭼﺎپ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ﻓﻘﻂ ‪ 28‬ﺳﺎﻝ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﺗّﻜﺎﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻮﺩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻏﻔﻠﺖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺳﺎﺧﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﺎﻋﻞ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﺟﻌﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻧﺎﮔﺰﻳﺮ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺭﺍﻯ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪) .‬ﻣﺮﺩﻡ‬
‫ﺗﺨﻴﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 1«.‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻼ ﺟﻌﻠﻰ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺔ ّ‬ ‫)ﺗﺪﺍﻭﻡ ﻭ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ( ﻳﻚ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍ ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺗﺨﻴﻞ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ ﻓﺎﻋﻞ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺔ ّ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﻫﻦﮔﻬﺎ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺧﻼﻗﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﺭﺍﻳﺔ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮﻯ ّ‬ ‫ﻭﻟﻰ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﻧﭙﺮﺳﻴﺪﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺧﻮﺩﺷﺎﻥ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ‬
‫ّ‬
‫ﺯﻭﺩ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻋﺘﻘﺎﺩ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﺧﻼﻕ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ (.‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻟﺰﻭﻣ ًﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﺸﺮﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻈﻴﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﺒﺮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺣ ّﺘﻰ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺩﻳﻮﻳﺪ‬
‫ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭﺓ ﺫﻫﻦ ﻋﻘﻼﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻳﺎ »ﻓﺎﻋﻞ« ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ‪.‬‬ ‫»ﺯﺑﺎﻥ« ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰﺍﺕ ﺍﺗّﻜﺎ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻰ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻫﻴﻮﻡ‪،‬ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ‬
‫ﭘﺴﺎﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﺼ ّﻮﺭ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻋﺎ ّﻣﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﻜﺎﺗﻠﻨﺪﻯ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻧﻜﻪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻥ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺯﻧﻪﻫﺎ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻝ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ »ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ« ﻭ »ﻧﻤﺎﺩﻫﺎ« ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺸﻜﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺮﺏ ﺭﻭﺷﻨﮕﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺍﻓﺰﻭﻧﻰﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻰﺛﺒﺎﺗﻰ ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻧﺤﻮﺓ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺧﺪﻣﺖ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻧﻮﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ‬
‫ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺯﺑﺎﻥﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﭼﺎﻟﺶ ّ‬
‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪،‬‬
‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ّ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺑﺮ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ« ﻭ‬ ‫ﻧﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ّ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ‬
‫ً‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺗﻨ ّﻮﻉ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺜﻼ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ‬ ‫»ﺍﻳﻨﻬﻤﺎﻧﻰ« ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻃﻮﺭ ﺗﺼ ّﻮﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻩﺍﻳﻢ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻓﺎﻋﻞ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﺍﻧﺤﺎﻱ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻧﻈﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻯ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﻣﺮﺍﺣﻞ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﻃﻰ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ‬
‫ﻼ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻋﺎﺕ‬‫ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪) .‬ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﺟﻌﻠﻰ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﺪ؛ ﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﺭﺍﻳﺞ ﻋﻠﻮﻡ ﺭﺍﻳﺎﻧﻪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺴﺘﺮ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﻛﻪ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﺳﺨﺖﻧﻮﻳﺴﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻐﺰ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ‪ .‬ﭘﺴﺎﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﻋﻠﻮﻡ ژﻧﺘﻴﻚ‪ ،‬ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﻭﻳﺮﻭﺱ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ‬ ‫ﻛﻠّﻰ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﺴﺘﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺭﺍﻳﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﻳﻢ‪ (.‬ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺭﺍﻫﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻳﻚ ﻭﺍژﻩ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻳﻚ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﭘﺴﺎﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻳﺎ ﭘﻴﺪﺍﻳﺶ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻫﻢ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺳﻌﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺣ ّﺘﻰﺍﻻﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﻨﺪ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻌ ّﺪﺩ ﻭ ﻇﺮﺍﻳﻒ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺢ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻭ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮﻭﺭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺭﻭﻳﻜﺮﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﻧﺴﻞ ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺑﺴﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﻗﺼﺪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﭘﻮﻳﺎﻳﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻳﻚ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺪﻑ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﻟﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻭ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﻰﺛﺒﺎﺗﻰ ّ‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺎﻟﺶ ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺟﻨﺒﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻜﺮﻯ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ‬
‫ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؛ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﻞ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ّ‬
‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ‬ ‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ّ‬
‫ﻫﺮ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻛﻠّﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﺁﻥ ﺳﻬﻢ‬ ‫ﻏﺮﺏ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺩﻫﻪﻫﺎﻯ ‪ 1940‬ﻭ ‪1950‬ﻡ‪ ،‬ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺘﻰ ﻧﻮ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺭﺍ ﻭ ﻋﻘﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺩﺭﻙ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻥ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻛﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺁﻟﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻫﮕﻞ )‪1770‬ـ‪1831‬ﻡ( ﺑﺮ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؛ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻣﺴﻠﻤ ًﺎ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻛﺎﺭﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﺳﺎﻳﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺧﺘﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﮕﻞ ﺍﻋﺘﻘﺎﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪4‬‬

 ‫»ﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ«‪» :‬ﺟﻨﺒﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺯﻧﺎﻥ ﺭﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺿﺎﻓﻪ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺩﺭﻙ‬
‫‪2‬‬
‫»ﻣﺎ ﺍﺧﺘﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻴﻢ«‪ ،‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺍﻇﺐ ﺧﻮﺩﺗﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﺪ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺷﺮﻭﻉ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ :‬ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺁﻳﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ‬
‫ﻼ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺎﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺿ ّﺪ ﺍﺩﻳﭗ ﻭﺍژﮔﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺸﺎﻱ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﺗّﻜﺎﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﺍﻳﻨﻬﻤﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻋﻘﻞ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﻋﻞ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﻋﺮﻑ ﺭﻭﺍﻧﻜﺎﻭﻯ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺣ ّﺘﻰ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ« ﻓﻜﺮ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻙ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﻼ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ »ﺭﻭﺍﻥ« ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﭼﺎﻟﺶ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺻ ً‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﭼﺎﻟﺸﻰ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﻓﺮﺩ ﻳﺎ ﺷﺨﺺ ﻳﺎ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‬ ‫»ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭﻯ« ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﺎﻛﺘﻴﻜﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮﺍﺕ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ّ‬
‫ﻫﺪﻑ ﺩﺭﻣﺎﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻭ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭﺵ ﺳﻌﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻫﺮﺝ ﻭ ﻣﺮﺝ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﺎﺏ ﺩﻫﺪ‬
‫ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ »ﺷﻴﺰﻭﺁﻧﺎﻟﻴﺰ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﺭﻭﻳﻜﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻫﺪﻓﺸﺎﻥ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ‬ ‫)ﺍﻟﺒ ّﺘﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ(‪ ،‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻳﺎ ﺯﺑﺎﻧﻰ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﺭﻭﺍﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻮﻳﺘﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎ‪» ،‬ﺷﻴﺰﻫﺎ« ﻳﺎ ﻗﻄﻌﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﻫﺪﻑ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ِ ،‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﺤﺮﻙ ﺍﻭﻟﻮﻳﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮﺷﺨﺼﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﺮﺽ ﺷﺮﻭﻉ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺛﺎﺑﺘﻰ ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﭘﺴﺎﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻧﻈﻢ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺜﺒﻴﺖ »ﭘﺎﺭﺍﻧﻮﻳﺎﻳﻰ«‬ ‫»ﻣﺤﺾ« ﻧﺒﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻛﻞ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﻳﻚ ّ‬ ‫ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﻧﺸﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﮔﺎﻩ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﺟﻮﺍﻧﺐ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ‬
‫ﺧﻼﻕ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻜ ّﺜﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ »ﺷﻴﺰﻭ« ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ّ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺗﺠﺪﻳ ِﺪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢﻫﺎ ﻓﻘﻂ‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ »ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ« ﭘﺎﺭﺍﻧﻮﻳﺎﻳﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺷﻴﺰﻭ«‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﻭ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺭﻭﺍﻧﺸﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ ّ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﻓﻜﺮﻯ‪ ،‬ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻫﻨﺠﺎﺭ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺣﺎﻛﻢ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﻓ ّﻌﺎﻻﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺴﺎﺏ‬
‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻳﻚ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺁﻳﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭘﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺮﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎﻡ ﺩﻭ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺗﺴﻠﻴﻢ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﻴﺰﻭ ﭼﺎﻟﺸﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ‬ ‫ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌ ّﻤﻖ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻫﻨﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ‬‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﻣﺎ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﻴﻢ ّ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺗﻄ ّﻮﺭ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺨﺶ ﺍﻋﻈﻤﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‬
‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑﺁﻟﻤﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺭﻭﺍﻧﻜﺎﻭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ‬ ‫ﺣﺮﻓﻪﺍﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻜﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﺎ ﺭﻭﺍﻧﻜﺎﻭ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ‪ ،‬ﻓﻠﻴﻜﺲ ﮔﺎﺗﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰﺍﺩﻣﻮﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺫﻫﻦ ﺗﻠﻘّﻰ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻋﺘﻘﺎﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺷﻴﺰﻭﺁﻧﺎﻟﻴﺰ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺩﻳﭗ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺎﺗﺎﺭﻯ )ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫)‪1930‬ـ ‪1992‬ﻡ( ﺳﭙﺮﻯ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺿ ّﺪ ِ‬
‫ﻫﻮﺳﺮﻝ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺭﺗﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺧﻠﻖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺷﺮﻭﻉﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﻧﻤﺎﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﻝ ‪ 1972‬ﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ‪ 1977‬ﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ‬
‫ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﮔﺮﻩ ﺧﻮﺭﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻓﻜﺮ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ( ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﻭﺍﺧﺮ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﺪﻩﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺷﻬﺮﺕ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻛﺎ ِﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑﺮ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺧﻼﻗﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻤﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺁﻣﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻗﺒﻠﻰﺍﺵ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﻧﻜﺎﻭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑﺗﺮ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺿ ّﺪﺍﺩﻳﭗ ﺍ ّﺩﻋﺎﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺑﻖ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻭ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺁﻟﻤﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﻣﻮﻧﺪ ﻫﻮﺳﺮﻝ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺭﺗﻴﻦ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺤﺚﺑﺮﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻌﻤﻮﻝ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ ﻭ‬
‫ﺭ ّﺩ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺗﻼﺵ‬ ‫ﻼ ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺧﻴﻠﻰ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺯﻭﺩ ﭘﻴﺶﻓﺮﺽﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻗﺒ ً‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝ ﻋﻘﻼﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺘﻼﺷﻰ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ‪ .‬ﺿ ّﺪ ﺍﺩﻳﭗ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻟﻪ ﻭ ﺗﺎ ﺣﺪﻭﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ‬ ‫ً‬
‫ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺁﺩﻣﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﭘﺬﻳﺮﻳﻢ )ﻣﺜﻼ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻳﻚ »ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺴﻂِ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺮﻑ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖ ﻣﻴﻞ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺁﻥ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻃﻖ« ﺍﺳﺖ(‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ّ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺍَﺷﻜﺎﻝ ﺑﻮﺭژﻭﺍﺯﻯ ﻭ ﻳﺎ »ﺗﺒﺎﺭﻯ« ﺩﺭ ﺩﻫﺔ ‪ 1960‬ﻡ ﺑﻮﺩ‪) .‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺁﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ »ﺿ ّﺪﺭﻭﺍﻧﭙﺰﺷﻜﻰ« ﺑﻪ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺁﻥ ﺭ‪ .‬ﺩ‪ .‬ﻟﻴﻨﮓ )‪1927‬ـ ‪1989‬ﻡ( ﻭ‬
‫)ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻜﻢ‬
‫ﺛﺎﺑﺖ )ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ »ﻓﺎﻋﻞ« ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎ ﻭ ﻗﻀﺎﻭﺕ ﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩ(‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﻭﻳﻠﻬﻠﻢ ﺭﺍﻳﺶ )‪1897‬ـ ‪1957‬ﻡ( ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻃﻮﻝ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻧﻘﻞ‬
‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ(ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ‬ ‫ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﭘﻮﻳﺎﻯ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻥ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻃﻮﻝ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﻗﻮﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﺍﻭﺍﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ (.‬ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﺪﻫﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺁﻧﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﻋﻘﻞ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻘﻼﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺳﻌﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﻭ ﺁﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻟﺰﻭﻣ ًﺎ ﺳﺮﻛﻮﺑﮕﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻤﻨﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ‬ ‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻫﺎ ّ‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝ ﻭ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﻄﺎﻕ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪ :‬ﭼﺮﺍ‬
‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻭﺍﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺪﺓ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ّ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻋﺮﻑﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻫﻨﺠﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺯﺵﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﻳﻢ؟ ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﻧﻤﻮ ِﺩ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻰ ﻭﺍﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﺯﭼﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﺭﺯﺵﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﻴﺎﻝ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﺻﻞ ﻭ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻳﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﻓﻜﺮ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ؟ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺩﺭ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ‬
‫»ﻭﺭﺍﻯ« ﺧﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺭﺍﻱ ﺩﺍﻣﻨﺔ ﻭﺳﻴﻌﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺑﺤﺚ ﺟﺎﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﺮﺩ؛ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺗﺎ ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻘﺐ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻰ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻭ ﻛﻠّﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺤﺚ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﻭ ﻣﺸﺮﻭﻉﺳﺎﺯﻯ‪ ،‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺧﻠﻖ‬
‫ﺍﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭ »ﻭﺍﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩﻫﺎ« ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺎﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﺗﻚﺻﺪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺻﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﻋﻘﻞ ﻛﻠّﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ ﻧﻜﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺭﻣﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺻﺪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻧﻮﺳﺎﻧﺶ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﺯﻧﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﺓ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺗﻠﻘّﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﺪﻧﺪ‪،‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪5 1393‬‬

‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺻﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺘﻼﺷﻰ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻓﺮﺽﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ‬ ‫ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ‪ .‬ﻧﺒﻮﻍ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻥ ﺁﺛﺎﺭﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻰ ﻫﻴﺠﺎﻥﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ )ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮ ﻳﺎ »ﻭﺍﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩﻫﺎ«( ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺭﺍﻯ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻳﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻛﺸﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻌ ًﺎ ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ‬
‫ﻼ ﮔﺮﻩ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻮ ِﺩ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻗﻀﺎﻭﺕ ﻳﺎ ﭘﻴﺶﻓﺮﺽ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﮔﺎﻩ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ؛ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺭﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ّ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻜﻢ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﻛﺮﺩ؛‬
‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪﻩﺍﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ّ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻫﻴﭻ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺟﺰ ﻓﻮﺟﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻫﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺩﺍﺩﻩﺍﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﺫﻫﻦ ﻳﺎ ﻓﺎﻋﻞ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﮔﺮ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩﻫﺎ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮ‬‫ﻫﻴﭻ ِ‬
‫ﻭﻗﻮﻉ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻳﻚ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻛﻬﻨﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻳﻚ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺑﺴﺘﺮ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﻪ‬
‫ﺷﺮﻭﻉ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺗﺠﺪﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﭘﺮﺳﺶ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻣﺘﻨﺎﻉ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻜﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺍﺫﻫﺎﻥ ﺑﺸﺮ‪ ،‬ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ »ﻏﻴﺮﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﮕﻰ‬ ‫ﺧﻠﻖ ﻭ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺣ ّﺘﻰ ﻛﻮﭼﻚﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻳﻚ ﺭﻭﻳﺪﺍﺩ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺪﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻭ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﺎﻣﻞ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﺳﻠﻮﻝ ﻭ ﻧﻮﺭ ﻓﻘﻂ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺒﻴﻪﺳﺎﺯﻯ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻏﺎﻟﺐ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺑﺪﻫﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻰ ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﻻ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻫﺎﺳﺖ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ »ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ« ﺩﺭ ﻭﺭﺍﻯ ﺁﻥ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺣﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﺚ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻓﻜﺮ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﻴﺮﺑﺸﺮﻯ ﻭ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺩﻭﺭﺑﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣ ّﺪ ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺗﺤ ّﻮﻝ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻗﺎﺕ ﺩﺭ ّ‬
‫ﺭﻭﻳﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮ ﺍﺯ ﭼﺸﻢ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ‬
‫ﻛﺎ ِﺭﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﻳﻚ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﻓ ّﻌﺎﻝ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻮﺟﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻮﺯﻩﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﻨﺪﻩ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮﻯ ﻏﻴﺮﺑﺸﺮﻯ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻜ ّﺜﺮ ﺑﺒﻴﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ‬‫ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ؛ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ »ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ« ﻭ ﺗﻄ ّﻮﺭ؛ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ّ‬ ‫ﻼ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﺎ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬
‫ﺍﻋﺘﻘﺎﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ّ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﻫﻤﺰﻳﺴﺖ‪» ،‬ﻓﻼﺕ« ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ّ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻤﻮﻻً ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﻭﺍﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻓﻘﻂ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ّ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻡ ﺯﺑﺎﻥﺷﻨﺎﺱ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻭﺍﮔﺮﺍﻯ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓﻫﺎ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻢ ﻭ ﻫﻨﺮ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﺳﻮﺋﻴﺴﻰ‬
‫ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻊ ﺑﺪﻭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ّ‬
‫ﻓﺮﺩﻳﻨﺎﻥ ﺩﻭ ﺳﻮﺳﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻊ ﺍﺳﺘﺒﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﺣﺎﻛﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺒﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺗﺤﻤﻴﻞ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺑﺪﻫﺪ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺍﻟﻬﻰ ﻣﻰﭘﻨﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪) .‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻰ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﺷﻜﺎﻝ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻢ ﻭ ﻫﻨﺮ ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ّ‬ ‫ﺗﺪﺍﻋﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻫﻤﭙﻮﺷﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻫﻤﺰﻳﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪(.‬‬ ‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﻣﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﻳﻜﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ »ﺳﺮﻋﺖﻫﺎﻯ« ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻳﻜﭙﺎﺭﭼﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺁﻭﺭﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻩ‬ ‫ﺟﻨﺒﺶﻫﺎﻯﻓﻜﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻙ‬‫ﮔﻴﺎﻫﻰ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﻙ ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﻳﻚ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻭ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻩ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ّ‬ ‫ﻗﺮﻥ ﺑﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﺑﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻣﺪّﺕ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ‬‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ّ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺳﻌﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‬
‫ﻼ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﮔﺎﻩ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﭘﻮﻳﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻨﮕﺮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻛﻠّﻴﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺭﺍﻯ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻛﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰﺍﺵ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻠﻢ ﻧﻤﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﺮﺳﻴﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻙ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﻣﺎ ﺳﻌﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺎﻓﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﺩﺑﻰ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺯﺑﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ ﺗﺎ ﻏﻴﺮﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺷﻮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺿﻤﻦ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻜﻢ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺭﻭﺷﻰ ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻣﺠﺎﺯﻯ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻨﻮﺯ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﻉ ﺳﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺷﺎﻫﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺍ ّﺩﻋﺎﻫﺎﻳﻤﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﺔ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺷﻜﺎﻓﺎﻧﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻓﻜﺮ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺭﻭﺍﻥﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻌﺎﻣﻞ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻭ ﻫﻨﺮ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﻭﺍﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﻓﻖ ﻭ ﻋﺮﻑ ﻋﺎﻡ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ‬
‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺖﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﻨﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻠﻖ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫* ﻋﻀﻮ ﻫﻴﺄﺕ ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﻭﺭﺍﻣﻴﻦ ﭘﻴﺸﻮﺍ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﺘﺤ ّﻮﻝ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﻴﺪﺍﻳﺶ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﺗﺎ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ‬
‫‪1.Deleuze, G. (1991) Empiricism and Subjectivity:‬‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺎﺯﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‪،‬‬
‫‪An Essay on Hume’s Theory of Human Nature,‬‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻫﻨﺮﻣﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫‪trans. Constantin V. Boundas, New York: Columbia‬‬
‫‪University Press, p. 80.‬‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﻣﺘﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﺮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫‪2.Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. (1983) Anti-Oedipus:‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻭ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺤ ّﻮﻝ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫‪Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. Robert Hurley,‬‬ ‫ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﻭﺭﺯﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺎ ِﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ‬
‫‪Mark Seem and Helen R. Lane, Minneapolis:‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍﻩ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﭘﺮﺳﺶﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫‪University of Minnesota Press. P. 61.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺎﻟﺶ ﺑﻜﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﺒﺔ ﭼﺎﻟﺶﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰ ﻛﺎ ِﺭ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪6‬‬

‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺍﺳﺘﻰ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺘﻨﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ؟ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺳﺨﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ ﺳﺨﻦ ﺍﺯ ﭼﻪ‬
‫ﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ؟‬
‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ّ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ »ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ«‪ .‬ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﻣﻌﻤﻮ ًﻻ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺗﻰ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ‬
‫»ﺟﻮﻫﺮ«‪» ،‬ﻋﺮﺽ«‪» ،‬ﺧﺪﺍ«‪» ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ«‪» ،‬ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ«‪» ،‬ﺷﻬﺮ« ﻭ ‪...‬‬
‫ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﻛﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻰ‬
‫ﻛﺸﻒ ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﺍﻩ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﺧﻼﻕ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻨﺮ ﻭ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﻩ »ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ« ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻔﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻔﻊ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝﺷﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻓﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﻡ‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﻯ ﺳﺨﻨﺎﻥﺷﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍ‬
‫ﭼﺮﺍ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻪ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻔﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﻭ‬
‫ﺑﺲ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ »ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟« ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫»ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟«؟‬
‫»ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ« ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺒﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺒﺎﺷﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﭘﺲ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻔﻰ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ‬
‫ﺯﻋﻢ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻃﺮﺣﻰ ﻧﻮ ﺩﺭﺍﻧﺪﺍﺧﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ«‬
‫ﻫﺮ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺍﺯ ِ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ِ‬
‫ﭼﺮﺍ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ؟‬
‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ »ﻛﺸﻒ«؛ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺗﻼﺷﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺧﺎﺹ‪.‬‬
‫ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﺷﺎﻥ ﺭﺳﺎﻧﺪﻥ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻧﮕﺎﻫﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺨﺶ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‬
‫»ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ »ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍ«ﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‬
‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﻩ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺮﮔﺰﻳﺪ‪ّ ،‬‬
‫ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ »ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ«‪ .‬ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﻣﻌﻤﻮ ًﻻ ﻣﺘﻮﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﺛﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ ﺑﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺁﺟﺮﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢﺍﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﺭ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺧﺪﺍﺩﺍﺩﻯ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﻛﺸﻒ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻭ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻓﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫‪ali.khodadadi.s@gmail.com‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﻡ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻓﺮﻡ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﺸﺎﻥ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺁﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺧﻮﺩﺷﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﻡ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺪﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻩﺷﺪﻩ‪ .‬ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﺟﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ‬
‫»ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟« ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ »ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ« ﺳﺨﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺎﻇﺮ ﺑﺮ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﻭ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻣﺘﻮﻧﻰ‬
‫ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﻪﻯ »ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻳﺎ ﻛﺸﻒ ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎﻧﻰﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﻣﺘﻦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻧﺎﻣﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﻡ ﻭ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎ ِﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺘﻦ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ »ﻓﺮﻡ«ﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ‬ ‫ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻓﻠﻴﻜﺲ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﺭﺍﻩ ﭘﻴﮕﻴﺮﻯ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺁﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺯﻫﺮﻩ ﺍﻛﺴﻴﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﮔﻔﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺁﻥ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﻭ ﭘﻴﻤﺎﻥ ﻏﻼﻣﻰ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺩﺍﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ؟«‪ 1‬ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺭﺍﻩ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﺰﻳﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ ﻧﻮ‪.1391 ،‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪7 1393‬‬

‫ﺁﻥ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻛﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﻪ ﻧﺎﻇﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺘﻨﻰ ﺟﺰﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻲ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﺁﻥﭼﻪ »ﻳﻚ ﻋﻤﺮ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ«‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻝ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺮﺍﺝ‬ ‫ﺑﺨﺶ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﻧﺎﻇﺮ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﻣﺘﻦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺏ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ »ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎ«‪ .‬ﺑﺨﺶ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮﮔﺎﻩ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺭﻛﺎﻥ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻓﺮﻡ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺸﻰ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺧﺎﺻﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎ؟ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ »ﻛﺎﺭ«ﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ »ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ »ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟« ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ« ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﺩﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﭼﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﺍﻯ ﻭ ﺷﺮﻭﺡ ﺁﻛﺎﺩﻣﻴﻚ ﺑﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﺮﻣﻰ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﻨﺪ؟ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ِ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻨﻰ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎ ﻣﻌﻤﻮ ًﻻ ﺑﺎ ﺷﻌﺮ ﻭ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺁﻥ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺧﻮﺭﺩﻩ ﺍﻣﺎ‬
‫»ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﺔ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ ﮔﻔﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ«‪» ،‬ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺩﺍﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ«‬ ‫ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻭﺳﻴﻊﺗﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻠﻤﻪ ﭼﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﺰﻳﻨﻨﺪ؟‬ ‫ﭘﻮﺷﺶ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻠﻖﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻭ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ‪ .‬ﻭ ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺰﻳﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﺩﺑﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﺮﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ‬
‫ﻗﻮﻝ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ »ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ«ﻯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻳﻚ »ﺩﺭﺧﺖ« ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﻧﻤﻰﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻼ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻜﺎﻥﺍﺵ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺭﻳﺸﻪﺍﺵ ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻥ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬ ‫ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﻋﺎﻡ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻮﺩﻭﺭﻭﻑ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﻣﻌﻴﻨﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﻼ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻯ ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬
‫ﻋﻤﻮﺩﻯ ﺗﻘﻮﻳﻤﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺧﻂِ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺧﺎﺻﻰ ﻣﻰﺯﻳﺴﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺧﻼﻑ ﻋﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﻮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﻼﻑ ﻋﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻳﻚ »ﺷﺠﺮﻩﻧﺎﻣﻪ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ »ﺗﺒﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ«‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺧﻄﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻫﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺣﺴﺐ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ ﻳﺎ ﺭﺩ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻗﺒﻠﻰ ﺩﺳﺘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ ﺩﻭﺩﻭﻳﻲ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺷﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﺧﻄﻰ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻯ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﮕﺮﺍ‪ ،‬ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﻦﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺳﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﺧﻼﻑ ﺗﺄﻭﻳﻞ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﻌﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺟﺴﺖﻭﺟﻮﻯ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﻮﻳﻰ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫‪2‬‬
‫ﺗﻄﻮﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻡ‬ ‫ﻫﺪﻑﺍﺵ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﻋﺎﻣﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺎﻇﺮ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺛﺮﻧﺪ‪«.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻜﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻋﻠﺖ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻯ ﻫﺮ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﺷﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺘﻦ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻭ ﺟﺰﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ ﻋﺪﻭﻝ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﺎﻣﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﺭﺷﺪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻗﺪﺑﺮﺍﻓﺮﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺩ ﭘﺎﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺳﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺟﺎ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﺧﻄﻰ ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﺭﺩ ﭘﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﻭ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺰﺍﺭ ﻓﻼﺕ ﺩﺳﺘﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ »ﺭﺩ ﭘﺎﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﺘﻮﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻧﺎﻣﻴﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍژﮔﻮﻥ ﻛﻨﻴﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﺸﻪ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺑﺰﻧﻴﺪ‪ ...‬ﺩﺭﺧﺖﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﻭ ﺑﺮﻭﺯ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻧﺎﻣﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁِ‬
‫ﻛﻨﻴﺪ‪ 4«.‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﺧﺖﻫﺎ ﺧﺴﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﻯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻫﻢﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﻭ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﺧﺖﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺭﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺭﻳﺸﻪﭼﻪﻫﺎ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ‬ ‫ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻫﺮ ﺩﺳﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﺟﻮﻳﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺭﻧﺞ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺑﺒﺮﻳﻢ‪ 5«.‬ﺩﺭﺧﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺭﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎ ﺭﻧﺞﺁﻭﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ 3.‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻚ ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪،‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻤﺪﺍﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠﻮﻡ ﻭ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﻣﺘﻮﻧﻰ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻣﺘﻜﺜﺮ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ‪ 1-n‬ﺑﻌﺪ ﻭ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺸﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺮﺍﺝ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺷﺮ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺧﻼﺹ ﺷﺪ‪ 6.‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻛﻤﻚ ﻋﻠﻮﻣﻰ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺳﺘﻮﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺟﺮﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﭘﺲ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ‬ ‫ﺧﺼﻮﺹ ﺭﻭﺍﻥﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﻧﻜﺎﻭﻯ‪ .‬ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺍﻳﻦﻛﻪ ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎ ﻣﺘﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺭﺩﭘﺎﻯ »ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ«‪ ،‬ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻳﻚ »ﻧﻘﺸﻪ« ﻳﺎ »ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ«‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﺩﺳﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﺍﺯ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪8‬‬

‫ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ...‬ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﻧﻪ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻧﻪ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻌﻴﻦﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﻣﻨﻪﻫﺎ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ »ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻯ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ« ﭼﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺑُﻌﺪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻧﻜﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩﺷﺎﻥ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺩﻫﺪ ﺍﻣﺎ ﻧﻪ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﻛﻪ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﺷﻮﺩ »ﺩﺭﺧﺖ« ﻭ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ«‪ .12‬ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﻛﺜﺮﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪:‬‬ ‫»ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ« ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﻮﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﺎﻥ ﺧﺴﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ‬
‫‪ .۱-n‬ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﺷﮕﻔﺖﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰ ﺗﺠﻮﻳﺰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡﻫﺎ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺑﺰﻧﻴﺪ؟‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﻧﺦﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﺮﻭﺳﻚ ﺧﻴﻤﻪﺷﺐﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﺫﻫﻦ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﻳﻦﻛﻪ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﺼﺮﻩ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺿﺎﻓﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮ ِﺩ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺧﺖ‪ِ ،‬‬
‫ﻋﺮﻭﺳﻚﮔﺮﺩﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﺭﺷﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ ﻋﺼﺒﻰ ﺍﻭ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 7.‬ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﺭﻳﺸﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﻜﺎﻧﺶ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﻭ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺣﺪﻭﺩﺵ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺟﺎﻯ ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺲ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻟﻰ ﻣﺘﻜﺜﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﻭ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥﺷﺪﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻭ ﺣﺘﻤﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺟﺰء‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫ـ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡﻫﺎ ﻧﺎﺩﻻﻟﺖﮔﺮﻧﺪ‪» :‬ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﺑﺎﻭﺭﻯ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪ‪ ،‬ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‬ ‫ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﺭﻳﺸﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻌﺪ ﺗﻨﻪ ﻭ ﺳﺎﻗﻪ ﻭ ﺑﺮگ ﻭ ﻣﻴﻮﻩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ ﺩﻭﺩﻭﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻳﻚ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﻣﺒﺪﻝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺭﺷﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻮﺍﺯﻯ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 13«.‬ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ‬ ‫ﺩﻭ ﺷﺎﺧﻪ ﻭ ﻫﺮ ﺷﺎﺧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﺷﺎﺧﻪﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺁﺧﺮ‪ 8.‬ﺗﺼﻮ ِﺭ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﻳﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺭﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺳﺮﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪ‬
‫ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﺭﺍ‪ .‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﻨﻮﺍﻝ ﻛﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺗﻘﻠﻴﺪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻛﻞ‬‫ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻋﻀﻮ ﻳﻚ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫ﻼ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬‫ﺑﺪﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺲ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻄﺶ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻋﻀﺎﻯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻭ ِ‬
‫‪14‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺩﻭﺩﻭﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ «.‬ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺁﻓﺘﺎﺏﭘﺮﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‪ .‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺭﻧﮓ‬
‫ﺟﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻧﮓ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺩﺭﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺣﻔﺎﻇﺖ ﺍﺯ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺟﺪﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﻛﭙﻰ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺒﻰ‬
‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﺪ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺑﻞﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎﻯ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﻭ ﭘﺪﺭﺳﺎﻻﺭﺍﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻪ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎ ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ﺗﺎﺯﻩﺍﻯ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚﺍﺵ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺠﺎﻣﺪ‪ .‬ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎ‬ ‫»ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰﺑﻮﺩﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﭘﻮﺳﺖ ﺁﻓﺘﺎﺏﭘﺮﺳﺖ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎﻯ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺑﻞﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡﻭﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺩﻻﻟﺖﮔﺮ ﻭ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ‪ 9«.‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﻮﺍﺯﻯ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻼ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩﻯ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒﮔﺮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻗﺮﻳﻨﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻨﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻕ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ـ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡﻫﺎ ﻧﻘﺸﻪﺍﻧﺪ ﻧﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺩﭘﺎﻫﺎ‪» :‬ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻠﻰ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ »ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﻧﻘﺸﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﻪ ﺭﺩﭘﺎ‪ 15«.‬ﺭﺩﭘﺎﻫﺎ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻭﺍﺭ ﻭ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺫﻫﻦ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﻻﻟﺖﮔﺮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﺧﺒﺮ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺭﺩ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺎ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ‪ .‬ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﮔﻴﺎﻫﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﻳﺸﻪ ﻭ ﺳﺎﻗﻪ ﻭ ﻣﻴﻮﻩ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻏﺎﻳﺖ‪ِ .‬‬ ‫ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ِ .‬‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﮔﻴﺎﻫﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺭﺷﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻣﺴﻴﺮﻳﺎﺑﻰ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﻧﻘﺸﻪﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻥﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻫﻢﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺒﻰ‪ .‬ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﭘﻴﺶ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡﻫﺎ ﻧﻘﺸﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺕ ﺑﺮ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺭﻭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﻳﺎ ﻫﺮ ﺟﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﺗﺼﺎﺩﻓﻰ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺳﻄﺢﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻘﺸﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﻭ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻧﺸﻴﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﺭﻳﺸﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺳﺎﻗﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺗﻨﻪﺍﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﻭ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؟ ﺁﻳﺎ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﺕ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﺮﭼﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ ﺷﺒﻜﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﺴﻄﺢ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻤﺎ ِﻡ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻠﻰ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﻫﻢ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ؟ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ‬ ‫ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﺷﺎﺧﻪﺷﺎﺧﻪ‬‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻤﺎ ِﻡ ﺟﻬﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎ ﺻﻠﺐﺷﺪﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﭘﻴﺎﺯﻫﺎ ﻭ‬
‫ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮﺗﻔﺎﻫﻢ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺎﺯﭼﻪﻫﺎ‪ 10«.‬ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺳﻮﺗﻔﺎﻫﻤﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﻮﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺭ ِﺩ ﭘﺎ ﻭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﻧﻘﺸﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺑﻰﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻧﻤﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺩﺳﺘﻮﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﺭﺩ‬ ‫ـ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡﻫﺎ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪» :‬ﻫﺮ ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ‪،‬‬
‫ﭘﺎﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍژﮔﻮﻥ ﻛﻨﻴﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﺸﻪ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺑﺰﻧﻴﺪ‪ ...‬ﺩﺭﺧﺖﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﻛﻨﻴﺪ‪ 16«.‬ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺘﻰ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺭﻳﺸﻪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻈﻤﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺻﻠﺐ ﻭ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺑﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﻧﻤﺎﻳﺎﻧﺪ‪» .‬ﮔﻴﺎﻫﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ 11«.‬ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺭﻳﺸﻪ ﻫﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻭﺟﻮﻫﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡﻭﺍﺭ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺰ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺭﺷﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﻰ ﺑﺰﺭگﺗﺮ ﺑﺪﻝ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺁﻳﺎ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﮔﻴﺎﻫﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖﺍﺵ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺭﺷﺪ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﻪ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺩﻭﺩﻭﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؟«‪ 17.‬ﺩﺭﺧﺖﻫﺎ ﺳﻮﺗﻔﺎﻫﻢﺍﻧﺪ ﭘﺲ ﺑﺎ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺧﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺑﻪ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﻛﻞ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﻣﻨﺘﻬﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ‬
‫ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺷﺮﺷﺎﻥ ﺧﻼﺹ ﺷﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﻫﻮﻳﺖ ﻭ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺛﺎﺑﺘﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻭﻝ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬
‫ﺩﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺨﺶ ِ‬ ‫ـ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡﻫﺎ ﻣﺘﻜﺜﺮﻧﺪ‪» :‬ﻛﺜﺮﺕﻫﺎ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻛﺜﺮﺕﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ »ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ« ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺫﺏ ﻭ ﺷﺎﺧﻪﺷﺎﺧﻪ ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﺮﺽ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪9 1393‬‬

‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺩﺭ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﺗﻨﮓ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﻧﮕﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻯ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚﺷﺎﻥ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺑﺰﻧﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﻭ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻨﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺗﺤﻤﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﻦﺑﺎﺭ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﺮﺩ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﺳﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻴﺎﻭﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻼﺵﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻤﻞﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺬﺯ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻋﻤﻞﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﻣﻤﻨﻮﻉ‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻯﮔﺰﻳﻦ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺷﺮﺣﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﻛﻤﺎﺑﻴﺶ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﻏﻰ ﺟﺎﻧﻮﺭﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‪ 19«.‬ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‬ ‫ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻣﺘﻜﺜﺮ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻨﮓ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻭ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺣﺼﺎ ِﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺻﻠﺐ‪ ،‬ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻭ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩﺍﺵ ﻣﺤﺮﻭﻡ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺶﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﺯﺩﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻏﺎﻳﺖ ﻭ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﺍﺵ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰﺍﻯ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺗﻐﻴﻴ ِﺮ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺻﻠﺐ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺧﻼﺻﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺧﺪﻣﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﻔ ِﻊ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﻣﻰﺯﺩﺍﻳﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺕ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺑﺎﺯﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﺮﻧﻮﺷﺘﻰ ﺩﺭﺩﻧﺎﻙ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺯﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎﻳﻰﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺶ ﺑﺎ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻣﺪﻝ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﺗﻨﮓ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻭ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻜﺜﺮ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﻓﺎﻳﺪﻩﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﺮﺩ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﺯﺩﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺎﺣﺖ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﻨﺪ؟ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻯ ﺗﺎﺯﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺒ ِﻊ ﺁﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﻈﺎﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺼﺎ ِﺭ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻟﺶ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﻛﺎ ِﺭ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺩﻫﺪ؟ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺗﻨﮓ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺸﻜﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻭ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﺭﻭﺩ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺁﺧﺮﻳﻦ ﮔﺎ ِﻡ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺻﺮﻑ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻭ ﺣﻮﺍﺱ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﺭﻭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﭼﮕﻮﻧﮕﻰ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩ ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻯ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻨﮓ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺩﻳﻮﺍﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺎ ِﻍ ﺟﺎﻧﻮﺭﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ِ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻛﺎ ِﺭ »ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ« ﻳﺎ ﺣﻮﺍﺱ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ »ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻭ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ »ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ« ﺩﺭ ﺫﻫﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺣﻮﺍﺱ‬
‫ﺑﺨﺶ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﻫﻢﺷﻜﻨﻨﺪﺓ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺟﻬﺖ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﺭﻓﺖ‪ ،‬ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ِ‬ ‫ﭘﻨﺞﮔﺎﻧﻪ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ‬
‫ﺣﺪﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﮔﺎﻣﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻳﻜﻰ ﻭ ﮔﺎﻣﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻛﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﺭﺍ »ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ« ﻣﻰﻧﺎﻣﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺸﻰ ﺑﻰﺳﺎﺑﻘﻪ‪ 20«.‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻭﻇﻴﻔﻪﺍﻯ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﻧﺎﺁﺷﻨﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﻇﻴﻔﺔ ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﻭ ﺭﻓﺘﻦ ﺗﺎ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺟﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺣﻖ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﺁﺷﻨﺎ ﻭ ﺍﺯﭘﻴﺶﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺣﻮﺍﺱ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﻥﺍﺵ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﻛﻬﻨﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺗﺎﺯﻩﺍﻯ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪» .‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ ﻭ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻭ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﻛﺸﻒ ﻭ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‪ 21«.‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﭼﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﺪﻝ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﺭﺧﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻌﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﻧﺎﺁﺷﻨﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﺁﺷﻨﺎ‬
‫ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻭ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺧﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﺩﺭ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﺑﻴﻨﺪﺍﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﺔ ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻳﺸﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭﻇﻴﻔﻪﺍﻯ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻣﺤﻮﻝ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺁﻣﻮﺧﺘﻪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻭﻇﻴﻔﻪﺍﻯ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺣﻮﺍﺱ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻥ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ‪ :‬ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺗﻰ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻘﺎﻳﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺑﺰﺭگﺗﺮ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﻤﻨﺪﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻭ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﺁﻥﭼﻪ »ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ« ﻧﺎﻣﻴﺪﻩﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﻣﺎﺩﻩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺻﻠﺐ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕﺍﺵ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ »ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻣﺎ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻣﺎ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻫﻨﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺫﻫﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻣﺎ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﻧﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﻭ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 22«.‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻪ ﭼﻨﺎﻥﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎﻧﻴﺎﻥ‬ ‫‪18‬‬
‫ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻣﺎ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﻧﺪ‪«.‬‬
‫ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ »ﺗﻌﻤﻖ« ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺑﮋﺓ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ )ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺁﻟﻴﺴﻢ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻭ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﻧﻤﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺣﻖ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ(‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﭼﻨﺎﻥﻛﻪ ﻣﺪﺭﻥﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﮔﻔﺘﻨﺪ »ﺗﺄﻣﻞ« ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ )ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺁﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ( ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﭼﻨﺎﻥﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫»ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ« ﻳﺎ »ﻫﻢﺭﺳﺎﻧﻰ« ﺑﻴﻨﺎﺳﻮژﻩﺍﻯ )ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺁﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺑﻴﻨﺎﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ(‪،‬‬ ‫ﺧﻄﺮ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺁﺷﻨﺎﻯ‬
‫ﭼﻪ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﺳﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺷﻜﺎﻝ ﻫﺪﻓﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﺟﺰ ﻛﺸﻒ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ‪» :‬ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ«‬ ‫ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺩﺭﺧﺖﻫﺎ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺭﻧﺞ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ »ﭼﻴﺰ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪» ،‬ﻣﻦ«ﺍﻡ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ »ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﺮ ﺳﻪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺑﺒﺮﻳﻢ؟ ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺘﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﺔ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﻛﻠﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺩﻫﻨﺪ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺧﺖﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺧﺼﻮﺹ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺳﻮﻕ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ؟‬
‫ﻛﻪ »ﺍﺻﻞ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﻛﻠﻰ ﻫﻴﭻ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ‬ ‫ﻣﺪﻝ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ِ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺧﻮﺩﺷﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ 23«.‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺁﺷﻨﺎ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮﺵ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻭ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻧﺤﻮﻩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﻪ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻛﺸﻒ ﻳﺎ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻚ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺧﺪﻣﺖ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ُﺗ ُﻨ ِ‬
‫ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﺔ ﻣﺜﺎﻝﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﻬﻢ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﻋﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪» .‬ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪10‬‬

‫ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻘﻰ ﻫﻢﭘﻮﺷﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﻭ ﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ‬ ‫ﭘﺸﺘﻴﺒﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺜﺎﻝﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﭘﺸﺘﻴﺒﺎﻧﻰﺷﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﻭ ﻫﻢﻧﻮﺍﺧﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ )ﺩﺭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻢ« ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺗﻰ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺸﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺷﻚﻭﺭﺯﻳﺪﻥ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻭ ﻫﻢﭘﻮﺷﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ »ﺣﻖ« ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻮﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﺷﻚﻭﺭﺯ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺪﻳﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﻭ ﻫﻢﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺸﻰ ﻭﺭﺍﻯ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺩﺍ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻦ‪ :‬ﺁﻥﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ(‪ .‬ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺭﻳﺰﻭ ِﻡ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺭﺍﻩ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺯﺩﻥ‬
‫ﻫﻢﭘﻮﺷﺎﻥﺷﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﻭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ‬ ‫ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶﮔ ِﺮ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﭘﻴﻤﺎﻳﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻫﻨﺮ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺍﻭﻝ‪ :‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻘﻰ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫»ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻳﻚ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻛﺜﺮﺗﻰ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺟﺪﺍ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ 24«.‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﻭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﮔﺮﻩﮔﺎﻩ ﻭ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺾ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻳﻜﻪ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻼﻗﻰ ﭼﻨﺪ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩﺷﺎﻥ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﻧﺪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﺯ ﭼﻨﺪ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﺷﺪﻩ‬
‫)ﻣﺆﻟﻔﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻢ« ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺗﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﺍﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻦ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦﺟﺎ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻢ«‬ ‫ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺧﻄﻮﻃﻰ ﻛﻨﺎﺭﻩﻧﻤﺎ ﻭ ﻣﺮﺯﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﺧﺪﺍ« ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺕ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺭﺩ(‪ .‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺟﺎﺑﺠﺎﻳﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻟﺮﺯﺍﻥ ﻭ ِ‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﺛﺮﻯ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪» :‬ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺗﺎ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ ﻭ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ )ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺣﺪﻯ ﺑﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻭﺻﻞ‬ ‫»ﻣﻦ ﻓﺎﻋﻠﻰ« ﻳﺎ »ﻣﻦ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻢ« ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺗﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ِ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ 28«.‬ﭘﺲ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﺍﻯ ﻫﻴﭻﮔﺎﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺳﻪ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﺔ ﺷﻚ ﻭﺭﺯﻳﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﻧﻤﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﺍﻯ ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ »ﻫﺴﺘﻰ« ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﭘﻞﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻭ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻯ ﭘﻮﺷﺎﻧﺪﻥ ﻭ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ(‪ .‬ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ‬
‫ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺧﺖ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺍﻳﻦﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ‬ ‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ »ﺍﻳﻦﺑﻮﺩﻥ«ﻯ ﻣﺨﺼﻮﺹ‬ ‫ﻛﻠﻴﺖ ﻗﻄﻌﻪﻗﻄﻌﻪ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻴﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺷﺒﻜﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ ﺧﻮﺵﺳﺎﺧﺖ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁِ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﻭ ﻫﻢﻧﻮﺍﺧﺘﻰ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﻭ ﻫﻢﻧﻮﺍﺧﺘﻰﺷﺎﻥ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﻭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺍﺟﺮﺍ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻗﻄﻌﺎﺕ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻳﻚ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎ ﺗﺠﺴﺪ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻧﻘﺎﻃﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺷﺒﻜﺔ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ِ‬ ‫‪25‬‬
‫ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻣﺨﺘﺼﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﺍﻧﺪ ﻧﻪ ﺍﻣﻮﺭﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻃﺒﻘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﻮﺍﺭﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺁﻳﺎ ﻫﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؟‬ ‫ﺟﺰﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺧﺎﺹ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺕ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺑﻰﺷﻜﻞ ﻭ ﻫﺮ ﺟﻮﺭﻩﺍﻧﺪ؟‬ ‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻡﻫﺎ ﻧﺎﺩﻻﻟﺖﮔﺮﻧﺪ )ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻢ« ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺕ‬
‫ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﮔﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺗﻚ ﺳﻮژﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﺗﻚ ِ‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻛﺠﺎﺳﺖ؟ ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻧﻈﻢ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ؟ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺩﮔﻰ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺳﻮژﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂِ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻛﻠﻰ‬
‫ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﺻﻔﺤﺔ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ«‪ .‬ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺩﻭﻡ‪ :‬ﺻﻔﺤﺔ‬ ‫ﺩﺳﺘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ(‪» .‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻋﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺧﻮﺩـﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻭ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻩﺷﺪﻥ ﻭﺿﻊ‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻘﺸﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻮﻝ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ 26«.‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﺰﻳﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ‪ 29.‬ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻞﻛﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩ ﻳﺎ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫»ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ‪ 27«.‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻃﺒﻖ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﭼﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﻳﻚ ﺻﻔﺤﻪﻯ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺩﻫﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺼﺪﺍﻗﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﺖ‬
‫ﻳﻚ »ﻛﻞ« ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﺘﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﭘﻴﺶﻓﺮﺽ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﻃﺒﻖ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﭼﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺻﻔﺤﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻠﺐ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻋﺚ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‪ِ ،‬‬
‫ﺍﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻴﻦ ِ‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺘﻈﺎﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪11 1393‬‬

‫ﻣﺴﺘﺒ ِﺪ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻭﺍﻻﺗﺮ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﺍﻥ ﺗﺤﻤﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪...‬‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺣﻘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﻃﻮﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺳﻤﺎﻥ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻋﻤﻮﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ ﺟﺎ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺽ »ﭘﻴﺸﺎﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 30.‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﺩﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻫﺮﺟﺎ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮﻩﻯ ِ‬
‫ﻧﻈﻢ‬
‫ﻧﻈﻢ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻳﻚ ِ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ‪ ...‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ِ 32«.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻭ ﻭ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩ ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺭﺙ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎﺕ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣﺴﺐ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺕ ﻭ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﭘﻴﺶﻓﺮﺽ‬
‫ﻧﻈﻢ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﻨﺶ‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﭼﻴﻨﺪ )ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺻﻠﺐ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻴﻨﺶ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﺻﻔﺤﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﻰﭼﻴﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺁﻥ »ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﺷﺖ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ )ﻧﻘﺸﺔ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺟﻮﻳﺎﻯ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ« ﻳﺎ ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺕ ﺑﺮ ﺻﻔﺤﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ‬
‫ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺷﻬﺮ ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺣﺴﺐ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻭ ﺟﻐﺮﺍﻓﻴﺎﻯ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻬﺮ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ »ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺑﻬﺮﻩ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ«(‪ .‬ﺻﻔﺤﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻈﻤﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘﺸﺔ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶﻣﻮﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﺷﻬﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺕ ﻭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺷﻬﺮﻯ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻥﻫﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﻢ ﻭ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺧﻄﻮﻃﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺨﺘﺺ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺶ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﻮﻟﻴ ِﺪ ﺷﻬﺮ ﻗﺒﻠﻰ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ(‪ .‬ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺍﻳﻦﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﺤﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﺷﺪﻥ‬
‫ﻧﻈﻢ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﺭﻭﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻈﻤﻰ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻨﺰﻝ ﻣﻰﮔﺰﻳﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻧﻮﺍﺣﻰ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬
‫ﻧﻈﻢ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻛﻴﺪﺍً ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻭﺭﺩ‪ِ ،‬‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻫﻢ ﻧﮕﻪ‬
‫ﺣﺴﺐ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂِ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺎ ِﻡ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺕ ﻫﺮﭼﻪﻓﺰﺍﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻀﻤﻴﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ...‬ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﭘﻴﻮﻧ ِﺪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻧﻈﻢ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻭ ﺍﻓﻘﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺎ ِﻡ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﻮﺩﻯ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ 31«.‬ﺻﻔﺤﺔ ﻫﺮ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﻭﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺻﻔﺤﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻭ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺒﻰ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﺑﮕﺮﻳﺰﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﻛﺴﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺗﻜﻴﻦﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺳﺮﺁﻏﺎ ِﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻣﻰﭼﻴﻨﺪ؟ ﺁﻳﺎ ﭼﻴﻨﺶ ﺗﻤﺎ ِﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﺷﺮﻁ ِ ِ‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻛﺎ ِﺭ ﻳﻚ »ﻣﻦ«‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻳﺎ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻧﻮﺍﺣﻰ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺷﺨﺺ ﻳﻚﭘﺎﺭﭼﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ؟ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻛﻴﺴﺖ؟‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﭘﺮﺳﺶ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژ«‪.‬‬ ‫ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﭘﻴﺶﻓﺮﺽ‬
‫ﺳﻮﻡ‪ :‬ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‬ ‫)ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬
‫»ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺩﮔﺮﻧﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻧﻘﺸﺔ ﻳﻚ ﺷﻬﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻤﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺭﺍﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ 33«.‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﻧﺎ ِﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌ ًﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻬﺮ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ِ .‬‬
‫ﻧﻈﻢ‬
‫»ﺟﻨﺎﺱ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎ ِﻡ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ‬ ‫ﺷﻬﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻘﺸﻪﻯ ﺷﻬﺮﻯ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺗﺎﻡ« ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪» .‬ﻧﺎ ِﻡ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻧﺎ ِﻡ ﻣﺴﺘﻌﺎ ِﺭ ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺕ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻦ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺧﻮﺩﻡ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﺍﺣﻰ ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﻭ ﻭﺍﻗﻌ ًﺎ ﻣﻮﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﺷﻬﺮ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻢ‪ 34«.‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻤﺎﻥﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ(‪.‬‬
‫ﺷﺨﺺ ﺭﻭﺍﻧﻰـﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻮژﺓ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺻﻔﺤﺔ ﻃﺮﺡﺭﻳﺰﻯ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺍﻭ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﻚﭘﺎﺭﭼﺔ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻞﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﻣﻦ«ﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﭘﻴﺶﻓﺮﺽ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﺍﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺨﻴﻞ ﺍﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻗﻄﻌﻪﻗﻄﻌﺔ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻟﻔﺎﻑ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺍﺻﻴﻞﺍﺵ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﭼﻴﻨﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺎ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺻﻔﺤﺔ »ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ«؟ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻭ ﻫﻤﺔ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺠﻰﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺳﻮژﻩﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺻﻔﺤﺔ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻠﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؟ ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ِ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﺍﺵ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ 35«.‬ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺑﺎ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﺪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻈﻢ ﻭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﺍﻛﻴﺪﺍً ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥﻧﻮﻳﺲ ﺍﺯ »ﺭﺍﻭﻯ« ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺻﻔﺤﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻜﻤﻞ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻈﻢﺍﺵ ﺑﺮﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻭ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻨﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻥﮔﺮ ﺗﻜﺜﺮ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻜﺜﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺯﻳﺮ ﻟﻮﺍﻯ ﻧﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﻜﻴﻢ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻈﻤﻰ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻈﻤﻰ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪﻯ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺳﻢ ﺭﻣﺰ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺁﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﻧﻈﻢ ﻋﻤﻮﺩﻯ )ﻧﻈﻢ‬
‫ﻣﻦ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ »ﺳﻮﻡﺷﺨﺺ«ﻫﺎﻯ ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺮﻭﻥ ﻭﺳﻄﻰ(‪ .‬ﺻﻔﺤﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺍﻃﻮﺭﻯ ﻳﺎ ِ‬
‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺑﻠﻪ ﻓﻜﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺑﻪ »ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ِ« ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﻣﻦ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻔﺤﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻭ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ ِ‬
‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺯﺭﺗﺸﺖ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻢ«‪» ،‬ﻣﻦ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻢ«‪» ،‬ﻣﻦ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻳﺎ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﺟﺰ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺩﻳﻮﻧﻮﺳﻮﺱ ﻣﻰﺭﻗﺼﻢ‪ 36«.‬ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﻢ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ‪» .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻴﺚ‪ ،‬ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﺯﺗﻮﻟﻴ ِﺪ ِ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﺪﻝ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻳﻚ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎ ِژ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻛﺴﺎﻧﻰﻛﻪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺣﻜﻴﻢﻫﺎ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺧﻼﻝ »ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ«‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺧﻼﻝ »ﺯﺭﺗﺸﺖ«‪ ،‬ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻥ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ )ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﻨﺎﻛﺮﺩﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﻨﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻛﺸﻴﺶﻫﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﻛﺸﻴﺶﻫﺎ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ »ﺷﺎﻋﺮ«(‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻣﻰﭼﻴﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻈﻤﻰ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻳﻚ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪12‬‬

‫ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ(‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﺪﺍ ِﻉ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ )ﺗﺨﻴﻞ‪ :‬ﻗﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺼﺎﻳﺺ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژ ﺍﻛﻴﺪﺍً ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺤﺔ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ‬
‫ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ( ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺮﻛﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺻﻔﺤﺔ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﺆﻟﻒ‬
‫)ﻓﻬﻢ‪ :‬ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﮔﺮﺩ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ(‪ .‬ﭘﻴﻮﻧ ِﺪ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻧﻘﺶ ﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ‪...‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻪ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻣﺘﻨﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺘﻦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ‬ ‫ﻼ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺤﻪﺍﻯ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ‬ ‫ﺣﺘﻰ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ ﺍﻧﺰﺟﺎﺭﺁﻭﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬
‫‪37‬‬
‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﻭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺤﺚ ﭘﻰ ﻣﻰﺭﻳﺰﺩ‪ «.‬ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ »ﻣﻦ«‬
‫ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻰ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﺘﺒﻠﻮﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﻚﭘﺎﺭﭼﺔ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺭﺍ ﻗﻄﻌﻪﻗﻄﻌﻪ ﻭ‬
‫ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺑﻰﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ )ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺍﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺣﺪ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩﻯ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﻪ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﻢﺩﻝ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺑﻰﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﺭﺍ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﺯﺭﺗﺸﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﻮﻧﻮﺳﻮﺱ ﻭ ﺁﺭﻳﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺰﺟﺎﺭﺁﻭﺭ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ‬
‫ﻭ ﻗﺴﻤﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ 39.‬ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮕﻰ ﺑﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﻛﺸﻴﺶ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﻴﺢ ﻭ ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ(‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻪ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ ﻭ ﻫﻢﻧﻮﺍﺧﺘﻰﺷﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻭ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﺧﺼﻴﺼﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺧﺼﺎﻳﺺ ﻣﻨﻔﻌﻞ ﻳﺎ ﻓﻌﺎﻝ‪،‬‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺧﺼﻴﺼﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺧﺼﻴﺼﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻗﻀﺎﻳﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻯ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻠﻬﻢ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻋﻮﺽ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺗﻰ ﻫﻢﭼﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺧﺼﺎﻳﺺ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺗﻜﺜﻴﺮ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻳﻚ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺟﺬﺍﺏ‪ ،‬ﭼﺸﻤﮕﻴﺮ ﻭ ﻣﻬﻢ ﺍﻟﻬﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻛﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺕ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻀﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺰ‬
‫‪40‬‬ ‫‪38‬‬
‫ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻪ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻮﺩ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺧﺼﺎﻳﺼﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺸﻒ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺻﻔﺤﺔ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺻﺪﻕ ﻭ ﻛﺬﺏ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺧﺼﻴﺼﺔ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩ )ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎ ِژ ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻋﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﻣﻜﺎﻟﻤﻪﺍﻯﺍﺵ ﺑﺮ ﺻﻔﺤﻪﻯ ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺟﺬﺍﺏ ﻳﺎ ﭼﺸﻤﮕﻴﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﭘﺎﺭﻣﻨﻴﺪﺱ ﻭ ﭘﺮﻭﺗﺎﮔﻮﺭﺍﺱ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﮔﻮﺭﮔﻴﺎﺱ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺧﺼﻴﺼﺔ‬
‫ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ ﻳﺎ ﺳﻠﺐ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺿﺪﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰﺑﻮﺩﻥﺍﺵ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺤﻪﻯ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻠﻰ ﻧﺎﻣﻮﺍﺯﻯ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻯ ﺍﻧﺰﺟﺎﺭﺁﻭﺭ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﻴﺢ ﻭ ﻛﺸﻴﺶ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ(‪.‬‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺑﻞﻛﻪ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍﻫﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﮔﺮﻳﺰ ﺍﺯ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژ ﻭ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺳﺎﺣﺘﻰ‬ ‫»ﻣﺆﻟﻒﻣﺤﻮﺭﻯ« ﻭ »ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﭘﻨﺪﺍﺭﻯ« ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻦ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰﻛﺮﺩﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻪ ﻛﺎ ِﺭ ﻳﻚ »ﻣﻦ ِ« ﻳﻚﭘﺎﺭﭼﻪ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻼ ﺁﮔﺎﻩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ »ﺁﻧﻬﺎ«ﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﻣﻦ« ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻔﺤﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺤﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺯﻳﺴﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﮔﺬﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺻﻔﺤﻪﻫﺎ ﺗﻜﺜﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻗﻊ »ﻣﻦ«ﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﻪﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻣﻰﻧﻮﺭﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺻﻔﺤﻪﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﺗﻤﺎﻣ ًﺎ ﺁﮔﺎﻩ ﻭ ﻳﻚﭘﺎﺭﭼﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ »ﻣﻦ«‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺩﻏﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻳﻚﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ ﭘﺲ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﻪ ﺑﺮ ﭼﻪ ﺑﺴﺘﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪،‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬‫ﺍﺳﻢ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻕ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﺪ؟ ﺻﻔﺤﺎﺕ ﻛﺠﺎ ﭼﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺗﻌﺪﺍ ِﺩ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻘﺎﻳﺪ ﻭ ﻛﺘﺐﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻡﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ ﻣﺒﺪﻝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﭘﺮﺳﺶ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ »ﺯﻣﻴﻦ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻕ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﺪ ﻛﺠﺎﺳﺖ؟ ِ‬ ‫ﻫﻢﻧﺎﻣﺸﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ‪ :‬ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎ ِﻩ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻣﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ‬
‫ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ »ﺳﻄﺢ«ﻯ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻋﻤﻴﻖ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺣﺮﻛﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻫﻢ ﺩﻭﺭ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ )ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎ ِژ‬
‫ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺕ ﻭ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﺯﻣﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ‪ ،‬ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﻋﻤﻴﻖﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﺔ ﺩﻭﻫﺰﺍﺭ ﻭ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﺻﺪﺳﺎﻟﻪ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﺯﺩﺍﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﻭ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﺯﺩﻭﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 41«.‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﺯﺩﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺧﻄﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻭ ﺑﻌﺪﻯ(‪.‬‬
‫ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺫﺍﺗﻰ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺟﺎﺯﺓ‬
‫ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺗﺎ ﺍﻳﻦﺟﺎ ﺳﻪ ﻋﻨﺼﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎﺕ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﻳﺨﺘﻦ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻩ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ :‬ﻃﺮﺡ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ ﻭ ﭼﻴﻨﻪﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫)ﻋﻘﻞ‪ :‬ﭘﻨﺪﺍﺷﺖ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‪ .‬ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪13 1393‬‬

‫ﺍﻣﺎ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ »ﻫﺮ ﺻﻔﺤﺔ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﺯﺩﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ؟‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ« ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪ ﻭ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؟ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﻭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ »ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ«ﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒﺷﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺳﻄﻮﺣﻰ ﺗﺨﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻰﺑُﻌﺪﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻃﺒﻖ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎ ﺩﻭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺻﻔﺤﻪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻰﻧﺸﻴﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﻣﻴﻦﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﻭ ﺟﺰﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺭﻭﺯﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ‬
‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐﻫﺎﻳﻰ ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺨﺖ ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻄﻮﺡ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬
‫‪42‬‬
‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﻪﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ‪ ،‬ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ «.‬ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻭ ﻛﻠﻰ ﻭ ﻧﺎﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﺟﺰﻳﻰ‪ 45.‬ﺭﺧﺪﺍ ِﺩ ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡﻫﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺸﺮﻓﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺎﻟﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻰﺷﻤﺎﺭ ﺭﺧﺪﺍ ِﺩ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﻄﻮﺣﻰ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﻛﻪ‬
‫)ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﻭ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺩﻭﺳﺘﻰ ‪ X‬ﺑﺎ ‪ Y‬ﻳﻚ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺯﻣﺮﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻧﻈﺎ ِﻡ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﭼﻴﻨﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺍﻣﺎ »ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ« ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ ﺣﻴﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺴﻤﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻭ ﻛﻠﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ‪ X‬ﻭ ‪ Y‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻳﻚ ِ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‬ ‫ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺻﻔﺤﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻤﺎ ِﻡ ﭼﻴﻨﻪﻫﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ‬
‫ﺟﺰﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ(‪ .‬ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎ ﺣﻴﻄﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﮔﺸﻮﺩﺓ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﻣﻨﺰﻝ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻄﺢ ﭼﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥﻫﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﻮﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪﻣﺮﺍﺗﺒﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻳﻚ »ﻫﻢﺑﻮﺩﻯ« ﻋﻈﻴﻢ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻧﺪ )»ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ« ﺣﻴﻄﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﺍﺯ ِ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ »ﺟﻐﺮﺍﻓﻴﺎ« ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ »ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ«‪ِ .‬‬
‫ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺩﻭﺳﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﺷﻤﻨﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻜﺎﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﺁﺷﻨﺎﻳﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫»ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻋﻈﻴﻢ ﻫﻢﺑﻮﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻭ ﭘﺲ ﺭﺍ ﺣﺬﻑ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﺘﻜﺜ ِﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺧﻮﻧﻰ ﻭ ‪ ...‬ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪﺍﻯ ﭼﻴﻨﻪﻧﮕﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺩ‪ ...‬ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺪ(‪» .‬ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ 46«.‬ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺁﺛﺎﺭﺷﺎﻥ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺏ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﭘﺮﺳﺶﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﺸﺎﻥ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﻣﻌﻤﻮﻟﻰ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﺗﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﻧﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﺻﺸﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ )»ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻛﻴﺴﺖ؟«‪» ،‬ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﺯﻳﺴﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻣﻰﺩﺭﺧﺸﻨﺪ‪ ...‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ؛‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻦ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺑﺮ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟«‪» ،‬ﻣﺴﺌﻮﻟﻴﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺒﺎﻝ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻫﻢﺑﻮﺩﻯ ﺻﻔﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢﻫﺎ‪ 43«.‬ﺗﻤﺎ ِﻡ ﺻﻔﺤﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟« ﻭ ‪ ...‬ﻫﻤﻪ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻠﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻫﻢﺑﻮﺩﻯ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ِ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ »ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ« ﭘﺮﺳﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ(‪ .‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﭼﻮﻥ ﻻﻳﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﻫﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻐﺮﺍﻓﻴﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺳﺨﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﻫﺎ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪» .‬ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻠﻰ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ‬
‫ﮔﻔﺖ ﻧﻪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ِ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ 47«.‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ »ﺷﺪﻥ« ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻃﺮﺡﺭﻳﺰﻯ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻣﻨﺪ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ِ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰﺍﻯ ﺣﻴﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻧﻈﻤﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺳﻤﺎﻥ ﺣﺎﻛﻢ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻰﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ِﻩ ﺍﻳﺠﺎ ِﺩ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺕ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻭ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ‬
‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪» .‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‪ ...‬ﺍﺯ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ ﻧﺎﺏ‪ ...‬ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ 48«.‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻈﺎ ِﻡ ﻣﺸﺨﺺﺍﺵ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰﺍﺵ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺗﺸﺨﺼﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﻯ ﭘﻴﺶﻭﭘﺴﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻈﻤﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺟﻮﺍﺏﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ ﻛﺸﻒ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﺁﺳﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﺯﺩﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻌﻴﻦﺑﺨﺸﻰ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯﺍﻯ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﻢ ﺍﻓﻘﻰ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﻛﻪ ِ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺧﺪﺍ ِﺩ ﺭﻭﺯﻣﺮﻩ ﻭ ﺁﻥﭼﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻭ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺟﻐﺮﺍﻓﻴﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮﺍﻍ ﺭﺧﺪﺍ ِﺩ ﻣﺤﺾ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﻢ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰﺍﺵ ﻣﻰﺭﺑﺎﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﭼﻨﮓ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭ ِ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﺗﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﺪ ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺟﺰ ﺳﻄﻮﺡ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻫﻴﺄﺕ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺭﻭﺯﻣﺮﻩ ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﺭﻭﺯﻣﺮﻩﺍﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺖ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻤﻜﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻃﺒﻖ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻤﺎ ِﻡ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﺤﺮﻙ ﻛﻪ ِ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﺭﻭﺯﻣﺮﻩ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺻﻔﺤﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﺧﻮﺩ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺟﻐﺮﺍﻓﻴﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬
‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ‪ ،‬ﻏﻴﺮ‬‫ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻪ ِ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺁﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ‪» :‬ژﺋﻮﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ« ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺯﻳﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺧﺘﻰ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎ ِﻩ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﺓ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺟﻐﺮﺍﻓﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻫﻮﻝﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮﻭﺭ ﻫﻤﮕﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺴﺘﻴﺰﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﻨﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﭼﺮﺍﻛﻪ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻧﻮﺷﺖ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻧﺸﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫‪44‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻧﺒﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﻣﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺟﻐﺮﺍﻓﻴﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻳﺪ‪» .‬ﺯﻣﻴﻦﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ« ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ »ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ«‪.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪14‬‬

 ‫‪ 3‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.20‬‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ؟ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻴﺄﺕ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫‪4. A Thousand Plateaus, p 14.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻨﮓ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﺮﻙ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ِ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎﺕ »ﺑﻪ ﭼﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ«؟‬
‫‪ 5‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.15‬‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻳﻚ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺑﺎﺭﻳﻚ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﻭ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﺑﻪ »ﻫﻴﭻ«‬
‫‪ 6‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.4‬‬ ‫ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪.‬‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺑﺘﺬﺍﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ‬
‫‪ 7‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.5‬‬
‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ‬
‫‪ 8‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺟﺰ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺗﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻧﺒﻮﺩﻥ‬
‫‪ 9‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﺯﺵ ﺑﺎ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬
‫‪ 10‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.7‬‬
‫‪ 11‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﺧﺸﻚ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻫﺮ ﺭﻭﺯﻩ ﺩﻋﻮﺕ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺟﻮﻯ ﺑﺎﺭﻳﻚ ﻭ‬
‫‪ 12‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.8‬‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﺏ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﺩﮔﻰ ﻭ ﺣﻤﺎﻗﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺁﺷﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫‪ 13‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.11‬‬ ‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺗﻨﮓ ﻭ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻯ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻣﮕﺮ ﺗﻮﻫﻤﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ‬
‫‪ 14‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺎ ِﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫‪ 15‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.14‬‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶﻣﻮﺟﻮ ِﺩ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻨﺪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺯ‬
‫‪ 16‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﻫﻢ ﺯﻧﺪﻩﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻔ ِﻊ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﻳﻮﺍﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻠﻨﺪ‬
‫‪ 17‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.6‬‬ ‫ﺣﻤﺎﻗﺖ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻥ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﻯ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﻓﺮﻭﻣﻰﺭﻳﺰﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬
‫‪ 18‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.29‬‬ ‫ﺩﻳﻮﺍﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺻﻠﺐ ﺭﺍ ﺁﺯﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ »ﻧﺎﺭﺍﺣﺖ‬
‫‪ 19‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.178‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ«‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﺯﺵ ﺑﺰﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﺭﺍﺣﺖ ﻧﻜﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﺯﺍﺭ‬
‫‪ 20‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.180‬‬ ‫ﻧﺪﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺟﻮﺍﺏ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫‪ 21‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺍﻧﺸﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎ ﻭ‬
‫‪ 22‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.14‬‬
‫ﻛﻠﻴﺴﺎﻫﺎ ﻧﻤﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻤﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬
‫‪ 23‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.19‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻰﻣﺎﻳﮕﻰ ﻭ ﻓﻘﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬
‫‪ 24‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.29‬‬
‫ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺭﻭﺯﻣﺮﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺭﻭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ِ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺳﺖ ﺗﻤﺎ ِﻡ‬
‫‪ 25‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.36‬‬
‫‪ 26‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.39‬‬
‫ﻭ ﺧﻄﻮﻁِ ﮔﺮﻳﺰ ﻭ ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﻧﻤﺎﻳﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬
‫‪ 27‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.50‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺩﺭ »ﻃﺮﻑ ﻏﻤﮕﻴﻦ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ«‪ 49‬ﻧﺠﺎﺕ‬
‫‪ 28‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.110‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪ 29‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.55‬‬
‫‪ 30‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.60‬‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻭ ﻣﺂﺧﺬ‬
‫‪ 31‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪56.‬‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‪ ،‬ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻓﻠﻴﻜﺲ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ‬ ‫‪.1‬‬
‫‪ 32‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.63‬‬ ‫ﺯﻫﺮﻩ ﺍﻛﺴﻴﺮﻯ ﻭ ﭘﻴﻤﺎﻥ ﻏﻼﻣﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ ﻧﻮ‪.1391 ،‬‬
‫‪ 33‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.88‬‬ ‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻋﺎﺩﻝ ﻣﺸﺎﻳﺨﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫‪.2‬‬
‫‪ 34‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﻧﻰ‪.1390 ،‬‬
‫‪ 35‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ‪ ،‬ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﭘﻴﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫‪.3‬‬
‫‪ 36‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.89‬‬ ‫ﻏﻼﻣﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﺩﻫﮕﺎﻥ‪.1392 ،‬‬
‫‪ 37‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.87‬‬
‫ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻯ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮ‪ ،‬ﺗﺰﻭﺗﺎﻥ ﺗﻮﺩﻭﺭﻭﻑ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ‬ ‫‪.4‬‬
‫‪ 38‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.105‬‬
‫ﻧﺒﻮﻯ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﺁﮔﻪ‪.1382 ،‬‬
‫‪ 39‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.108‬‬
‫‪Difference and Repetition,Deleuze, .5‬‬
‫‪ 40‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.114‬‬
‫‪ 41‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.117‬‬
‫‪Gilles, Tr. Paul Patton, Columbia University‬‬
‫‪ 42‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.124‬‬ ‫‪.1994 ,Press‬‬
‫‪ 43‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.83‬‬ ‫‪A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism .6‬‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦﺟﺎ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺷﺪ‪،‬‬
‫‪ 44‬ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﮔﻰ ﻭ ِ‬ ‫‪and Schizophrenia, Gilles Deleuz& Felix‬‬
‫ﺧﻼﺻﻪ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫‪Guatarri, Tr. Brian Massumi, University of‬‬
‫‪45 Difference and Repetition ,p 189.‬‬ ‫‪.1987,Minnesota Press, Minneapolis‬‬
‫‪ 46‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.188‬‬
‫‪ 47‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.30‬‬ ‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺖﻫﺎ‬
‫‪ 48‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.36‬‬ ‫‪ 1‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.45‬‬
‫‪ 49‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.329‬‬ ‫‪ 2‬ﺑﻮﻃﻴﻘﺎﻯ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.19‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪15 1393‬‬

‫ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺻﻤﻴﻤﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﻮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺳﻨﺖ ﻣﻌﻬﻮ ِﺩ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﻫﻢ ﻋﺼﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ِ‬
‫ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻮﺿﻮﺡ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‬
‫ﺍﺫﻋﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﻭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻓﺮﺍﻭﺍﻧﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 1.‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﻇﺮﻩﺍﻯ ﺑﺎ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﻭ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻛﺴﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻮﺯﺓ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﻣﻄﻠﻘ ًﺎ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺁﻣﻮﺧﺖ‪:‬‬
‫ﺑﻰﺣﺮﻣﺘﻰ ﺳﺨﻨﮕﻮﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﺍﻥ‪ 2.‬ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻭ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﺄﺛﺮ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﺗﺎ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺩﺭ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﻋﺠﻴﺐ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻣﻔﺴﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﺘﺄﺧﺮﺗﺮ ﺍﻭ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﮕﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﺳﺎﺭﺍ ﻣﻴﻠﺰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﺴﺮﺍﻥ ﻛﻠﻴﺪﻯ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺒﻴﻞ ﺷﺮﻳﺪﺍﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻳﻔﻮﺱ ﻭ ﺭﺍﺑﻴﻨﻮ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﺣﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺫﻋﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺧﺬ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻗﻄﻌ ًﺎ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﻭﻳﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﻬﻢ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺭﺍ ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺗﺮ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮﺍﺱ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻭ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﺎﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‬
‫ﻛﺸﺎﻧﺪﻥ ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺴﺘﻮﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﻴﭻ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻴﭻ ﺗﻠﻘﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﻭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺣﺸﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻀﺎﻋﻒ ﺭﺍﻫﺒﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺑﻨﺪﺭﺕ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻋﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺔ ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻓﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﻭ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺷﺮﺡ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﮔﺎﻩ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺎ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺑﺎﻻ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺎﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻗﻮﻝ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺎﺋﻮﺋﻴﺴﺖ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﺒﻬﻢﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫*‬
‫ﻣﺤ ّﻤﺪ ﺣﺴﻴﻦ ﺩﻻﻝ ﺭﺣﻤﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺭﺗﺮ ﻭ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 3.‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ‬ ‫‪mhdr2010@yahoo.com‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺛﺮ ﮔﺎﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﭘﻴﭽﻴﺪﻩﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﮔﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻬﻢ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻣﺬﻛﻮﺭ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺪ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺎﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺧﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻓﻪﺍﻯ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺟﺬﺍﺏ ﻭ ﺁﻣﻮﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻔﺴﺮﻳﻦ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻓﻜﺮﻯ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﻳﺎ )ﺳﻪ ﺩﻭﺭﻩ( ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﻭ ﺗﺒﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ)ﻭﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎﻳﻰﻛﻪﺑﺮ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺘﻤﻨﺪﻯ‪،‬ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖﻭ‪...‬ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ(‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺗﻮﺍﻓﻖ ﺍﻏﻠﺐ ﺷﺎﺭﺣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻣﻔﺴﺮﺍﻥ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺁﻥ ﮔﺎﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺤﺚ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢ ﻭ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻭ ﺗﺄﺛﺮ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻓﺎﺕ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﺮﻭﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺒﺎﻧﻰ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ ﺭﺳﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭ ﺗﺎﺯﻩﺍﻯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻈﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﺒﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺣﺘﻰ ﮔﺎﻩ ﻛﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺭﺍﺑﻴﻨﻮ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻳﻔﻮﺱ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﻡ‬
‫ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻓﺼﻠﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﺭﺯﺷﻤﻨﺪﺷﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺩﺍﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ 4.‬ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻊ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻔﺴﺮﺍﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻴﻠﺰ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﺪ‪» :‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺭﺥ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻓﺮﺩﻯ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺨﺘﺎﺭ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﺑﺮ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ ﻋﻤﻠﻜﺮﺩ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ‬ ‫ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﻰﻧﺎﻣﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻧﻴﻜﻮ ﺳﺮﺧﻮﺵ‬
‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﺒﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﻨﺪﺓ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺍﻓﺸﻴﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﺪﻳﺪﻩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﻘﺪﻡ ﺍﻭ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﻧﻲ‪.1386 ،‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪16‬‬

 ‫ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺍﺝ ﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﺗﺄﻳﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻜﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ »ﺳﻮژﻩ« ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﺄﺧﺮ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺒﺎﺭ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪ 5«.‬ﺍﺧﺬ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺭﻭﻳﻜﺮﺩﻯ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ‬
‫ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻜﺎﻥﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻠﻘﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻮﻛﻮﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺧﺎﺻﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺒﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻪ ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﻀﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﺷﺎﺭﺡ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺫﻳﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻧﺨﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﺟﻨﺒﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺨﺸﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﻭ ﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﻭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﺍﺗﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻋﺪﻡ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﮔﺮﻭﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺷﻜﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﻀﺎ ﻫﺮ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺍﺯ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺎﺳ ًﺎ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ 6.‬ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻧﺎﻫﻤﮕﻮﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﻋﺪﻡ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺵ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﻭﻳﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﺩﻭﻡ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﻫﻤﺒﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﺟﺪﻯ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻋﻤﻮﻣ ًﺎ ﺗﺒﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺳﻮژﻩﻫﺎﻳﺶ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﻭ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﺶ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺟﻤﻠﻪﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﺪﺍﻭﻡ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺍﻓﺘﺮﺍﻕ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺷﺎﺭﺣﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ )ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻦ( ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮﻯ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ‬ ‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﺩﻭ ﻓﺼﻞ ﻭ ﻳﻚ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﺼﻞ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺨﺸﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﭼﻨﺪﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﺧﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﺩﻭ ﺩﻭﺭﺓ ﻓﻜﺮﻯ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻓﺼﻞ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺪﻳﻦ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺁﻥ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﭼﻬﺮﺓ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻓﺼﻞ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﻣﻦ ﺁﻏﺎﺯﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﺑﺮﻋﻜﺲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻼ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﻣﻦ ﺗﻼﺵ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻢ ﺗﺎ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺘﻘ ً‬
‫ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺷﺮﺣﻰ ﻣﺨﺘﺼﺮ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﻨﻢ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﺍﺳﺘﺎ ﺑﺮ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﺍﻓﺘﺮﺍﻕ‬
‫ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‬ ‫»ﻧﺎ ﺷﺨﺺ«‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ »ﺍﻭ«‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻳﻚ »ﻛﺴﻰ«ﺍﻧﺪ‪» ،‬ﺍﻭ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ«‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺷﺎﺭﺣﺎﻥ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﻟﺬﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺑﺮ ﻓﺼﻞ‬
‫ﺍﺫﻋﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‬ ‫»ﻛﺴﻰ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ« ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﻧﻮﺍﺩﻩ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﺗﺸﺨﻴﺺ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﺩﺍﺭﻡ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻧﻜﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﻔﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻧﮕﺎﻫﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﻓﺮﺽ‪ ،‬ﻗﻀﻴﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺮﺟﻊ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺖﻣﻨﺪﻯ‪ ،‬ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‬ ‫ﺟﻤﻼﺕ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﻳﮕﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﺎﻭ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻬﺮ ﻣﻨﺼﻮﺏ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻗﻀﻴﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻀﻴﻪ ﺭﺍ ﭘﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻛﻠﻤﻪ ﻣﻨﺼﻮﺏ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؟ ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ )ﻳﺎ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ( ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮﻯ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ‬ ‫‪7‬‬
‫ﺩﺳﺘﻮﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؟«‬
‫ﺣﺴﺐﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺻﺎﺩﻕ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ :‬ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ »ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ« ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻭﺟﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﻭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﻛﺐ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻈﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺮﻋﻜﺲ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ‬ ‫ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ‪ ،‬ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺘﻌﻬﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﻔﺘﻦ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ؛‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﮋﺓ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﺓ‬ ‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﻮﺟﻬﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻀﺎﻳﺎ ﻭ ﺟﻤﻼﺕ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻓﺮﺍﻭﺍﻧﻰ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺗﺎﺑﻊ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﭘﺎﻳﻪﺍﻯ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻝ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﻗﻀﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﻭ‬ ‫ﺷﺮﺡ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰﺩﺍﻧﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺟﻤﻠﺔ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺩﺳﺘﻮﺭﺩﺍﻧﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ‪ ،‬ﺷﺎﻛﻠﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻘﺎﻃﻊ ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺱ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻄﻰ ﻋﻤﻮﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺻﻐﺮﻯـﻛﺒﺮﻯﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻫﻤﮕﻨﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺗﺎﺑﻊ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﻗﻀﺎﻳﺎﻯ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺧﻄﻰ ﺍﻓﻘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻤﻠﻪﻫﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺗﺮ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺩﻗﻴﻖﺗﺮ‪ ،‬ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﻭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺗﺎﺑﻊﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺎﺑﻊ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺧﻄﻰ ﺍﺭﻳﺐ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺯ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺶﺗﺮ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﺪ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﺳﻮﻡ ﭘﻴﭽﻴﺪﻩﺗﺮ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﻣﻨﺎﻗﺸﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﺗﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﻳﮕﺎﻧﻰ )ﻋﺠﺎﻟﺘ ًﺎ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻌﺪﺍً ﺩﺭ ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺚ ﺗﺒﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﭘﻴﮕﻴﺮﻯ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍﻭ ﺳﻮﻣﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﻜﺮﻩ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ‪ (8‬ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻧﺪﻫﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﻀﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﻣﻜﻤﻞ ﻳﺎ ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ )ﻧﻬﺎﺩﻫﺎ‪،‬‬ ‫ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﺫﺍﺗ ًﺎ ﻛﻤﻴﺎﺏ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰﺍﺕ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ‬
‫ﺭﻭﻳﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻛﺮﺩﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻯ( ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻭ ﻧﻮﻉ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻗﻀﻴﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺭﻭﻳﻜﺮﺩ ﻧﻴﭽﻪﺍﻯﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻨﻬﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﻧﺎﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﻬﺎﺩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﮕﻰﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﺗﻜﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻀﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺗﻮﺍﺯﻯ ﻋﻤﻮﺩﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻭ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻇﺮ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﻧﻤﺎﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻬﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﻩﻣﻨﺪﻯ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ‬
‫ﻧﻤﺎﺩ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻠﻴﺘﻰ ﺍﻓﻘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﻳﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻧﻬﺎﺩﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﮕﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻨﺤﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻔﺮﻭﺽ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻫﻴﭻ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺆﻟﻔﺎﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﮕﻰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻣﺸﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؛ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺳﻴﺮ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﺍﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺤﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺠﺎﻭﺭﺕ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﻪﮔﻰﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻠﻰﺗﺮ ﺑﺎ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﺧﻄﻰ ﻣﻮﺭﺏ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺠﺎﻣﺪ‪ :‬ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ‬ ‫ﻋﺮﺻﻪﺍﻯ ﻳﻜﻰ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﮕﻰﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‬
‫ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺤﻴﻂﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻰ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﻩﻣﻨﺪﻯ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎﻳﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺣﺪﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ؛ ﺍﻓﻖ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮ ﻭﺟﻪ ﭘﺴﺎﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻧﻪ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪:‬‬
‫ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻳﻚ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺴﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻋﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻛﻮﺟﻴﺘﻮ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮژﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮﻣﻨﻮﺗﻴﻚ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻭ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺍﺯ ﻣﺪﻳﻮﻥ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﺍﺑﻴﻨﻮ‬ ‫ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻛﻨﺪ )ﻳﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﺩ(‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺡ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪17 1393‬‬

 ‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺩﺭﻳﻔﻮﺱ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﻴﺸﻞ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮﻯ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﮕﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻤﻴﻖﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻣﺎﻳﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻫﺮﻣﻨﻮﺗﻴﻚ ﺭﺍ ﭼﻨﺪﻯ ﭘﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﺍﺭ ﻧﺸﺮ ﺳﭙﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺧﻼﺻﻪ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺒﺴﺘﺔ ﻇﺮﻳﻒ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥﺷﻜﻨﻰﻫﺎـﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺰﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﺑﻴﺶ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺷﻰ ﺗﺄﻭﻳﻠﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺣﺪ ﺷﺪﻳﺪ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥـﺑﻰﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺄﻭﻳﻞ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﻪﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥﺷﻜﻨﻰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯﺷﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﻣﺘﻦ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺘﻦ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻓﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺣﻘﻮﻕ ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻊ ﺗﺠﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ ﺗﺎ ﺑﺒﻴﻨﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺱ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻰ ﻛﺸﻒ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺍﻭ ﻛﻨﺶ‬
‫ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻫﻢ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﺑﺎ ﺑﻰﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﻛﻼﻣﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﻭﺭ ﻧﻤﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺲ ﺁﻥ ﻋﻨﺼﺮﻯ ﭘﻨﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺸﻒ ﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﭼﺮﺍ‬
‫ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺯﺩﻥ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺑﻰﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺪﻳﺮﻳﺖ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥﺷﻜﻨﻰﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﺷﻜﻨﻰﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺍﻣﺘﻴﺎﺯ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻝ ﭘﻨﻬﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻃﺒﻘﺔ ﺣﺎﻛﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﺠﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﭼﻮﻥ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌ ًﺎ ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺧﺪﻣﺖ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺣﺎﻛﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺳﺮﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻤﻨﻮﻉ ﻭ ﻣﺠﺰﺍ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻝ ﺟﻤﻠﻪﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻗﻀﺎﻳﺎ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﭘﻮﺷﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺳﺒﺐ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻫﺪﻑ ﻭ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﺍﺳﺘﻴﻼ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﻰﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺩﺳﺘﻴﺎﺑﻰ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺟﻨﮓ ﻓﺘﺢ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺻﻠﺢ‪ :‬ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺻﻮﺭﻯﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺑﺎ ﻛﺸﻒ ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ ﺻﻮﺭﻯ ﻛﺴﺐ ﻧﻤﻰ ﺷﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺟﻨﮓ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻨﮓ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﭼﻮﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻧﺎﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺻﻮﺭﻯﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺗﻼﻃﻤﻰ‬
‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻧﻪ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻤﻠﻚ ﻛﺴﺐ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺣﺎﻛﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺩﺳﺘﻴﺎﺑﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﺎﮔﻔﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻓﺮﺽ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭘﺲ ﻟﺰﻭﻣﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻮﺭﻯﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺑﻬﺮﻩ ﮔﻴﺮﻳﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻋﺠﻴﺐ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﻃﺮﺡ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﮔﺮﻳﺰ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻤﻠﻪﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻛﻠﻤﻪﻫﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭼﺮﺍ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯﻫﺎﻯ »ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ« ﻳﺎ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﻫﺎ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﻗﻀﺎﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﻳﺎ ﺳﻮژﻩـﻣﺆﻟﻒ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯﻫﺎﻯ »ﻧﺎ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ« ﻳﺎ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺤﻴﻂﻫﺎ‪.‬‬ ‫ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻛﺸﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻳﻜﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﭘﺰﺷﻜﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻳﻚ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺲ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺮﺍﻗﺒﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻨﺒﻴﻪ ﻣﻰ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺩﻩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺟﻤﻌﻴﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﻡ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﺭﺓ ﺗﺒﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺴﺮﺍﻥﻣﺘﺄﺧﺮﺗﺮ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪﺓ ﻣﺤﻴﻂﻫﺎﻯ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻧﻬﺎﺩﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﻳﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﺮﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ ﺗﺒﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻇﺮﻳﻒﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﻭ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﮕﺮﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻯ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻗﻄﻊ ﻣﺤﻴﻂﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺰ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺭﻭ ﺗﺒﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺪﺍﻭﻡ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺤﻴﻂﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ :‬ﺑُﻦ ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﻫﻤﮕﻦﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﺪﺍﺧﻞ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻳﻤﻠﻚ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻣﺎﻳﻤﻠﻚ ﻃﺒﻘﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺭﺍ ﻣﻴﻠﺰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻫﻢ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻴﺘﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻤﺎﺩﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﻫﻢ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺴﺮﺍﻥﻛﻠﻴﺪﻯ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺍﻗﺒﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻨﺒﻴﻪ ﮔﺎﻣﻰ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻯ‬ ‫ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺒﻴﻞ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺧﻮﺍﻩ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﭼﻮﻥ »ﺯﻧﺪﺍﻥ« ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ )ﻣﺤﻴﻂ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ ﻣﺎﻳﻤﻠﻚ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﺛﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﺎﺣﺐ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﻰ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺷﺮﻳﺪﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﻳﻔﻮﺱ‬
‫»ﺣﺒﺲ«( ﻳﺎ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍ )ﺯﻧﺪﺍﻧﻰ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﺳﺖ(‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻳﺎ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺁﺭﺍﻳﺶﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻧﻮﺭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎﻛﺘﻴﻚﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻚﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻋﻤﻠﻜﺮﺩﻫﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‬
‫ﻭ ﺭﺍﺑﻴﻨﻮ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ‬
‫»ﻛﻠﻤﻪ« ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺎﻡﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺩﺍﻝ ﻫﻢ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺗﺼﺎﺣﺐ‪ .‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻳﺎ ﺷﻜﻞ‪ ،‬ﻣﺪﻟﻮﻝ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺻﻔﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﭻ‬
‫ﻼ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺑﺰﻫﻜﺎﺭﻯ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺰﻫﻜﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻠﻤﻪﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻧﻔﻮﺱ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺍﻳﺪﺋﻮﻟﻮژﻯ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﺟﺮﻡﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻛﻴﻔﺮﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬ ‫ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺧﺸﻮﻧﺖ ﻭ ﺳﺮﻛﻮﺏ‬ ‫ﺍﺛﺮ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﺣﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺳﻮژﻩﻫﺎﻳﺸﺎﻥﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻼ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ‬‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻗﻴﻖﺗﺮ‪ :‬ﺧﺸﻮﻧﺖ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬ ‫ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺭﺅﻳﺖ ﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‪ ،‬ﺷﻰﺍﻱ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍﻭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒ ًﺎ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻇﺮ‬ ‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻋﻤﻞ‪ .‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻣﺮ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺩﺭ »ﺗﻮﻟﺪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻚ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﺍﻧﮕﻴﺨﺘﻦ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻭ‪ ....‬ﺩﺭ ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻊ‬ ‫ﺍﺫﻋﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻣﺎﻧﮕﺎﻩ« ﺍﻣﺮ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ »ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﻀﺒﺎﻃﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﻃﺒﻘﻪ ﺑﻨﺪﻯ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺧﺬ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‬
‫ﺟﻨﻮﻥ«‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﻮﺍﻧﮕﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻴﻤﺎﺭﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻭ ﺑﻬﻨﺠﺎﺭ ﺳﺎﺯﻯ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻰﻋﻘﻠﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺰﺷﻜﻰ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﺁﻣﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺮﺍﻗﺒﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻨﺒﻴﻪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻗﻄﻌ ًﺎ‬
‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﻨﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﻨﻔﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺬﻛﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻊ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ‬
‫ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﺎﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻰ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ »ﻣﺮﺍﻗﺒﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻨﺒﻴﻪ« ﺷﻜﻞ‬ ‫ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻊ ﺍﻧﻀﺒﺎﻃﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻧﻀﺒﺎﻁ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻬﺎﺩ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﺷﻜﻞ ﺍﻣﺮ‬ ‫ﻳﻜﻰ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﻭ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﻀﺒﺎﻁ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﻟﻮژﻯﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻭﻳﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺭﺅﻳﺖ ﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﺍﺵ ﺑﺎ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺍﻣﺮ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﭘﺬﻳﺮ‪ .‬ﺯﻧﺪﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺷﻜﻞ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ ﻭ ﻧﻬﺎﺩﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻗﻄﻊ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺮﺭﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺣﻘﻮﻕ ﻛﻴﻔﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﻭﺻﻞ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺴﻮ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻭﺍﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪18‬‬

‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻰﺷﻚ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﻟﻮژﻯ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﺛﺮﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻞ ﺣﻮﺯﺓ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻰ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺰﻫﻜﺎﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻗﻄﻊ‬
‫ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﻟﻮژﻯ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺷﻜﻠﺒﻰ ﻭﻗﻔﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺧﻨﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﮔﺰﻳﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ ﻗﻄﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﺣﻘﻮﻕ ﻛﻴﻔﺮﻯ ﺑﻰﻭﻗﻔﻪ ﺯﻧﺪﺍﻧﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺁﺭﺍﻳﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻋﻬﺪﻩ ﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﻟﻮژﻯﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺭﻭﺍﻧﻪ ﺯﻧﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﺷﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻝ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺯﻧﺪﺍﻥ ﺑﻰﻭﻗﻔﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﻛﻠﻤﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺁﺭﺍﻳﺶﻫﺎ ﺳﺎ ّﻣﺎﻥﺩﻫﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﻭﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺰﻫﻜﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻭ ﺍﻫﺪﺍﻓﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺁﺭﺍﻳﺶﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻚﻫﺎﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﺰﻳﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﺯﻧﺪﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺣﻘﻮﻕ ﻛﻴﻔﺮﻯ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻊ ﺳﻠﻄﻨﺘﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻯ ﺣﺎﺷﻴﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻭ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﺷﻜﻞ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺳﺘﻠﺰﺍﻡ ﻣﺘﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻭ‬
‫ﺳﺎ ّﻣﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻧﻀﺒﺎﻃﻰ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻫﻤﺨﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺁﺳﺘﺎﻧﻪ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﻟﻮژﻳﻚ ﮔﺬﺭﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﮔﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺖ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﻓﻮﻕ ﻛﺎﻣﻼً‬
‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻳﺪ ﻣﺨﺘﺼﺮﻯ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺷﺎﺭﺣﺎﻥ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺨﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺨﺘﺼﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﻭ ﻇﺮﺍﻓﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‬ ‫ﺷﺮﺣﻰ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﺮﺡ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺟﺎ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﻧﻤﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻨﻤﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭ ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎﺩ ﻣﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻼﻗﻪﻣﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ »ﻣﺮﺍﻗﺒﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻨﺒﻴﻪ« ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻭﺭﺓ‬
‫ﻭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺁﻧﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﻪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺑﻪ ﻇﺮﺍﻓﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺬﻛﻮﺭ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﻳﺮﻳﻨﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﺍﻭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺴﺖ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻋﻄﻒ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﻳﮕﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻭ ﻣﺂﺧﺬ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺍﻭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ :‬ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﻋﻤﻠﻜﺮﺩﻯ‬
‫‪» .1‬ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻓﻠﻴﻜﺲ ﮔﺎﺗﺎﺭﻯ«‪ ،‬ﭘﻠﭙﺘﻦ ﺩﺭ‪ :‬ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﺎﻧﻊ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺻﻄﺤﻜﺎﻛﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓ ﺍﺭﺷﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻥ‪.1390 ،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻣﺒﺮﺍ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺎﻳﮕﺎﻧﻰ ﺷﻨﻴﺪﺍﺭﻯ ﻳﺎ‬
‫‪ .2‬ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮﻯ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ ﻫﺮﻣﻨﻮﺗﻴﻚ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﻳﻔﻮﺱ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﻮﺑﺮﺕ ﻭ ﭘﻞ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﺪﺍﺭﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻧﻘﺸﻪ ﻭ ﻧﻘﺸﻪﻧﮕﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺸﻪﺍﻯ ﻫﻢ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﻩ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺭﺍﺑﻴﻨﻮ؛ ﻣﻴﺸﻞ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺣﺴﻴﻦ ﺑﺸﻴﺮﻳﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﻧﻰ‪.1379 ،‬‬ ‫ﻛﻞ ﻋﺮﺻﻪ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩﻫﺎ ﻭ‬
‫‪ .3‬ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ژﻳﻠﺪﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻧﻴﻜﻮ ﺳﺮﺧﻮﺵ ﻭ ﺍﻓﺸﻴﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﺪﻳﺪﻩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺍﺩ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺻﻮﺭﻯ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻫﺮﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍ‬
‫ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﻧﻰ‪.1386 ،‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﻧﺎﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺎﺩﻳﺪﻩ‬
‫‪» .4‬ﺭﻭﺷﻨﻔﻜﺮﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ« )ﮔﻔﺘﮕﻮﻯ ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻣﻴﺸﻞ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ(‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒ ًﺎ ﻻﻝ ﻭ ﻛﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺳﺮﮔﺸﺘﮕﻰ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ )ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘﺪ ﭘﺴﺎ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ(‪ ،‬ﮔﺰﻳﻨﺶ ﻭ ﻭﻳﺮﺍﻳﺶ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻮﺟﺐ ﺩﻳﺪﻥ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺟﺐ ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺘﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﻣﺮﻛﺰ‪.1386 ،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻭ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫‪ .5‬ﻣﻴﺸﻞ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﺳﺎﺭﺍ ﻣﻴﻠﺰ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻮﺵ ﻧﻮﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻧﺸﺮ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﺮﻛﺰ‪.1389 ،‬‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺠﺰﻳﻪ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺩﻻﻟﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﻭ ﺧﻼﻗﻴﺖ‬
‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺖﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻭ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﻨﺘﻈﺮﻩ ﻭ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﻣﺤﺘﻤﻞ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺭﺍ‬
‫* ﺩﺍﻧﺸﺠﻮﻯ ﺩﻛﺘﺮﻯ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﻳﺎﺳﻮﺝ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﺎﺕ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ‬
‫‪» .1‬ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻓﻠﻴﻜﺲ ﮔﺎﺗﺎﺭﻯ«‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.367‬‬ ‫ﻼ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻗﺒ ً‬
‫‪» .2‬ﺭﻭﺷﻨﻔﻜﺮﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ«‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.302‬‬ ‫ﺍﮔﺮ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪﻩ ﻧﺎﺁﺷﻨﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺗﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺨﺶ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺣﻮﺻﻠﻪ‬
‫‪ .3‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.298‬‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺧﺮﺝ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺘﻰ ﺟﺎﻟﺐ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻭ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ ﻛﺴﺐ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .4‬ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮﻯ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ ﻫﺮﻣﻨﻮﺗﻴﻚ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪. 186‬‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﺎ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻭ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺭﺍ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .5‬ﻣﻴﺸﻞ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.47‬‬ ‫ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﺍﻭ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﻧﺶ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻭ‬
‫‪ .6‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺤﺚ ﻣﻔﺼﻞﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺠﺎﻝ ﻛﻮﺗﺎﻩ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻣﺮ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﭘﺬﻳﺮ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻣﺮ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﭘﺬﻳﺮ‬
‫ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻴﻠﺰ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺮ ﻋﻜﺲ )ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻴﺖ ﺑﺨﺶ‬
‫ﭼﮕﻮﻧﮕﻰ ﺳﺮﺍﻳﺖ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﻀﺒﺎﻃﻰ ﺯﻧﺪﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺤﻴﻂﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺍﺭﺗﺶ‪،‬‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻫﻤﺨﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﻳﻚ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ(‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﻛﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﻣﺪﺭﺳﻪ ﻭ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﻧﺎﻗﺺ ﻭ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﻣﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪) .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ‬
‫‪ (77‬ﺣﺎﻝ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﭼﻨﺎﻧﻜﻪ ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﻣﺬﻛﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﺑﮕﺬﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺳﺮﺍﻳﺖ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻋﻠﺖ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻔﺮﻭﺽ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻧﻜﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻀﻤﻦ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ‬
‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻣﻰ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﻪ ﺩﻭﺷﺎﺧﮕﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻋﻤﻞ‬
‫ﺭﻭ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﺧﻴﺰﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .7‬ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.17‬‬ ‫ﺍﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﻓﻮﻛﻮﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ‬
‫‪ .8‬ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺨﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﻌﺎﺭﻳﻒ ﻳﻜﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻛﻠﻴﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺍﻭ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻰ‪ ،‬ﺁﺭﺍﻳﺶﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺳﺎ ّﻣﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺩﺳﺖ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭﺵ ﺗﻌﺎﺭﻳﻔﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ ﻳﻜﺴﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﻭ ﺷﻜﻠﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺻﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻮﺟﺐ ﺳﺮﺩﺭﮔﻤﻰ ﻣﻔﺴﺮﺍﻥ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻭﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺒﺐ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻜﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ‪ :‬ﭘﻴﺶ‬
‫ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺍﻭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﻟﻮژﻯ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﻟﻮژﻯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪19 1393‬‬

 ‫‪ .1‬ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯ ﺿ ّﺪ ﺍﻭﺩﻳﭗ ﻭ ﻫﺰﺍﺭ ﻓﻼﺕ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﻣﺠﻠﺪ »ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﺳﻜﻴﺰﻭﻓﺮﻧﻰ« ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻣﻤﻠﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍژﻩﺍﻯ ﺁﺷﻨﺎ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺁﻥﺩﻭ ﺁﻭﺍﻳﻰ ﻏﺮﻳﺐ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪» :‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ«‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻛﺴﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻋﺎ ِﻡ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻠﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪:‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺼﻴﻼﺕ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻋﻠﻮﻡ ﭘﻨﺠﻢ ﺩﺑﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻄﻠﻘ ًﺎ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ »ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺁﺳﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ«‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻜﻰ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺳﻠﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺻﻔﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ‪:‬‬
‫ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ »ﻣﻴﻞﻭﺭﺯ«‪» ،1‬ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ«‪» ،‬ﺟﻨﮕﻰ«‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ ﭼﻔﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﺑﺴﺖ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺍژﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺑﻌﺎ ِﺩ ﻧﻮﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺎﻧﺪ؛ ﺁﻥ ﻗﺪﺭ ﻧﻮ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻞ ﭘﺎﺗﻮﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺭﺍ »ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ« ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ 2.‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﻣﺘﻦ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺭﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ‬
‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﺮﺩﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪ 3‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫‪4‬‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﺮﺩﻳﺪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻗﻄﻌ ًﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍﻳﺘﻬﺪ‬
‫»ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ«ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺯﺍﻳﻰ‪ 5‬ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺖ‪ :‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺘﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻝ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ »ﺷﺪﻥ«‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ »ﻫﺴﺘﻰ« ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨﺪﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻓﺮﺿﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻓﻼﺕ‬‫ﺿﺪ ﺍﻭﺩﻳﭗ ﻭ ﻫﺰﺍﺭ ِ‬
‫ّ‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﺍﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﺪﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪» ،‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﮔﻔﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﻜﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺣﻮﻝ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ِ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .2‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‬
‫ﭼﺮﺍ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ؟ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﮔﻔﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺣﺮﻑ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﻴﻢ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻤﺎﻥ ﮔﻨﺠﻰ‬
‫ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ؟ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﺁﻭﺭﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ ﺳﺨﻦ‬ ‫‪iman.ganji@yahoo.com‬‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺳﺎﻳﺒﻮﺭگﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺭﺅﻳﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ِ‬
‫ﺫﻫﻦ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ؟ ﺁﻳﺎ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺁﻥ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻱ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺩﻳﺪ؟‬ ‫‪Anti-Oedipus:‬‬
‫ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺘﻦ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﺑﺎ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎﺗﻰ‬ ‫‪Capitalism and‬‬
‫ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﺔ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺣﻔﻆ‬ ‫‪Schizophrenia. Deleuze,‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﺦ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﭘﺮﺳﺶﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫‪Gilles and Félix Guattari.‬‬
‫‪Trans. Robert Hurley,‬‬
‫ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﻬﻤﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪:‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ‬ ‫‪Mark Seem and Helen‬‬
‫ﭘﺮﺳﺶﻫﺎﻳﻰ »ﺧﺎﻡﺩﻻﻧﻪ ﻭ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ« ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺷﻨﮕﺮﻯﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫‪R. Lane. Minneapolis:‬‬
‫ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻧﻪ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ‬ ‫‪University of Minnesota‬‬
‫ﻧﻮﺍﻧﺨﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻛﻮﺩﻛﺴﺘﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺗﻴﻤﺎﺭﺳﺘﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺷﻨﻴﺪ؛ ﭘﺮﺳﺶﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ‬ ‫‪.Press, 2000‬‬
‫ﺩﮔﺮﺩﻳﺴﻰ ﻧﻴﭽﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻛﻮﺩﻛﺎﻥ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻛﻮﺩﻙ ﺭﺍ ﺳﻮﻣﻴﻦ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ‬
‫ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺫﺍﺕﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻧﺔ »ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻓﻬﻤﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻣﺎ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﻛﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﺫﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ 6‬ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻭ‪ ،7‬ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‬ ‫‪A Thousand Plateaus.‬‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‪ 8«.‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻓﺮﺿﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ؟ ﺍﺟﺎﺯﻩ ﺩﻫﻴﺪ‬ ‫‪Trans. Brian Massumi.‬‬
‫ﺟﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺟﻮﻳﻤﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪Minneapolis, London:‬‬
‫ﻛﻠﻤﺔ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‪ 9‬ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍژﺓ ﻻﺗﻴﻦ ‪ machina‬ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫‪University of Minnesota‬‬
‫‪.Press, 2005‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ »ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﺗﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﺁﻻﺕ ﻭ ﺍﺩﻭﺍﺕ ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ؛ ﺗﻤﻬﻴﺪ‪،‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪20‬‬

‫ﺧﺪﻋﻪ‪ ،‬ﺣﻘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺍژﺓ ﻻﺗﻴﻦ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍژﺓ ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻧﻰ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﺔ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺷﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎﻥ ‪ mekhane‬ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ »ﺗﻤﻬﻴﺪﺍﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻠﻰﺍﺵ ﺑﺎﻻﺧﺮﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ Mekhane .‬ﻫﻢﺧﺎﻧﻮﺍﺩﺓ ﻭﺍژﺓ ‪) mekhos‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﻯ ﻣﻨﻔﺮﺩ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﻣﻬﺎﺭﺕﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﺳﻠﻄﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﻭﺳﻴﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺼﻠﺤﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﺪﺑﻴﺮ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺒﺎﺏ«( ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻳﺸﺔ ‪ magh‬ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ »ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ‪ ،‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ« )ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻄﻌﻪ‬
‫ﻓﻌﻞ ‪] can‬ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ[ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ( ﺍﺷﺘﻘﺎﻕ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﺘﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ِ‬
‫ﺭﻳﺸﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻟﻐﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺻﻞ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻏﺬﺍ ﻣﺼﺮﻑ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺮژﻯ ﻣﻰﺳﻮﺯﺍﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‬
‫ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﺁﻻﺕ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﻜﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﻟﻮژﻳﻚ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» ،‬ﺭﻭﺣﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ«‪ 11‬ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺗﺎ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺮ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﺳﻠﻄﻪ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺗﺪﺑﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﺼﻠﺤﺖ‪ ،‬ﺧﺪﻋﻪ ﻭ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺮﺧﺪﻧﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻡ ﻭ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻫﻰ ﻋﻈﻴﻢﺗﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﻏﻮﻝﭘﻴﻜﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺪﻝ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺣﻘﻪ ﺩﻭ ﺳﻮﻳﺔ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ‪ :‬ﺳﻮﻳﺔ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺳﻮﻳﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺪﻳﻦﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫»ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ«‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺮﺍﻟﺪ ﺭﻭﻧﻴﮓ‬
‫»ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﻭ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻗﻄﻌ ًﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺣﻴﻄﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺴﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺍژﻩ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ )ﻭ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻳﻚ ﻃﺮﻑ‬ ‫ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﺑﺨﺶ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﻣﻰﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﻧﺨﺴﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ]ﻓﻮﻕﺍﻟﺬﻛﺮ[ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ( ﺑﻞ ﺑﺮﻋﻜﺲ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺣﻴﻄﺔ ﺗﻴﺎﺗﺮ )ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻴﺎﺗﺮﻯ(؛ ﻭ ﺩﻭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺣﻴﻄﺔ ﺟﻨﮓ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮﺭ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﺁﻻﺕ ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻜﻰ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪ‪ 12«.‬ﺑﻪ‬ ‫)ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻨﮕﻰ(‪.‬‬
‫ﻋﻼﻭﻩ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ »ﺁﺩﻣﻚ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺮﻥ ﺷﺎﻧﺰﺩﻫﻢ ﻣﻴﻼﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﻜﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺘﻦﻫﺎ ﻭ‬
‫ﺭﺳﻮﺏ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﻜﺮﻯ«‪ 13‬ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﮔﻔﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﺁﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺭﻓﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ‬
‫ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻟﻐﺖﻧﺎﻣﺔ ﺭﻳﺸﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻫﺔ ﺩﺭﺗﺮﻣﻴﻨﻮﻟﻮژﻯ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﻭﻝ )ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ( ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ ﻭ ﻣﻬﺎﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫‪ 1540‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ »ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ« ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺮﻥ ﻫﻔﺪﻫﻢ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﺗﺮ ﻫﻢ ﺷﺪ‪» .‬ﻣﻴﻞ« ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﺠﺴﺪ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺑﻌﺪﺗﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻝ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ‬ ‫ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪» :‬ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻯ ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﺁﻻﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﺔ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻱ ﻣﺘﺤﺮﻙ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﻜﻰ«‬
‫ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩ«‬ ‫ِ‬
‫»ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﺍﺿﺎﻓﻪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ »ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﺁﻻﺕ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺝﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺑﻬﻴﻨﻪﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ؛‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻡ ﻣﺤﺎﺻﺮﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻨﮓ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻣﺘﻦ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﺳﻮﻳﺔ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺴﺖ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ «.‬ﮔﺮﺍﻟﺪ ﺭﻭﻧﻴﮓ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻗﺪﺭﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺮﻥ ﻫﻔﺪﻫﻢ ﻣﺼﺎﺩﻑ ﺷﺪ ﺑﺎ »ﺗﻜﺜﻴﺮ ﻭ ﺁﺭﻯﮔﻮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﺧﻮﺭﺩﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﺁﻻﺕ ﻛﺎﺭﺧﺎﻧﻪ‬
‫‪14‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﻪﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨﺪﺑﻰﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﺳﻮﻳﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﭼﺮﺥﺩﻧﺪﻩﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﻪﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‪ 10«.‬ﺑﺪﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﺨﺸﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺑﺰﺭگﺗﺮ ﻛﺎﺭﺧﺎﻧﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬
‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫»ﺷﺪﻥ«‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺑﺪﻝ ﺷﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥﺷﻤﻮﻝ‬
‫‪15‬‬
‫ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺳﻮﻳﺔ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﻛﺸﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪﺍﻯ ﺗﻤﺎ ّﻣﺎ ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﻮﺡ ﺧﺮﺩ‬
‫ﻭ ﻛﻼﻥ‪ .‬ﭼﻪ ﺑﺴﺎ ﺍﺻﻠﻰﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﺴﺘﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ ﺍﻧﺠﻤﺎ ِﺩ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﻪ )ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺍﺑﺪﺍ ِﻉ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ( ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻓﻜﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺻﻠﺐ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ ﺩﺭﺁﻣﺪﺓ ﻛﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻮﺁﻭﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﻓﺰﺍﻳﻨﺪﺓ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻭ ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻰﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺗﺨﺮﻳﺐﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﺮﻛﺰ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺍﺗﻮﻧﻮﻣﻴﺴﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ‪ :‬ﺗﺮﻭﻧﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﮕﺮﻯ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ‬
‫ﻭﻳﺮﻧﻮ ﺩﺭ »ﻗﻄﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ« ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﺔ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﺁﻻﺕ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺶ ﺑﻬﺮﻩﻭﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺳﻮﺩ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺭﺅﻳﺎﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮﺍﺱﻫﺎ ﺿﺎﺑﻄﺔ ﺳﻮﻣﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ‬
‫ﻭ ﻓﺎﻧﺘﺰﻯﻫﺎ ﺣﻮﻝ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺩﻭﺭﺓ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﺣﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ژﺍﻧﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ »ﺧﺮﺩ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ«‪ .‬ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺭﺍ ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ‬
‫ﻧﻮﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﻋﻠﻤﻰـﺗﺨﻴﻠﻰ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺭﺍ ِﻡ ﭘﺲ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﺁﻥ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ‪ general intellect‬ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ 16‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺿﺎﺑﻄﺔ ﺳﻮﻡ ﻭﺭﺍﻯ ﺩﻭ ﺿﺎﺑﻄﺔ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻭ ﭘﺘﺎﻧﺴﻴﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻜﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺑﺨﺶ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻭ‬ ‫‪ 2.1‬ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻭﺍﺳﻂ ﻗﺮﻥ ﻧﻮﺯﺩﻫﻢ‪ ،‬ﺭﺩﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺣﻴﺎﻯ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﺔ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﺭ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺭﺍﻯ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﺔ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺭﺍﻩ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﺨﺶ ﻣﻌﺮﻭﻑ »ﻗﻄﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ« ﺍﺯ ﮔﺮﻭﻧﺪﺭﻳﺴﺔ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﺖ ﻧﻴﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﻳﻴﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﺎﻭﻥ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺠﺎﻣﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﺍﻍ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺘﻦ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪21 1393‬‬

‫ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻼﺣﻈﺎﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺎﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺳﺒﺐ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺩﻭ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺩﻋﺎﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺰ »ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ« ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺪﺍﺧﻠﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺑﺪﻳﻞ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺨﺸﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﻩ ﺍﮔﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻃﻮﻝ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻧﻪ ﺗﻤﺎ ِﻡ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺪﺍﺧﻠﺔ ﭘﺮﻓﻮﺭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻧﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻞ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ‬ ‫ﺧﺮﺩ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪ ﻭ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺑﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺤ ًﺎ‬
‫ﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﻣﻪ ‪ 68‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﺍﺩ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﺪ‪» :‬ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﺔ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ ﺍﺯ ﮔﺴﺴﺖﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺷﻜﺴﺖﻫﺎ« ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﺗﺎ ﭼﻪ ﺣﺪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺴﺴﺖﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺟﺪﺍ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻗﻠﻤﺪﺍﺩ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺗﺎ ﭼﻪ ﺣﺪ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺭﻭﺯﻣﺮﻩ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻛﻨﺘﺮﻝ ﺧﺮﺩ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩ؛ ﺑﺮﻋﻜﺲ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ ﺧﻄﻮﻃﻰ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﺩﺭﺁﻣﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺟﻨﺒﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ 19.‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎ ﭼﻪ ﺣﺪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻣﺒﻬﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻼﻓﺼﻞ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻓﺰﻭﺩﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺿﺢﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﻳﻚ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ »ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪17«.‬ﭘﺲ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺗﺎ ﭼﻪ ﺣﺪ ﺧﺮﺩ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﻫﺎﺳﺎﺯﻯ‬
‫‪20‬‬
‫ﺳﻴﻼﻥ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻗﻄﻊ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺗﺎ ﭼﻪ ﺣﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺧﺪﻣﺖ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻴﻼﻥ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺳﻴﻼﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻏﺬﺍ )ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﻫﺎﻥ(‪،‬‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺑﺴﺘﺮ ﻭ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺳﻨﺠﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‪،‬‬
‫ﺷﻴﺮ )ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﭘﺴﺘﺎﻥ(‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻜﺘﺔ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﻬﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺿﺎﺑﻄﺔ »ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻴﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻭ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻣﺮﺍﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻫﻨﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﻫﺎﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻮﺩﻙ‬ ‫ﻓﻬﻤﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺑﺪﻝ ﻧﺸﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﭘﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﻣﺎﺩﺭﺵ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺳﻴﻼﻥ ﺷﻴﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻗﻄﻊ‬ ‫)ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻳﭽﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰﺑﺨﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﻴﺮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺎﻧﺪ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﻫﺎﺿﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺯﻋﻢ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‪ ،‬ﭘﺮﻭﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺎﻯ ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻮﺩﻙ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ »ﻫﺮ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺭﻫﺒﺮﻯ ﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺨﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻋﻬﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﻓﺖ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺗﺎ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻼﻥ ﺍﻧﻘﻄﺎﻉ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺩﻫﻘﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩﺷﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؛ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﺽ ﻣﻮﻟﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﻭ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺟﻤﻌﻰﺑﻮﺩﻥ‪ 18‬ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺎﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ِ‬
‫‪21‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺧﻼﻑ ﺩﻫﻘﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ :‬ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﺩﻭ ِﺭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﺎﺭﺧﺎﻧﻪ ﺟﻤﻊ‬
‫)ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻜﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻫﻢ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﺪﻧﺪ ﻭ »ﻣﻜﺎﻥ«ﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺟﻤﻌﻰﺑﻮﺩﻥﺷﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ‬
‫ﺗﺮﻣﻴﻨﻮﻟﻮژﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‪» ،‬ﻣﻴﻞ« ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﻫﻘﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻢ ﺩﻭﺭ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ‬
‫»ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩ« ﺩﺭ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪22‬؛ ﻗﺪﺭﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰ ﻭ ﺁﺭﻯﮔﻮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﺪﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﮔﺸﺖ‪(.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﺑﻰﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ »ﺷﺪﻥ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﺮ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺠﻤﺎ ِﺩ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‬ ‫‪ .2.2‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ »ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﻭ ﺍﺳﻜﻴﺰﻭﻓﺮﻧﻰ«‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺻﻠﺐ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺨﺮﻳﺐ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﻪ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮ‪ ،‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ‬
‫‪ 2.2.1‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎ ِﻡ ِ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩ »ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻻ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻴﻼﻥ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺟﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﻘﺪﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫ﭘﺴﺖﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺳﻴﻼﻥ ﻣﻴﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺳﻴﻼﻥ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺭﻭﺵﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺧﻄﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻠﻰ ﺍﻭ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﺭﻳﺨﺘﺶ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‬
‫ﻭ ﺗﻌﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻭ ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ(‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻝ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻠﻰ ﺧﻄﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻄﺶ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻻ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﻋﺎﻡﺗﺮﻯ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﺍﺗﺨﺎﺫ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﻣﺤﻞ ﺗﻘﺎﻃﻊ ﺳﻴﻼﻥﻫﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ؛ ﻣﺤﻞ ﺍﻧﻘﻄﺎﻉ ﻭ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ‬ ‫ﺭﻳﺨﺖﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰﺍﺵ ﻭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻤﺖ ﺳﻮﻕ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺟﻬﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺻﻞ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺭﻳﺨﺖ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻧﺪﻫﻰ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﻭﻯ )ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻰ‪ 23‬ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻻ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﮔﺮﺍﻟﺪ ﺭﻭﻧﻴﮓ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺮﺩﻳﻢ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﻣﻐﺰ‪ ،‬ﻗﻠﺐ‪ ،‬ﺩﺳﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ ﭘﺎﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﺗﻦ(‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺨﺶ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ »ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ‬ ‫ﺧﺼﻴﺼﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻔﻬﻤﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻭ‪،‬‬ ‫ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻠﻰﺍﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺍﺳﻜﻴﺰﻭﻓﺮﻧﻰ ﺑﺴﻂ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻜﺘﺔ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺧﻼﺻﻪ‬
‫‪24‬‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﻛﺮﺩ‪ :‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﻳﺎ ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‬
‫ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺤﻞ ﺗﻘﺎﻃﻊ ﺳﻴﻼﻥﻫﺎ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺳﺮﺗﺎﺳﺮ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ‬
‫ﮔﺎﻩ ﻣﺴﺎﻟﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝﻫﺎ ﻭ ﮔﺴﺴﺖﻫﺎ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻧﺪﻫﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻧﻔﺼﺎﻝﻫﺎ ﻭ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺧﻼﺻﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎ ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪22‬‬

‫ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﭼﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﭼﻔﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺴﺖ »ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻭ ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﮕﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻮ ﺩﻭﺳﻮﻳﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺏ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ‪ ...‬ﺁﭘﺎﺭﺍﺗﻮﺱ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺟﺎ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺍﻧﻀﺒﺎﻁ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨﺒﻴﻪ‬
‫ﻭ ﻧﻈﺎﺭﺕ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﺮﺩ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺁﺧﺮ‪.‬‬
‫‪28‬‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﻳﻚ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡﻭﺍﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﻣﺼﻨﻮﻋﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢ ﮔﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪«.‬‬
‫ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺍﺋﻤﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﻓﻮﺭﺩﻳﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺷﺎﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻭﺻﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺰﻳﻦ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻧﻘﻄﺎﻉﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﮔﺴﺴﺖﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺷﻜﺴﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻗﻄﻌﻪﻭﺍﺭﮔﻰﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﺔ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﺭﻳﺨﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻳﻢ؛ ﺍﻧﻘﻄﺎﻉﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺍﻛﺴﻮﺩﻭﺱ ]ﺧﺮﻭﺝ‬ ‫ﻣﺼﻨﻮﻋﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺩﺳﺖﻛﻢ ﻧﻈﺮﮔﺎﻩ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺩﺳﺘﻪﺟﻤﻌﻰ[ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻣﺘﻨﺎﻉ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﻓﻬﻤﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻋﺰﻳﻤﺖﮔﺎﻩ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﺗﺮﺍﮔﺬﺭﻧﺪﺓ ﻭﺍﻭ ﺭﺑﻂ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﭘﺲ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺳﺘﺎﻳﺶ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﻳﺘﺔ ﺟﻤﻌﻰ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺳﺎﻳﺒﻮﺭگ ﺩﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺧﻼﺻﻪ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺲ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﻭ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ‬
‫ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ﻓﻬﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺳﻴﻼﻥﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﺘﺼﻞﺷﺪﻥ‪ :‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ »ﻭ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺧﺎﺹ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺍﻭ ﺭﺑﻂ ﺍﺣﺘﻴﺎﻁ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺧﺮﺝ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﺍ ِﻭ ﺭﺑﻂِ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺗﺎﺑﻌﻰ ﺧﻨﺜﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺯﻋﻢ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩﻯ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻭ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﻳﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﻮﻝ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺒﺎﺷﺖ ﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﭘﺮﻭﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺎﻯﺻﻨﻌﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻋﻜﺲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ »ﻭ«ﺍﻯ ﮔﺰﻳﻨﺶﮔﺮ ﻭ ﺁﺭﻯﮔﻮ ﻃﺮﻓﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻦ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺸﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻛﺜﺮﺗﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﮔﻮﻥ ﺭﻫﺒﺮﻯﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﻳﺎ ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﮕﻰ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻭ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓ ﻳﺎ ﺻﻨﻌﺖ‬
‫ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻫﻤﮕﻮﻥ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪» :‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺨﺶ ﺭﺍ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﻭ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﺳﺮ ﺑﺎﺯ ﺯﺩﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻮﺽ‪،‬‬
‫ﻧﮕﺮﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺴﻂ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ؛ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺰ؛ ﺑﻞ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺩﺭ ـ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﻦ ﺩﻭ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﻋﻬﺪﻩﻣﻰﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ِ‬
‫ﺯﻋﻢ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﻭ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﻭﺍﺟ ِﺪ »ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭﺓ‬ ‫»ﻭ« ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺧﻂ ﻣﺮﺯﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﻣﺮﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﻭ ﺩﻫﻘﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺍﻝ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﻰﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺗﻬﻰ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺧﻂ ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ ﻳﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻴﻼﻥ‪ ،‬ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻣﺎ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻳﺪﻥ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩﻯ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ ﺳﻔﺖ ﻭ ﺳﺨﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩﺷﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺟﺰﺍ« ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻴﺴﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ‬ ‫‪29‬‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ‬ ‫ﻛﻤﺘﺮ ﺗﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ؛ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺿﺎﺑﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﺳﻮﻡ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺧﻂ ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻋﺒﻮﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺷﺪﻥﻫﺎ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏﻫﺎ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺧﻮﻳﺶﻣﻰﻛﺸﺎﻧﺪ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺩﻭﺷﺎﺧﮕﻰ ﻋﻘﻴﻢ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﻳﺎ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻭ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪» 25«.‬ﻭ« ﺧﻄﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺮﺍﮔﺬﺭﻧﺪﻩ‪ ،26‬ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺼﺤﻴﺢ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ )ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺗﺮﺍﮔﺬﺭﻧﺪﮔﻰ( ﺳﻄﻮﺡ‬
‫‪ 2.2.2‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻣﻴﻞ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﻞ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺍﻭ ﻳﻚ ﻭﺍ ِﻭ ﺧﻨﺜﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ :‬ﺟﻤﻌﻰﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺧﻼﻑ ﺩﻫﻘﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻴﻼﻥﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ ﺁﻥ‪» ،‬ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏﻫﺎ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪«.‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﻋﺎﻡ ﺑﺎ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﻛﻮﺗﺎﻩ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ :‬ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﺗﻘﺎﻃﻊ ﺷﻜﻞ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﻣﻴﻞﻭﺭﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺪﻝ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻯ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻭﺭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‪،‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻴﻄﺔ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ »ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﻛﺸﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﻓﻮﺭﺩﻳﺴﻢ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ‬
‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻜﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺟﻤﻊ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭﺧﺎﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﻼﻥﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻫﻮﻳﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻪﺩﻗﺖ‬
‫ﻭ ﮔﺴﺴﺖﻫﺎ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺟﺎﺯﻩ ﺩﻫﻴﺪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺪﻳﺪﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻞ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺳﻴﻼﻥ ﺑﻰﻗﻴﺪﻭﺑﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ‬
‫»ﻣﻜﺎﻥ«ﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻤﺎﺱ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺍﺣﻰ ﻣﺠﺎﻭﺭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺟﻤﻌﻰﺑﻮﺩﻥﺷﺎﻥ ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ‪ :‬ﻫﺮ ﻓﺮ ِﻡ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫‪27‬‬
‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺩﻭﻟﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﻼ ﻓﺮ ِﻡ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺁﻣﻴﺰﻧﺪ‪«.‬‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ‬
‫ﻧﻬﺎﺩﻫﺎ ﻫﺮ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺻﻠﺐﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﻓﺎﻗ ِﺪ »ﺷﺪﻥ«ﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﻓﺮﺍﻣﻮﺵ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻝ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﻭ ﻳﻜﻰ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻫﻘﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺎ ِﺭ ﻣﺜﺒﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺳﺮﻫﻢ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻟﻰ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰﺑﺨﺶ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻛﻨﺶﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻰﺷﻤﺎﺭ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺗﻌﻴﻦﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺑﺮﺩﻩﻛﺸﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻢ ﺩﻭﺭ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻧﺪ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﺮ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﻓﻮﺭﺩﻳﺴﻢ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ ﻣﻰﺷﺪﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺗﻘﺪﻡ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪23 1393‬‬

‫ﺁﺭﺯﻭﻯ »ﺷﻌﺮﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺲ ﻓﺴﺘﻴﻮﺍﻝﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺟﻤﻌﻴﺖﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﻣﺮﺩﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﻞﻭﺭﺯ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻜﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺭﺩﻳﺎﺑﻰ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻴﺎﺑﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺳﺮﺯﻳﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﺪﻧﺪ« ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﻭﺭﺍﻧﺪﻧﺪ‪ 33.‬ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻜﻰ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﻫﻨﺮ ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻟﻪﺭﻭﻯ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ ﻣﻰﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻭ ﻧﻈﻢﺷﺎﻥ ﺧﻠﻠﻰ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻧﺸﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﻋﻜﺲ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺁﻭﺍﻥﮔﺎﺭﺩﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻣﺪﺍﻓﻊ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﻳﻴﻨﻰ ﻫﻨﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﻞﻭﺭﺯ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻡ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺩﺍﺋﻤ ًﺎ ﺧﺮﺍﺏ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺳﺘﺮﺳﻰ ﺻﻨﻌﺖ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓﺳﺎﺯﻯ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻻﻳﻰﺷﺪﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﻢ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺏ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﻜﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻨﺮ ﻏﺎﻟﺒ ًﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﺼﻴﺼﻪ‬
‫ﻭ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺑﺎﺯﺍﺭ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺩﻭﺭ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﺁﻟﻮﺩﻩﻧﺸﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻓﺎﻧﺘﺰﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﮔﺮﻭﻫﻰ ﺭﺍﺳﺘﻴﻦ ﺑﻬﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ؛ ﻓﺎﻧﺘﺰﻯﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺭﻭ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﻭﺡ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﺍﺭ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻴﻞﻭﺭﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﻛﻮﺗﺎﻩ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ‬
‫ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻟﻪﺭﻭﻯ ﻫﻨﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﺯﺩﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻝ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩ ﺑﺎﺯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﮔﺮ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻜﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺍﺭﺩﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ‬
‫‪30‬‬
‫ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻨﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻴﻄﺔ ﺑﺴﺘﺔ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﻳﻴﻨﻰ ﺍﻧﺰﻭﺍﻃﻠﺒﺎﻧﻪﺍﺵ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﻋﻨﺼﺮ ﻛﮋﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪«.‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﻞﻭﺭﺯ ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮﺷﺖ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﻣﻴﻞ‬
‫ﺗﻦ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺁﻭﺍﻥﮔﺎﺭﺩﻳﺴﻢ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﭘﺎﺭﺍﺩﻭﻛﺲ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺩﺍﻏﻰ ﺑﺮ ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻐﻴﺮ ﻭ ﺩﮔﺮﺩﻳﺴﻰ ﺩﺍﺋﻤﻰ ﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﻓﺮﻭ ﻣﻰﺭﻳﺰﻧﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ّ‬
‫ﻭ ﺭﺅﻳﺎﻯ ﺷﻜﺴﺖﺧﻮﺭﺩﻩﺍﺵ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺭﻭﺯﻣﺮﺓ ﻫﻨﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﺟﻤﻊ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩﻥﺷﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﻞﻭﺭﺯ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﻫﻨﺮ ﺯﻧﺪﻩﻯ ﺭﻭﺯﻣﺮﻩ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺸﻢ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺧﺎﺹ »ﺷﺪﻥ« ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻜﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺩﺍﺋﻢ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﺻﻠﺐ‬ ‫»ﻫﺴﺘﻰ«‬ ‫ﺧﺎﺹ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﺑﺎﻻ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻛﺎﺫﺏ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮ‪» ،‬ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻁ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﻢ ﻭ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺍﺯﭘﻴﺶﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﻢ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻴﺖﺳﺎﺯﺍﻧﺔ ﻫﻨﺮ ﻭ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ«‪ 34‬ﻧﻪ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﺁﻭﺍﻥﮔﺎﺭﺩﻫﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻋﻜﺲ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺷﺪﻥﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺁﺯﻣﻮﻥﮔﺮﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ »ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻫﻨﺮﻯ ﻭ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ«‪ 35‬ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻴﻞ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﻞﻭﺭﺯ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻁ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻴﺖﺳﺎﺯ ﺩﻭﺭﻯ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻭ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻯ‬ ‫ﭘﺲ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﻞﻭﺭﺯ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺗﺨﺎﺫ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺣﻴﻄﺔ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﻢ ﻛﻨﻮﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪﻯ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﻭ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻨﺮ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﭘﻰ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯﺷﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﺑﺴﺘﻪﻯ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﻳﺰﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺟﻐﺮﺍﻓﻴﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺻﻔﺤﺔ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻘﺸﻪﻧﮕﺎﺭﻯ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺧﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺑﺪﺍ ِﻉ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺪﻳﻞ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺷﺪﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﻭ ﻛﻪ »ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺰﺍﺭ ﻓﻼﺕ ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺻﻔﺤﺔ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ« ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻣﻌﻴﻨﻰ ﺑﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﻧﺸﺖ‬‫ﮔﻮﺷﻪﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﻧﺸﺘﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛‪ 31‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﻞﻭﺭﺯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ِ‬
‫ﻫﻨﺮ ﻭ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺣﻴﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻳﺎ »ﻫﻨﺮ ﻭ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ« ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺩﻋﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺑﺪﺍً ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﺑﺎ ﮔﻔﺘﻦ‬ ‫ﺑﻌﻼﻭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﻞﻭﺭﺯ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺮﻑ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻨﺮ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻟﻪﺭﻭﻯ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ‬ ‫ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﺯﺩﺍ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﺔ‬
‫ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻟﻪﺭﻭﻯ ﻫﻨﺮ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻤﺰﻭﺝ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻫﻨﺮﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﻞ ﻗﻮﻝ ﺑﺎﻻ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻫﻨﺮ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺠﺎ ِﻡ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻪ؛ ﺍﺩﻋﺎﻯ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻨﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺤﻮﺭ ﻫﻨﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﻣﺤﻮﺭ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺠﻬﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﻋﻘﻴﻢ ﻫﻨﺮﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ﻓﻬﻢ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﻳﻴﻨﻰ ِ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﻫﻨﺮ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺗﻘﻮﻳﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﮔﻔﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻗﺮﻥ ﻧﻮﺯﺩﻫﻢ ﭘﺎﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ‬
‫ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ ﭼﻔﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺴﺖ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ‪ ،‬ﭘﺮﺳﺶﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺒﻴﻞ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺳﺘﺎﻭﻳﺰﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺯﺍﺭ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫»ﺧﻮﺩﺁﻳﻴﻨﻰ ﺣﻴﻄﺔ ﻫﻨﺮﻯ« ﻳﺎ »ﻫﻨﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ« ﻭ ﺍﻟﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﻨﺮ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺘﻨﺎﻉ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮﺷﺪﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺁﺧﺮ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﺎﺫﺏ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﻫﻨﺮﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺣﻴﻄﻪﻫﺎ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ‬
‫ﻧﺎﮔﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﻭﺍﺝ‬
‫‪ِ .3‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ؛ ﻭ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﻨﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺗﺨﺎﺫ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ؟ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﺯﺩﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﻭ ﺛﻐﻮ ِﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺻﻨﺎﻳﻊ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻰ ﻭ ﺧﻼﻗﻪ‪ 32‬ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻰ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺨﻦ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﻨﺮﻯ ﻭ ﺧﻼﻗﺔ ﮔﺎﻟﺮﻯﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺸﮕﺎﻩﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺣﺮﺍﺝﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺴﺘﻴﺘﻮﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﭘﺲ ﻫﺮ ﻟﻮﮔﻮﺱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺍﻣﻰ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 36،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭﺍﻣﺎﺗﻴﺰﻩ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻰ ﻫﻨﺮﻯ‪ ،‬ﺻﻨﻌﺖ ﺳﺮﮔﺮﻣﻰ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻭﺝ‬
‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻝ ﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﻣﻪ ‪ 68‬ﺭﺩﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻭ ِ‬ ‫ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﺯﺩﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﻩ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ؛ ﺣﺪﻭﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ‬
‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﻭ ﺍﺳﻜﻴﺰﻭﻓﺮﻧﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﻘﻴﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺭﺯﺵﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺗﺮ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻳﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺳﺮﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻫﻨﺮ ﺁﻭﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭﺩ ﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺭﺅﻳﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻛﺮﺩﻩﺍﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝﻫﺎ ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‬ ‫ﺁﻭﺍﻥﮔﺎﺭﺩﻫﺎ ﺯﺩﻭﺩﻥ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻭ ﻫﻨﺮ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻫﻨﺮ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻴﻼﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﻞ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﮔﺎﻩ ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﺭﺍﺣﺖﺗﺮ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺁﻣﻴﺨﺘﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻭ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻨﺮﻯ ﻭ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶﮔﺮﺍﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﺠﻠﻰ ﻣﻴﻞ ﺟﻤﻌﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻔﻬﻤﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺟﻨﺒﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ‬ ‫ﻼ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ‬ ‫ﺭﻭﺯﻣﺮﮔﻰ ﺑﻮﺭژﻭﺍﻳﻰ ﺷﺮﻡﺁﻭﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﺑﻮﺱﺷﺎﻥ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺜ ً‬‫ِ‬
‫ﻗﺎﺩﺭﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﺭ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮ ِﻡ ﺩﻭﻟﺘﻰ ﺍﻣﺘﻨﺎﻉ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺣﻴﻄﻪﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺗﻴﺎﺗﺮ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺑﻰ ﻫﺎﻓﻤﻦ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺁﺭﺗﻮ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﻭﺍﻥﮔﺎﺭﺩﻫﺎ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪24‬‬

‫ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺖ ﭼﻔﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺴﺖ ﺑﺨﻮﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺑﺎ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺭﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﺷﺒﻜﻪﺍﻯ ﺟﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻕ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺳﻄﻮﺡ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﺗﺮﺍﮔﺬﺭﻧﺪﺓ »ﻭ« ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺤﻠﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺟﻤﻌﻰ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻧﺎﻫﻤﮕﻮﻥ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻫﮋﻣﻮﻧﻴﻜﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪﺧﺼﻮﺹ ﺿﻤﻦ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺷﺘﺎﺑﺎﻥ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﻟﻮژﻯﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺑﺴﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻃﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻼﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎﺗﻰ‪ ،‬ﺭﺳﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻨﺘﺮﻧﺖ ﻭ ﺷﺒﻜﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ‪ ،‬ﺷﻴﻮﺓ‬
‫ﻗﺪﻳﻤﻰ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﻨﺴﻮﺥ ﻭ ﻫﮋﻣﻮﻧﻰ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻫﮋﻣﻮﻧﻰ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ‬ ‫ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻪ ‪ 68‬ﺳﺮﺑﺮﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺟﻨﺒﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻪ ‪ 68‬ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺰﻳﻦ ﺷﺪ‪ :‬ﻫﮋﻣﻮﻧﻰ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻛﺎﺭ‬
‫ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ‪» :‬ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﻛﺎﺭﻱ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﻱ ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺗﻲ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﻧﺸﺠﻮﻳﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﻜﺎﺭﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻓﻤﻴﻨﻴﺴﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ‬
‫ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻲ ﻛﺎﻻ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻱ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺩﻭ ﺟﻨﺒﺔ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚﺳﻮ‪ :‬ﺗﺎ ﺟﺎﻳﻲ‬ ‫ﺧﻼﻑ ﻗﻴﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﭘﺮﻭﻟﺘﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻝ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ »ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﻱ ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺗﻲ« ﻛﺎﻻ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺍﻧﻘﻄﺎﻉ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻱ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻤ ًﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺗﻲ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺮﻭﺳﻪﻫﺎﻱ‬ ‫ﺑﻬﺮﻩﻛﺸﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻓﻮﺭﺩﻳﺴﻢ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻤﭙﺎﻧﻲﻫﺎﻱ ﺑﺰﺭگ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﻧ ِﻮ ﻣﻪ ‪ 68‬ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎﻱ ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻲ ﻭ ﺳﻮﻣﻴﻦ ﺭﺥ ﻣﻲﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﻞﻭﺭﺯ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪ‪ :‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺟﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻬﺎﺭﺕﻫﺎﻱ ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎ ِﺭ ﺑﻲﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺴﻴﭙﻠﻴﻦ ﻓﻮﺭﺩﻳﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﻫﺎ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻨﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻓﺰﺍﻳﻨﺪﻩﺍﻱ ﺑﺪﻝ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻬﺎﺭﺕﻫﺎﻱ ﺳﻴﺒﺮﻧﺘﻴﻜﻲ‬ ‫ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﺴﻴﭙﻠﻴﻦ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺒﻰ ﭼﭗ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻞ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺯ ﻗﻴﺪ‬
‫ﻭ ﻧﻈﺎﺭﺕ ﻛﺎﻣﭙﻴﻮﺗﺮﻱ )ﻭ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎﺕ ﺍﻓﻘﻲ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬ ‫ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺷﺪﻧﺪ؛ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺳﻴﻼﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻮﺩﻱ( ﻣﻲﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻱ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﻭﻗﺘﻲ ﺁﻥ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺘﻲ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻮﻗﺘ ًﺎ ﻣﺘﻮﻗﻒ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻞ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﭼﻔﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺴﺖ ﺧﻮﺭﺩﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺪﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ »ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﻱ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻲ« ﻛﺎﻻ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻱ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪﺍﻱ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺖﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﺎﺕ ﺑﺪﻳﻞ ﻛﻮﺷﻴﺪﻧﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺳﺘﺎﻯ ﺷﻜﻞﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﻭ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ‬
‫ﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ‬ ‫ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉﮔﺮﻯ ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﺑﺮ ﻣﻲﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻤﻮﻣ ًﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ »ﻛﺎﺭ« ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺳﺒﻚ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺯﺩﻧﺪ‪.‬‬‫ﻼ ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻲﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﺩﺳﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺖﻫﺎ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺁﻏﺎﺯ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ‬ ‫‪ 3.1‬ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ‬
‫ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻣﺸﻐﻮﻝ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻭ ﺗﺜﺒﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩﻫﺎﻱ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻲ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﺄﺧﺮ‪ :‬ﻫﮋﻣﻮﻧﻰ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮﮔﺎﻩ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﺴﺖﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮ ﻫﻨﺮﻱ‪ُ ،‬ﻣﺪﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺳﻠﻴﻘﻪﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻫﻨﺠﺎﺭﻫﺎﻱ ﻣﺼﺮﻑﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺳﻄﺤﻲ ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻳﻚﺗﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸﻐﻮﻝ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻭ ﺗﺜﺒﻴﺖ ﺍﻓﻜﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ‬
‫‪40‬‬
‫ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻲ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪«.‬‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯ‪ ،‬ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺍﻥ ﭘﺴﺖﺍﺗﻮﻧﻮﻣﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬
‫ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺷﺪﻳﺪﺍً ﺑﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺢ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻥ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻋﻮﺍﻃﻒ ِ‬
‫ﺍﻳﺘﺎﻟﻴﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻭﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﻣﺘﺄﺧﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻫﺔ ﺑﻪﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ‬
‫‪ 70‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﻗﺪﻡ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻻﺗﺰﺍﺭﺍﺗﻮ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﻯ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻫﻪ‪ ،‬ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ ﻣﻪ ‪» ،68‬ﺗﺤﻮﻝ ﺑﺰﺭگ«‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭﺧﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺗﻮﻣﺎﺳﻴﻮﻥ ﻓﺰﺍﻳﻨﺪﺓ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻮﻝ‬
‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺯﻳﺎﺩ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺘ ًﺎ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﭼﺮﺧﺔ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺻﺎﺩﺭﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻛﺎﺭﺧﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺸﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﻭﺵﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺳﺎﻟﻦ ﺷﻜﻼﺕ‪ ،‬ﺑﺰﺭگﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺸﮕﺎﻩ‬
‫ﺟﻨﻮﺏ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﺭﺯﺍﻥﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ـ‪ ،‬ﺧﻄﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻠﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺷﻜﻼﺕ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ‪ 18‬ﺗﺎ ‪ 20‬ﺳﺎﻝ ‪ 2013‬ﺩﺭ ﻟﻨﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻛﺎﻫﺶ ﺗﺪﺭﻳﺠﻰ ﻭ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﭘﺮﻭﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺎﻯ ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻛﺸﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ‪ ،‬ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨ ِﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺍﻭ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﺑﺮﮔﺰﺍﺭ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺷﻜﻼﺕ ﺑﻪﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻻﻳﻰ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ؛ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ‪ ،‬ﺷﻜﻼﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺫﻳﻞ ﻛﻨﺘﺮﻝ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻳﻦﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﺭﻳﺨﺘﺶ‬
‫ﺧﺪﻣﺎﺕ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻣﻪ ‪ 68‬ﻫﻢ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﻛﺎﻻﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺷﺒﻜﺔ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻻﻫﺎ ﻭ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺳﺎﻟﻦ ﺷﻜﻼﺕ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﺷﻜﻼﺕﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻧﻘﺪﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﺗﺎﺳﺮ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﺮﺍﺭ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺫﻫﻦ ﺧﻄﻮﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺷﻜﻞ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ »ﺷﻤﻮﻝ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ‪ 38«37‬ﻭ ﺗﺮﻭﻧﺘﻰ ﺑﺪﻝ‬
‫ﺭﺍﻳﺞ ﻭ ﻋﺎﺩﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺗﺎ ﻣﺠﺴﻤﻪﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﺠﻴﺐ‬ ‫‪39‬‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺳﺮﺗﺎﺳﺮ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻛﺎﺭﺧﺎﻧﺔ ﺑﺰﺭگ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﺠﻮﻳﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺯﻧﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﺭﻣﻨﺪﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﻜﺎﺭﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻏﺮﻳﺐ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ »ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻛﺎﻧﺴﭽﻮﺁﻝ ﺗﺠﺴﻤﻰ« ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺲ ﺷﻜﻼﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺩﺳﺖ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺒﻜﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺍﺭﺯﺵ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﺒﻮﺏﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﺨﺶ ﭘﺮﻓﻮﺭﻣﻨﺴﻰ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫ﺷﺒﻜﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﻩ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺷﺪﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻧﺪﻫﻰ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﺟﻤﻌﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺟﺮﺍﮔﺮ ﺯﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺳﻂ ﺳﺎﻟﻦ ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﻭﺍﻧﻰ ﭘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻜﻼﺕ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ ﻣﺪﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ »ﻋﻤﻮﺩﻯ« ﻛﻪ ﭘﺮﻭﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﮔﺮﻡ ﺣﻤﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺨﺶ ﻣﺤﺒﻮﺏ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺸﮕﺎﻩ‬
‫ﻧﻘﺶ ﺳﺮ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﺍﻥ ﺩﺳﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ ﭘﺎﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺪﻝﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﻟﺒﺎﺱﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻜﻼﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻦ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺳﻮﻯ ﻓﺮﻣﻰ ﺍﻓﻘﻰ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺒﻰ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﻋﻜﺲ‪ ،‬ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻧﺪﻫﻰ ﺑﻪ‬
‫»ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ«‪ 41‬ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪﻛﻞ ﺟﺪﺍ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻛﻞ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪25 1393‬‬

‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺸﮕﺎﻩ‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻣﮕﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ »ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻰ« ﭘﻨﺎﻩﺟﻮﻳﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﭘﺮ ﻣﺨﺎﻃﺮﻩ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻭ ﻣﻮﻗﺘﻰﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻣﺤﻞ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ )ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻚﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﻨﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ »ﻫﻨﺮﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ«‪ 42‬ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺠﺒﻮﺭﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻭ ﺗﺤﺼﻴﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺸﻮﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﻛﺸﻮﺭ ﺳﻔﺮ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﺴﺘﺄﺟﺮﺍﻥ ﺟﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻪ ﺑﺴﺎ ﻫﺮ ﻳﻜﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺟﺮﺍ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫)ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ ﺧﻼﺻﻪ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻫﮋﻣﻮﻧﻴﻚﺷﺪﻥ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﻭ ﻣﺎﻩ ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﻪ ﭘﻮﻝ ﺟﻴﺐﺷﺎﻥ ﺧﺎﻧﻪ ﻋﻮﺽ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ(‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ‬
‫ﻼ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﻳﻴﻦ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 51.‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺭﻓﺘﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ]ﺍﺯ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﻧﺒﺮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﺧﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﺸﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻬﻢ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺵﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺭﺟﻮﻉ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻃﺒﻖ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺸﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺎﻃﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﺭﺯﺍﻥ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺁﺳﻴﺎﻯ ﺟﻨﻮﺏ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﺵﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻣﻨﺪ ﺟﻤﻌﻰﺑﻮﺩﻥ‪ ،‬ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻧﺪﻫﻰ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬
‫ﺷﺮﻗﻰ ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ[ ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻤﻌﻰﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ‬
‫ﺣﻮﻝ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﺁﻻﺕ ﻛﺎﺭﺧﺎﻧﻪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ِ‬‫ﺟﻤﻊ ِ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻫﮋﻣﻮﻧﻴﻚ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﻛﺎﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﻻ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺷﺪ‬ ‫ﺩﻫﻘﺎﻧﻰ ﺳﻮﺍﺭ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﺩﻫﻘﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻓﺮﺻﺖ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻰ ﺷﺎﻏﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭﺧﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﺟﻤﻌﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻝ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺳ ِﺮ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺗﻮﻟﻴ ِﺪ‬
‫‪52‬‬
‫ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﻳﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯﺷﺪﻩ ﺳﺮﺑﺮﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﻛ ِﺰ ﺳﻮﺩﺁﻭﺭﻯ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻣﺎ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎ ِﺭ ﻗﻮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺳﻮﺍﺭﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ‪ ،‬ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﻟﻮژﻯ‬
‫ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩﺷﺎﻥ ﺷﺮﻁِ ﻻﺯ ِﻡ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﺎﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ(‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﺑﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ‬
‫ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺩﺍﺋﻤﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﻭ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻧﺪﻫﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻣﻨﺪ ﺷﺒﻜﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻓﻘﻰ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﺗﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﭘﻞ‬ ‫»ﻣﺎﻫﻴﭽﻪ« ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻣﻨﺪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺳﺎﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪:‬‬
‫»ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﻛﻨﻮﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻮﻟﻴ ِﺪ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﺳﺘﺮﺳﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻴﻼﻥ ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫»ﻣﺪﻝ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﺯﺍﺩ«‪ 43‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻤﻮﺩﻯ ﻓﻮﺭﺩﻳﺴﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻤ ًﺎ ﻭ ﺑﻰﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‬ ‫ﺯﻳﺴﺖ‬ ‫ﭼﺮﺧﺶ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﻋﻰ‬
‫»ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﻣﺪﻳﺮﻳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﻻﻯ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻧﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﺔ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﻛ ِﺰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﺤﺎﻟﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺑﻞ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ«‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺑﺪﻝﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺟﻨﺲ ﻣﺪﻳﺮﻳﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺪﻳﺮﻳﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ِ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰ‬ ‫‪45‬‬
‫ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﻣﺎﺯﺍﺩ‪ 44‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪«.‬‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭﺧﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﻃﺮﻑ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻤ ًﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻣﻨﺪ ﺍﻧﻌﻄﺎﻑﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﻭ ﺟﻤﻌﻰﺑﻮﺩﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻻ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺍﻧﻌﻄﺎﻑﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺭﻭﺯ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ )ﻛﺎﺭﺧﺎﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭﺭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﺁﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬
‫ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺳﻔﺖ ﻭ ﺳﺨﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺷﻐﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﺎﺭﻩﻭﻗﺖ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ( ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺩﺧﺎﻟﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﻏﻴﺮﺭﺳﻤﻰ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺭﺩﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﺭﻣﺰﺩﻯﻫﺎ‪ ،46‬ﻭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺁﺧﺮ‪ .‬ﻧﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻋﺎﻃﻔﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ »ﭘﺮﻣﺨﺎﻃﺮﻩ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻨﻈﻴﻢ ﻭ ﻛﻨﺘﺮﻝ ﺭﻫﺎ ﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ‬
‫ﻳﺎ »ﻣﺘﺰﻟﺰﻝ‪ «47‬ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﺁﺩﻡ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﺿﻮﺍﺑﻂ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ ﺩﺭ ﺯﺍﻳﺶ ﺯﻳﺴﺖ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ )‪ (2008‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ‬
‫ﻧﺌﻮﻟﻴﺒﺮﺍﻟﻰ ﺣﺎﻛﻤﻴﺖﻣﻨﺪﻯ )ﻳﺎ ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺗﺮ‪ ،‬ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖﺩﺍﺭﻯ( ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻤ ًﺎ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺳﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﻭﺯﺍﻧﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻰﺧﺒﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻫﻨﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩ‬
‫ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻟﻄﻒ ﮔﻮﺷﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﻮﺷﻤﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻠﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻮﺯﺓ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻯ ﺩﺧﺎﻟﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﻧﻬﺪ‬
‫ﺩﺳﺘﺮﺱﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﮕﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ ﺍﻳﻨﺘﺮﻧﺖ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺳﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺗﺎ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺎﻧﺎﻟﻴﺰﻩ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﻭ ﺳﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﻓﺮﺍﻏﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻢﺭﻧﮓ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺍﺭﺩ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻯ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﻻ ﺳﺮﺗﺎﺳﺮ ﺣﻴﻄﺔ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﻭﺭﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻳﺎ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺧﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﺪﻝ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻮﻝ ﻧﮕﺮﻯ ﻭ ﻫﺎﺭﺕ‪ ،48‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺳﺮﺗﺎﺳﺮ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻛﺎﺭﺧﺎﻧﺔ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ‬
‫ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻦ »ﭘﺮﻓﻮﺭﻣﻨﺲ« ﻭ »ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺭﻭﺯﺍﻧﻪ«ﻯ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺎﺭﺍﺩﻭﻛﺲ ﻣﺎﺟﺮﺍ ﺁﻥ ﺟﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﻴﻨﺔ ﺑﻬﺮﻩﻭﺭﻯ ﻭ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻫﻢ ﺁﻣﻴﺨﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺁﺩﻡ ﻻﺯﻡ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺘﺨﺼﺺ ﺑﻼﻣﻨﺎﺯﻉ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﺎﺭﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶﮔﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺧﻼﻗﻴﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻮﺁﻭﺭﻯ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻗﻴﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺣﻴﻄﻪﻯ ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻞ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ِ‬
‫ﻼ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻧﻮﺁﻭﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺣﺪﺍﻛﺜﺮ ﺣﻮﺯﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻨﻈﻴﻢ ﻭ ﻛﻨﺘﺮﻝ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺳﺪ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻼﻗﻪ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤ ً‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺩﻫﺪ؛ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻛﺎﺭﺁﻓﺮﻳﻦ‪49‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺘﺎﻧﺴﻴﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﻳﻴﻦ ﺯﻳﺴﺖﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﺰﻟﺰﻝ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺩﺭﺁﻣﺪ ﺍﻧﺪﻙ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺪﺍﻡ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﻟﺨﻮﺍﻩ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ ﭘﺘﺎﻧﺴﻴﻞﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺧﺮﺍﺝ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻧﻌﻄﺎﻑﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻼﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻫﻢ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺑﺪﻝ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺑﺮﻭﻥﻳﺎﺑﻰ‪ 50‬ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﺭﺯﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺸﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺳﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ِ‬
‫ﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﻭ ﻃﺮﻓﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺟﺎﺑﺠﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻧﺒﻮﻩ ﻭ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺭﺍﻯ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ‪ ،‬ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻤﺎﻝ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ‪،‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺟﻨﻮﺏ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻬﺎﺟﺮﺕ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪26‬‬

‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﺣﺰﺑﻰ ﭼﭗ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺷﻜﺎﻝ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‪ 54‬ﻏﺮﺑﻰ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺣﻔﻆ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺳﻴﻼﻥ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶﮔﺮ‬
‫ﻧﺨﺒﻪﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻧﻪ ﻳﺎ ﻫﻮﻳﺖﻣﺤﻮﺭ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺎﻟﺶ ﻛﺸﻴﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻧﻊ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻮﺟﺰ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ﻛﻨﻮﻧﻰ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺁﻣﻮﺯﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﺑﮕﺬﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺍﺳﺎﺳﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﻻﻟﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﻨﻮﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﻢ‪ :‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ »ﻭﺍﻭ ﺭﺑﻂ«‪ .‬ﭼﻄﻮﺭ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻃﻰ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨﺪﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﺸﻐﻮﻝ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺻﻨﻌﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﺳﺎﺯﻯ »ﻣﺮﺩﻡ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﻩ« ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﻛﺮﺩ؟‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﺜﻤﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﺗﺎﺳﺮ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺓ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻛﻪ »ﻻﻳﻚ«ﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻴﺲﺑﻮﻛﻰ ﻫﻢ ﭘﻮﻝﺳﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﺳﻮﻳﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻭ ﻣﺂﺧﺬ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺳﻮﻳﺔ‬
‫‪» .1‬ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ« ﻻﺗﺰﺍﺭﺍﺗﻮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﺭﻳﺘﺰﻳﻮ؛ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪﺧﺎﻃﺮ‬ ‫ﻛﺸﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﻪﺗﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺩﻩ ِ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﻳﺪ؛ ﺁﻧﺘﻮﻧﻴﻮﻧﮕﺮﻯ ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﺍﻥ؛ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺍﻳﻤﺎﻥ ﮔﻨﺠﻰ ﻭ ﻛﻴﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ ﻋﻠﻢ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻭ ﺭﺍﻩﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻯ ﻭ ﻧﮕﻬﺪﺍﺭﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﺁﻻﺕ‬
‫ﻣﻬﺘﺪﻯ؛ ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺭﻭﺯﺑﻬﺎﻥ‪.1390 ،‬‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭﺧﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ ﻃﺮﻑ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺩﺍﺩﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ‪،‬‬
‫‪The Soul at Work: From Alienation to Autonomy. .2‬‬ ‫ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺳﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﭘﺮﻓﻮﺭﻣﻨﺲﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﻭﺯﻣﺮﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺭﺯﺵﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﻰ‬
‫‪Berardi, Franco “bifo”. Trans. Francesca Cadel and‬‬ ‫ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﻳﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺎﻧﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻓﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮ ﺧﺪﻣﺎﺗﻰ‬
‫‪.2009 ,(Giuseppina Mecchia. Los Angeles: Semiotext(e‬‬ ‫)ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺯﺍﺭﻳﺎﺏ ﺗﺎ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﺻﻨﻌﺖ ﺳﺮﮔﺮﻣﻰ ﺗﺎ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﺗﻔﺮﺟﮕﺎﻩﻫﺎ ﻭ‬
‫‪Desert Islands and Other Texts. Deleuze, Gilles. .3‬‬ ‫ﻣﻴﻜﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻛﻠﻮﺏﻫﺎ ﺗﺎ ﻣﻨﺸﻰﻫﺎ ﺗﺎ ﻃﺮﺍﺣﺎﻥ ﺗﺎ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺍﻥ ﻛﺎﻣﭙﻴﻮﺗﺮﻯ(‬
‫‪.2004 ,(Los Angeles, New York: Semiotext(e‬‬
‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻛﺎﺭﺗﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺩﻫﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺣﻴﻦ ﺧﺪﻣﺖ ﻟﺒﺨﻨﺪ‬
‫‪Negotiations. Deleuze, Gilles. New York: .4‬‬
‫‪.1995 ,Colombia University Press‬‬
‫ﺑﺰﻧﻴﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺳﺖﻛﻢ ﻣﺮﺍﻋﺎﺕ ﺁﺩﺍﺏ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻜﻨﻴﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ‬
‫‪A Thousand Plateaus. Trans. Brian Massumi. .5‬‬ ‫»ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ« ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺷﻜﻮﻓﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻧﻮﺁﻭﺭﻯ ﻳﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫‪,Minneapolis, London: University of Minnesota Press‬‬ ‫ﮔﻤﺎﺷﺘﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺳﺎﻧﻴﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﺮﺍﻧﻜﻮ ﺑﺮﺍﺭﺩﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻬﺮﻩﻛﺸﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺭﺍ »ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ‬
‫‪.2005‬‬ ‫ﺭﻭﺡ« ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ 53.‬ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻭ‬
‫‪Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. .6‬‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺍﻏﺖ ﻣﺤﻮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﺭﺗﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻯﺗﺎﻥ ﻛﺎﺭ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫‪Deleuze, Gilles and Félix Guattari. Trans. Robert‬‬
‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫‪Hurley, Mark Seem and Helen R. Lane. Minneapolis:‬‬
‫ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻭ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﺯﺩﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻯ ﺑﺰﺭﮔﺘﺮﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫‪.2000 ,University of Minnesota Press‬‬
‫‪Into the Factory: Negri’s Lenin and the” .7‬‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺯﺵﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﻰ ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ ﺑﻴﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪Subjective Caesura.” Hardt, Michael. The Philosophy‬‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺁﻥ ﺿﺎﺑﻄﺔ ﺳﻮﻡ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺎﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬
‫‪of Antonio Negri: Resistance in Practice. Ed. Timothy‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﻧﻮﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﺯﻳﺴﺖﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﭘﺮﻣﺨﺎﻃﺮﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﻳﻴﻨﻰ‬
‫‪S. Murphy and Abdul-Karim Mustapha. London: Pluto‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺷﺮﺡ ﺩﺍﺩﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻫﻨﻮﺯ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﺍﺳﺘﺤﺎﻟﻪ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ‬
‫‪.Document .38-7 .2005 ,Press‬‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﻔﻬﺘﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶﮔﺮﻯ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ‬
‫‪Commonwealth. Hardt, Michael, und Antonio .8‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻗﻮﺍﻯ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻭ ﻋﻮﺍﻃﻒ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺪﻝ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺎﺭﺍﺩﺍﻳﻢ ﺍﺭﺯﺵﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ‬
‫‪Negri. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press‬‬
‫‪.2009 ,of Harvard University Press‬‬
‫ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﻭ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﻩ ﺩﺭ‬
‫‪Museum of the Streets.» Hoffman, Abbie. The» .9‬‬ ‫ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪» ،‬ﺧﺎﺭﺝﺍﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬
‫‪http://theanarchistlibrary.org/ .1980 .Anarchist Library‬‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ«‪ .‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻮﻫﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ‬
‫‪library/abbie-hoffman-museum-of-the-streets (Zugriff‬‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﺎﺕ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻣﺼﻮﻥ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﻩ ﺭﺍ‬
‫‪.(2012 May .12 am‬‬ ‫ﻼ ﺣﺰﺏ ﭘﻴﺸﺮﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫‪Grundrisse: Foundations of the Political .10‬‬
‫‪ .4‬ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪﮔﻴﺮﻯ‬
‫‪Economy (Rough Draft). Marx, Karl. Übersetzung:‬‬
‫‪.1993 ,Martin Nicolaus. London: Penguin Books‬‬ ‫ﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻨﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﻳﻢ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺷﺎﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ‬
‫‪Art and Multitude. Negri, Antonio. Boston: .11‬‬ ‫ﺩﻝ ﻣﻌﻀﻞﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭ ﻣﺠﻠﺪ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﻭ ﺍﺳﻜﻴﺰﻭﻓﺮﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ِ‬
‫‪.2011 ,Polity Press‬‬ ‫ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻫﺔ ﻫﻔﺘﺎﺩ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻃﺮﻑ ﺑﻮﺩﻩﺍﻳﻢ ﻭ‬
‫‪Deleuzian concepts : philosophy, colonization, .12‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺩﻫﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻌﺪﻯ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺗﺜﺒﻴﺖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻳﻦﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪،‬‬
‫‪politics. Patton, Paul. Stanford: Stanford University‬‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﺯﻉ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ‬
‫‪.2010 ,Press‬‬
‫ﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺳﺎﻳﻠﻰ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﺎﺧﺮ ﻭ ﺟﻬﺖ ِ‬
‫‪A Thousand Machines. Raunig, Gerald. .13‬‬
‫‪,(Übersetzung: Aileen Derieg. Los Angeles: Semiotext(e‬‬
‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ‬
‫‪.2010‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ ﻭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﻩ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﺍﺯ ﮔﻔﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫‪Art and Revoltion. Raunig, Gerald. Los Angeles: .14‬‬ ‫ﻗﺪﻳﻤﻰ ﻭ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﭼﭗ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻭ ﻫﺮ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ‬
‫‪.2007 ,(Semiotext(e‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﭼﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺩﻣﻮﻛﺮﺍﺳﻰ ﭘﺎﺭﻟﻤﺎﻧﺘﺎﺭﻳﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻨﺪﮔﻰ‪/‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪27 1393‬‬

 ‫‪30 30. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and‬‬ ‫‪For what use is a ‘fickle and inconstant’» .15‬‬
‫‪Schizophrenia, p. 31.‬‬ ‫‪multitude? Striving, self-knowledge and collective‬‬
‫‪...» .31‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰﺍﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺟﻬﺎﺕ ﻧﺸﺖ‬ ‫‪desire in Spinoza’s political philosophy» Taylor,‬‬
‫ﻧﻜﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺣﺘﻰ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪﻃﻮﺭ ﻓﺰﺍﻳﻨﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺻﻠﺐ ﻛﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺟﻠﻮﻯ‬ ‫‪J. D. The Society for European Philosophy/Forum‬‬
‫‪for European Philosophy Joint Annual Conference,‬‬
‫ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺳﺪ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.A Thousand Plateaus, p) «.‬‬
‫‪.2013 ,Kingston University. London‬‬
‫‪.(204‬‬
‫‪.3 .Lenin In England». Tronti, Mario. Libcom» .16‬‬
‫‪32. Creative and Culture Industries.‬‬
‫‪.(2011 4 .12 http://libcom.org (Zugriff am .1964 January‬‬
‫‪33. « Museum of the Streets", 1980.‬‬
‫‪34. Art and Revoltion, p. 16.‬‬
‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺖﻫﺎ‬
‫‪ .34‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬
‫‪1. Desiring.‬‬
‫‪36. Desert Islands and Other Texts, p. 103.‬‬
‫‪2. Deleuzian concepts : philosophy,‬‬
‫‪37. Real subsumption.‬‬
‫‪colonization, politics, 145.‬‬
‫‪3838. Art and Multitude, p. 68.‬‬
‫‪3. Ontology.‬‬
‫‪39. « Lenin In England «.‬‬
‫‪4 . Whitehead.‬‬
‫‪» .40‬ﻛﺎﺭ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ«‪.‬‬
‫‪5 . Ontogenesis.‬‬
‫‪ :Use-value .41‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺎﻥ ﺗﺎ ﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ »ﺍﺭﺯﺵ‬
‫‪6 . Is.‬‬
‫ﻣﺼﺮﻑ« ﺑﺮﮔﺮﺩﺍﻧﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻣﺼﺮﻑ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﺩﺍﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫‪7 . And.‬‬
‫ﻧﻈﺮﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫‪ ،consumption‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻠﻴﺪﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺘﻦﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫‪8. A Thousand Machines, p 19.‬‬
‫ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﺎﺛﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ِ ،‬‬
‫‪9 . Machine.‬‬
‫ﺗﺠﻠﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻣﺼﺮﻑﮔﺮﺍ )‪ (consumerist‬ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ‬
‫‪10. A Thousand Machines, pp. 20-19.‬‬
‫»ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﻣﺒﺎﺩﻟﻪ« ﻓﺮﻭﻛﺎﺳﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬
‫‪11. Grundrisse: Foundations of the Political‬‬
‫ﺗﺎ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﻛﺎﻻﻫﺎﻯ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢﺍﺭﺯ ﻋﺎﻡ‬
‫‪Economy, p. 693.‬‬
‫)ﭘﻮﻝ( ﻣﺒﺎﺩﻟﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺿﺎﻓﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻘﺪﺍ ِﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ‬
‫‪12. A Thousand Machines, p. 22.‬‬
‫ﺍﺭﺯﺵ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺼﺮﻑﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻮﻟﻴ ِﺪ ﻛﺎﻻﺧﺪﻣﺎﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺟﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻨﻰ ﺍﺯ ِ‬
‫‪13. Grundrisse: Foundations of the Political‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺠﺎﻣﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ‪ ،‬ﺧﻠﻂ ﻣﺼﺮﻑ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ‬
‫‪Economy, p. 692.‬‬
‫ﻧﺎﻣﻄﻠﻮﺑﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪14 . Social subjection.‬‬
‫‪42. Curation.‬‬
‫‪15 . Machinic enslavement.s‬‬
‫‪43. Anthropogenetic.‬‬
‫‪16. Grundrisse: Foundations of the Political‬‬
‫‪44. Added value.‬‬
‫‪Economy, p. 706.‬‬
‫‪45. Commonwealth, p. 132.‬‬
‫‪ .17 17.‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫‪46. Freelancers.‬‬
‫‪18. collectivity.‬‬
‫‪47. Precarious.‬‬
‫‪19. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and‬‬
‫‪ .48‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.146‬‬
‫‪Schizophrenia, p. 36.‬‬
‫‪ :Entrepreneur .49‬ﻛﺎﺭﺁﻓﺮﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻫﺔ ‪ 80‬ﺑﻪ ﺑﻌﺪ‬
‫‪ .20‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﺏ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﻳﺎﭘﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺷﺮﻛﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺭﺍﻩ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﺧﺘﻨﺪ‬
‫‪ .21‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ ﺷﺮﻭﻉ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﻻﺭﻓﺘﻦ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻠﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺛﺮﻭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫‪ .22‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﺟﻰ‪ .‬ﺩﻯ‪ .‬ﺗﻴﻠﻮﺭ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﺪ‪» :‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﻔﻬﻢ »ﭼﺮﺧﺶ‬
‫ﻣﺎﻟﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺗﻰ ﺻﻨﻌﺖ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻻ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻟﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ »ﻛﺎﺭﻓﺮﻣﺎ« ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬
‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ« ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻟﺘﻮﺳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻓﻬﺮﺳﺖ ﻛﺮﺩ‪:‬‬
‫ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺎﺩﻯ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻟﺐ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺑﺪﺍﻧﻴﺪ ﻳﺎﭘﻰ ﺭﺳﻤ ًﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺟﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭﻓﺮﻣﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩ‪ /‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻧﮕﺮﻯ؛ ﻣﻴﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ؛‬
‫‪ 20‬ﺗﺎ ‪ 30‬ﺳﺎﻟﻪﻯ ﻣﺮﻓﻪ ﻭ ﺷﻬﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﺔ ﻛﺎﺭﻯﺍﺵ »ﺣﺮﻓﻪﺍﻯ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺩﻣﻮﻛﺮﺍﺗﻴﺰﻩﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﻓﻌﺎﻝ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﻟﻴﺒﺎﺭ؛ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺿﻤﻨﻰﺗﺮ ﻭ‬
‫ﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﻫﻴﭙﻰﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻪ ‪ 68‬ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﻛﺮﺩ ﺁﻥ ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﻫﺒﺮﺍﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺟﺮﻯ ﺭﻭﺑﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺤﻰﺗﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﻞ ﻭ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺷﺎﻛﻠﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﻳﺘﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺪﻳﻮ‪«.‬‬
‫ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻯ ﻫﻴﭙﻰ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﻳﺎﭘﺮﺩﺍ ِﺯ ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻒ ﺑﺎ ﻛﺎﭘﻴﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ‪.‬‬
‫)‪For what use is a ‘fickle and)...‬‬
‫‪50. Outsourcing.‬‬
‫‪23 . Communication factor.‬‬
‫‪ .51‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.142‬‬
‫‪24. A Thousand Machines, p. 19.‬‬
‫‪ .52‬ﺭ‪.‬ﻙ‪Into the Factory: Negri’s Lenin and the :‬‬
‫‪25. Negotiations, p. 45.‬‬
‫‪.Subjective Caesura‬‬
‫‪26 . Transversal.‬‬
‫‪ .53‬ﺭ‪.‬ﻙ‪The Soul at Work: From Alienation to :‬‬
‫‪27. A Thousand Machines, p. 8.‬‬
‫‪.Autonomy‬‬
‫‪ .28‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.10‬‬
‫‪54. Representation.‬‬
‫‪ .29‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺻﺺ ‪27‬ـ ‪.29‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪28‬‬

‫ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ‪ :‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭘﺮﻭژﻩ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭ ﺩﻭ ﺟﻠﺪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ‬
‫‪1‬؛ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪2‬؛ ﺯﻣﺎﻥـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺩﻫﺔ ﻫﺸﺘﺎﺩ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺟﻠﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺳﺮﺩ ﻓﻀﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺁﻛﺎﺩﻣﻴﻚ ﻭ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻫﻰ ﻣﻮﺟﺐ ﺷﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﺍﺕ‬
‫ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻯ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﻮﻳﻖ ﺑﻴﺎﻓﺘﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺨﺸﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﭼﻨﺪ ﻭ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺭﺩﻳﺎﺑﻰ ﺩﻻﻳﻞ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻼﺷﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺭﺩﻩﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺩﻭ‬
‫ﻧﻮﻉ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ )ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﻭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ( ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺳﺘﻴﺎﺑﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻠﺪ‬
‫ﺍﻭﻝ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ‬
‫ﻭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺣﺮﻑ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻠﺪ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺤﻰ ﺍﺟﻤﺎﻟﻰ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺗﻌﺎﺭﻳﻒ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﻭ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﻄﻮﻑ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻠﺪ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺤﺚ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‪-‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﻭ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺗﭙﻨﺪﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﺁﻧﺮﻯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻭ ﭼﺎﺭﻟﺰ‬
‫ﺳﻨﺪﺭﺱ ﭘﺮﺱ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺑﻴﻨﺶ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺳﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﭘﺮﺱ ﺗﻼﺵ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺗﺎ ﻫﺮ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﻴﻼﺩ ﺭﻭﺷﻨﻰ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﭘﺮﺱ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻭ ﺍﻭ ﻳﻚ ﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫‪Milad.roshany@gmail.com‬‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻣﻠﻬﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺍﺿﺎﻓﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻭ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﻮﺍﺭﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ‬
‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺗﻜﺎﻧﻪـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﺎﺏـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻻﺑﻪﻻﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺟﺎ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺶ ﮔﻮﻧﺔ‬
‫‪Cinema 1: The‬‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﺳﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺗﺎ ﺷﺮﺣﻰ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ‬
‫‪Movement-Image.‬‬
‫ﻫﺮ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫‪Deleuze, Gilles. Trans.‬‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﻩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬ ‫‪H. Tomlinson and B.‬‬
‫‪Habberjam. The Athlone‬‬
‫‪press (London), 1986.‬‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭ ﺩﻭ ﺟﻠﺪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪1‬؛‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪2‬؛ ﺯﻣﺎﻥـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺩﻫﺔ ﻫﺸﺘﺎﺩ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﭘﺮﻭژﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻠﻨﺪﻯ ﮔﺎﻡﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻭﺳﻌﺖ ﺟﺎﻩﻃﻠﺒﻰﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺑﻼﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭ ﺳﻪ ﺟﻤﻠﺔ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺔ ﺟﻠﺪ ﺍﻭﻝ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫‪Cinema 2: The Time-‬‬
‫‪Image. Deleuze, Gilles.‬‬
‫»ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺭﺩﻩﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬
‫‪Transl. Hugh Tomlinson‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻛﻮﺷﺸﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻃﺒﻘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮ ﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ‪ 1«.‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻛﺎﻓﻰ‬ ‫‪and Robert Galeta.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻃﻤﻴﻨﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰﺍﺵ‬ ‫‪The Athlone Press,‬‬
‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﺎﺟﺮﺍﺟﻮﻳﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻳﻚ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻧﮓ ﺗﻔﺮﻳﺤﺶ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫‪2000.‬‬
‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻛﺸﻒ ﻭ ﻃﺒﻘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺗﺎ ﺁﺳﺘﺎﻧﺔ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺑﺮﻫﻢﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭﺭﺩﺳﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪1‬؛ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎﺭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﻨﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﺯﻭﺭﺁﺯﻣﺎﻳﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺯﻳﺒﺎﻳﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻣﺎﺯﻳﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ‪،‬‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺍﺷﻜﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻣﻴﻨﻮﻯ ﺧﺮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻧﻮﻳﻨﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻛﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻮﺯﺓ ﺩﻳﺪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺠﺎﻣﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﭼﺎپ ﺍﻭﻝ‪.1392 ،‬‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪29 1393‬‬

‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺨﺸﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻮءﺗﻔﺎﻫﻢ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺎﺁﺷﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﺯﺑﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻭ ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺢ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻫﻨﺮ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺳﺮﻛﻮﺏ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻫﻨﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ‬
‫ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺪﻟﻰ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ »ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻮﺩﺭﺗﻮﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻯ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﺁﻛﺎﺩﻣﻴﻚ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺗﻼﺵ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻳﻚ ﺧﻂ ﻣﻨﺴﺠﻢ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻫﻨﺮ ﺗﺸﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺕ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻥ ﺗﺎ ﻣﻴﺘﺮﻯ ﻭ ﻣﺘﺰ ﺑﻜﺸﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻯ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ‬ ‫ﺳﻮﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭘﺮﺗﺎﺏ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ 2«.‬ﻭ ﺑﺮﻋﻜﺲ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﺤﺚ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺘﻲ ﺭﻭﺩﻭﻭﻳﻚ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻰ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻫﻨﺮ ﻧﻴﺰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻔﻮﺫ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ‬
‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﺩﻭ ﺟﻠﺪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﺯﺑﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻧﮕﺮﺵﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺠﺎﻣﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﻓﻜﺮﻯ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ ﺁﺷﻨﺎ ﻧﺒﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﻫﻨﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﺳﺮژ ﺩﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﭘﺎﺳﻜﺎﻝ ﺑﻮﻧﻴﺘﺰﺭ ﻭ ژﺍﻥ ﻟﻮﻳﻰ ﺷﻴﻔﺮ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﺿﻤﺎﻧﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫‪4‬‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻫﻢ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻭ ﻫﻨﺮﻣﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻣﺼﺎﻟﺢ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺨﺶ ﻋﻤﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﺒﺎﻝ ﺳﺮﺩ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺒﻚ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻚﻧﮕﺎﺭﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﻣﺘﺪﻟﻮژﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺳﻴﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺟﻬﻨﺪﻩ ﻭ ﭘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﻭ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﻭﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺭﺍ ﺁﺯﻣﻮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺣﺎﻻ ﻧﻮﺑﺖ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺭﮔﺒﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﭘﺸﺖ ﺳﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺣﺪﺍﻛﺜﺮ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺑﭽﺮﺧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺭﺍ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻛﻨﺪ‬
‫ﻫﻢ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰ ﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﺘﺪﻟﻮژﻯ‪ ،‬ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﻨﺎﺳﺖ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻫﻴﻮﻡ ﻭ ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﻭ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺣﺮﻑ ﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ‬
‫ﭼﺎﺭﻟﺰ ﺳﻨﺪﺭﺱ‬
‫ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺵﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺮﺳﻮﻡ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮﺵ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺱ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻭﻳﮋﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺩﻭ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻭ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﺓ ﭘﺲ‬ ‫ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺩﻫﺔ ﻫﻔﺘﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺳﻮﺳﻮﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﻧﻜﺎﻭﻯ ﻟﻜﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪،‬‬
‫ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺳﻮﺳﻮﺭﻯ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻭﻟﻮﻳﺖ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺳﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺻﻠﺐ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﻪﻯ ﺩﺍﻝ‪ /‬ﻣﺪﻟﻮﻝ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺗﻌﻤﻴﻢﺑﺨﺸﻰ‬
‫ﻭ ﻳﻜﺴﺎﻥ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻜﻰ‬
‫ﺯﺑﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺠﺎﻣﻴﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺭﻭﺡ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﺒﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ‬
‫ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻮﻗﺖ‪ ،‬ﻛﻮﺗﺎﻩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻨﻰ)ژﻧﺘﻴﻜﻰ‪،‬‬
‫ﺗﻜﺜﻴﺮ ﺷﻮﻧﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ »ﺷﺪﻥ« ﻣﺪﺍﻡ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﺳﺎﺯﮔﺎﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ 5.‬ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻑ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺪﺍﻳﺸﻰ(ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺍﻧﻜﺎﻭﻯ ﻟﻜﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﻳﺖ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﺁﻥ ﻭ ﺗﻘﺎﺿﺎﻳﺶ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﻰ ﻓﺮﺽ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﻰ )ﭘﺪﺭ‪ /‬ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺩﺭ‪/‬‬
‫ﺍﺑﮋﺓ ﻣﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﻛﻮﺩﻙ‪ /‬ﺳﻮژﻩ( ﻭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻃﻮﺭ ﺗﻼﺷﺶ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺳﻠﺒﻰ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ‬
‫ﻣﻴﻞ )ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻓﻘﺪﺍﻥ(‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺗﻀﺎﺩﻯ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﺑﺎ ﺭﻭﺣﻴﺔ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ 6.‬ﻓﺎﺭﻍ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻫﺔ ﻫﻔﺘﺎﺩ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪،‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻛﺮﻳﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻣﺘﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻮﺯﺓ ﺯﺑﺎﻧﺸﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﻧﺸﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﺳﻜﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯﺍﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺣﻮﺯﺓ ﺭﻭﺍﻧﻜﺎﻭﻯ ﻟﻜﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺭﺍﻩ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻯ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﺭﻭﻳﻜﺮﺩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻰ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﻣﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ‬
‫ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻥ ﻭ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻗﺮﺍﺑﺖ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻧﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰﻳﺎﺑﻰﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ‬
‫ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺶﺗﺮ ﺁﺯﻣﻮﺩﻩ ﻧﺸﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﻭ ﻗﻠﺐ ﺗﭙﻨﺪﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﺁﻧﺮﻯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻼﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻳﺰﻧﺸﺘﺎﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭﺭﺳﻮﻥ ﻭﻟﺰ ﻭﺁﻟﻦ ﺭﻧﻪ ﻫﻢ ﺳﺨﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺨﺺ‬
‫ﭼﺎﺭﻟﺰ ﺳﻨﺪﺭﺱ ﭘﺮﺱ‪ .‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﮔﻔﺖ؟ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺁﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻬﻰ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﭘﺮﺍﮔﻤﺎﺗﻴﻜﻰ ﭘﺮﺱ ﺁﺷﺘﻰ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﺩﻭ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﺶ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺪ‪ ،‬ﻓﻴﻠﻤﺴﺎﺯ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻭ ﭘﺮﺱ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻛﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺤﻮﺭ ﺩﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻭ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻛﺴﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺟﻠﺪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﺧﻴﺰ ﺑﻠﻨﺪ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻔﻮﺫ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻯ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ‬
‫»ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻗﺮﻥ ﺑﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﻮ ﺗﺎﻣﻠﻴﻨﺴﻮﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺳﺎﺯﮔﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺧﻮﺩﺷﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺳﺮﺩ ﻣﺨﺎﻃﺒﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻟﻮﻻﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺁﺧﺮﻳﻦ ﺩﺳﺖﺁﻭﺭﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻯ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ‬
‫ﺣﺘﻲ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻫﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻛﺎﺩﻣﻴﻚ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﻳﮋﻩ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺳﻨﺖ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺗﻨﺪ ]‪ ،[...‬ﺭﻳﺸﻪ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪ 7«.‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺑﻮﺩ‪» ،‬ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺣﺘﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺣﺮﻑ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻨﻰ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﻠﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻨﺖ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻫﻰ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻩ‬
‫ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﭘﻴﺸﺮﻓﺖ ﺧﻄﻰ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻳﻚ ﻧﺎﻫﻨﺠﺎﺭﻯ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ‪ 3«.‬ﺭﻭﺩﻭﻭﻳﻚ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪30‬‬

 ‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺮﺩﺍﻧﺪﻩ ﺷﺪﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺮ »ﺷﻰء ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﺎﻟﻜﺘﻴﻜﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺫﻫﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺗﺮ ﺍﺩﻏﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ »ﺷﺪﻥ« ﺣﺮﻑ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ «.‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩ )ﻣﺪ ِﺭﻙ(‬ ‫ﺑﻰﺟﻬﺖ ﻭ ﻫﺰﺍﺭﺗﻮ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺒﻜﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﭘﻴﭽﻴﺪﺓ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺰ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻥـﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ »ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﺒﻜﺔ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ‪ ،‬ﺷﺪﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ‬
‫ﺯﻧﺪﻩ« )‪ (Living image‬ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻣﻰﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﺒﻜﺔ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺗﻤﻴﺰﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﻧﮓ‬
‫ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﺸﺄ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺑﺎﺯﺩ‪ 8«.‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻭ ﭘﺮﺱ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﭘﺎﻳﺔ‬ ‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﻭ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻋﺎﻡﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﺰﻡ ﻛﻨﺶ‪ /‬ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﭘﺸﺘﻮﺍﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺭﻭﺷﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰﺍﺵﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻏﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻭ ﭘﺮﺱ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭ ﺩﻭ ﺟﻠﺪ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﻃﺒﻖ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻮﺭ‬ ‫)ﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻧﻔﻮﺫ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪1‬؛‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮگ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻮﺭ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﻯ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﺮگ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﭘﻴﺶﺗﺮ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ(‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻓﺘﻮﺳﻨﺘﺰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ‬ ‫ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻻﻳﻞ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭﻯ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻥ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪2‬؛‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﭼﮕﺎﻟﻰ ﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﻨﺪﺓ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﺪﻳﻊ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﻭﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺻﺮﻓﻪﺟﻮﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻋﺎﻡ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺷﺮﺡ ﻭ ﺑﺴﻂ ﺁﻥ ﺩﺳﺘﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﺰﻡ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺬﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎﺝﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺩﻫﺔ ﻫﺸﺘﺎﺩ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﻯ ﻭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻗﺐ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭﺗﺮ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺯﻧﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻧﺘﻈﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪﮔﺎﻧﺶ‬
‫ﭘﺮﻭژﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻠﻨﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮﻛﺰ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﻣﻐﺰ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻭ ﭘﺮﺱ ﺗﺴﻠﻂ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻑ‬
‫ﮔﺎﻡﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻭﺳﻌﺖ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﻋﺼﺎﺏﺁﻭﺭﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺵ ﻭ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻳﻚ ﺩﺳﺘﻮﺭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﺍﺷﺮﺍﻑ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﻯ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﻐﺰ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺳﺘﻮﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﻀﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﻠﻢﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺭﺍ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺟﺎﻩﻃﻠﺒﻰﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺑﺪﻥ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﻋﺼﺎﺏ ﻭﺍﺑﺮﺍﻥ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻳﻚ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻑ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﺣﻰ ﺗﺎ ﺣﺪ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﻯ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥﺑﻼﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ‪ .‬ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻨﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻭﻳﮋﻩ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭ ﺳﻪ ﺟﻤﻠﺔ‬ ‫ﺗﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﺭﺍ ﻭﻗﻔﻪﺍﻯ )‪ (Gap/interval‬ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﻭ ﭘﺮﺱ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻫﻢﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻛﺮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺧﻼﺻﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍﻳﻰﻣﻘﺪﻣﺔ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﺩﻩﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺍﻭﻭ ﺷﺮﺣﻰ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺟﻠﺪ ﺍﻭﻝ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨﻰ‬ ‫ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﮔﺰﻳﻨﺶ ﻭﺟﻮﻫﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻬﺎﻧﺔ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻓﺎﺭﺳﻰ ﺟﻠﺪ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫)ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻭﺟﻮﻩ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ( ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﺩﻭ ﺟﻠﺪﻯ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺸﺮﻳﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺭﻭﻯ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩ‪» .‬ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪1‬؛ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ‬ ‫ﺳﻮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻭ ﺳﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‪-‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ‬ ‫ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﺰﻳﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﻰ ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻭﻝ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﻮﺩﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺭﺩﻩﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺎﺭﺓ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ‪ ،‬ﻧﻮﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﺭﺳﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻋﻜﺲﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺘﻮﮔﺮﺍﻓﻴﻚ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﺗﻮﮔﺮﺍﻓﻴﻚ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻛﻮﺷﺸﻰ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻑ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎ ﺗﺎﺑﺎﻧﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﮔﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻑ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺗﺎﺑﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺼﻞ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ ﺷﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯﻃﺒﻘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬
‫ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺑﺎ ﻓﻴﻠﺘﺮ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮ ﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﺎﺑﺎﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺣﺘﻲ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻘﺎﺕ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺜﻞ ﺑﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻐﺰ ﻭ‬
‫ﺩﻭﻣﻴﻦ ﺷﺮﺣﺶ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﻋﺎﻯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ »ﮔﺴﺴﺖ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﻗﺼﺪ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺩﻳﺖ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻔﻊ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻣﻠﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻞ ﺳﻨﺖ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻤﺖ ﺭﻭﺡ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻉ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺁﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﻓﻬﻤﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﻛﻠﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﻜﺎﺭ‬
‫ﻭ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻌﺎﻉ ﻧﻮﺭﻯ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻝ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﻜﻰ ﺫﺍﺗﻰﺷﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻑ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺎﺩﻩﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺭﺋﺎﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﻃﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺪ ‪ ...‬ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺁﻥ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﺮﻑ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﺭﻍ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺒﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻯ‬
‫ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻰ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺩﻭﺁﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻧﻮﺭ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ . ...‬ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻋﻜﺴﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺁﻟﻴﺴﺖﻫﺎ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺔ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﻝ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺫﻫﻦ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺑﺮﻛﻠﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﻜﺎﺭ ﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 9«.‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﺎﻛﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺣﺴﻰـﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ )‪Sensory-motor‬‬ ‫ﺭﺋﺎﻟﻴﺴﺖﻫﺎ َﻋ َﺮﺽﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ )ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺭﻧﮓ‪ ،‬ﺯﺑﺮﻯ ﻭ ‪ ،(...‬ﻛﻪ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ‬
‫‪ (schema‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺨﺶ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﺣﺴﻰ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪31 1393‬‬

‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﺓ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﺏ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﮔﺰﻳﻨﺶ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺨﺶ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﭘﺮﻭﺭﺍﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﻡ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﺮﻙﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻛﻰ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺗﻨﻈﻴﻢﮔﺮ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺣﺴﻰـﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺶ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻗﺐ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺩﻭ ﺭﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺣﺬﻑ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﻛﻞ ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﻭ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺑﻴﻨﺶ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺢ ﺩﻭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺧﻄﻰ ﻭ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻭ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ )‪ (quality‬ﻭ ﺗﺄﺛﺮ )‪ ،(affection‬ﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ‬
‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺑﻰﻭﻗﻔﻪﻯ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﻭ ﻧﻔﻮﺫ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻛﻨﺶ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺠﻰﮔﺮﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺨﺸﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩﻯ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻭ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺣﺴﻰـﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ؛ ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ .‬ﺗﺄﺛﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺘﻰ ﭘﻴﺸﺎ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺯﻋﻢ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪» .‬ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻧﻤﻰﺍﻧﺠﺎﻣﺪ‪10«.‬ﻭ‬
‫ﺧﻼﻕ«‬ ‫ﺧﻼﻕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﻭﺟﻪ ﮔﺸﻮﺩﺓ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺩﺭ »ﺗﺤ ّﻮﻝ ّ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﻧﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻧﺎﺏ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺷﻮﺭﺯﻳﺴﺘﻰ )‪ (élan vital‬ﻳﺎﺩ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺪﺕﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﮔﺴﺘﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻨﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺧﻼﺻﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺳﻰ )ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﺧﺸﻢ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻋﺸﻖ ﻭ ‪ (...‬ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‬
‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺣﺴﻰـﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ )ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﻼ‬ ‫ﻧﺸﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻟﻦ ﺭﻧﻪ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺏ ﮔﺮﻳﻪ( ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ‬ ‫)ﻣﺤﻴﻂﻫﺎﻯﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ‪/‬‬
‫ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺷﺪﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻰﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰﺳﺎﺯ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ(‬
‫ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ ﺣﺴﻰـﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻫﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺎﺯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺎﺗﻮﺭﺍﻟﻴﺴﻢ‬
‫ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﻋﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﻣﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺟﻮﻉ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺼﻞ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ‬
‫‪ 2‬ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،11‬ﺩﻳﺎﮔﺮﺍﻡ ﺳﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻴﻞ ﺯﻭﻻ ﺣﺮﻑ‬
‫ﻛﻞ ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﻮﺭ ﻋﻤﻮﺩﻯﺍﺵ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﻭ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻛﺴﻰ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﺤﻮﺭ ﺍﻓﻘﻰ ﺁﻥ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺳﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ )ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ( ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﮕﻰ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﺗﻮﺭﺍﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺣﺴﻰـﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰﻫﺎﻯﺗﻠﺦ‬
‫ﻛﻞ ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺜﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﺓ ِ‬
‫ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺭﺋﺎﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺑﺮﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﻨﺶ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻫﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﭘﺮﺱ ﺗﻼﺵ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﺷﺎﺩﻭﺷﻰ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻃﺮﺣﻰ ﺧﻼﻗﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﺸﺎﻥﺩﺍﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻫﺮ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬
‫ﮔﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻲ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﭘﺮﺱ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩﺗﺮ ﻧﻴﺰﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ ﻧﺴﺒﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺣﺮﻑ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺑﺮﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺷﺮ ﺍﺑﺪﻯ ﻭ‬
‫ﻭﺿﻊ ﺳﻮﻡ ﭘﺮﺱ ﺍﺳﺖ‪) .‬ﺑﻌﺪﺗﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺳﻪ ﻭﺿﻊ ﭘﺮﺱ ﻭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﺮﻳﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺭﺩﻩﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺻﺤﺒﺖ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﻛﺮﺩ(‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺿﺎﻓﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ )ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻗﻬﺮﻣﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﻭﻻ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﻣﻠﻬﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﺗﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ( ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺣﺴﻰـﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﻧﺎﺑﻮﺩﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻭﻳﮋﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺣﺴﻰـﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺎﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﺗﺎﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻰﮔﻨﺠﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺩﻭ‬ ‫ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺗﻜﺎﻧﻪـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﺎﺏـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﻻﺑﻪﻻﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﻰ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚﺳﺮﻯ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﻨﺠﺎﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺶ ﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻏﺎﻟﺒ ًﺎ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺑﺎ ﺭﺋﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺩﻳﻮ‬
‫ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﻛﺮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺽ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﻰ ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺒﻚﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﺶﺗﺎﻳﻰ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﭙﺮﺩﺍﺯﻳﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﺑﺪﻧﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ‪-‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻭﻳﮋﻩ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺣﺴﻰـﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺗﻌﺎﺭﻳﻒ ﻧﻤﺎﻯ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﻭ ﻧﻤﺎﻯ ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺍﻧﻄﺒﺎﻕ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ )ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﺎﺩﺗﻰ‬
‫ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻤﺎﻯ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﺩﻳﺪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ( ﺑﺎ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎﺕ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺳﺮﻳﻊ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‬
‫)ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﺔ ﺩﻳﺪ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﺭﺍﻛﺘﺮﻫﺎ( ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻤﺎﻯ ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ‬ ‫ﺧﻄﻰ ﻭ ﭘﻴﺶﺭﻭﻧﺪﻩ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﻚ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺮﺟﻊ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺮﺟﻊ ﺳﻮﻡ‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻣﻮﻓﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪32‬‬

 ‫ﻓﺮﺍﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺟﺎﺑﻪﺟﺎ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ‬ ‫ﺷﺨﺺ‪ .‬ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻤﺎﻯ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﺎﻯ ‪ POV‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻌﺎﺩﻝ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺼﺪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﺍﻛﺘﺮ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺟﺎﺑﻪﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺁﺷﻔﺘﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﺛﻘﻞ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻲ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻤﺎﻯ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺟﺎﺑﻪﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻭﺝ ﻭﺍژﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺻﻼﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺗﺮﻣﻴﻢ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﻓﺮﺽ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﻣﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﮔﺎﺯﻯ‬ ‫ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﭼﺮﺥ )ﺁﺑﻞ ﮔﺎﻧﺲ‪ (1923/‬ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﺭﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻠﻰﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﭼﺸﻤﺎﻧﺶ ﺁﺳﻴﺐ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﭗﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺤﻮ‬
‫ژﻳﮕﺎ ﻭﺭﺗﻮﻑ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻯ ﻭﺭﺗﻮﻑ ﻣﺒﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻭﺻﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﭘﻴﺶﺗﺮ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺁﺷﻮﺑﻨﺪﺓ ﻫﺮ ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺯﺧﻤﻰ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻛﺎﺭﺍﻛﺘﺮ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ﻭ ﭘﻴﭗﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻲ‬
‫ﻣﻮﻧﺘﺎژ ﻭ ﻳﻚ ﭼﺸﻢ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﻜﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﺷﮕﻔﺖﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ژﺍﻥ ﻣﻴﺘﺮﻯ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻚ ﻧﻤﺎ‪/‬ﻧﻤﺎﻯ ﻣﻌﻜﻮﺱ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻄﺒﻖ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺪﺓ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻧﻰ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﭘﺬﻳﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﺎ ﻧﻪ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ‪،‬‬
‫»ﺑﻪ ﺯﻋﻢ ﻭﺭﺗﻮﻑ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻮﻧﺘﺎژ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﻝ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻧﻴﻤﻪ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﺎ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ‬
‫ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﻟﺬﺍﺗﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﺮﺟﻮﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻀﺎ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻧﻘﺎﻃﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﺍﺯﺍﺕ ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻢ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻤﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭﺭﺑﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎﺭﻫﺎ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﭼﻘﺪﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﺎﺭﺍﻛﺘﺮﻫﺎ‬
‫ﻭ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻫﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﻳﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ‬
‫‪14‬‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﺪﻥ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺘﺎ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪﻫﺎ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺩﻭﺭﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺟﺎﺯﻩ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺩ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺭﻭﻧﺎﻟﺪ ﺑﺎگ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺎﺏ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﺩﻳﺪ ﻳﻚ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﭼﺎﺭﻟﺰ ﺳﻨﺪﺭﺱ ﭘﺮﺱ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﺮ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖ ﺑﺮﺳﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﺓ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﻨﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺳﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻨﻰ )ژﻧﺘﻴﻜﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﻴﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖ ﺑﺮﻭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺮ »ﺩﻭﺭﺑﻴﻦ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺯﻭﺭﺁﺯﻣﺎﻳﻰﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺪﺍﻳﺸﻰ( ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ‬ ‫ﻳﻜﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ‬
‫ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰﻳﺎﺑﻰ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺖﺯﺍﻳﻦ )‪ ،(Mitsein‬ﻳﺎ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻫﻰ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺘﻦ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﺗﻮﮔﺮﺍﻓﻴﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺯﻳﺒﺎﻳﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﻨﺎ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮ ﺟﺎﻥ ﺩﻭﺱ ﭘﺎﺳﻮﺱ ﭼﺸﻢ ﺩﻭﺭﺑﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺯﻭﺍﻳﺔ ﺩﻳﺪ ﮔﻤﻨﺎﻡ ﻓﺮﺩﻯ‬
‫‪12‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﺶ ﺑﺎ ﻭﻗﻔﻪ‪/‬ﮔﭗ ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﺶ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﺷﻨﺎﺱ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎ‪«.‬‬
‫ﻛﻞ ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩ‪ 15.‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻪ ﻓﺮﻣﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻧﻮﺳﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺭﺩﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻭ ﻗﻄﺐ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﻭ ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺣﺘﻲ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ‬
‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻨﻰ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﮔﺮﺍﻡ )‪(gramme‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﻰﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﻫﻢ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻥﮔﺮ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺯﻳﺒﺎﻳﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻭﺍﻻﺗﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺍﺷﻜﺎﻝ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻭﺭﺗﻮﻑ ﻭ ﺁﻭﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺜﻞ ﺍﺳﺘﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺩﻭﺭﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭘﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻧﻮﻳﻨﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻛﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻛﻴﺞ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻳﻜﻞ ﺍﺳﻨﻮ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺣﺮﻑ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ‬
‫ﻭ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺧﺎﺭﺝ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻛﻞ ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺭﺋﻮﻡ )‪ (Reume‬ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﻣﻰ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻧﻰ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺩﺳﺘﻴﺎﺑﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺩﺍﻥ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺳﻴﻮﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ ﻣﺜﻞ‬ ‫ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺣﻮﺯﺓ ﺩﻳﺪ‬
‫ﮔﺮﻣﻴﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ژﺍﻥ ﻭﻳﮕﻮ ﻭ ﺭﻧﻮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺳﻴﺎﻝ ﭘﻴﮕﻴﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﻤﺘﺎﺯ ﻭ ﻣﺮﻛﺰﻯ )ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ(‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﻣﻰﺍﻧﺠﺎﻣﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻭﻗﻔﻪ‪/‬ﮔﭗ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﻰ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﻛﻠﻤﻪ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﻯ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻰﻟﻐﺰﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﺮﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﻝ ﺩﻭﺭﺑﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰ ﻧﻴﻤﺔ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﻧﻤﺎﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﺤﺚ‬ ‫ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺳﻴﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺳﻴﻮﻧﻴﺴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﺔ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺳﺨﻦﮔﻔﺘﺎﺭ )‪ (dicisign‬ﻣﻰﻧﺎﻣﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺘﺎﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺋﻮﻡ ﻭ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﮓ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺻﺤﻨﺔ ﺑﻨﺪﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﻭﻭﺩﻭﻳﻞ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺭﺋﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺮﺍﻡ‪ ،‬ﺑﺨﺸﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻼﺵ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ‬ ‫)ﻭﺍﺭﻳﺘﻪ( ﺍﺛﺮ ﺍﻭﺍﻟﺪ ﺩﻭ ُﭘﻦ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻨﺪﺑﺎﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻼﺵﻫﺎ ﻧﺘﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻣﻮﺟﺐ ﻳﻚ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺟﻤﻌﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺳﻘﻒ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ )ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻥـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﺑﺨﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻘﺎﺭﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺷﻮﺩ(‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﻮﻓﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ ژﻧﺘﻴﻜﻰ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ )ﮔﺮﺍﻡ( ﺩﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﺜﺎﻝﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻴﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﻓﻴﻠﻤﺴﺎﺯﺍﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻳﺎ‪،‬‬
‫ﻳﺎﺑﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﻭﺩﺧﺎﻧﻪ ﻭ ﺁﺑﺮﺍﻫﻪ ﻭ ﺧﻼﺻﻪ ﺁﺏ )ﺳﻴﺎﻟﻴﺖ( ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‬
‫ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻓﺮﺍﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻏﻴﺮﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺳﻴﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺑﺎ ﭘﻴﭻ ﻭ ﺗﺎﺏ ﻭ ﻟﻐﺰﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻫﺮ ﺳﻮﻳﻪﺍﺵ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﺍﻛﺰ‬
‫ﺗﺄﺛﺮ‪-‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﺛﻘﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺟﺎﺑﻪﺟﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﺭﻭﻯ ﺧﺸﻜﻰ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ‬
‫»ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﺔ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻭﺭﻭﺩﻯ ﻭ ﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺁﺏ‪،‬‬
‫ﺧﺮﻭﺟﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ 16«.‬ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻧﺎﺏ ﻭ ﭘﺎﻟﻮﺩﻩ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 13«.‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺶ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ ﺣﺴﻰـﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﻣﺎﻝ ﻓﺮﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺶﺗﺮ ﺑﺤﺚ ﻛﺮﺩﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪33 1393‬‬

‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻠﻮﺯﺁپ )ﻧﻤﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﻣﻮﺟﺐ ﻳﻚ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﺄﺛﺮ ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺴﺘﻪ( ﻭ ﭼﻬﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﺎﻯ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺴﻄﺢ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻚ ﻭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺷﺪﺕﻫﺎ ﻭ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﭼﻬﺮﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﮕﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰـﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺣﺘﻲ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ )‪ (Express‬ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺑﻴﻨﺶ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﺪﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻰـﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺗﺄﺛﺮ ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﻭ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺘﻰ ﻧﺎﺏ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰ ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺩﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩﺵ )ﻟﺬﺍﺗﻪ( ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ )ﻓﻰﺫﺍﺗﻪ( ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺭﺩﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻮﻉ ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﺩﺭ ﭼﻬﺮﻩﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻮﻳﮋﻩ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻇﺮﻓﻴﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻣﻰ‬
‫ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰ ﭘﺮﺗﺮﻩ ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﻭﻝ‪ ،‬ﭼﻬﺮﻩ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻳﻚ ﺧﻂ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﻭﺭﮔﻴﺮ )ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻮﺭ( ﻭ ﻳﻚ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻛﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻯ ﻣﻨﻔﺮﺩ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺑﻪ ﺍﺯﺍﻯ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻇﺮ ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻧﻪ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 17«.‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ‬
‫ﻼ ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻚ ﺁﻳﺮﻳﺲ‬ ‫ﻭﻳﮋﺓ ﮔﺮﻳﻔﻴﺚ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﭼﻬﺮﻩﻫﺎﺳﺖ )ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺣﻮﺯﺓ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ )ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ( ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﮔﺮﻳﻔﻴﺚ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻛﻠﻰ ﭼﻬﺮﺓ ﺯﻧﺎﻧﻪ(‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﺩﻭﻡ‪» ،‬ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺭﻧﺞ‪ ،‬ﺷﻌﻒ ﻭ ‪ ....‬ﺍﻳﻨﻬﻤﺎﻥ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﺮ ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﻨﺎﺳﺖ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺧﻼﻝ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﻭ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻯ ﭘﺮﺍﻛﻨﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﻨﻬﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﺷﻬﻮﺩ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﻫﻴﻮﻡ ﻭ ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺲ‬
‫ﻛﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﻨﺪ؛ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﺷﻜﺴﺘﻪ ﻭ ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻪﺍﻯ ]‪ [...‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻂ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺣﺮﻑ‬
‫ﺩﻭﺭﮔﻴﺮ )ﭘﺮﻫﻴﺐ( ﺳﺮﭘﻴﭽﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ 19«.‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺪﺭﺗﻰ ﺣﺮﻑ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﻭﻳﮋﺓ‬ ‫ﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻼ ﭼﻬﺮﺓ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ‪ ،‬ﭼﻬﺮﻩﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﺁﻳﺰﻧﺸﺘﺎﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪) .‬ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﺑﻼﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻛﺸﻴﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﺧﻂ ﻣﺸﻰ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻤﺎ‪ ،‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﭼﻬﺮﺓ ﺟﺬﺍﺏ‬ ‫ﺁﻳﺰﻧﺸﺘﺎﻳﻦ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﺸﻴﺶ ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﻓﺮﻳﺒﻜﺎﺭﺍﻧﺔ ﺍﻭ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻳﺰﻧﺸﺘﺎﻳﻦ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ ﭘﺸﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﻭﺭﺳﻮﻥ ﻭﻟﺰ ﻭ‬
‫ﮔﺮﺩﻥ ﺑﺎﺭﻳﻚ ﻭ ﻧﺮﻣﺔ ﮔﻮﺷﺖﺁﻟﻮﺩ ﮔﻮﺵ ﺍﻭ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ(‪ .‬ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‬
‫ﺁﻟﻦ ﺭﻧﻪ ﻫﻢ ﺳﺨﻦ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻬﺮﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺗﻠﻔﻴﻘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺁﻥ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻤﺎﻳﻞ )‪(icon‬‬ ‫ﮔﻔﺖ؟ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻧﺎﻣﺪ‪ .‬ﻭ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺩﻭ ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺁﻣﺎﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺗﺄﺛﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻛﺸﻴﺪ؛ ‪ contour icon‬ﻭ ‪trait icon‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻭﻟﻰ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻛﻠﻰ ﭼﻬﺮﻩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﻣﻰ ﺭﺩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﭼﻬﺮﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻬﻰﺩﻗﻴﻖ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻤﺎﻯ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﻭ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺣﺬﻑ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪» .‬ﻛﻠﻮﺯﺁپ ﺍﺯ ﭼﻬﺮﻩ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﺯﺩﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﺘﺎﺑﺶ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺳﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩ ﻗﺮﺍﺭﺩﺍﺩﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺟﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .1 :‬ﻓﺮﺩﻳﺖ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﮔﺮﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ‬
‫)ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻛﺎﺭﺍﻛﺘﺮﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ(‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬
‫‪ .2‬ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ )ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻘﺶ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ( ﻭ ‪ .3‬ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻰ )ﻧﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻔﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻣﺜﻞ‬
‫‪20‬‬
‫ﻓﻴﻠﻤﺴﺎﺯﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻘﺶﺍﺵ(‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭼﻬﺮﻩ ﻭ ﻧﻤﺎﻯ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺷﻜﺎﻝ ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺨﺸﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﺮﺟﻮﺭﻩ )‪ (espace quelconque‬ﺣﺮﻑ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺻﺤﻨﺔ ﺍﻳﺴﺘﮕﺎﻩ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺩﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺭﻧﺞ ﻭ ﺷﻌﻒ ﺑﻪ ﺣﻮﺯﺓ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺻﻔﺖﻫﺎ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻗﻄﺎﺭ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﺟﻴﺐﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﺳﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻨﻘﻄﻊ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻪﺗﻜﻪ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﺻﻔﺘﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ‬
‫ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﮕﻨﻰ ﻭ ﻳﻜﻨﻮﺍﺧﺘﻰﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺍﮔﺮ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﺭﻧﮓ ﺳﺮﺥ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻠﻮﺯﺁپ‪ ،‬ﺗﺄﺛﺮﺍﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡﺯﺩﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻭ ﭼﻬﺮﻩ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺮﺍﺝ‬ ‫»ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﺔ »ﺳﺮﺥ«‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻭﺍژﺓ ﺳﺮﺥ )ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﺮ ﺟﻮﺭﻩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻓﻀﺎ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ( ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻳﺎ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪﻩ ﻳﺎ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺟﺎﻯ ﭼﺸﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺁﻥﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺁﻥﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺭﻧﮓ ﻃﺒﻘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺷﺪﺕ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﭘﻴﻜﺮﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻛﻠﻰ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺳﻄﻮﺡ ﺍﺷﻴﺎ ﺑﺪﻫﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﻓﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻓﻀﺎ‬ ‫ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎ ﻓﻬﺮﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﻥ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻤﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻄﺮ‬
‫ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﻟﻤﺲ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻚ ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻢ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﺮﻯ ﻭ ﻋﺎﻃﻔﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫‪18‬‬
‫ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻪﺍﺵ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﭼﻨﺪﮔﺎﻧﻪ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺣﻮﺯﺓ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻭ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪«.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪34‬‬

 ‫ﺣﺮﺹ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺑﻮﻧﻮﺋﻞ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻨﮕﻞ ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺩﻳﻮﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮگ‬ ‫ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﺁﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ‪ 21«.‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﻍ‪ ،‬ﺍﺗﺎﻕ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻠﻚﺍﻟﻤﻮﺕ‪ ،‬ﺻﺤﺮﺍﻯ ﺳﺘﻮﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻤﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻨﻰ ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ؛ ‪qualisign‬؛ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺻﺤﺮﺍ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻍ ﺳﻨﮕﻰ ﻋﺼﺮ ﻃﻼﻳﻰ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻛﺮﺩ‪23«.‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻜﺎﻥﻫﺎﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﺮﺟﻮﺭﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ‪ ،icon‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺳﺒﻌﻴﺖ ﻏﺮﻳﺰﻯ ﻭ ﺑﺪﻭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﺤﻴﻂﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﺁﺷﻨﺎ‬ ‫ﭼﻬﺮﻩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﻗﺪﺭﺕـﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،qualisign ،‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺳﺮﻧﻮﺷﺖ ﻗﻬﺮﻣﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﺟﺎﻡ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕـﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﺮﺟﻮﺭﻩ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻳﺎﺩﺁﻭﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﺮﺟﻮﺭﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻪ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﺟﻐﺮﺍﻓﻴﺎﻳﻰـﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺭﺳﺎﻧﻪﺍﺵ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭﻝ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﺳﺎﻳﻪ ﻭ ﺗﻀﺎﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﻜﻰ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺷﻨﺎﻳﻰ )ﺗﻮﺳﻂ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻛﺴﭙﺮﺳﻴﻮﻧﻴﺴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻟﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻛﻨﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻀﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺨﺪﻭﺵ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﺭﺳﺎﻧﻪﺍﺵ )ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ( ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﻏﻴﺮﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﻚ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ( ﺩﻭﻡ‬
‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸﺘﻘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻉ ﻏﻨﺎﻳﻰ )‪) (lyrical abstraction‬ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻤﻨﺪﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺳﻮﻥ ﻭ ﺩﺭﺍﻳﺮ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﺎﺕ ﺳﻴﺎﻩ‪ ،‬ﺳﻔﻴﺪ ﻭ ﺧﺎﻛﺴﺘﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﮔﻲ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺯﻣﺎﻥﻣﻨﺪﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻧﺎﺗﻮﺭﺍﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﺓ ﺭﻭﺣﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﺑﺮﺩﺍﺭﺩ( ﻭ ﺳﻮﻡ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺭﻧﮓ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺳﻮﻯ ﺯﻭﺍﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻤﺴﺎﺯﺍﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻠﻬﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻪ ﻧﺎﺗﻮﺭﺍﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫)ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﻟﻰ ﻭ ﭘﺮﺕ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﺁﻧﺘﻮﻧﻴﻮﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻓﺼﻞ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺯﻭﺍﻝ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﺷﺒﺎﻉ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ(‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﺷﺘﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻳﻚ ﺁﻧﺘﺮﻭﭘﻰ ﺷﺘﺎﺏ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺧﻄﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﻜﺎﻧﻪ‪-‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﻮﻧﻮﺋﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻓﺮﺳﺎﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺣﻠﻘﻪﺍﻯ ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺪ ﻓﺎﺻﻞ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ ﺷﺮﺡ‬
‫ﺟﻮﺯﻑ ﻟﻮﺯﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻧﻔﺠﺎﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﻳﺸﺘﻦ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻱ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺸﺨﻴﺺ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺧﺸﻮﻧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮﻯﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺪﻭﻯ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﻴﻄﻰـﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺑﻬﺎﻡ ﻏﺮﻳﺰﻯ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﺮﻳﺰﻯ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﺯ ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻰﺷﻜﻞ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻓﻴﻠﻤﺴﺎﺯﻯ ﻣﺜﻞ ﺳﺎﻣﻮﺋﻞ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﺴﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺮژﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻭﺣﺸﻰ ﺍﺟﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ‬ ‫ﻓﻮﻟﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺩﻟﻤﺸﻐﻮﻟﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﺗﻮﺭﺍﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰﺍﺵ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﺁﻥﻛﻪ ﺭﺋﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﺯ ﻗﻄﻌﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻃﺮﺡﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺪﻭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ‬
‫ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻣﺤﻴﻄﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ‪/‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﺍﺭﺟﺢ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﺮﻳﺰﻯ ﺭﻫﺒﺮﻯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﺮ‪/‬‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺩ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻨﺒﺔ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﻧﺎﺗﻮﺭﺍﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﻛﻴﻨﮓ‬ ‫ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﻫﺮﺟﻮﺭﻩ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻴﻢ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ )ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻄﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻌﺪﺗﺮ‬
‫ﻭ ﺣﺘﻲ ﺳﻮژﺓ‬ ‫ﻼ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺳﻜﺎﻧﺲ‬ ‫ﻭﻳﺪﻭﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺳﺘﻴﺎﺑﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻥ ﻣﻮﻓﻖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﻳﺪ( ﺑﺎ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭﻯ‪/‬ﻣﺤﻴﻂﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺗﻜﺎﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻘﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺁﺧﺮ ﺩﻭﺋﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻓﺘﺎﺏ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻛﺸﻤﻜﺶ ﺩﺭﺍﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻭ ﺧﺸﻮﻧﺖ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ‪/‬ﺗﻜﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺪﻭﻯ ﺭﻭﺑﺮﻭﻳﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﻣﺜﻞ ﺑﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻐﺰ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻗﻬﺮﻣﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺷﻬﻮﺍﻧﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﺮﺟﻮﺭﻩ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤﻴﻂﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﺗﻮﺭﺍﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺍﺗﻼﻑ ﺁﻧﺘﺮﻭﭘﻰ ﻏﺮﻳﺰﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻫﻢ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺳﻤﺖ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺟﺎﻡ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﻴﻂﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﻗﺼﺪ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ‪ ،‬ﺣﺴﺎﺳﻴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﺁﻥﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ )‪ (Expression‬ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺠﺎﻣﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺩﻳﺖ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻨﻰ ﻭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺛﺮﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ )‪ (Impression‬ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ 22.‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﻔﻊ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻉ‬ ‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺗﻜﺎﻧﻪـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﺳﻤﭙﺘﻮﻡ )ﺩﺭﺩﻧﺸﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﻪ )ﻣﺤﻴﻂﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ‪ /‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ(‬
‫ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺁﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫‪ (Symptom‬ﻭ ﺑﺖﻭﺍﺭﻩ )‪» .(Fetishes or Idols‬ﺳﻤﭙﺘﻮﻡﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺎﺗﻮﺭﺍﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻣﻴﻞ ﺯﻭﻻ ﺣﺮﻑ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻛﺴﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ﻓﻬﻤﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺣﻜﻢ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺗﻜﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻣﺸﺘﻖﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺖﻭﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻓﺘﻴﺶﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻪ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﻧﺎﺗﻮﺭﺍﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻠﺦ ﺭﺋﺎﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻗﻄﻌﺎﺕ }ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ{ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ 24«.‬ﺳﻤﭙﺘﻮﻡ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻫﻰ ﻭ ﺩﻭﺷﺎﺩﻭﺷﻰ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻛﻠﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺳﺮﺑﺮﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺷﺮ ﺍﺑﺪﻯ ﻭ ﺭﺍﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﺮﻳﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻬﺮﻣﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﻭﻻ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﻜﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻜﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺭﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻼﺷﻰ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻭ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﻧﺎﺑﻮﺩﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻳﻚ ﺷﻴﺐ ﺗﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻓﺘﻴﺶﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺑﺖﻭﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺟﺎﻡ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺎﺗﻮﺭﺍﻟﻴﺴﻢ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﻛﻨﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﺩﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺩ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﻧﺎﺗﻮﺭﺍﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﺍﺷﺘﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻢ ﻭ ﺑﻮﻧﻮﺋﻞ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻛﻔﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﺧﺎﻃﺮﺍﺕ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺴﺘﺨﺪﻡ ﺑﻮﻧﻮﺋﻞ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻓﻴﻠﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻢ ﻭ ﺑﻮﻧﻮﺋﻞ‪ ،‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻟﻮﻛﻴﺸﻦﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺪﻓﺎﺻﻞ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﺮﺟﻮﺭﻩ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻣﻜﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﺮﺩ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖﺷﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ‬
‫)ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ( ﻭ ﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ )ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ( ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻓﺮﻡ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺠﻰ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﻟﻰ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﺑﻮﻧﻮﺋﻞ ﻭ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺶ ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﻪﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ )ﻣﺤﻴﻂ‬
‫ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻧﺴﺠﺎﻡ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ‪/‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ( ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻬﺪﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪» .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻜﺎﻧﻪـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﻗﻠﺔ ﻛﻮﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻮﻫﺮﺍﻥ ﻧﺎﺑﻴﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﻛﻠﺒﺔ ﺟﺎﺩﻭﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﺴﺮﺍﻥ ﺍﺑﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﻗﺼﺮ ﻣﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻠﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﺩﺍﺏ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺨﺶ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻘﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺻﺤﺮﺍ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪35 1393‬‬

‫ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﻭ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﺣﺎﺩﺙ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺶ‪-‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻌﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻀﺎـﺯﻣﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻨﻰ ﺣﺮﻑ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﻧﻮﺋﻞ ﺑﻮﺭچ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻓﺮﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻣﺤﻴﻄﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻛﻨﺶ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺠﻴﮕﻴﺮﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺭﻭﺑﺮﻭ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻝ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﮕﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺋﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺭﺋﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎﺟﻰ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﻴﻂﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻐﺮﺍﻓﻴﺎﻳﻰـﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺠﺎﻣﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺮﺩﻯ‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺟﻪ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﭼﺎﻗﻮﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺩﻭﻳﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺟﺴﺪ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺳﻨﮕﻔﺮﺵ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ‪ ،‬ﻣﺜﻞ ﺩﺷﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻴﻠﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺳﺘﺮﻥ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺎﺑﻞ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺧﻴﺎﺑﺎﻥﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺟﻨﺎﻳﺖ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﮔﺮﻳﻔﻴﺚ ﺭﻭﺑﺮﻭﻳﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯﻫﻴﭽﻜﺎﻙ‬
‫ﻓﺮﻡ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺭﻓﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﺁﻥﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺗﻤﺴﻔﺮ ﻓﺮﺍﮔﻴﺮ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺤﻴﻄﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎﺝ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺭﻭﻯ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ )ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻧﻰ( ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯﻫﻴﭽﻜﺎﻙ‬
‫ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻓﺮﺍﮔﻴﺮ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻮﺿﻌﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻭ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ‬
‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴﻴﺮﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺳﻤﺖ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻗﺐ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪﻯ‬
‫ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺷﺪﮔﻰ ﻣﻰﭘﻴﻤﺎﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﻡ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻛﻪﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺴﺖ‬
‫ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻪ )‪ (index‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻪ ﺩﻭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻭﻳﮋﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻛﺸﻒ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺔ ﻓﻘﺪﺍﻥ )‪(index of lack‬‬ ‫ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯﻫﻴﭽﻜﺎﻙ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﻫﺮ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﻮﻧﺔ ﺷﺎﻳﻊ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﺎﺭﺍﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺟﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﺍﮔﺎﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ ﺗﺄﺛﺮﻯ ﻭ ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻧﺎﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻞﻭﻓﺼﻞ ﻭ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺷﻜﻞ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺩﻭﻡ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺔ ﺍﺑﻬﺎﻡ )‪ (index of equivocity‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺶ ﺩﻭﭘﻬﻠﻮ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻭ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﻞ ﻧﻤﺎﺩﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺗﻤﺎﺷﺎﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎﺝ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺳﺮﺩﺭﮔﻢ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩﻣﻌﻨﺎ‬
‫»ﻣﺮﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻻﻯ ﺳﺮ ﺟﺴﺪﻯ ﭼﺎﻗﻮ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺍﻳﺴﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺁﻳﺎ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻘﺘﻮﻝ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺸﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﻓﻘﻂ ﭼﺎﻗﻮ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺍﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻞ‬
‫ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؟«‪ 25‬ﻳﻚ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺶ )ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺩﺭ ژﺳﺖ ﺑﺎﺯﻳﮕﺮ( ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺩﻭ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﺩﺭﮔﻤﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻣﻠﻦ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ 26.‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻨﻰ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻓﺮﻡ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﮔﻴﺠﺔﻣﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻛﻮﭼﻚ‪ Vector ،‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻭ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺳﻤﺖ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻃﺮﺡﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺟﻬﻨﺪﻩ ﻭ ﻣﻨﻘﻄﻊ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﻜﻠﺖـﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺟﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ Synsign ،‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ‬
‫ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻃﻮﻝ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ‬
‫ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﺍﮔﻴﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺧﻂ ﺷﻜﺴﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻣﺎ‪ ،‬ﻳﺨﺒﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻭ ﺳﺒﻌﻴﺖ ﻣﺤﻴﻄﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﻧﺎﻧﻮﻙ ﺷﻤﺎﻝ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺯﻳﮕﺰﺍگﻭﺍﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻫﺎ ﻋﺒﻮﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺧﻂ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻧﻮﻙ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺩﺍﺭ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ )ﻳﺎ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ ﻛﻨﺶ( ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺩﻭﺭﮔﻴﺮ ﻣﺤﻴﻄﻰ )‪ (contour‬ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﺷﻜﻞ‬ ‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻓﺮﻡ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻜﺘﺐ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻜﺘﺐ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻪ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺭﺋﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻯ ‪binomial‬‬
‫ﻭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﻫﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﺩﻫﺔ ‪ 1930‬ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻴﻠﻤﺴﺎﺯﺍﻧﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ ﮔﺮﻳﺮﺳﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ ﺭﻭﺗﺎ‪ ،‬ﺷﺎﻫﻜﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻼﻫﺮﺗﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﻡ‬ ‫ً‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﺻﺮﻓﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺗﻬﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺑﺮﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺑﻰﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰـﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻣﺘﻬﻢ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻜﺎﻥـﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻘﺎﺕ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰـﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰﺍﺵ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻛﻞﻗﺎﻋﺪﻩﻣﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻓﻼﻫﺮﺗﻰ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﺔ ﻣﺤﺎﻓﻈﻪﻛﺎﺭﺍﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﺎﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻗﺐ ﺣﻀﻮﺭﺷﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺳﻬﻤﮕﻴﻦﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﺮﻡ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺏ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺣﺘﻲ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻨﺶ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻗﺒﻦ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻣﺤﻴﻂ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺰ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺏ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻓﺮﻡ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻓﻼﻫﺮﺗﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻝ ‪ SAS‬ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ )‪،(Situation‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ ‪ S‬ﺩﻭﻡ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮ ﻧﺎﺗﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺕ‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺶ )‪ (Action‬ﻭ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺩﻭﻡ )‪ (‘Situation‬ﺍﺯ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻝ‬
‫ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﺓ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﻣﻜﺘﺐ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ‬ ‫‪ ‘SAS‬ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻭ ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪36‬‬

 ‫ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻔﻊ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻓﻼﻫﺮﺗﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻨﺎ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻓﺮﻡ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺮﺱ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﭘﺮﺱ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻛﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺷﻜﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻨﻮﻋﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ‬
‫»ﻫﺮ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻛﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺩﺭﺑﺮﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪﺓ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻰ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺭﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖﻫﺎ )ﻭﺿﻊ ﺍﻭﻝ(‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻣﻐﺎﻳﺮﺕﻫﺎ )ﻭﺿﻊ ﺩﻭﻡ( ﻭ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻼﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺑﺨﻮﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎﺝﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ )ﻭﺿﻊ ﺳﻮﻡ( ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻛﻰ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﻼﺷﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻼﻗﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺶﺩﺭﺁﻣﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻪ ﻭﺿﻊ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ 28«.‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺳﻮﻯ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻭﺭﻳﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﭼﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻭﺿﻊ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﺗﺎﺏ‪-‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻪ ﻭﺿﻊ ﭘﺮﺱ ﺣﺮﻑ ﺑﺰﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻨﻄﺒﻖ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺯﺗﺎﺏـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺿﻊ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺿﻊ ﺻﻔﺮ )‪ (Zeroness‬ﻣﻰﻧﺎﻣﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻭﺿﻊ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻓﺮﻡ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ‬
‫ﺳﻮﻡ ﭘﺮﺱ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫)ﻭ ﺑﺮﻋﻜﺲ( ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﺒﺪﻝ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﺸﺎﻥﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ )‪ (Relation-Image‬ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﻡ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‪-‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﮔﺬﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﺎﺏـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻳﺰﻧﺸﺘﺎﻳﻦ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﭘﺮﺱ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻧﺴﺒﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻭﺿﻊ‬ ‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻴﻠﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻳﺰﻧﺸﺘﺎﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺻﺤﻨﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺳﻮﻡ ﭘﺮﺱ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭﺿﻊ ﺳﻮﻡ ﭘﺮﺱ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺍﺵ ﻧﻤﺎﺩ )‪(Symbol‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺩﺭﺍﻡ ﻭﻗﻔﻪ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺧﺒﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻕ ﺩﺭﺍﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺑﻌﺪﻯ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺎﺭﻳﻒﻧﻤﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ﺗﺪﺍﻭﻡ ﻭ ﻋﺎﺩﺕ ﻭ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﺿﻊ ﺳﻮﻡ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻼ ﺻﺤﻨﺔ ﺗﺌﺎﺗﺮ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺗﻮﻃﺌﺔ ﺗﺮﻭﺭ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﺍﻳﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪) .‬ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﻭ ﻧﻤﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺳﻮﻳﺔ ﺫﻫﻨﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺣﺎﻣﻞ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮﮔﺮ‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﺨﻮﻑ(‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻓﺮﻡ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﻡ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﺁﻏﺎﺯ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺿﻊ ﺳﻮﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺜﺎﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻌﺪﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭘﻴﭽﻴﺪﻩﺗﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺍﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺰﺭگ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﺷﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﻩﻣﻨﺪﻯ ﻭ ﺍﺳﻠﻮﺏ ﻋﻘﻼﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫)ﻣﺜﻞ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻭﺣﺸﻰ( ﻭ ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ )ﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻨﻮﻥﺁﻣﻴﺰ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻫﺮ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﻧﻤﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﻗﻬﺮﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ( ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﺮﺗﺰﻭگ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻧﻤﺎﻯﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻓﻬﻢ ﻭ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﺓ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻠﻴﺖ ﺫﻫﻨﻰ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻌﻜﻮﺱﺳﺎﺯﻯ )ﺑﭽﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺑﺰﺭﮔﺴﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺯﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﻣﺮﺩ( ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﺩﻳﺪ‬ ‫)ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﺳﺮﺧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻤﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﻥ(‪» .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺿﻊ ﺳﻮﻡ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻫﺎﻛﺰ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﮔﻔﺘﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﭼﺎﭘﻠﻴﻦ )ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ )ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺣﻜﺎﻣﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻮﺟﺐ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ ﻧﻤﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﺭﺍﻳﺸﮕﺮ ﻭ ﺩﻳﻜﺘﺎﺗﻮﺭ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﺩﻳﻜﺘﺎﺗﻮﺭ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﭼﺎﭘﻠﻴﻦ ﻭ‬
‫ﺯﺍﻭﻳﺔ ﺩﻳﺪ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 29«.‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺮﺱ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻨﻰ ﻧﺴﺒﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﺜﻞ ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻦ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭﺍﻛﺘﺮﻫﺎ(ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﺎﺩ )‪ (symbol‬ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﻟﻮﺍﻯ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﻭ ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻟﻮﺍﻯ ﻓﺎﺷﻴﺴﻢ(‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺫﻫﻨﻰ ﻣﻬﻴﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺭﻭﻧﺎﻟﺪ ﺑﺎگ ﺟﻤﻊ ﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،27‬ﺩﺭ ﭼﻨﺪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻤﺎﻯ ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻧﺴﺒﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻫﻴﭽﻜﺎﻙ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺔ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﺗﺎﺏـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻫﻴﭽﻜﺎﻙ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺴﺖ ﻛﺸﻒ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ )ﺁﻳﺰﻧﺸﺘﺎﻳﻦ(‪ ،‬ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺮﺟﻊ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ ﻫﻴﭽﻜﺎﻙ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﺗﺄﺛﺮﻯ ﻭ ﻫﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻌﻜﻮﺱ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ )ﻫﺎﻛﺰ( ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻞ ﻧﻤﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻞ ﻧﻤﺎﺩﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺶ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﻣﺮﺟﻊ ﺳﻮﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮﺩﺭﮔﻤﻰ ﻭ ﺳﺮﮔﻴﺠﺔ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻃﻮﻝ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻭ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ )ﭼﺎﭘﻠﻴﻦ(‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﻫﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‪-‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﺳﻪ ﻭﺿﻊ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﺷﺨﺺ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻞ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﻩﻣﻨﺪ ﺳﻬﻤﮕﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻫﻴﭽﻜﺎﻙ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻞ‪،‬‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺱ‬
‫ﻏﺎﻟﺒ ًﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﺭﻭﺷﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺩﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻼﺵ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺯ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭﻟﻰ ﺯﻧﺠﻴﺮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ‬ ‫)ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ( ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻪ ﻭﺿﻊ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻃﺒﻖ ﻳﻚ ﺭﻭﺍﻝ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﭘﺸﺖ ﺳﺮﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺮﻧﺪﮔﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺱ ﻣﻨﻄﺒﻖ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺮﺱ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺿﻊ ﺍﻭﻝ )‪ (Firstness‬ﺍﺯ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﺍﺯ ﺷﻬﺮ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺁﺩﻡﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﻳﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻳﻜﻰ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍژﺓ ﺷﻤﺎﻳﻞ )‪ (Icon‬ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﭘﺸﺖ ﺳﺮ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺭﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺷﻤﺎﻳﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻛﻤﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ )ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺟﻨﺎﻳﺖ ﻛﺸﻒ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﻬﺎ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻈﻢ ﻋﺎﺩﻯ‬ ‫ﺻﺮﻓﻦ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﺪ( ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﻭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ‪ ،‬ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺎﺭﻙ )‪(mark‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﻭﺿﻊ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻛﺎﺭ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭﻯ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻭﺿﻊ ﺩﻭﻡ ﭘﺮﺱ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻧﺎﻣﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﻥﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩﺷﺎﻥ‬ ‫)‪ (Secondness‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻪ )‪ (Index‬ﺑﺤﺚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﻭ ﻋﺎﺩﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﻧﺎﮔﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺷﺒﻜﺔ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺭﺍﺣﺘﻰ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺟﻬﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻘﺶ ﻧﻤﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻄﺒﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﻣﺎﺭﻙ )‪ (demark‬ﻣﻰﻧﺎﻣﺪ‪» .‬ﺑﻌﻀﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻣﺎﺭﻙﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﺩﻗﻴﻘﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺿﻊﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﺮﺱ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪37 1393‬‬

‫‪2000.‬‬ ‫)ﻧﺸﺎﻧﮕﺬﺍﺭﻫﺎﻯ( ﻓﻴﻠﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﻴﭽﻜﺎﻙ ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺜﻞ ﺁﺳﻴﺎﺏ ﺑﺎﺩﻯ ﺩﺭ‬
‫‪8. Deleuze on Cinema. Bogue, Ronald. Routledge press,‬‬
‫ﺧﺒﺮﻧﮕﺎﺭ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺮﻩﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻒ ﺑﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﭼﺮﺧﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ‬
‫‪2003.‬‬
‫ﻫﻮﺍﭘﻴﻤﺎﻯ ﺳﻢﭘﺎﺵ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻤﺎﻝ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻤﺎﻟﻐﺮﺑﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻣﻰ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬
‫‪9. Using Deleuze: The Cinema Books, Film Studies and‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻟﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺳﻢﭘﺎﺷﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮﻯ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﻟﻴﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫‪Effect. Dyrk Ashton. ProQuest LLC. 2006.‬‬ ‫ﺷﻴﺮ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﻧﻮﺭﺍﻧﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺩﺭﺧﺸﺶ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺁﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ ﺳﻮءﻇﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺟﺐ ﺷﻚ ﻭ ﺗﺮﺩﻳﺪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻛﻠﻴﺪﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻔﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺮﻑ »ﻡ« ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺖﻫﺎ‪:‬‬ ‫‪30‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻯ ﻣﺮگ ﺑﮕﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻰﺧﻮﺭﺩ‪«.‬‬
‫‪ :1‬ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.3‬‬
‫***‬
‫‪2. Gilles Deleuze’s time machine, P xiv.‬‬
‫ﺗﺎ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ )ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪،‬‬
‫‪3. Ibid. P xi.‬‬
‫ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ( ﻭ ﺩﻭ ﮔﻮﻧﻬﺔ ﺑﻴﻨﺎﺑﻴﻨﻰ ﺗﻜﺎﻧﺔ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ )ﺑﻴﻦ‬
‫‪4. Gilles Deleuze’s time machine, P xii‬‬
‫‪ .5‬ﺭ‪.‬ﻙ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ( ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﺎﺏ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ )ﺑﻴﻦ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ‬
‫‪Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia,‬‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ( ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺷﺶ ﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻛﺮﺩﻳﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫‪Chapter 3. PP 217-200. Article I.‬‬ ‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺧﺮﻳﻦ ﺻﻔﺤﺎﺕ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪1‬؛ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫‪ .6‬ﺭ‪.‬ﻙ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻨﻬﺎ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺣﺴﺎﻧﻰـﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺭﻭﺡ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﺳﺎﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﮓ ﺩﭼﺎﺭ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺩﻭ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ‪،‬‬
‫‪Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia,‬‬
‫‪.283-273 .4 and Ch 9-1 PP. 1 Chapter‬‬ ‫ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺌﻮﺭﺋﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺍﻳﺘﺎﻟﻴﺎ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺗﻼﺵ ﻛﺮﺩ ﺗﺎ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ‬
‫‪7. What is philosophy?, P18.‬‬ ‫ﺭﺋﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻓﺮﺍﮔﻴﺮ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺣﺴﻰـﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ‬
‫‪ .8‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.40‬‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺑﻜﺸﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .9‬ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪ :1‬ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.95‬‬ ‫ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺷﻜﺎﻑﺩﺍﺭ ﻭ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﺍﻟﺰﺍﻣﺎﺕ ‪ ‘SAS‬ﻭ ﻳﺎ ‪ ‘ASA‬ﺑﺮﺳﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻯ‬
‫‪ .10‬ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻳﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.46‬‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﺮﺍﻛﻨﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺁﺷﻔﺘﻪ ﺳﺮ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻭ‬
‫‪11. Cinema 2: The Time-Image, Pp 29-28.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺪﺭﻥ )ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﻼ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺗﺄﺛﺮـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻫﺎ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﮕﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .12‬ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪ :1‬ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.113‬‬ ‫ﻓﻴﻠﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻟﻦ ﺭﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺶـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻞﻳﺎﻓﺘﺔ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺫﻫﻨﻰ‬
‫‪ .13‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.122‬‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﭘﺸﺖ ﺳﺮﮔﺬﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺣﺴﻰـﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺭﺍﻩ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺭﻭﺏ ﮔﺮﻳﻪ( ﺑﻪ‬
‫‪ .14‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.125‬‬
‫ﺳﻮﻯ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﺎﺑﻊ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺭﺍﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪15. Deleuze on Cinema, P 69.‬‬ ‫ﻓﻀﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﻳﻜﺪﺳﺖﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺑﻮﻳﮋﻩ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﺎﺑﻊ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻓﺮﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺭﺍﻩ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ‬
‫‪16. Ibid. p 76.‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻋﺒﻮﺭ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭ ﺩﺳﺘﻴﺎﺑﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻠﺪ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺷﺪﻥﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫‪ .17‬ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪ :1‬ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.151‬‬
‫‪18. The Cinema Books, Film Studies and Effect, P‬‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪2‬؛ ﺯﻣﺎﻥـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻳﻜﺴﺮﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﻰﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫‪127.‬‬ ‫ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ‬
‫‪ .19‬ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪ :1‬ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.137‬‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻭ ﻣﺂﺧﺬ‬ ‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰﺳﺎﺯ‬
‫‪20. Deleuze on Cinema, P 78.‬‬ ‫‪ .1‬ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪1‬؛ ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻣﺎﺯﻳﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ‬
‫‪21. Ibid. p 80.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻴﻨﻮﻯ ﺧﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﺎپ ﺍﻭﻝ‪.1392 ،‬‬
‫‪22. Cinema 1: The Movement-Image, P 123.‬‬ ‫‪ .2‬ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻳﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﺮﻯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ‪ .‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗﻠﻰ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﻰ‪ .‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﺩﻓﺘﺮ ﻧﺸﺮ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓ‬
‫ﺣﺴﻰـﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ‬
‫‪ .23‬ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪ :1‬ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.194‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ‪.1375 .‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .24‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .3‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﭘﺎﻝ ﭘﻴﺘﻦ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ ﻣﺤﻤﻮﺩ ﺭﺍﻓﻊ‪ .‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﮔﺎﻡ ﻧﻮ‪.1387 ،‬‬
‫‪ .25‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.247‬‬
‫‪4. Gilles Deleuze’s time machine. D. N. Rodowick. Duke‬‬
‫‪ .26‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻓﺮﻡ ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻰ ﺑﻴﻀﻰ )‪ (elipse‬ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪University Press.1997.‬‬
‫ﻓﺮﻣﻰ ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﺗﻘﺎﺭﻥ‪ .‬ﻛﻪ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﺗﻘﺎﺭﻥ ﺁﻥ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻧﻰ )ﺗﻘﺎﺭﻥ( ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖﻫﺎ‬
‫‪5. What is philosophy?. Gilles Deleuze and Félix‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﻭﻡ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺔ ﺍﺑﻬﺎﻡ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻨﺪﮔﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ‬
‫‪Guattari. Trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Graham Burchell.‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﺯﺑﺎﻧﻰ ﻫﻢ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺩﻭﻡ ‪ elipse‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ »ﺣﺬﻑ« ﺩﺭ‬
‫‪Columbia University Press. 1994.‬‬
‫ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻢ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺔ ﻓﻘﺪﺍﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖ‬
‫‪6. Cinema 1: The Movement-Image. Deleuze, Gilles.‬‬
‫ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺣﺬﻑ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺪﺭﻳﺞ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫‪Trans. H. Tomlinson and B. Habberjam. The Athlone‬‬
‫‪27. Deleuze on Cinema, Pp 92-97.‬‬
‫‪press (London), 1986.‬‬
‫‪28. Deleuze on Cinema, P 67.‬‬
‫‪7. Cinema 2: The Time-Image. Deleuze, Gilles. Transl.‬‬
‫‪ .29‬ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ‪ :1‬ﺣﺮﻛﺖـﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.298‬‬
‫‪Hugh Tomlinson and Robert Galeta. The Athlone Press,‬‬
‫‪ .30‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.306‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪38‬‬

‫ﺗﺨﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﻌﺪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺮﺑّﻊ ﺩﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﻣﺮﺑّﻊ ﻳﻚ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ّ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺮﺑﻊ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺮﺑﻊ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﺷﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﺤﻮﺓ ﻋﻄﻒ ّ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪:‬‬
‫)‪ (1‬ﺩﻭ ﻣﺮﺑّﻊ »ﺩﻓﻌﺘﻦ« ﭘﺪﻳﺪ ﺁﻣﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻰﺭﺑﻂ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻭ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼ ّﻮﺭ ﺷﺪﻩ‪.‬‬
‫)‪ (2‬ﻣﺮﺑّﻊ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ »ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ« ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﻣﺮﺑﻊ ﺑﺰﺭگﺗﺮ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺭﻭﻧﺪ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﺰﺭگﺗﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺣﺎﻝ ﺁﻥ ﻟﺤﻈﺔ ﺧﻄﻴﺮ ﺳﺮﺑﺮ ﻣﻴﺎﻭﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﺑﻪ ﺷﺮﺡ )‪ (1‬ﺍﻋﺘﻘﺎﺩ ﻭﺭﺯﻡ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺷﺮﺡ )‪.(2‬‬
‫ﺷﺮﺣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻇﻬﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻓﻌﻰ ﻭ ﺑﻰﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ‬
‫ﺩﻳﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺷﺮﺣﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻣﺮﺑّﻊ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻟﻤﺲ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺳﻄﻮﺡ ﺑﺴﺎﻭﻳﺪﻧﻰ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺷﺮﺡ‬
‫ﻧﻮﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﺍﺭﺯﺷﻰ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﻣﺜﻞ ﺭﻧﮓ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ‪ ،‬ﺭﻧﮓ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﻚ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺷﺮﺡ ﻟﻤﺴﻰ‪ ،‬ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﻻﻣﺴﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﺭﻧﮓ ﺩﺍﻍ‪ .‬ﺭﻧﮓ ﺳﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺑﺮ ﺷﺮﺡ ﺩﻭﻡ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺷﺪﻩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎ ﺍ ّﻭ ًﻻ ﺳﻄﻮﺣﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻻﻣﺴﻪﺍﻯﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﺩﻓﻌﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﻫﺮ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺒﺘﻼ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻭ ﻛﺸﺶ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺭﻭ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﭘﺪﻳﺪ ﺁﻣﺪﻥ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﺲ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‪:‬‬
‫ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺮﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺣ ّﺘﻲ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻪﻟﺘﻪﻫﺎ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺳﺮﺍﻳﺖ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺨﺰﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ »ﻧﻴﺮﻭ«ﻫﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻘّﺎﺵ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻔﺘﺶ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ‪-‬ﻃﻠﺴﻢ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ‪» ،‬ﻧﻮﺭ«ﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺭﺻﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺮ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ‬
‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﺭﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺷﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﻜﻰﺷﺎﻥ ﺗﺄ ّﻣﻞ ﻣﻰﻭﺭﺯﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﮔﻮﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻭﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ‬
‫ﭼﺮﺧﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﺑﻪ ﻟﻤﺲ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺳﺰﺍﻥ ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻕ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﺷﺎﮔﺮ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺷﻮ ﺗﺎ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪ ،‬ﭘﺮﺗﻮﻫﺎ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺍﺧﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺳﻴﻮﻧﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﭼﺸﻢ ﻭ ﻣﻐﺰ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻟﻤﺲ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﺑﻴﺎ‪،‬‬
‫*‬
‫ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚﺗﺮ ﺗﺎ ﺩﺳﺘﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﺑﺮﺳﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﻟﻤﺴﺶ ﻛﻨﻰ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺗﻀﻲ ﻛﺮﺑﻼﻳﻰﻟﻮ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻟﻤﺲ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻮﺷﺖ ﻭ ﭘﻮﺳﺖ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪morteza.karbalaee@gmail.com‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﺨﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻔﺖ ﻭ ﺳﺨﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺑﻰﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻧﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺵ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭼﺸﻢ ﻣﺎ ﻛﺸﺶﻣﻨﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﻓﻌﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺨﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺟﺎﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﻮﺍﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺧﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﺮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻔﻊ ﮔﻮﺷﺖ‪» .‬ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻛﻠﻪﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﮔﻮﺷﺖ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ 1«.‬ﻭ ﺍﻭ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻟﻤﺲ ﺑﺮﺳﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﻮﺷﺖﺳﺎﻻﺭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺁﺗﺶ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ‪» .‬ﺁﺗﺶ«‬
‫ﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺭﻭﺷﻨﺎﻳﻰﺍﺵ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺣﺮﺍﺭﺗﺶ ﻭ ﺑﻰﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯﺍﺵ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺷﻢ ﻫﺮﺍﻛﻠﻴﺘﻮﺳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻳﻚ ﺁﺗﺶ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ‪ .‬ﻣﺮﺍﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ »ﻣﻨﻄﻖ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ« ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻊ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻫﻨﺮ ﻧﻘّﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺷﻜﺎﻝ ﻭ ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺩﻝ ﻛﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ‪» .‬ﺩﺭ ﻫﻨﺮ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻩ ﺩﺭ‬
‫‪2‬‬
‫ﺗﺼﺮﻑ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪«.‬‬
‫ﻣﻮﺳﻴﻘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﺍﺷﻜﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ّ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﻨﺘﻬﺎ ﺁﻥﻗﺪﺭ ﻟﻄﻴﻒ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ‬
‫ﻓﺎﺻﻠﺔ ﻧﺠﻮﻣﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ُ ،‬ﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻟَﺨﺖﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻓﻘﻂ »ﻳﻚ ﮔﺎﻡ« ﺑﺎ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻘّﺎﺵ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻚ ﮔﺎﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺪﺩ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪39 1393‬‬

‫ﺁﻥ ﻛﺶ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪» :‬ﺁﻳﻨﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﮔﻮﺷﺖ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮﺷﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺑﺎ ﮔﻮﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﻃﻠﺴﻤﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺴﺨﻴﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺟﺰ ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﺎﺑﻨﺪﻩ‪ .‬ﺁﻳﻨﻪ ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﻣﺎﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻌﻀ ًﺎ ﺿﺨﺎﻣﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻳﺎ ﺟﺎﻟﺐ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍژﺓ »ﺑﻴﻜﻦ« ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺳﻴﺎﻩ‪ 6«.‬ﭘﺲ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺸﺨﻴﺺ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻗﻄﻌﺎﺕ ﮔﻮﺷﺖ ﺩﻭﺩﻯ ﻧﻤﻚﺳﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻬﻠﻮﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﭘﺸﺖ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺳﺘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺣﺮﻛﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻨﺪﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺧﻮﻙ ﺗﻬﻴﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ؟ ﺁﻥ ﻫﻢ ﮔﻮﺷﺖ ﺧﻮﻙ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﮔﺎﻭ ﻛﻪ‬
‫»ﺗﺎﺑﻴﺪﻥ« ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎ ﻣﺜﻞ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﻮﺍﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺯﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﺍﻧﺒﻮﻩ ﮔﻮﺷﺖ ﺑﻰﺍﺳﺘﺨﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺻﻠﺐ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺳﺮ ﺟﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺴﺘﺪ ﻭﺍ ﺑﺮﻭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ »ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻴﻢ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﻮﺭﺩﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ »ﻳﻚ ﮔﺎﻡ« ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺾ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ« ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻨﺪﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺎﺵ‬ ‫ﺭﺅﻳﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻴﺶﺗﺮ؟ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‪:‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﺗﻨﺪﺑﺎﺩ ﻭ ﺗﻮﻓﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻓﻮﺭﺍﻥ ﺁﺏ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺨﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺣﻠﻘﺔ ﮔﺮﺩﺑﺎﺩ«‪ 7‬ﻣﺎ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﺗﻨﮕﺎﺗﻨﮕﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ‬
‫ﻟﻤﺲ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺣﺲ ﻛﻨﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﺳﻨﮕﻴﻨﻰ ﮔﻮﺷﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﻣﺪﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻭ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺮﻛﺖﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺸﺨﻴﺺ ﺩﻫﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﻋﺮﺻﺔ ﺩﻭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﻠّﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻮﺝ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ 3«.‬ﭘﺲ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻯ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﺭﻧﮓ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺗﺎ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺸﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺳﺎﺯﺩ؛ ﻭ ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﺗﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻢ ﺑﭙﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺧﻂ ﺷﻜﻞﺳﺎﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﻡ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻣﻮﺳﻴﻘﻰ ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺴﺖ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ )ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﻭ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ( ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻓﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺮﮔﺸﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﻰﺻﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺻﺪﺍﻣﻨﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻘّﺎﺷﻰ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﻓﺎﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺴﺎﻭﺍﻳﻰ ﮔﻮﺷﺖﺳﺎﻻﺭﺍﻧﻪ ﺷﺮﺣﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ »ﻭﻥﮔﻮگ ﺣ ّﺘﻲ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪» :‬ﺧﻂ ﺷﻜﻞﺳﺎﺯ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻧﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻭ ﻧﺸﻨﻴﺪﻩ ﺩﺍﻧﺔ ﮔﻞ ﺁﻓﺘﺎﺑﮕﺮﺩﺍﻥ‪ 4«.‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻧﻴﻢﻛﺮﺓ ﻟﮕﻦ ﺩﺳﺘﺸﻮﻳﻰ ﻳﺎ ﭼﺘﺮ ﻓﺮﻭ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ .‬ﺿﺨﺎﻣﺖ ﺁﻳﻨﻪ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ »ﻧﺎﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ« ﻭ »ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ« ﺁﻥ ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﺖ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ‬
‫ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﻛﮋﺭﻳﺨﺖﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻜﻞﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻳﻚ ﮔﺎﻡ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻜﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﺭﺍﺥ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺁﻳﻨﻪ ﻋﺒﻮﺭ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻨﻘﺒﺾ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻨﺒﺴﻂ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦﻫﺎ‬
‫»ﺗﻌﻴﻦ« ﻧﻴﻤﻪﻣﺎ ّﺩﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ّ‬ ‫ﺧﺒﺮ ﺍﺯ ّ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻮﺃﻡ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻴﻎ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﻧﺎﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﺔ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺳﺨﻦ ﺍﺯ »ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ« ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺳﺨﻦ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ّ‬
‫ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻥﺷﺪﻥ ﻏﻴﺮﻋﺎﺩﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻞ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺷﺪﻳﺪﺍ‬
‫ّ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﺭﻧﮓ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻟﺒﺨﻨﺪﻯ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﭘﺮﺍﻛﻨﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﺠﺎﻟﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬
‫ّ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﻣﺤﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬‫ّ‬
‫‪8‬‬
‫ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺳﺎﻃﺖ ﺧﻂ ﺷﻜﻞﺳﺎﺯ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪«. ...‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪) .‬ﻫﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻧﺎﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺭﻧﮓﺁﻣﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻧﻮﺭ ﻭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻟﻤﺲ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺭﺍ »ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺩﺍﻧﺔ ﮔﻞ ﺁﻓﺘﺎﺑﮕﺮﺩﺍﻥ« ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﻣﻨﺴﺠﻢ ﺣﺮﻑ‬
‫ﺩﻭ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ ﺑﻰﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺯﻧﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺩﺍﻧﺔ ﮔﻞ ﺁﻓﺘﺎﺑﮕﺮﺩﺍﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻘّﺎﺵ ﻧﺎﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ »ﺭﻧﮓﺁﻣﻴﺰﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ«ﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻪ ﺭﻧﮓﺁﻣﻴﺰﻯ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻤﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻋﺶ ﻛﺮﺩ‪(.‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺭﻧﮓﺁﻣﻴﺰﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺘ ًﺎ ﺭﻧﮓﺁﻣﻴﺰﻯ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻧﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺪﻡ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﺪ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ‬
‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻭﺍ ﺭﻭﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﮕﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻳﻨﺔ ﻋﺪﻡ‪ .‬ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ »ﺁﻳﻨﻪ« ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺷﻰء ﻧﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺑﻰﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﻘّﺎﺷﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻮﺭﻫﺎ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺧﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻳﻚﺑﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺎﺭﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻮﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻫﻢ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺗﺎﺑﻴﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﺎﺑﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺭﻭﻳﻪ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻳﻨﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺩﻭﺭ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﺟﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺟﺰ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﻃﻦ ﺑﻰﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎ ﻣﺎﻧﻊ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻋﺪﻡ ﭼﻴﺮﻩ‬
‫ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﭘﺲ ﻭ ﭘﻴﺶﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻛﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪﺷﺎﻥ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﭘﺎﻛﻴﺰﻩ ﻭ ﺷﺴﺘﻪ ُﺭﻓﺘﺔ ﺭﻭﺷﻦﺳﺎﺯ ﻭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﻚﺳﺎﺯ ﭘﺮﻫﻴﺰ‬
‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺁﻣﺪﻧﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭ ﺭﺍﻩ ﻣﻜ ّﻤﻞ ﻫﻢ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻭ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻋﺪﻡ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺴﺨﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻚﺭﻧﮓ ﻛﻪ »ﺍﺑﺪﻳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻮﺭ«‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﻮﺵ ﻟﻤﺴﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺧﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺭﻭﺷﻨﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺗﺴﺨﻴﺮ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﺟﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎ ﺳﻘﻮﻁ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﻜﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺻﻌﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺳﻘﻮﻁ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪ‪ .‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺟﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻳﻨﺔ‬
‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﺘﺎﺑﻮﻟﻴﻚ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﮔﻮﺷﺖﺷﺎﻥ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻋﺪﻡ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺘﻨﻰ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﮔﻮﻳﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦﺭﻭ ﻧﻘّﺎﺷﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﻨﻰ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻯ ﺳﻔﻴﺪ ﺭﺍ‬
‫‪9‬‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﭘﻮﺳﺖﺷﺎﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ُﭘﺮﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻯ ﻧﻘﻮﺵﺩﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﻋﺪﻣﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻳﻨﺔ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫***‬ ‫ﮔﺸﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻻﻣﺴﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺟﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺴﺘﺮ »ﺳﻘﻮﻁ« ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺘﻨﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪» .‬ﺳﻘﻮﻁ‬
‫ﺟ ّﺬﺍﺑﻴﺖ ﺳﺆﺍﻝ »ﻓﻼﻥ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟« ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﮕﺮﺩ ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻃﻰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﺯﻧﺪﻩﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺁﻥ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ‬
‫ﮔﻔﺖﻭﮔﻮﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺟ ّﺬﺍﺑﻴﺘﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺰﻭﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻰء ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻦ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪» «.‬ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻫﺮﭼﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺷﺪﻳﺪ ﺁﻥ ﻳﻚ‬
‫‪5‬‬
‫ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺣ ّﺘﻲ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺰﻭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻘﻴﻪ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﺴﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﻏﺮﻕ‬ ‫ﻧﺰﻭﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺓ ﺑﺰﺭگﺗﺮ ﻳﺎ ﻛﻮﭼﻚﺗﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺻﻌﻮﺩ‪«.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺷﺐ ﺻﺒﺢ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﻌﻄﻮﻑ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﻫﺮﭼﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻛﻨﺪﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﺭ ﻣﻰﺟﻨﺒﺪ ﺣ ّﺘﻲ ﺍﮔﺮ »ﺭﺅﻳﺖﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ«‬
‫ﺍﺷﻴﺎﻯ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺷﻴﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﻟﻰﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻏﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺭﺅﻳﺖﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﺍﻳﻦﺟﺎ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻴﺰﻯ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺗﺼ ّﻮﺭ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺜﻞ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﻴﺴﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻳﻮﺭﺵﺁﻭﺭﻧﺪﻩ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻴﺰﻳﻮﻟﻮژﻳﻚ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ‬
‫ﺍﺷﺘﻴﺎﻕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺍﺷﻴﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰ َﻛ َﻨﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻘﻴﻪ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺣ ّﺘﻲ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺍﺭﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ‪» ،‬ﺁﻳﻨﻪ«‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻴﺎﻫﻮﻯ ﺁﺷﻮﺑﻨﺎﻙ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻴﺰﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ؟‬ ‫ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻳﻨﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺳﺮﺷﺖ ﻻﻣﺴﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﺎﺑﻴﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪40‬‬

 ‫ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎﻯﺑﻴﻜﻦ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫»ﺭﻧﮓﺁﻣﻴﺰﻯ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ«ﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺭﻧﮓﺁﻣﻴﺰﻯ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻤﻨﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺭﻧﮓﺁﻣﻴﺰﻯ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‪.‬‬

‫ﺗﺠﺴﻢ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺼﻠﻮﺏ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﺯﻝ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ ّ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﻫﺮﭼﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻭ ﻫﺮ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﻬﺸﺖ ﺻﻌﻮﺩ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺒﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺷﻜﻞ ﻳﺎ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‪» ،‬ﻣﻨﻄﻘﺔ ﻣﺪ ّﻭﺭ« ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺼﻞ ﻳﻚ‬
‫‪11‬‬
‫ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﻯ ﺑﺎ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺻﻞ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻘﻴﺾ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺭﻭﻳﺪﺍﺩ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩﺵ ﺗﺄ ّﻣﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﻳﻚ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﺔ ﻣﺪ ّﻭﺭ ﻣﻌﻤﻮ ًﻻ ﻣﺸﺨّ ﺺ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻠﻘﺔ ﻣﺪ ّﻭﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﺗﺎ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ ﻛﻨﺪ؟‬ ‫ﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﺮﺩ ﻳﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻰﻧﺸﻴﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪» ،‬ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺑﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻭﺭﻯ ﮔﺰﻳﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭﻻ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ‪ 10«.‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﻴﺎﺕ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﺍﺗﻴﻮ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﮔﺮﺍﻧﻪ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺘﻰ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻨﻴﻚ ﺟﺪﺍﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻠﻘﻪ ﺟﺪﺍﺳﺎﺯ ﻳﻚ »ﺍﻣﺮ‬
‫‪12‬‬
‫ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ ﻭ ﺗﻚﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﻧﺸﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻟﺰﻭﻣ ًﺎ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻗﻊ« ﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ »ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺟ ّﺬﺍﺑﻴﺖ ﺍﻧﺰﻭﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺟ ّﺬﺍﺑﻴﺘﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﺩﻭ ﺟﻨﺒﻪ‪ :‬ﺍ ّﻭ ًﻻ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺭﻓﺘﻦ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ‪ «...‬ﻭ »ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺭﺥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‪ «...‬ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ »ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ« ﻭ ﻣﻜﺚ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺷﻰء ﺑﻰﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖﺳﺎﺯﺵ‬ ‫ﺍﮔﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ »ﺑﻰﺣﺮﻛﺖ« ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺷﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ »ﺍﻣﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻣﺰﺍﺣﻢ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ؛ ﻭ ﺛﺎﻧﻴ ًﺎ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻳﻚ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﮔﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻗﻊ«ﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‪» ،‬ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ« ﻳﺎ »ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺴﻠﺦ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻳﻚ ﻭﺍﻗ ِﻊ ﺧﻮﺩﺑﺴﻨﺪﻩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﮔﻔﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻠﻘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺪ ّﻭﺭ »ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺳﻪ ﺳﺎﻝ ﮔﺬﺷﺖ ﻣﻬﻢ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻬﻢ ﺗﺼﻠﻴﺐ ﻭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺮﻙ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ّ‬
‫ﺣﻠﻘﻪ ﮔﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻰ ّ‬
‫ﺑﻰﺳﺎﺑﻘﻪ ﻭ ﻻﺣﻘﻪ‪ .‬ﺭﻣﺰ ﺟ ّﺬﺍﺑﻴﺖ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺟﺰ »ﻧﻴﺴﺖ«ﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻧﻮﺭ ﻭ ﻟﻤﺲ ﮔﻔﺘﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺗﻨﻴﺪﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ »ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ« ﻳﺎ »ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ« ﺭﺍ ﺍﺣﺎﻃﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ؟ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺟﺰ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻠﻘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺪ ّﻭﺭ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖﺳﺎﺯ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭼﻮﻥ‬
‫»ﻧﻴﺴﺖ«ﻫﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺷﻰء؟‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺮﻙ ﻧﺎﮔﺰﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺟﺪﺍﺳﺎﺯﻯﺷﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻰء ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻟﻤﺲ ﻭ ّ‬
‫ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻨﻬﺎ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﭘﺎﻳﺒﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺳﺰﺍﻥ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺑﺪﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻭ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻃﻰ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﺧﻮﻳﺸﺎﻭﻧﺪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﻣﻨﻔﻚ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺍﺵ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻣﻰﺍﻳﺴﺘﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺷﺐ ﺗﺎ ﺻﺒﺢ‪ ،‬ﻏﺮﻕ ﺩﺭ ّ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﻱ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﻳﻚ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭﺳﺘﺎﻧﺶ ﻣﺸﻐﻮﻝ ﺧﻮﺭﺩﻥ ﻏﺬﺍ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﺏ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺣﺮﻛﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻰء ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻝ‬ ‫ﺭﻓﺘﻨﺪ‪) .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻬﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻟﻜﺒﻴﺎﺩﺱ( ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻠﻘﺔ ﻣﺪ ّﻭﺭ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﺟﺪﺍ ﺷﺪ ﻭ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻮﺩﺓ »ﮔﻮﺷﺖ ُﻣﺮﺩﻩ« ﺷﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺮﻙ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺑﻪ »ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻰ«‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻰ ّ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺎﺕ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺘﻮ ّﻗﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻳﻚ »ﻭﺍ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻝ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻭﺳﺘﺎﻧﺶ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﻛﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻭ ﺧﻔﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ‬
‫ﺭﻭﻧﺪﻩ«‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﺳﺮﺍﻳﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﺑﺴﺎ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻴﺴﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺣﺎﻃﻪ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﺎ »ﻧﻴﺴﺖ« ﻛﻪ ﺭﻣﺰ ﺟﺬﺍﺑﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻍ ﺟﺘﺴﻴﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻮﺍﺭﻳﺎﻧﺶ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ‪ .‬ﺣﻮﺍﺭﻳﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻋﻴﺴﻲ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‪ .‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻣﺘﻮ ّﻗﻒ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺣﺮﻛﺎﺕ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﺧﻄﺮ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪﺵ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﺏ ﺭﻓﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺣﻠﻘﺔ ﻣﺪ ّﻭﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﺭ ﻋﻴﺴﻲ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻳﻚ »ﺳﻘﻮﻁ« ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺳﺰﺍﻥ ﭼﻪ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ؟ ﺳﺰﺍﻥ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺮﻙ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻠﻴﺐ‬ ‫ﭼﻨﺒﺮﻩ ﺯﺩ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺍﺵ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻋﻴﺴﻲ ﺑﻰ ّ‬
‫ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﺭﺍ »ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ« ﺑﺴﺎﺯﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ »ﻧﻮﺭ«ﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﺍﻋﺼﺎﺏ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﻠﻴﺐ! ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻋﻼﻗﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﺗﻦ ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺑﺮ ﭼﺸﻢﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻣﻐﺰ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻗﺼﺎﺏ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺤﻜﻤﻰ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺳﻼﺧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ّ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﻋﻮﺕ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻜﻰ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﺍﺟﺮﺍ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺗﻦ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺗﺼﻠﻴﺐ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ؛ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻠﻴﺐ ﺍﻟﺒ ّﺘﻪ ﻣﺨﺘﺺ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﮔﻮﺷﺖ ﻭ ﭘﻮﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﺍﻋﺼﺎﺏ‪ .‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺩﺭﻫﻢﺁﻣﻴﺨﺘﮕﻰ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻧﻘّﺎﺷﻰ ﻭ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻧﻘّﺎﺷﺎﻥ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﻭ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻭ ﺗﻠﻘّﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻣﻴﺰﺓ ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﺰﺍﺝ ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎ‪ .‬ﺑﻴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺳﺰﺍﻥ‬ ‫»ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻘّﺎﺷﻰ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺑﺪﻥ ﻧﻮﺭ ﻭ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺳﻴﻮﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻰ ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﺮﺟﻊ ﺍ ّﻭﻟﻴﻦ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻴﺖ ﺷﻜﻞ‬
‫ﺭﻧﮓ )ﺍﻣﭙﺮﺳﻴﻮﻥﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻧﻄﺒﺎﻋﺎﺕ( ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﻋﻜﺲ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺣ ّﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺳﺘﺨﻮﺵ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻭ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻛﮋﺭﻳﺨﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪،‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪41 1393‬‬

‫ﺍﻣﺮ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﻚ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻰ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻴﺐ‪ .‬ﺭﻧﮓ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻳﺖ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺭﻭﺡ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 18«.‬ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ »ﺭﻭﺡ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻫﻮﺍ‪ .‬ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ 13«.‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ‬
‫ﻃﺐ ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻧﻰ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻧﻔﺲ ﻭ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺭﺍﻩ ﺑﺒﺮﺩ؟ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺑﺨﺎﺭﻯ« ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ّ‬ ‫ﺗﻨﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻧﻘّﺎﺷﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺗﻨﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺭﻭﺡ ﺑﺨﺎﺭﻯ ﻭ »ﺟﺴﻢ ﻓﻠﻜﻰ« ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻴﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺑﻴﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﺳﺮﺍﻳﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﭘﺲ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻧﻮﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﮔﻮﺷﺖ ّ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺭﺍﻩ ﺫﻫﻨﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ِﺟﺮﻡ ﻓﻠﻚ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺑﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻛﮋﺭﻳﺨﺘﻰ ﭘﺮﻫﻴﺰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻓﺮﺍﺧﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻛﮋﺭﻳﺨﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﻮﺗﺎﻩﺗﺮ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ؟ ﺁﻳﺎ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﺪﺓ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺑﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﭼﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺭﻭﻧﺪﮔﻰ‪ .‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺳﻄﻮﺡ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ‬
‫ﻭ ﭼﺮﺍﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻮﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻴﺎﻧﻰ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺍﺑﻦﺳﻴﻨﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ »ﻧﻔﺲ«‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ »ﻫﺮ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻭ ﻫﺮ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻧﺒﺎﺷﺘﻪﺷﺪﻩ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻳﺎ ﻧﻔﺲ‪ ،‬ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ »ﺑﺪﻧﻰ ﻟﺰﻭﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ« ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻟﺨﺘﻪﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻨﮓ ﺁﻫﻚ‪ 14«.‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﭘﺮﺳﻴﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻳﺎﺩ ﻧﻤﻰﺁﻭﺭﻳﻢ؟ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻳﺎﺩ ﻧﻴﺎﻭﺭﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻔﺲ‬ ‫ﺳﻄﻮﺡ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺒﺎﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻪ ﺳﺎﺯﻭﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻟﺨﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ؟‬
‫ﻓﻠﻜﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻪﺍﺵ ﭼﺸﻢ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻪﺍﺵ ﮔﻮﺵ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻪﺍﺵ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﺣﻮﺍﺱ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻟﺐﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﺮﺍﻑ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺔ ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺳﻄﻮﺡ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻨﻰ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻛﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻛﺮﻩﺍﻯﺍﺵ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻘﻮﻳﺖﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﻰ ّ‬ ‫ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻭﻗﻔﻪﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﻢ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮﺳﺎ ِﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻰ‪ ،‬ﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﻭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﻤﺮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻭ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻮﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻏﻢ‬ ‫ﺑﺨﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﻰ ّ‬ ‫ﺧﺸﻮﻧﺘﺶ ﺑﺎﺯﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ 15«.‬ﺑﺪﻳﻦﺳﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺤﺚ »ﺣﺮﻛﺖ« ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺗﻨﮓﻧﻈﺮﻯﻫﺎ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﺴﻞﺷﺎﻥ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﻣﻨﻘﺮﺽ ﻧﺸﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺁﻏﺎﺯﻳﺪﻳﻢ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺷﺪﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺘﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺁﻣﻮﺯﻩﺷﺎﻥ ﺍﺻﻼﺣﺎﺗﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺑﺮ ﻧﺠﻮﻡ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﺑﺤﺚ »ﺍﻧﺰﻭﺍ«ﻯ ﺟﺬﺍﺑﻰ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺶﺗﺮ ﻛﺮﺩﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‬
‫ﺗﺼﺮﻑﺁﻭﺭﻧﺪﺓ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻓﻼﻛﻰ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺒﻴﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻓﻼﻛﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ّ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻯ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻳﻮﺭﺵﺁﻭﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺳﻮژﻩ‪ .‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﻃﺒﻖ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻳﺎ ﻣﺠﺎﻟﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ؟ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩ »ﺣﺮﻛﺖ«ﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﻭ ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﻨﺎ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺩﻟﺒﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ »ﮔﺮﺩﺵ ﺭﻭﺯﺍﻧﺔ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ«‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺴﺖ‬
‫ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‪ ،‬ﻫﻢ ﺭﻭﺡ ﺑﺨﺎﺭﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻴﻢ ﻭ ﻫﻢ‬ ‫ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﻪ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻪﻛﻨﺞ ﺍﻧﺰﻭﺍ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ؟ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ‬
‫ﺟﺮﻡ ﺍﻓﻼﻛﻰ‪ .‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻀﺎﻋﻒ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺰﻭﺍﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻜﺖ ﺗﺸﺨﻴﺺ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪» :‬ﺑﻜﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪﻣﻮﺳﻴﻘﻰ‬
‫ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﭼﺸﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﺸﻤﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﻫﻴﭻﮔﺎﻩ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻧﺒﻮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺮﺩﺵ ﺭﻭﺯﺍﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺴﺖ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻣﻰ ﭼﻨﺪ ﻇﺮﻓﻴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﻧﺎﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﻚ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺮﺳﻪﺯﻧﻰ ﻣﺨﺘﺺ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻜﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯﺑﻰﺻﺪﺍ‬
‫ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﻃﻮﺭ ﺩﻣﺪﻣﻰ ﺩﺭ ﮔﺮﺩﺵﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺣ ّﺘﻲ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺍﻳﺮﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻨﺸﻮﺭ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻧﻬﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﻭ ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﻚ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﭘﺮﺳﻪﺯﻧﻰ ﻛﻮﺩﻙ ﺍﻓﻠﻴﺞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 16«.‬ﻳﻚ ﺗﺸﻨﺞ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺻﺪﺍﻣﻨﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ 19«.‬ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻓﻠﻚ ﺑﺨﺎﺭﮔﻮﻧﻪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺪﻥﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺜﻞ ﻛﺮﻡ ﺯﻳﺮ ﭘﺎ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﻧ ّﻘﺎﺷﻰﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﮔﺎﻟﺮﻯ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻮﺯﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻳﻢ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻠّﻖ ﻭ ﺑﻰ ّ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺳﺮﻳﻊ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺣﻠﻘﻪ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻣﺒﺎﺩﺍ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﺯﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﺭﺅﻳﺖﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﻳﻢ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻣﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﻚ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﻮﻗﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﺸﻢ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻥ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﻻﻣﺴﻪﺍﺵ‪ .‬ﺗﺸﻨﺞ‬ ‫ﭘﺎ ﺑﺮﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻓﺸﺎﺭ ﭘﺎ ﺑﺮ ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺭﺅﻳﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻤﺎﺷﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺘﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‬
‫***‬ ‫***‬
‫ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻧﻘﺎﺵ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻓﺮﻡ ﻭ‬
‫»ﻭﻥﮔﻮگ ﺣ ّﺘﻲ‬
‫ﻧﻮﺭ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻭﻓﺎﺩﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﺮﻑﮔﺎﻩ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺷﻜﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻑ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ ّ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯﻧﺎﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺎ »ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﭘﺎ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﮔﺎﻩ ﺳﻮﺳﻮﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺭ ّﺩﭘﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﺭ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ »ﺑﺪﻥ ﺑﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ« ﺑﺮﺳﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﺩﻥ ّ‬ ‫ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺩﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﻫﺴﺖ؟ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ؛ ﻭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡﻫﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ »ﺣﻀﻮﺭ« ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﺣﺲ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻧﺪﻳﺪﻩ ﻭ‬
‫ﻓﻘﻂ ﻳﻜﺠﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺣﺮﻑ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻥ ﺑﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ ﺑﺪﻧﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﺑﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰ ّ‬
‫ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡﻫﺎﻯ ّ‬ ‫ﻧﺸﻨﻴﺪﻩ ﺩﺍﻧﺔ ﮔﻞ‬
‫ﺭﺅﻳﺖﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﻣﺮﺋﻰ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺷﻤﺎﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ »ﺳﻪﻟﺘﻪ«ﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻣﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻭ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ »ﭼﻴﺴﺖ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺍﺳﺮﺍﺭﺁﻣﻴﺰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻥ ﺑﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ »ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ‬
‫ﺁﻓﺘﺎﺑﮕﺮﺩﺍﻥ‪«.‬‬
‫ﻭﻳﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺷ ّﺪﺕ ّ‬
‫ﺳﻪﻟﺘﻪﻫﺎ ﺿﺒﻂ ﻭ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻰ ﺷﻮﺩ؟ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻳﻰ )ﺑﺎ ﻣﺸﺨّ ﺼﺔ ﻧﻮﺭ( ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ« ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﭼﺸﻢ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﺮﻗﻰ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻛﻠّﻴﺖ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻣﻘﻌﺪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺦ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﺪ‪» :‬ﻭﺭﺍﻯ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﻧﻮﺭﺍﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺴﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯﻯ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﺣﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺁﺭﺗﻮ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ ﺍﺷﺘﺒﺎﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ 20«.‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻧﻮﺭﺍﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﺸﻒ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻭ »ﺑﺪﻥ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡﺍﺵ« ﻧﺎﻣﻴﺪ‪ 17«.‬ﺁﻳﺎ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻛﺴﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻫﻢ ﻭﺣﺪﺕﺑﺨﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻢ ﻛﺜﺮﺕﺳﺎﺯ‪ .‬ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﻭ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫»ﺑﺪﻥ ﺑﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ« ﺭﺍ ﻛﺸﻒ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﺘﻮﻥ ﺁﺭﺗﻮ ﺍﺳﺖ؟ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺗﺎ‬
‫ﻭﺣﺪﺕ؛ ﻭ ﻛﺜﺮﺕﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﺭ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺶﺗﺮ‬ ‫ﺑﺸﻮﺩ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪ ﻣﺮﺍﺩ ﺍﺯ »ﻛﺸﻒ« ﺍﻳﻦﺟﺎ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﭼﻪ‪ .‬ﻛﺸﻒ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺍﺟﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻳﺎﺩ ﻛﺮﺩﻳﻢ ﻭ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻏﻴﺮﻧﻮﺭﺍﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺷﺘﺒﺎﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻥ ﺑﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻛﺸﻒ ﺍﻳﺪﺓ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺑﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ؟ ﻫﺮﭼﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ‪» ،‬ﺑﺪﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻮﺭﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ« ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺳﺮﻧﺨﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻼﻡ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻮﺭ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻫﻢ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻢ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻫﺴﺖ‪» :‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺴﺖﻭﺟﻮﻯ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺍ ّﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﻭﺭﺍﻯ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪42‬‬

 ‫ﺭﻭﻯ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻣﺤﻘّﻖ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﺻﻔﺮ ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﻣﻰﭘﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺪﺭ »ﺑﺴﺎﻃﺖ« ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭ‬
‫ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﻪ »ﻧﻴﺮﻭـﺁﺷﻨﺎ«ﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻨﻮﺯ ﺳﺮﮔﺮﻡ‬ ‫ﺷﻢ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩ ﻣﺘﻀﺎﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺮﺍﺭﺁﻣﻴﺰ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﻰ ﺑﺎ ّ‬
‫ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﺭﻳﺘﻢ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ؟ ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻳﻦﻃﻮﺭ ﺑﺸﻮﺩ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ‬ ‫ﺣﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺩﻭ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ »ﻭﺣﺪﺕ« ﻭ »ﻛﺜﺮﺕ« ﺭﺍ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻪﻟﺘﻪﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺤﺚ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺳﻪﻟﺘﻪﻫﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻪ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺳﻮﺳﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺎﺭﺓ ﺩﻳﺮﺁﺷﻨﺎﻯ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺑﺎ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ« ﺩﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺭﻳﺘﻢ »ﻓ ّﻌﺎﻝ ﻭ ﻣﻨﻔﻌﻞ ﻭ ﻣﻼﺯﻡ« ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ؛ ﻭ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻪﻟﺘﻪﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﺭ‪ .‬ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭ‪ ،‬ﺳﻪﻟﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﻣﺪﻳﻮﻥ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻧﻮﺭﻧﺪ‬
‫»ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺍﺳﺮﺍﺭﺁﻣﻴﺰ« ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﺦ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﺑﻪ ﻭﻯ ﺣﻖ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻭ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥﺷﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺳﺮﺍﺭﺁﻣﻴﺰ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺍﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰﺍﺵ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻪﻟﺘﻪﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﻧﺪﻛﻰ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫»ﺍﺱ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻪﻟﺘﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ّ .‬‬
‫‪21‬‬
‫ﻧﻮﺭﻯ »ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻭ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﺩﺭﺁﻣﻴﺨﺘﻪ« ﺗﻦ ﺑﺪﻫﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺤﺚ »ﻣﻼﺯﻡ«‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻧﻮﺭ ﻭ ﺭﻧﮓ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﺟﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎ‪«.‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻤﺮﻧﮓ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺪﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺷﻮﺭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺷﻮﻳﻢ‬
‫ﻭﺣﺪﺕﺳﺎﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺧﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺶ ﺑﻴﺎﻳﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﺎ ﺧﻄﺎﺑﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﺠﻠﺴﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﺭ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﻪﺍﺵ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻭ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﺭﺍ‬
‫***‬ ‫ﺑﺸﻨﻮﻳﻢ‪» :‬ﺳﻪﻟﺘﻪ‪ :‬ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺭ ﻭ ﺭﻧﮕﻰ ﻋﺎﻡ ﻭ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺤﺚ ﺳﻪﻟﺘﻪﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﮔﺰﻳﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺩﻭﺭ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺎﺯ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﻳﺘﻤﻴﻚ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻭ ﺩﻭﻣﻴﻦ »ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ« ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ ﻭ ﺗﻮ ّﻗﻌﻰ ﺟﺰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ »ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ«‬ ‫ﺍﺗّﺤﺎﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺼﺮﻑﺷﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻘّﺎﺵ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔ ّﺘﺶ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﭘﻰ ّ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻢ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﻯ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻃﻠﺴﻢ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎ ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺭﺅﻳﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻧﻮﺭ‪ .‬ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭـﻫﺴﺘﻰﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺳﻴﺎﻩ ﺳﻘﻮﻁ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮـﻃﻠﺴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺐ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺭﻧﮓـﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺳﻔﻴﺪ‬
‫ﺟﻮﺵ ﻭ ﺍﺛﺮﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﻘّﺎﺵ‬ ‫ﺳﻘﻮﻁ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﻜﻴﻚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ...‬ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺑﺪﻳﺖ ﺗﻚﺭﻧﮓ ﺑﺪﻝ‬
‫‪22‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﺮﺽ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺮﺩﻳﻢ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﻓﻀﺎـﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﻰﻛﺮﺍﻥ ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪«.‬‬
‫ﺟﺬﺍﺑﻴﺖ ﺳﺆﺍﻝ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯ‪ ،‬ﺣﻤﻠﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺟ ّﺬﺍﺏ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯ ّ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﭘﺎﻓﺸﺎﺭﺍﻧﺔ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺿ ّﺪﻫﮕﻠﻰ ﺑﺮ »ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻯ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ«‬
‫»ﻓﻼﻥ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟«‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﺑﻪ »ﺩﺳﺖ« ﻧﻘّﺎﺵ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﭼﺸﻢ ﺍﻭ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﺻﻞ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﺮ ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪» ،‬ﻭﺣﺪﺕ« ﺳﻤﺞﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﮕﺮﺩ ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻃﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺑﻰﺁﻥ ﻧﻘّﺎﺷﻰ‬ ‫ﻛﻤﺮﻧﮓ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻧﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﻭ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻗﺮﻳﻦ ﻫﻢ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﮔﻔﺖﻭﮔﻮﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪» :‬ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻕ«! ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺴﺎﺭ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ »ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻕ«‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﺔ ﻭﺣﺪﺗﻰ ﭘﻴﺶﭘﺬﻳﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺗﺸﺨﻴﺺ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﭼﻪ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎﺩﺁﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﻻﺯﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ ﺷﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﻭ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻣﻨﺘﻘﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﻴﺪﻭﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺖ »ﻭﺣﺪﺕ«‬
‫ﺟﺬﺍﺑﻴﺘﺶ‬‫ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ّ‬
‫ﺩﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺧﺒﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺗّﺤﺎﺩ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﻭ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻧﻘﺎﺵ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺧﻼﺹ ﺷﻮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﺳﺘﺎﻯ ﺗﻌﻘﻴﺐ ﻛﺎﻣﻴﺎﺑﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﻭ ﭘﺮﻭﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺰﻭﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺮﻩﮔﺎﻩ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺁﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﻭ ﮔﺴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺷﺘﻴﺎﻕ ﻭﺍﻓﺮ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺷﻰء ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻥ ﻧﻘّﺎﺵ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻀﺎ ﻣﻰﭼﺮﺧﺪ ﻭ ﻣﻰﺟﻨﺒﺪ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺘﺎﻕ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﺣﺎﻓﻈﺔ ﻏﻴﺮﺍﺭﺍﺩﻯ« ﭘﺮﻭﺳﺖ ﻭ »ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯ«‬
‫ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺣ ّﺘﻲ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﻫﺮﺩﻭ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻢ ﺑﺮ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻧﻘّﺎﺵ؛ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﻓﺮﺍﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﻳﻚ ﻓﻴﮕﻮ ِﺭ ﺩﺭـﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻭ ﮔﺴﻴﺨﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﺍﻥﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯ ﺑﺮ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪﺧﺼﻮﺹ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻪﻟﺘﻪﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻪﺗﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖﮔﺮﻯ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ »ﺩﺳﺖ« ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎ ﻣﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺳﻪﺗﺎﻳﻰ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ »ﻓ ّﻌﺎﻝـﻣﻨﻔﻌﻞـﻣﻼﺯﻡ«‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺰﻭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻘﻴﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺘﮕﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮﺩﻭ ﺑﺮ »ﭼﺸﻢ« ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍﻳﻦﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩ ﻭﺣﺪﺕﺳﺎﺯ ﻧﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺩﻭﺵ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ‪،‬ﺍﻳﺴﺘﺎﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﺩﺳﺖ ﭼﻪﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺘﮕﺮ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦﻗﺪﺭ ﺧﻮ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ »ﻣﻼﺯﻡ« ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ‪» ،‬ﻣﻼﺯﻡ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﻏﺮﻕ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﺗﺤﺖ ﭼﻴﺮﮔﻰ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﭼﺸﻢ ﻭ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻧﻮﺭﻫﺎ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﻳﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻭﺯﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ّ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺷﺐ‬ ‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻕ«‪ ،‬ﺩﺳﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺍﺭﻳﺎﺳﻮﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻰ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ 23«.‬ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ِ‬
‫ﺑﺤﺚ‬
‫ﺻﺒﺢ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﺴﺨﻴﺮ ﭼﺸﻢ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻕ ﻭ ﺗﺼﺎﺩﻑ ﻣﻰﺟﻨﺒﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻥ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻰ ﺗﻐﻴﻴ ِﺮ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻓ ّﻌﺎﻝ ﻭ ﻣﻨﻔﻌﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﻣﻼﺯ ِﻡ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ »ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ« ﻣﻨﻘﻄﻊ ﮔﺸﺘﻪ‪» .‬ﻣﺜﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺤﺚ »ﺳﻘﻮﻁ« ﻛﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﻴﻢ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻇﺮ ﺑﺎ »ﻋﺪﻡ« ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻛﻨﺘﺮﻝ ﺁﺩﻡ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰـﻧﻮﺭﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻪ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻋﻼﻣﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﺎ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﻨﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﭼﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﺟﺰ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺑﮕﺬﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻨﺘﻈﺮ ﺑﻤﺎﻧﻴﻢ ﻟﺤﻈﺔ‬
‫ﻣﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻼﻣﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒ ًﺎ ﻛﻮﺭ ﺩﺳﺘﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺳﻘﻮﻁ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺳﺮﺑﺮﺳﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻔﻬﻤﻴﻢ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻭ ﻣﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻔﻮﺫ ﻧﺎﮔﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺍﺧﻞ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﺪﺍﺭﻯ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﺍﺳﻴﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻪﺍﻳﻢ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﻣﻰﺯﻯ ﺍﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺁﻳﺎ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ »ﻣﻼﺯﻡ« ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺧﺒﺮ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ 24«.‬ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻰﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺭﻋﺸﻪﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺣ ّﺪ ﺁﻥ ﺳﻘﻮﻁ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺑﺪﻫﺪ؟ ﺁﻳﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺧﻮﻳﺸﺎﻭﻧﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ »ﺣﺎﻓﻈﺔ ﻏﻴﺮﺍﺭﺍﺩﻯ« ﻣﺎﺭﺳﻞ ﭘﺮﻭﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺮﺩﻭ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻓﻘﻰ ﺳﺎﻗﻂﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻒ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻼﺯﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎ‬
‫ﻭ ﻧﻘّﺎﺵ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﺍﻳﻦﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺎﮔﻬﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ »ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻕ« ﻓﺮﻭﺍﻓﺘﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ؟ ﺍﻳﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺍﺑﻴﺪﻩﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺛﺎﺑﺖﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ »ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ« ﺩﺳﺖ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖﮔﺮﻯ ﻭ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺭﻳﺘﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﻓ ّﻌﺎﻝ ﻭ ﻣﻨﻔﻌﻞ ﺭﺍ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻰ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﻌﻴﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ »ﺩﺳﺖ« ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯ‪» ،‬ﻛﻮﺭ«‬ ‫ﺳﻘﻮﻁ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ »ﻣﻼﺯﻡ« ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻟﺤﻈﺎﺕ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﺳﻘﻮﻁ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻼ »ﭘﺎ«‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﺍﻋﻀﺎﻯ ﺑﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺻﻔﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﺳﻘﻮﻁ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪43 1393‬‬

‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﺛ ِﺮ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻛﻮﺭ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﻓﺎﺟﻌﻪ‬ ‫ﮔﻔﺖ؟ ﺁﻳﺎ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﺳﺮﺍﻍ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ »ﭘﺎ« ﺭﺍ ﺩﭼﺎﺭ ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻕ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺁﺷﻮﺏ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺮﻕ ﻛﻠﻴﺸﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﺪﺍﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺷﻜﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﻣﺜﻞ‬ ‫)ﺗﺼﺎﺩﻑ( ﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺻﺤﺮﺍ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺎﺣﻴﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺻﺤﺮﺍ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻠﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﭘﺎ ﻧﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ؟ ﻓﻘﺮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻣﺎﻥ ﭘﺮﻭﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻏﺮﻳﺒﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺤﺚﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺎﺭﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺗﻜﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻮﺳﺖ ﻛﺮﮔﺪﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻳﺮ ﻣﻴﻜﺮﻭﺳﻜﻮپ‬ ‫ﻣﺜﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ّ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺷﮕﻔﺖﺁﻭﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺧﺎﻟﻰ‬
‫‪26‬‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻛﻠﻪ ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ «.‬ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ »ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﻭﻯ »ﺩﺭ ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ« ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﺵ ِ‬
‫ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻥ ﻧﺎﮔﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺿﺮﺑﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻗﻠﻢﻣﻮ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﺩﺭ ﻛﺸﻤﻜﺶ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻏﻢﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﻢ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺣﻴﺎﻁ‬
‫ﻧﺎﻣﻌﻘﻮﻝ‪ ،‬ﻏﻴﺮﺍﺭﺍﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﺎﺩﻓﻰ‪ ،‬ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻗﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪27«.‬ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻮﺟﻪ ﺍﺗﻮﻣﺒﻴﻠﻰ ﻧﺸﺪﻡ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺧﺎﻧﺔ ﮔﺮﻣﺎﻧﺖ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩﻡ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺣﻮﺍﺳﻢ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ ّ‬
‫ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎﺩﺩﻫﻨﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ »ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ«ﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ »ﺍﻣﺮ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺁﻣﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺷﻨﻴﺪﻥ ﻓﺮﻳﺎﺩ ﺭﺍﻧﻨﺪﻩ ﻫﻤﻴﻦﻗﺪﺭ ﻓﺮﺻﺖ ﻛﺮﺩﻡ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩﻡ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻊ« ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﺔ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﺑﻜﺸﻢ ﻭ ﻭﻗﺖ ﭘﺲﺭﻓﺘﻦ ﭘﺎﻳﻢ ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻨﮕﻔﺮﺵ‬
‫ﺁﺷﻮﺏ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻛﻞ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﺑﺮﻧﻤﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﭘﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻠﻨﺪﻯ ﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻃﺮﻓﺶ ﺍﻧﺒﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻞ ﺩﻳﺪﺍﺭﻯ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﺍﺗﻴﻮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﭼﻨﺪ ﺗﻚﺿﺮﺑﻪﻯ ﻗﻠﻢﻣﻮ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﺧﻮﺩﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﺯﻳﺎﻓﺘﻢ ﻭ ﭘﺎ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺳﻨﮕﻰ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺘﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻛﻤﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﮓ‬
‫ﺗﺰﺭﻳﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺼﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻔﻊ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻣﺨﺪﻭﺵ ﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺎﺭﻯﺍﺵ ﻓﺮﻭﺭﻓﺘﻪﺗﺮ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺔ ﺩﻟﺴﺮﺩﻯﺍﻡ ﻣﺤﻮ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺷﺎﺩﻛﺎﻣﻰ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺑﺮ »ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ« ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺣﺲ ﻛﺮﺩﻡ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪﻥ ﺩﺭﺧﺘﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﻁ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺮﻳﻂﮔﺮﻯ ﻧﻘّﺎﺷﺎﻥ ﮔﺮﻳﺰﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻠﻴﺸﻪﻫﺎ ﻣﺸﺨّ ﺺ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﺩﺷﻰ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﺑﻠﺒﻚ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮﻡ ﺁﻣﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺶﺗﺮ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩﻡ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺗّﻜﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺣ ّﺪ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻗﻮﺱ ﺧﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺭﺗﻨﻮﻳﻞ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﭼﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﻣﺰﺓ ﻛﻠﻮﭼﺔ ﻣﺎﺩﻟﻦ ﺧﻴﺴﻴﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭ ﺳﺒﻚ »ﻧﻘّﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ« ﻭ »ﺍﻛﺴﭙﺮﺳﻴﻮﻧﻴﺴﻢ‬ ‫ﭼﺎﻯ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺩﺍﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ« ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻘّﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺘﻪﺍﻡ‪ 25«.‬ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻕ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮﺭﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﺍﺗﻮﻣﺒﻴﻞ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎﺯ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﻳﻚ ﺭﻣﺰﮔﺎﻥ ﺻﺮﻓﺎ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻓﺮﻳﺎﺩ ﺭﺍﻧﻨﺪﻩ‪ .‬ﭘﺎﻫﺎ »ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻪ« ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﻳﺎﺩ ﺭﺍﻧﻨﺪﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥﻫﻢ‬
‫ﺑﺼﺮﻯ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻛﺴﭙﺮﺳﻴﻮﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭ ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻪ ﺑﺮﺁﻣﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﻯ ﺳﻨﮕﻰ »ﻓﺮﻭﺭﻓﺘﻪﺗﺮ« ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﺳﻨﮓﻫﺎ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺁﺷﻮﺏ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﻂ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺮﺍﺑﮕﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻧﺎﮔﻬﺎﻥ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺷﺎﺩﻛﺎﻣﻰ ﻧﺎﮔﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻠﻮﭼﻪ ﺧﻴﺴﻴﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﺸﻮﺩ »ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ«‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﻛﺎﻣﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦﺍﺵ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﭼﺎﻯ ﮔﺸﺎﻳﻨﺪﺓ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﺔ ﻏﻴﺮﺍﺭﺍﺩﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻣﺎﻥ ﭘﺮﻭﺳﺖ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻤﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻧﺎﻛﺎﻣﻰ ﻣﻔﺼﻞ ﻭ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺮﺍﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﺔ‬
‫ﭘﺎ ﺑﺮﺁﻣﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﭘﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺳﺎ ِﺯ ﻓﺮﻳﺎ ِﺩ ﺭﺍﻧﻨﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﺓ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﺎﻧﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻭ ﻣﺂﺧﺬ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻯ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﻭﻯ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ؛ ﻭ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺑﺎ »ﺳﻘﻮﻁ« ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ِ ،‬‬
‫‪ .1‬ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﺲ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‪ :‬ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻭﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺑﺎﺑﻚ‬ ‫ﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻨﮕﻰ ﻛﻪ »ﻓﺮﻭﺭﻓﺘﻪﺗﺮ« ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺰﻭﺍ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ّ‬
‫ﺳﻠﻴﻤﻰﺯﺍﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﺭﻭﺯﺑﻬﺎﻥ‪.1390 ،‬‬ ‫ﺳﻨﮓﻫﺎ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺳﻨﮕﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺁﻣﺪﻩﺗﺮ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﻭ ﺳﻪ ﺻﻔﺤﺔ‬
‫‪ .2‬ﺩﺭ ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ‪ :‬ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺭﺳﻞ‬ ‫ﺑﻌﺪﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻧﻴﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﺒﻴﻨﻴﺪ ﺭﺍﻭﻯ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ »ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ«ﻯ‬
‫ﭘﺮﻭﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻣﻬﺪﻯ ﺳﺤﺎﺑﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻣﺮﻛﺰ‪.1382 ،‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻧﺎﮔﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ »ﭘﺎﻯ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﮔﺸﺘﻪ«ﻯ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺮﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺍﻭ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺮﺍ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺷﮕﻔﺖﺯﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻥ ﺗﻼﺵ ﭘﺎﻓﺸﺎﺭﺍﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺮﺝ‬
‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺖﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻬﻢﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .14‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.86‬‬ ‫* ﺩﻛﺘﺮﺍﻱ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ‬ ‫ﺑﺤﺚ »ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻕ« ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺎﺩﮔﻰ ﺭﻫﺎ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﺫﻭﻕ‬
‫‪ .15‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.89‬‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺑﻴﺖ ﻣﺪﺭﺱ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪﺍﻯ ﻭ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰﺍﺵ ﻗﻄﻌ ًﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺼﺎﺣﺒﻪﻫﺎ ﮔﻔﺘﻪ‬
‫‪ .16‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.90‬‬ ‫‪ .1‬ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﺲ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‪ :‬ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺣﺴﺎﺳﻴﺖ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻯ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮﻫﺎ ﺍﺟﺮﺍ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺗﺼﺎﺩﻑ ﻭ ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻕ ّ‬
‫‪ .17‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.96‬‬ ‫ﺹ ‪.35‬‬ ‫ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻜﻠﻴﻒ ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭ ﺣﻮﺯﻩ ﻣﺸﺨّ ﺺ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﻮﺯﺓ ﺑﺪﻥ‬
‫‪ .18‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.99‬‬ ‫‪ .2‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.109‬‬ ‫ﻧﻘّﺎﺵ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻮﺯﺓ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯﺷﺪﻩ ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺘﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ‬
‫‪ .19‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.105‬‬ ‫‪ .3‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﺩﻭ ﺳﺆﺍﻝ ﻣﻬﻢ ﺍﻳﻦﺟﺎ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻧﻘّﺎﺵ‬
‫‪ .20‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.117‬‬ ‫‪ .4‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.111‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺍﻣﻦ »ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻕ« ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ‬
‫‪ .21‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.139‬‬ ‫‪ .5‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.137‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻦﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻕ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ؟ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺳﺆﺍﻝ‬
‫‪ .22‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.140‬‬ ‫‪ .6‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.61‬‬
‫ﺍ ّﻭﻝ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻗﺘﺒﺎﺱ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺼﺎﺣﺒﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ ﺍﻳﻦﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﭘﻴﺶ‬
‫‪ .23‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.125‬‬ ‫‪ .7‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.79‬‬
‫‪ .24‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.157‬‬ ‫‪ .8‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.80‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘّﺎﺷﻰ‪ ،‬ﭘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮ ﻛﻠﻴﺸﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘّﺎﺷﻰ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ‬
‫‪ .25‬ﺩﺭﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺯﺩﺳﺖ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ‪:‬‬ ‫‪ .9‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.39‬‬ ‫ﺧﺎﻟﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮ ﻛﻠﻴﺸﺔ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﺍﺗﻴﻮ ﻛﻪ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻋﻜﺎﺳﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.210‬‬ ‫‪ .10‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.43‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﻫﺠﻮﻡ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻩ ﻭ ُﻗﺮﻕﺍﺵ ﻛﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﻘّﺎﺵ ﺷﻜﺴﺘﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ُﻗﺮﻕ ﻭ‬
‫‪ .26‬ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﺲ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‪ :‬ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ‪،‬‬ ‫‪ .11‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.184‬‬ ‫ﺳﺘﺮﺩﻥ ﻭ ﺯﺩﻭﺩﻥ ﻭ ﺗﺎﺭﺍﻧﺪﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻠﻴﺸﻪﻫﺎﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺑﺮﺳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺹ ‪.156‬‬ ‫‪ .12‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.45‬‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺍﺗّﻔﺎﻕ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ‪ ،‬ﺩﺳﺖﻛﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﻴﻜﻦ‪ ،‬ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﺤﻘّﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫‪ .27‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.157‬‬ ‫‪ .13‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.84‬‬ ‫ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺑﺎ »ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ«‪ .‬ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ‪،‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬

‫ﭼﻜﻴﺪﻩ‪ :‬ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻓﻠﻴﻜﺲ ﮔﻮﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ‪ :‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺳﻮﻯ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺳﻪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ )ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﺆﻟﻒ ﻭ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩ(‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻣﺮﺳﻮﻡ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ ﻭ ﻏﻤﮕﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺷﺨﺼﻰ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻭ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﻮﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺗﻼﻗﻰ ﮔﺎﻩ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰـﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﻴﻄﺎﻧﻰ ﻓﺎﺷﻴﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﺘﺎﻟﻴﻨﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰﺑﺨﺶ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ‬
‫ﻣﺮﺳﻮﻡ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺣﻜﻢ ﻭ ﺩﺳﺘﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﺳﻪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ﺳﺮﺳﭙﺮﺩﮔﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﻴﻄﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺭﻭﻯ‬
‫ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺧﻼﻝ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ ﻭ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺳﺮﺣﺪ ﺑﻰﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺑﻨﺪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ‬
‫ﻭ ﻧﺎﺷﺎﺩﻯ ﻣﺎ ﺑﻴﻔﺰﺍﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺷﺎﺩﺍﻥ ﻭ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰﺑﺨﺶ‬ ‫ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺿﻤﻨ ًﺎ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﮔﺮﻭﻫﻰ ﺁﺩﻡ ﺑﺎ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﮋﺍﺩﻯ‬
‫ﻭ ﺩﻳﻨﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺻﺮﻑ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﺮﺩﻣﺎﻥ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻣﺮﺩﻡ ﻣﻨﻘﺎﺩ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯ‪ ،‬ﺣﺘﻰ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻳﻚ ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺍ ّﻣﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻳﻚ ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﺑﺰﺭگ‬ ‫ﺷﺎﭘﻮﺭ ﺑﻬﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﻢ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺗﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﻋﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ‬ ‫‪Shapour.behyan@gmail.com‬‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﻢ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺼﺪﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ‬
‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﭼﻬﺮﻩ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﭘﺪﻳﺪ ﺷﺪﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﻧﺎﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻮ ﺷﺪﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﻩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬

‫ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻳﺎ ﺳﻪ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﺔ‬

‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺭﻭﺑﺮﻭﻳﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﺁﻧﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻴﻢ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻟﻤﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺍﻓﺴﺮﺩﻩ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﭼﻨﮕﺎﻝ ﭘﺪﺭﻯ ﺑﻰﺭﺣﻢ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭﻗﺘﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺑﻴﻤﻪ‬
‫ﺳﻮﺍﻧﺦ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺮﺍﻥ ﺗﻠﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺎﻣﺰﺩﻯﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺎﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻭ ﺧﺠﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ‬
‫‪Kafka:‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺸﻮﺭﺷﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺻﺎﺩﻕ ﻫﺪﺍﻳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺸﻮﺭ ﻣﺎ‬
‫‪Toward a Minor‬‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺰ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﻛﺲ ﺑﺮﻭﺩ ﺩﻭﺳﺖ‬
‫‪Literature (Theory‬‬
‫ﺍﻭ ﺳﻌﻰ ﻛﺮﺩ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺴﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮﻯ ﺧﺪﺍ‪،‬‬
‫‪and History of‬‬
‫ﺗﺮﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﺪﺍﻧﺲ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭﺵ ﺷﺮﺡ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺍﻕ ﻭ ﺷﺮﺡ‬
‫‪Literature), Gilles‬‬
‫ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﻫﻮﺕ ﺩﻧﻴﺎﻯ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ‬
‫‪Deleuze, Felix‬‬
‫ﮔﺎﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﻴﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫‪Guattari, U.S.A:‬‬
‫ﻣﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎﻳﻰ ﺷﺎﺩﺍﻥ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻣﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻗﻮﻯ ﭘﻨﺠﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪University of‬‬
‫ﺍﻭ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ّﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎـﺩﺭﺍﻛﻮﻻ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﻥﺁﺷﺎﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‬
‫‪Minnesota, seventh‬‬
‫ﻋﺰﺏ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎﻯ ﺍﺗﻮﺑﻴﻮﮔﺮﺍﻓﻴﻚ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﺎ‬
‫‪printing, 2003.‬‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﻓﺮﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ »ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺏ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪45 1393‬‬

‫ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﮔﺮﻩ ﮔﺎﻩ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﮕﻠﻮ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎﻳﻰ« ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﻫﺪﻑ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﺭﺳﺎﻧﺪﻥ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺗﺎﻕ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﻳﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﻓﺎﺷﻴﺴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﻮﺭﻭﻛﺮﺍﺳﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻳﻚ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻏﻴﺮﺷﺨﺼﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ «.‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﻭ ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻃﺮﻑ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻑ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﺩﻋﺎﻯ ﻣﻌﻄﻮﻑ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﺭﺍ ﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺪﻓﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺳﻮﺳﻴﺎﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺁﻧﺎﺭﺷﻴﺴﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻄﻮﻑ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ‪1‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺁﺩﻡ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﮔﺎﻩ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﻩ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺻﺮﻑ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻨﻴﻪﺍﻯ ﺿﻌﻴﻒ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻘﺎﺩ ﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﻓﺎﺷﻴﺴﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻮﺭﻭﻛﺮﺍﺗﻴﻚ‪ ،‬ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺷﺨﺼﻰﺍﺵ ﺁﺩﻣﻰ ﺷﻜﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﺍﻭ‬
‫ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰﺑﺨﺶ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰﺑﺨﺶ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻄﻮﻑ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻼﻣﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺳﻼﻣﺖ ﺑﺰﺭگ‪ .‬ﺳﻼﻣﺘﻰ ﺷﺎﺩﻯﺁﻓﺮﻳﻦ‪.‬‬
‫ﺧﺎﺹ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﭼﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻨﺒﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻧﺎﺭﺷﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺳﻮﺳﻴﺎﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﻜﻨﻨﺪﮔﻰ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺿﻌﻒ ﺑﻨﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻟﻜﻨﺖ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻮﺯ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﻤﺪﻟﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻨﺒﺶﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺟﺰ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺳﻤﺶ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ ﻣﻼﺣﺖ )‪.(charm‬‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﻭ ﻗﻬﺮﻣﺎﻧﺎﻥ ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﺁﻧﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺳﺒﻚ ﻣﻨﺒﻊ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻼﺣﺖ ﻣﻨﺒﻊ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ْ‬ ‫ْ‬
‫ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﭘﺪﺭ‪ ،‬ﺩﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺳﺮﮔﺬﺷﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﻣﻼﺣﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻮﺑﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻧﺮﺳﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﻼﺣﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺘﻮﺟﻪ ﺳﻼﻣﺖ ﻭ ﺳﺮﻭﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻼﺣﺖ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻼ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺎﻣﻪﻫﺎ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﺳﺨﻨﮕﻮ ﻭ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﺳﺨﻦ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻭ ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﻳﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﻣﻼﺣﺖ ﻣﺎ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺑﮕﺬﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻮﺗﺎﻩ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﺄﻳﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻟﺠﺎﺟﺖ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﻧﺎﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ‬
‫ﻗﻬﺮﻣﺎﻧﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻮﺷﻨﺪ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﻫﺪﻑ ﻣﻼﺣﺖ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻭ ﺳﻼﻣﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﺪﻑ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﻫﻢ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ »ﻣﺴﺦ«‪ ،‬ﮔﺮﮔﻮﺍﺭ ﺣﺸﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﺪﻑ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﺒﻚ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﺒﻚ‬
‫ﺗﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺜﻠﺚ ﺧﺎﻧﻮﺍﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻣﺜﻠﺚ ﺍﻗﺘﺪﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺭﻭﻛﺮﺍﺳﻰ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﻭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻼﺣﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‬
‫ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﻟﻰ ﺍﺗﺎﻗﺶ ﺟﻮﻻﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﻪ ﻣﺎﻳﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ ﺍﺩﻳﭙﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﺒﻚ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻟﻜﻨﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻟﻜﻨﺖ‬
‫ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﺎﺭﺵ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺣﻜﻢ ﻣﺮگ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻓﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺳﺒﻚ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻟﻜﻨﺖ ﻭﺍﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺧﻼﻝ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺮ ﺍﺑﻼﻍ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﮔﺮﺩﻥ ﻣﻰﻧﻬﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﺧﺎﻧﻮﺍﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﺭﺳﺎﻧﺪﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺗﺎ ﺣﺪ ﺑﻰ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻳﮕﻰ‪ .‬ﻟﺨﺖ ﻭ ﻋﻮﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻓﻘﻂ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻣﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻣﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻤ ً‬
‫ﻼ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﺨﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺟﺎ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺘﻦ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﻭﺯﺑﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺷﺎﻫﺪ ﻣﻴﻞ ﺳﺮﻛﺸﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩﻯ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺪﻫﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺳﺒﻚ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻣﺮﺳﻮﻡ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺯﻭﻛﺎﺭ ﭼﻴﺪﻣﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻮﺭﻭﻛﺮﺍﺗﻴﻚ ﻭ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ‬ ‫ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻳﻚ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺘﻦ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻳﺮﻟﻨﺪﻯ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻳﺰﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﭘﺬﻳﺮﺩ ﻭ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻗﻄﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻄﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﺭﻭﻣﺎﻧﻴﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺯﺑﺎﻧﻰ ﺟﺰ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﭘﺮﻭﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﺰﺭگ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻴﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺎﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻧﻰ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻛﻪ ﻏﺎﻟﺒ ًﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻧﺎﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺰﻭﻯ ﻭ ﻏﻤﮕﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺯﻳﺒﺎﻳﻰ ﺧﺘﻢ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻊ ﺁﻥ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ 2«.‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺳﺒﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺮﺩﻡ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻳﺎ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺣﻜﻢ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻭ ﺩﺳﺘﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﺓ ﺍﻛﺜﺮﻳﺘﻰ ﺣﺮﻑ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﻨﺪ‪) .‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺷﺪﻡ‪،‬‬
‫ﺷﺨﺼﻰ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺯﺑﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻛﻠﻤﻪ ـ ﻧﻈﻢ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻛﻠﻤﻪ ـ ﺣﻜﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻡ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻛﺮﺩﻡ‪ (.‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺒﻚ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻼﺣﺖ ﻣﺴﺌﻠ ْﻪ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﺮﺩﻥ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺳﺘﻮﺭﺍﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺑﻼﻍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺣﺘﻰ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﺪ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﺍﺩﺍﻯ ﻳﻚ ﺑﭽﻪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﺩﻳﻮﺍﻧﻪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺣﻜﻢ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺎﺗﺎﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﺯﺑﺎﻥ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺯﻥ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﺎ ﻛﺴﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻟﻜﻨﺖ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﻭ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻋﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﻼﻏﻰ ﻭ ﺣﻜﻤﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﮔﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﻳﻨﻬﺎ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺗﺎ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻭ ﺳﻼﺣﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺧﻠﻖ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ‬
‫ﺧﻂ ﮔﺮﻳﺰ ﺩﻭﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺎﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺛﺎﺑﺖﻫﺎ ﺳﺮﻭﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻥ ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻥ ﺯﺑﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺓ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﺁﺭﺗﻮ‪ ،‬ﺭﻧﺞ ﺑﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ‬
‫ﮔﻮﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻧﺤﺮﺍﻑ ﻃﺮﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺿﻤﻨ ًﺎ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ‪ ،‬ﻗﺪﺭﺗﻰ ﻣﻬﻴﺐ ﻭ ﺷﻴﻄﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻠﻴﺴﻪ ﻧﺎﻣﻪ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﺪ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻛﺜﺮﻳﺖ ﻫﻢ ﻫﺴﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻗ َِﺒﻞ ﻣﻜﺎﺗﺒﺎﺕ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻻﺯﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺗﺎﻕ ـ ﺗﺎﺑﻮﺕ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺎﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻛﺜﺮﻳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺎﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﻼﻗﻰ ﮔﺎﻩ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ »ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺁﻧﮕﻠﻮ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎﻳﻰ«‪،‬‬ ‫ﻓﺮﻭﻳﺪﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﺑﺎ ﭘﺪﺭﺵ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺒﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰـﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﺿﻤﻨﻰ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻛﺜﺮﻳﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﭘﺪﺭ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻗﺎﻫﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﭘﺴﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﻤﺎﻕ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺷﺨﺼﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺳﺮﻛﻮﺏ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺲ ﭘﺪﺭ‪ ،‬ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺭﺍﺯﻫﺎﻯ »ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﻛﺜﻴﻒ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﻧﮕﺮﺍﻥ ﺭﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ‬ ‫ـ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺑﺰﺭگﺗﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺪﺭ ﺟﺰء ﻳﺎ ﻛﺎﺭﮔﺰﺍﺭ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‬
‫ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺍﺋﻤ ًﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻮﺩﻛﻰ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎﻯ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻪ ﺟﺎ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﺑﺎﺑﺎ ﻭ ﻣﺎ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻛﻮﺟﻴﺘﻮ‪ ،‬ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻭ ﺗﺸﺨﺺ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎﻯ ﺭﻳﺰﻭﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪46‬‬
 ‫ﺑﻪ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺍﺯ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﺆﻟﻔﺎﻥ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺭﺍﺯﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻮﭼﻜﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺷﻮﻕ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺎﻳﻪ‬
‫ﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﺑﺎﺷﻜﻮﻫﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻛﺎﻟﺒﺪ ﻧﺎﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﺸﺮﻯ ﺗﺮﻭﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ 7.‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻳﺎﺩ ﻣﺎ ﺑﻴﺎﻭﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﮔﺮﻳﺰﻯ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻗﻬﺮﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ »ﺧﺎﺋﻦ« ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺧﺎﺋﻦ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻜﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺪﺍﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻳﺎﺩ ﺭﺍﺯ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﻛﺜﻴﻒ ﺍﺩﻳﭗ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻘﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻨﺪ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺧﺎﺋﻦ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻳﺎﺩ ﺍﺩﻳﭗ ﺷﻬﺮﻳﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﮔﺮﻳﺰﻳﺶ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺎﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ‬
‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ‪ .‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﻴﺎﻧﺖ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ ﻫﺪﻑ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻧﺶ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺷﺪﻧﺶ ﺑﺎ ﺭﺍﺯ ﺑﺰﺭگ‪ .‬ﺭﺍﺯ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ ﻫﺪﻑ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮ ْﺩ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ .‬ﮔﻨﺎﻩ ﻧﺎﺧﺪﺍ ﺍﺣﺎﺏ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﻨﻬﺎﻥ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺑﻰ ﺩﻳﻚ‪ .‬ﻧﻬﻨﮓ ﺳﻔﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﮕﻴﺮﺍﻥ ﭘﻴﺮﻭﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻛﺴﻰ ﻧﻤﻰ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺗﻮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ «.‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺑﻴﻤﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺁﻥ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻧﻬﻨﮓﻫﺎ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻫﻤﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻩ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﻝ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺭﺍﺯ ﻛﻮﭼﻜﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺭﻭﻯ ﺯﻣﻴﻦﺍﻧﺪ؛ ﻣﺴﺘﺒﺪ ﻭ ﻛﺸﻴﺶ‪ْ .‬‬
‫ﺧﻮﺭ ﺷﻜﺎﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ ﺷﻴﻄﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺣﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﺧﻴﺎﻧﺖﺍﺵ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﺑﺮ ﮔﺮﺩ ﻣﺎ ّﻣﺎ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺑﺎ ﻣﻰﭼﺮﺧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺭﺍﺯﺁﻟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﺍﺵ ﺑﺎ ﻟﻮﻳﺘﺎﻥ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻧﺘﺤﺎﺏ ﻫﺪﻑ ﻣﺘﻀﻤﻦ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﻃﻮﺭﻯ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻬﻨﮓ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 8.‬ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺧﻴﺎﻧﺖﺁﻣﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﻛﻦ ﺑﺒﻴﻦ ﭼﻪ ﻗﺪﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺍﺯﻡ ﺳﻨﮕﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻡ‪ .‬ﺭﺍﺯ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﻭ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻭ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻠﻰ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﺭﺳﻴﻮﺱ ﺩﻟﻤﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺍﺧﺘﻪ ﭘﺮﻫﻴﺰﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺍﻭ ﺿﻤﻨ ًﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻫﻢ ﺭﻭ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭﮔﺮﺩﺍﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﭼﻬﺮﻩﻫﺎ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﻫﻢ‪ .‬ﮔﻨﺎﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﮔﺰﺍﺭﻯ ﺳﻤﻴﻨﺎﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺯﻋﺎﻣﺖ ﭘﺎپ‬
‫ﺧﻄﻰ ﺍﺯ ﮔﺮﻳﺰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﮔﺮﻳﺰﻯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺭﺥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺩﻳﭗ ﺷﻬﺮﻳﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﻛﺸﻴﺶ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﻴﺎﺩﻫﺎ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ژﺭژ ﺑﺎﺗﺎﻯ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺳﺮﮔﺮﺩﺍﻧﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻃﻮﻻﻧﻰﺍﺵ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺳﺮﻧﻤﻮﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﮔﺮﺩﺍﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺭﺍﺯ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ‬
‫‪3‬‬
‫ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﻪ ﺩﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺩﻳﭗ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﺮﺍژﺩﻯ ﻳﻬﻮﺩﻯ ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺩﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻛﺸﻴﺸﻰ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﭼﺸﻤﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﻻ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺧﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺭﻭ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﻭ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺜﻞ‪ :‬ﻫﺮﻣﺎﻥ ﻣﻠﻮﻳﻞ ﻭ ﺗﻮﻣﺎﺱ‬
‫ﭘﺮﻭﺳﺖﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻳﺔ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻋﻬﺪ ﻋﺘﻴﻖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﻗﺎﺑﻴﻞ‬ ‫ﻫﺎﺭﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﺭﺍﺑﺮﺕ ﻟﻮﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﻴﻮﻧﺴﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﻜﺎﺕ ﻓﻴﺘﺰﺟﺮﺍﻟﺪ ﻭ ﻭﻳﻠﻴﺎﻡ ﻓﺎﻛﻨﺮ‬
‫»ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﻳﻮﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻋﻬﺪ ﻋﺘﻴﻖ ﺗﻘﺎﻃﻊ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﮔﺮﻳﺰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺳﺎﻣﻮﺋﻞ ﺑﻜﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻨﺮﻯ ﻣﻴﻠﺮ‪ ،‬ﺟﻚ ﻛﺮﻭﻙ‪ ،‬ﻭﻳﺮﺟﻴﻨﻴﺎ ﻭﻭﻟﻒ‪ ،‬ﺩﻯ‪.‬‬
‫ﺧﻂ ﺟﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺁﺏ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﺮﺩ ﻣﺘﺄﻫﻞ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍچ‪ .‬ﻻﺭﻧﺲ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﻋﺰﻳﻤﺖ‪ ،‬ﺷﺪﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ‬
‫ﺧﺎﻧﻮﺍﺩﻩﺍﺵ‪ ،‬ﺧﻂ ﻋﺒﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﻙ ﻋﺸﻖ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﻙ ﻭﻃﻦ‪ .‬ﻋﻬﺪ‬ ‫ﻋﺒﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﺟﻬﺶ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﺧﻠﻖ‬
‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻋﺘﻴﻖ ﻧﻪ ﺣﻤﺎﺳﻪ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺗﺮﺍژﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﺭﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺁﻧﮕﻠﻮ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﺮ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﻫﻢ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﺟﻐﺮﺍﻓﻴﺎﻳﻰ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﺭﻓﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﻏﺮﺏ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﺭﻣﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﺧﺎﺋﻦ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺭﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺧﺎﺋﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺴﻠﻂ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﺸﻒ ﺷﺮﻕ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻏﺮﺏ‪ ،‬ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻣﺮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻧﻰ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﻢ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺷﻴﺎﺩ‪ .‬ﺷﻴﺎﺩ ﻣﺪﻋﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﮔﺬﺷﺖ‪ 4.‬ﺗﻮﻣﺎﺱ ﻫﺎﺭﺩﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻣﺎﻟﻜﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻳﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺜﺒﻴﺖ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﺎ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﻳﻚ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻱ‬ ‫ﺍﻭ ﺁﺩﻡﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺳﻮژﻩﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺲﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﺪﺕ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻏﺎﻟﺒ ًﺎ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺨﺺ‪ .‬ﻳﺎ ﻣﺪﻋﻰ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺷﻴﺎﺩ ﭘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻮﻛﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺲﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺍﺣﺘﺮﺍﻡ ﻓﻮﻕ‬
‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔﻧﺎﺩﺭﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻧﺒﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻛﺸﻴﺶ ﻭ ﻃﺎﻟﻊﺑﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺷﻴﺎﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﮔﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﺩ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺧﺎﺋﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺭﻣﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﭘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻴﺎﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺭﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﺎﻥ ﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺷﺨﺺ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺷﺨﺺ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ‬
‫‪9‬‬
‫ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﺰﺭگ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺷﻴﺎﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻬﺪ ﻋﺘﻴﻖ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﺍﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻪ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ »ﺷﺎﻧﺲﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ« ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﺷﺎﻧﺲ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻓﺮﺩ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺳﻮژﻩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺴﺘﻪﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻧﺎﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺮﻙ ﻫﻮﻳﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻃﻮﻝ ﺧﻄﻮﻃﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺷﺎﻧﺲ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺪﺷﺎﻧﺴﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺯﻳﺒﺎﻳﻰﺧﺘﻢ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺍ ّﻣﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻳﻚ ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﻢ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩﻫﺎﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ؛ ﺑﺪﺷﺎﻧﺴﻰﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺧﺎﺹ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺗﺴﻤﻴﻪ ﻋﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﻳﻚ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮگ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺘﻞ ﻣﻨﺘﻬﻰ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﻢ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺼﺪﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ﺷﺪﻥ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻫﺎﺭﺩﻯ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺳﺮﻧﻮﺷﺖ ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰ‬
‫ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﭼﻬﺮﻩ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﭘﺪﻳﺪ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻮ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺴﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺮﻛﺐ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺲﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻣﻮﻟﻜﻮﻟﻰ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ .‬ﺫﺭﻩ ﺫﺭﻩ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﭘﻴﺶ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﻣﺎ ﻣﺜﻞ ﺧﻄﻰ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ‪ ،‬ﺧﻄﻰ ﺩﺭ ﮔﺮﻳﺰ ﺍﺯ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﻳﺰﻧﺪ‪ْ 5.‬‬
‫ﺍﻭﻙ‬
‫ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﭼﻬﺮﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻗﻬﺮﻣﺎﻥ ﺭﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺮﺩﻡ ﺷﻮﺭﻳﺪﻩ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻨﻬﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻮﻻﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻛﺜﺮﻳﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﭘﺮﺍﻛﻨﺪﻥ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺁﺳﻤﺎﻥ ﭘﺮ ﺳﺘﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﺍﻳﺴﺘﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻉ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﺯ »ﺍﺻﻮﺍﺕ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻜﻪﺗﻜﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻫﺮ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺍﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻗﻴﺎﻓﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺸﺮﻯ‪ ،‬ﻣﺰﺍﺣﻤﺖﻫﺎﻳﺸﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺷﻰﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺷﻰﻫﺎﻳﺸﺎﻥ«‬
‫ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﮔﺮﻯ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻛﺜﺮﻳﺖ‬ ‫ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ 6.‬ﺍﻭ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﮔﺮﻳﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮﻯ ﺍﺩﻳﭗ‪ ،‬ﭘﺪﺭ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ »ﻧﻈﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﺧﺘﺮﺍﻥ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻧﻈﻢ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ‪ ،‬ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻢ ﺷﻜﺴﺘﻦ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺷﺨﺺ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﺩﻭﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺳﻮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﺎﺑﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻦ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﺎﺑﺎﻥ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﻭ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﻭ »ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺳﻴﺮ ﻭ ﺳﻴﺎﺣﺖ ﺷﺒﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﺎﺯ ﺁﻣﺪﻥ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪47 1393‬‬

‫ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﺑﻨﺎﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺩﻧﻴﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﻰﭘﺪﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﺍﺩﺭﻯ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﻮﺍﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺮﻭﺭﻳﺨﺘﻦ‪ .‬ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺴﺘﺒﺪ ﻭ ﺷﺎﻩ ﻭ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‬
‫ﻭﻳﺮﺍﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻛﻬﻦ ﭘﺪﺭﻯ‪ .‬ﻭﻳﺮﺍﻥ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﺪﺭ‬ ‫ﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ‪.‬‬
‫ﺧﻄﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻫﺮ ﺯﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ّ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻗﺮﻥ ﻧﻮﺯﺩﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺮﻭﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺎ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ‬
‫ﻣﺮﺩﻯ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺮﺍﺩﺭ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻛﻤﻮﻧﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻓﻘﺎ‪،‬‬
‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻠﻮﻳﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﺧﻮﺕ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺷﻮﺭﻭﻯ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻣﺎﻟﻜﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺧﺎﻧﻮﺍﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻠﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻫﻴﭻ‬
‫‪10‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻊ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﻭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺟﺰ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ‪ْ .homo tantum ،‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻳﺎﺩﺩﺍﺷﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﻭﺯﺍﻧﻪﺍﺵ ﺩﺭ ‪ 25‬ﺩﺳﺎﻣﺒﺮ ‪ 1911‬ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﺿﻤﻨ ًﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﺍﻳﺰﺍﻙ ﻟﻮﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﻳﻬﻮﺩﻯ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻗﺒﻠﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒ ًﺎ ﺁﻣﻴﺨﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ‬
‫ﻭﺭﺷﻮ ﻭ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﭼﻚ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺪﺍﺭﻙ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻳﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻬﺎﺟﺮﺗﻰ‬
‫ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺗﻜﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺫﻫﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﺴﺠﻢ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺧﺬ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺭﻭﺱﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻠﺸﻮﻳﻚ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍﻭ ﺛﺒﺖ ﺧﺎﻃﺮﺍﺕ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻠﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﺪﺍﺭﻙ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻳﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺮﻭﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺎﻯ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻯ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻨﮕﺎﺭﻯ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ »ﭘﺮﻭﻟﺘﺎﺭﻳﺎﻯ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ«؛ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭﺷﻜﻞ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺒﺮﺩ ﻃﺒﻘﺎﺗﻰ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﻧﺎﻫﻤﮕﻮﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺑﻴﺪﺍﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻮﻋﻮﺩﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻗﺮﻥ ﻧﻮﺯﺩﻫﻢ ﺩﻭ ﺳﺮ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺮﺍﮔﻤﺎﺗﻴﺴﻢ‬
‫ﺁﺭﻣﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﻻ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﻞ ﺟﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺭﻭﻳﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺩﺑﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎﻳﻰ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺭﻭﺳﻰ ﺳﻮﺳﻴﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺍﻫﺪﺍﻑ ﺩﻟﻨﮕﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻀﺎﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺍﮔﻤﺎﺗﻴﺴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﻼﺷﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﻮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ﭘﺪﺭﺍﻥ ﻭ ﭘﺴﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺤﺚ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺧﻄﺎﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﻮ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ؛ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻠﻰ ﻣﻰ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ؛ ﺑﺤﺜﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﭼﻪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭﺩﻧﺎﻙ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﺟﻤﺠﻤﻪ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺡ ﭘﺪﺭﻯﺍﻯ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺎﺗﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰﺑﺨﺶ ﻭ ﺑﺨﺸﻮﺩﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻛﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﺎﻟﻚ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﺤﻘﻖ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺁﻳﺎ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺭﺧﺸﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻠﻮﻳﻞ »ﺗﺒﻬﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ« ﺧﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﺍﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺧﺎﻣﻮﺵ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﺑﺰﺭگ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ؟ ﺗﺮﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﺪﺍﻟﺘﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻣﺮﺳﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﺭﻭ‪ ،‬ﻣﻠﻮﻳﻞ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺓ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﻘﻠﺪﻫﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻄﻮﻑ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺧﺼﻮﺻﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﺓ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻤﺎﻳﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﺪ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﻣﺠﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﺰﺍﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻞ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﺁﺭﺗﻮ‪ ،‬ﺭﻧﺞ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺟﺎﭘﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﺯﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺰﺭگ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﺯﻟﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻄﻌﺎﺗﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻫﻢ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺖ ﺗﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻞ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺁﻥ ﻏﻠﺒﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻯ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﻛﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﺠﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﺰﺍﻳﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺟﺰءﺍﺵ ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻠﻪ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻄﻰ ﻣﺠﺰﺍ ﻭ ﺳﻴﺎﻝ ﻭ ﺟﺎﺭﻯ‪ .‬ﻣﺠﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﺰﺍﻳﺮﻯ ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻗﺪﺭﺗﻰ ﻣﻬﻴﺐ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻫﻢ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻧﻤﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺮﺩﻡ ﻣﺘﻮﺟﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﻰ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﻛﺸﺶﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﻣﺘﺤﺮﻙ ﻭ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﺳﻴﻨﻮﺳﻰ‪ .‬ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ‬
‫‪11‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺘﺶ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻭ ﻣﺪﺍﻓﻌﺶ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺟﻤﺠﻤﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺳﺘﻮﻥ ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻟﺒﺎﺱ ﺍﻭﻧﻴﻔﻮﺭﻡ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺷﻴﻄﺎﻧﻰﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﻌﻄﻮﻑ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮﺩﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﻘﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺮﺩﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺟﺎﻣﻪ ﺩﻟﻘﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺗﻜﻪﺩﻭﺯﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻋﺸﺎﻥ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺷﺘﻴﺎﻕ ﻫﻤﮕﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻟﻚ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ‬‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﻻﺯﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎ ﻭ ِ‬
‫ﻣﻀﺎﻣﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﻢ ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺍﻣﻨﻪﺷﺎﻥ ﻣﺠﺎﻝ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﺷﻔﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﺩﺭﺍﻥ ﻋﻀﻮ ﻣﺠﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺠﺰﺍﻳﺮ ﺑﺪﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺷﺘﻴﺎﻕﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﺭﻭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺎﺳﺰﺍﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻧﻴﺎ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺟﺎ ﺟﻮﻻﻥ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪» .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﭘﺮﺍﮔﻤﺎﺗﻴﺴﻢ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺩﻭ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻣﻰﺟﻨﮕﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺗﻚ ﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﺳﺮﺩﺍﺑﻰ ﻧﻪ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻨﺎ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫]‪ [particularities‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭﺷﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﻭﺯ ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻕ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺗﻮﺟﻬﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺒﺎﺏ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩﻯ ﺑﻰﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﺸﻤﻮﻝ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺯﻭﺩ ﮔﺬﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻋﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﻣﻌﺪﻭﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺟﺎﺫﺑﻪﺍﺵ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﺮﻛﺲ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻛﻞ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺤﻼﻝ ﺟﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻋﺸﻖ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﻭ ﺧﻴﺮﺧﻮﺍﻫﻰ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ‬
‫‪12‬‬
‫ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻤﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﻣﺮگ ﻭ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﭼﻪ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻚ ﺑﻮﺩﻫﺎ ﻧﻤﻰﭼﺴﺒﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰ ﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ :‬ﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﺫﻭﺏ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻞ ﺧﻮﺩﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ؟ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ »ﺍﺻﺎﻟﺖ«ﺷﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻴﻖﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺍﺑﺪﻳﺖ ﻛﺸﻒ ﻛﺮﺩﻳﻢ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﻧﺎﺑﻬﻨﮕﺎﻣﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔ ْﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺻﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻧﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺍﺑﺪﻯ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﺎﺑﻬﻨﮕﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺁﺩﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺍﻩ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻳﺎ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻋﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺭﻭﻳﺎﺭﻭ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺭﺳﺘﮕﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﻫﻴﭻ ﻫﺪﻓﻰ‪ .‬ﺭﻫﺴﭙﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻋﺎﺯﻡ ﺳﻔﺮ ﺩﺭﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺁﻣﺪ‪ «.‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺎﻣﻮﺋﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻧﻮﺭﺩﺍﻧﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺻﺪﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺗﻠﺮ ﻧﻘﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﺍﻭ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﻥ ﻫﻮﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺸﻒ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻻﺭﻧﺲ ﻣﻮﻋﻮﺩ ﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺭﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺗﻠﺮ؛ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﻰ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻛﺠﺎ ﻭ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺟﺎﺑﻪﺟﺎ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻬﻢ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩﻯ‬ ‫ﺭﺳﺘﮕﺎﺭﻯ ﺟﻮ ﻭ ﺧﻴﺮﺍﺧﻮﺍﻫﺎﻧﻪ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ ﺍﺭﻭﭘﺎﻳﻰ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﻋﻮﺩ ﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ‪،‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪48‬‬

‫ﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﻜﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﺎ ﻟﺨﺖ ﻭ ﻋﻮﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﭘﻮﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﻮﺍﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮﺷﺨﺼﻰ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻚﺑﻮﺩﻫﺎ ﺟﻨﺒﻪﺍﻯ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﻓﺮﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﺟﺎ ﻧﻬﺎﺩﻥ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ‪ .‬ﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻰ ﺁﺧﺮﺕﻧﮕﺮ‬
‫ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﺻﻮﺕﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺁﭘﻮﻛﺎﻟﻴﭙﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺣﻜﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ‪ :‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫‪13‬‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﻧﻔﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﺟﻴﺮﺟﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻇﻬﺎﺭ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺁﺩﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺭﻭﺍ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮﺣﺪ ﭘﺮﻳﺸﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺩﻳﻮﺍﻧﮕﻰ ﺑﻜﺸﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺜﻞ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﻓﺮﻣﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ‪ :‬ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺘﻰ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﻴﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺭﺗﻠﺒﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﻭ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﺗﺮﺟﻴﺢ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺁﻣﺪﻥ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﺮﺩﻣﻰ‪ .‬ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﺮﺩﻣﻰ‪ .‬ﻣﺮﺩﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ‬
‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﺑﺎ ﻟﻜﻨﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﺑﺎ ﺩﺭﻫﻢ ﺷﻜﺴﺘﻦ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻣﺮﺳﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺣﺎﻭﻯ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺁﺧﺮﺕﻧﮕﺮﻯ ﻭ ﻣﻮﻋﻮﺩﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ‬
‫ﭼﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻣﺘﻀﻤﻦ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺷﺨﺺ ﺷﺪﻥ؛ ﺑﻰﻧﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻳﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ؛ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ .‬ﻛﺴﻰ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺣﺮﻑ‬ ‫ﻭ ﮔﺮﻳﺰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮژﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﻳﭗ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺪﺭ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻊ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﻭ‬
‫ﻧﻜﺮﻩ ﺷﺮﻭﻉ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺣﺮﻑ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻣﺘﻀﻤﻦ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻧﻘﺪ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‪ .‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻪ ﭼﻴﻨﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﻣﺪﻥ ﻭ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻉ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﺎﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﺁﻥ ﻧﺎﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻧﻮﻳﺪ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺁﺩﻡﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﺩﻡﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻫﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻪ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺯﻥ ﻣﻦ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺎﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻗﻴﺪ ﻧﺎﺷﺎﺩﻯ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺗﻢ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﻥ ﺭﻧﺠﻮﺭﻯﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺩﻳﭗ‪ ،‬ﭘﺪﺭ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﺩﺭ ﻣﻦ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺮ ﻣﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺯﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﺩﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺮﻯ‪ .‬ﺭﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺗﺤﻤﻴﻞ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻴﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻭ ﭘﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻧﻬﺎﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻗﻴﺪ ﺣﺮﻑ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻭ ﭼﺴﺒﻴﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ »ﻯ« ﻧﻜﺮﻩ‪ .‬ﺟﻤﺎﻋﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻋﺰﺏﻫﺎ‪،‬‬
‫ﺳﻴﻤﭙﺘﻮﻡﺷﻨﺎﺱ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻳﻚ ﻋﻼﻣﺖﺷﻨﺎﺱ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﻴﻤﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﺠﺮﺩﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻳﺘﻴﻢﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺑﻰﭘﺪﺭ‪ .‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮﻯ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺟﻮﻳﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺳﻼﻣﺖ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺘﺤﻘﻖ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺷﺎﺩﻯ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺭﺍ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﺓ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻡ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﺧﺸﺎﺧﺶ‬
‫ﺩﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﻴﻄﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺗﺎﻗﺶ ﻣﻰﺷﻨﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﭼﻴﺪﻣﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻭ ﻣﺂﺧﺬ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺮﺳﻴﻢ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﭼﻴﺪﻣﺎﻥﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻭ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻳﻰ‬
‫‪ .1‬ﻳﺎﺩﺩﺍﺷﺖﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺘﺲ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻣﺼﻄﻔﻰ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻴﻪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻳﻰ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻧﻴﻠﻮﻓﺮ‪.1379 ،‬‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﻴﻄﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﭼﻴﺪﻣﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫‪ .2‬ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺮﺩﻡ ﺷﻮﺭﻳﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﻣﺎﺱ ﻫﺎﺭﺩﻱ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺍﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﺻﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﺓ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺘﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺗﺎﻗﺶ ﻣﻰﺷﻨﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﭼﻪ‬
‫ﻳﻮﻧﺴﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮓ ﻧﺸﺮ ﻧﻮ‪.1380 ،‬‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﻣﻠﻮﻳﻞ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺗﺸﺨﻴﺺ ﺑﻴﻤﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫‪3. Critical and Clinical, Gilles Deleuze,‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺠﻮﻳﺰ ﺩﺭﻣﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﺗﺸﺨﻴﺺ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﻴﻄﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫‪Verso. Uk. 1998 ,1.‬‬ ‫ﺗﺠﻮﻳﺰ ﺍﻭ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺍﺧﻮﺕ ﺍﺯ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺗﺌﺎﺛﺮ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﺍﻭﻛﻼﻫﻤﺎ ﺩﺭ‬
‫‪4. Dialogues, Gilles Deleuze and Claire‬‬ ‫ﺁﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻋﺰﺏﻫﺎ ﺑﻰ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺭﻧﮓ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ‬
‫‪Parnet, New York Colombia University Press,‬‬ ‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻛﻨﻮﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻬﻴﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻫﺮ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﻳﻚ ﺑﻮﺭﻭﻛﺮﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ‬
‫‪1987.‬‬ ‫ﻓﺎﺷﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﻟﻨﻴﺴﺖ ﺷﻮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺟﻮﺍﻣﻌﻰ ﻣﺸﺘﻜﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻠﻮﻓﻴﻠﺪﻫﺎ‪،‬‬
‫‪5. Difference and Repetition,Continuum ,‬‬ ‫ﺯﺍﻣﺰﺍﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺭﺗﻠﺒﻰﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺁﺣﺎﺏﻫﺎ‪ .‬ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻛﺎﻓﻜﺎ ﻭ ﻣﻠﻮﻳﻞ ﻭ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ‬
‫‪Gilles Deleuze, London and New York, 2001.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮﻯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻰﺧﺼﺎﻝ؛ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺁﺩﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻋﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺟﻮﻩ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩﺁﻭﺭ ﺳﻮژﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯﻯ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺳﻮژﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ ﺍﺩﻳﭗ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻣﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻮﻋﻮﺩﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ‬
‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺖﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺧﻮﺍﻩ ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺍﻩ ﺑﺸﺎﺭﺕﮔﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﻣﺆﻟﻒ‬
‫‪1. Dialogues, p.50.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺤﻜﻴﻢ ﺑﺨﺸﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪2. Ibid.p.5.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺆﻟﻔﺎﻥ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺧﺎﻃﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﻔﺮﻧﺎﻣﻪ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ »ﺭﺍﺯﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫‪3. Ibid.p.47-46.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﻛﺜﻴﻒ« ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﺎ ﺗﻜﻴﻪﮔﺎﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺭﻓﺘﻪﺷﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﺯﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪4. Ibid.p.37.‬‬ ‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﺪﺭ ﻣﻮﻳﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﭘﺪﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻧﻘﻴﺎﺩ‬
‫‪5. Ibid.p. 40.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺁﺭﺍﻣﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ‬
‫‪ .6‬ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺮﺩﻡ ﺷﻮﺭﻳﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺹ‪.14‬‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺑﻰﭘﺪﺭﻧﺪ؛ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﺑﺮﺍﺩﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺍﺧﻮﺕ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ‬
‫‪ .7‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.10‬‬ ‫ﻭﺳﻴﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﺧﻨﺜﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﻭ ﺩﺍﺩﺍﻥ ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺗﻰ ﺧﻨﺜﻰ‬
‫‪8. Dialogues, p.42.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻣﺎ ﺩﺳﺘﻮﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻴﻢ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰﻫﺎ ﻭ‬
‫‪9. Ibid.p.41.‬‬ ‫ﺗﺸﺨﺺﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎ ﺁﺷﻨﺎ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﺓ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ‬
‫‪10. Critical and Clinical, p.89.‬‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺭﻳﺰﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﺤﻮ ﺯﺑﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻠﻔﻆ ﻛﻠﻤﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺯﺑﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥ‬
‫‪ .11‬ﻳﺎﺩﺩﺍﺷﺖﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺻﺺ ‪.83 181‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﺤﻜﺎﻡﺑﺨﺶ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬
‫‪ .12‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﺹ‪.183‬‬ ‫ﻟﻜﻨﺖ ﻭﺍ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻟﺮﺯﺵ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‬
‫‪13. Difference and Repetition ,Continuum,‬‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭﺵ ﺑﺎ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺍﻭ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺎﻩ‬
‫‪p.322.‬‬ ‫ﺣﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺁﺳﺘﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻜﻮﺕ ﻛﺸﺎﻧﺪﻥ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻫﻢ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺜﻞ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪49 1393‬‬

‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ‪ :‬ﻫﺪﻑ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ِ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ‬
‫»ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ«‪» ،‬ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ«‪» ،‬ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩ« ﻭ »ﺯﻣﺎﻥ« ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ‬
‫ﺿﻤﻦ ﻣﺮﻭﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﻭﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ِ‬
‫ﺣﻮﻝ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﺎﻧﻮﻧﻰ »ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ« ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﮔﻮﻧﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ« ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﻗﻮﺍﻡ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻴﺸﮕﻔﺘﺎ ِﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ :‬ﺑﻪ ﺯﻭﺩﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻓﺮﺍﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺳﺒﻜﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺮﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﺮﺳﻮﻡ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻤﻜﻦ‬
‫ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﻋﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﺌﺎﺗﺮ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳ ِﺪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﺯﻣﺎﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ‬
‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻧﻘﺸﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﺯﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﻭﺭﺯﻯ‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﻴﺰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ »ﻛﻮﻻژ« ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰ ﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﭼﻮﻥ ﺳﺎﻳ ِﺮ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻭ ﺗﺌﺎﺗﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺻﺤﻨﻪﺍﺵ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺲ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻭ ﻫﮕﻞ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦﺯﻣﺎﻥ‬
‫ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺗﺎ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻮﺳﺮﻝ‪ ،‬ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﻭ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻋﺎﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﭼﻬﺮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻧﻘﺶ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﺍﺗﻰ ﻣﻮﺟﺰ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺳﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺍﺯ ﺭﻳﺨﺖﺍﻧﺪﺍ ِﺯ« ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻫﻨﺮ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻢ ﺗﻨﻴﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺣﺴﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ ﺿﻌﻴﻒ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﻳﻜﺮﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻭ ﻫﻨﺮ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎ ﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﻩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬

‫ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﻘﺪ »ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺟﺰﻣﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ«‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ‬ ‫*‬
‫ﻋﺎﺩﻝ ﻣﺸﺎﻳﺨﻰ‬
‫ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂِ »ﺩﻳﮕﺮﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬
‫‪adelmashayekhi@gmail.com‬‬
‫ﺟﺰﻣﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ »ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ« ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬
‫ﺣﺴﺐ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﻘﺎﺩ ﻭﺭﺯﻳﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺘﻀﻴﺎﺕ »ﻋﻘﻞ ﺳﻠﻴﻢ« ﻭ »ﺣﺲ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ«‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ‪ (1‬ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﻤﻮﺩﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪﺍﻯ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ‬
‫‪1‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﺯ »ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ« ﻭ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﻯ ُﺻﻠﺐ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻨﻬﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻭ ‪(2‬‬
‫‪2‬‬
‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻗﻴﻖﺗﺮ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﻛﻞ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻫﺮ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻫﻴﺌﺘﻰ ﺗﺄﻟﻴﻔﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫»ﺟﻬﺎﻥ« ﱢ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﻛﺐ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﻯ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺘ ًﺎ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺁﺳﻤﺎﻥ ﻭ ‪،...‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﺑﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻣﻴﺰ‪ ،‬ﺷﻴﺮﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﺷﺪﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﻴﺄﺕﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺗﺄﻟﻴﻔﻰﺍﻧﺪ‬
‫»ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ« ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﮔﺮﺑﻪ ﻭ ﻣﻴﺰ ‪...‬‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺑﻪﺍﺯﺍﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺆﻟﻔﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺳﭙﻬﺮ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ‪ِ .‬‬
‫ﭘﻴﻤﻮﺩﻥ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﺔ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﻓﻀﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻻﺯﻡ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﺪﺕ ِ‬
‫‪3‬‬
‫ﻭ ﻧﺎﻳﻞ ﺁﻣﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒ ّﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺨﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻳﻜﺴﺮ ﺣﺬﻑ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺷﺮﺣﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑُﻌﺪ‬
‫ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨ ِﺪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫‪Difference and‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﻣﺮ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﻪ »ﺯﺑﺎﻥ« ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫‪Repetition, trans.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﺒﻨﺪﻯ ﺯﻧﺠﻴﺮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﺑﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫‪Paul Patton,‬‬
‫ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ« ﺗﺒﻌﻴﺖ ﻛﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﮔﺮﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻣﻴﺰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺳﺎﺧﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫‪Columbia‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ«‪» ،‬ﻗﻨﺪ ﺷﻴﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ«‪» ،‬ﺁﺳﻤﺎﻥ ﺁﺑﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ«‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪،‬‬ ‫‪University Press,‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﺟﺰﻣﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺘﻀﻴﺎﺕ ﻧﺴﺨﺔ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫‪New York, 1994.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪50‬‬

 ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻳﻦﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺧﻼﺻﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ :‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻛﻠﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻨﺪ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺟﺰﻣﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺼﺎ ِﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ »ﺍﻧﻄﺒﺎﻕ« ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻧﺴﺨﻪﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺮﻁﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﻜﻰ‬ ‫ﺭ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﺮﺍ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻳﺒﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﻰ ﻗﻴﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺟﺰﻣﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻥ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ‬
‫ِ‬
‫‪4‬‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺗﻜﺮﺍ ِﺭ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻨﺲ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺷﺮﻁ ﺑﻪ »ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﻮﺩﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﺒﺲ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳﺖ؟ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺣﺼ ِﺮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺫﻳﻞ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻛﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺍﻭﻝ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻰ ﺭﺟﻮﻉ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺼﻞ ِ‬ ‫ﮔﻨﺠﺎﻧﺪ؛ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﻣﺴﺒﻮﻕ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻛﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﻓﻮﺭﻓﻮﺭﻳﻮﺱ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﻻ ﺗﺎ‬ ‫ﻛﻠﻰ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﺷﻴﻮﻩ ﺑﺮﻭﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﺮ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺫﻳﻞ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻫﻢﺍﺭﺯﻯﺍﺵ ﺑﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺫﻳﻞ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﻗﺎﻟﺐ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﻗﺪﺭ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ‪ ،‬ﺫﻳﻞ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﮔﻨﺠﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻛﻠﻰ ﻣﻰﮔﻨﺠﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﻗﻄﺮﺓ ﺁﺏ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ‬
‫)»ﻓﺼﻞ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﺟﻨﺲ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﺼﻞ‪ :‬ﻓﺼﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺣﻴﺚ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻢﺍﺭ ِﺯ ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﻗﻄﺮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﺏ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎﺑ ِﻊ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﺜﺮﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻨ ﱢﻮﻉ«(‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺼﻞ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺟﻨﺴﻰ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻮ ِﻡ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻮﻝ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ « ‪.‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫‪8‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ »ﻣﺤﻤﻮﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻮﻝ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻘ ّﻮ ِﻡ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ ﺟﺰﻣﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻓﺼﻞ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎ ِﻡ ﻣﺤﻤﻮﻝ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﻓﺮﻭﻛﺎﺳﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ )ﻣﺜﻞ ﺗﻀﺎ ِّﺩ ﺩﻭ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻣﺼﺮﺡ ﻳﺎ »ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴ ِﻮ« ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ ﺟﺰﻣﻰ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﻛﻠﻰﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﭘﻴﺶﻓﺮﺽﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺟﻨﺲ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﻓﺰﻭﺩﻩ‬ ‫»ﺟﺴﻤﺎﻧﻰ« ﻭ »ﻏﻴﺮ ﺟﺴﻤﺎﻧﻰ« ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺑﻪ ِ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺍﺭﺗﺪﻭﻛﺲ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﻓﺮﺍ ِﺩ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺴﺒﻮﻕ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ(‪.‬‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺗﻘﺪﻳ ِﺮ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻃﻮﻝ‬
‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﻻﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ‬ ‫‪9‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻭ ﺗﺎﺑ ِﻊ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﻗﻢ ﺯﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪» :‬ﺍﺻﻮﻝ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺟﻨﺎﺱ ﺍﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻳﻢ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎ ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻭ ﻣﻮﺍﻓﻖ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺩﺭﺳﮕﻔﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻧُﻪ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﺔ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﻓﺮﺍ ِﺯ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ« ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻀﺎﻣﻴﻦ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻀﻤﺮ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻃﺮﻳﻘﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺩﻩﮔﺎﻧﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ »ﺟﻨﺲ« ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺸﺎﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ‪ ...‬ﺗﺎ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺍﺳﻴ ِﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺁﻛﺴﻔﻮﺭﺩﻯِ‬
‫ﺳﻨﺦ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﺟﻨﺲ ﻭ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻋﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺫﻳﻞ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻰﮔﻨﺠﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻘﺮﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻓﺼﻞﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺷﻤﺎﺭ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺟﻨﺲ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﻭﺩﻩ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﺷﺮﻭﻉ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻳﺎ ﺳﻮژﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‬
‫»ﺑﺰﺭگﺗﺮﻳﻦ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻨ ّﻮﻉ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﻮﺍ ِﻉ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ« ﺭﺍ ﺟﻨﺲ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻮﻝ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻧﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ 5«...‬ﭘﻴﺶﻓﺮﺽﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺩﻩﮔﺎﻧﻪ )ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻓﺼﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻓﺰﻭﺩﻩ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﻣﻌﻤﻮ ًﻻ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ »ﻫﺮ ﻛﺴﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ ‪» ،« ...‬ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺾ«‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻧُﻪ ﻋﺮﺽ( ﺑﺮﺳﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻓﺼﻞﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺿﻤﻴﻤﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﻜﺎﺭ ﻛﺮﺩ‪» ،«...‬ﺑﺪﻳﻬﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‪ «...‬ﺑﺮﻭﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ 6.‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺻﻮﻝ‬
‫ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻝ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻛﻪ »ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﻟﺐ‬ ‫ﺣﺘﻰ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻗﺎﻟﺐﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻴﺎﻳﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺯ ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬
‫ﻓﺼﻞﻫﺎ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻪ؟« ﭼﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ؟ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫»ﺩﻭﻛﺴﺎﻳﻰ« ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺔ »ﻋﻘﻼﻧﻰ« ﺍﺭﺗﻘﺎ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻯﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﺿﻢ ﻣﻌﺪﻭﻡ‬ ‫ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻥ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺸﻜﻞ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ ﱢ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﻭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺗﺎ ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺕ ﻭ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﻭﺍﺭﻳﺎﺳﻴﻮﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺻﻮﻝ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ‬
‫ﺁﻥﺟﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻓﺮﺽ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺟﻨﺲ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺷﻮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ ﻛﻠّﻰ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻳﻜﺴﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﺮ ﻓﺼﻞ ﺟﻨﺲ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺯﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻨﺲ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﮔﻮﻳﻰ ﺑﺪﻳﻬﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺮ ِﺩ ﻗﻮﻩﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻓﺼﻞ ﻓﺼﻞ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﺼﻞ ﻓﺼﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﺼﻞ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻫﻢ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﺸﻜﻞ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺴﻠﺴﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺣﺴﺐ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖﺷﺎﻥ ﺟﻮﻳﺎﻯ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﻴﺎ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﭻﮔﺎﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﻧﻤﻰﺭﺳﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮕﻰ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ‬ ‫ﻗﻮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺪﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﮔﻔﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﺟﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺟﻨﺲﺍﻻﺟﻨﺎﺱ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥﻛﻪ ﺣﺲ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻛﺴﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺟﻨﺎﺱ ﺍﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﺦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﻮﺍ ِﻉ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻨﺲ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻳﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺁﻥﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻳﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻛﺴﻰ‬
‫ﺫﻳﻞ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺟﻨﺴﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻧﻮﺍ ِﻉ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻧﻜﺎﺭ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺳﺐ؛ ﺟﻤﺎﺩ ﻭ ﻧﺒﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻥ ﺟﻤﻠﮕﻰ‬ ‫ﻼ ﻣﻴﺰﻯ‬ ‫ﻗﻮﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥﻛﻪ ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺟﻮﻫ ِﺮ ﺟﺴﻤﺎﻧﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺟﻨﺲ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻟﻤﺲ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻢ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺗﻜﻪ ﻣﻮ ِﻡ ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺕ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﻴﺰﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺣﻤﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﮕﺮ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰﻯ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﻡ ﻭ ﻣﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﻡ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻯ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺴﺎﻁِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﺪﻩﺍﻡ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﻤﺔ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﻓﻮﺭﻓﻮﺭﻳﻮﺱ ﺑﺮﭼﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻘﺮﺭ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺯﺵﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﺑﺴﻨﺪﻩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ‬
‫‪7‬‬
‫ﺟﻨﺲ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺑﺮ ﻫﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﻪ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺪﻣﺘﻜﺎ ِﺭ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻭ ﻛﻠﻴﺴﺎ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺣﻤﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؟‬ ‫ﺩﻭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺟﺪﻳ ِﺪ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﻭ »ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺭﻓﺘﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ« ﻳﺎ »ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ« ﭘﺎﺳﺦ‬ ‫ﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻰﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﺷﻜﻞ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻦﺑﺴﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ِ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪51 1393‬‬

‫ﻧﻘﺶ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺳﺐ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮﻳﻚ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ« »ﺍﻳﻦ ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ ﺗﺎ ﺗﻮﻣﺎﺱ ﺁﻛﻮﻳﻴﻨﻰ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﻣﺎﺱ ﺁﻛﻮﻳﻴﻨﻰ ﺗﺎ ﻫﻮﺳﺮﻝ‬
‫‪10‬‬
‫ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ«؛ »ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭﺓ ﻳﻚ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ«‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺩﻩﮔﺎﻧﺔ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺫﻳﻞ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﻪﮔﻰﺍﺵ ﻓﺮﺍﭼﻨﮓ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ؛ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ِ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻧﺪ؛ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻌﺎﺑﻴﺮ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮﻯ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻠﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﮔﻨﺠﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ »ﺷ ّﺪﺕ«ﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﻩﻫﺎ‪ 11.‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻨﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻌﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻗﺪﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ‬
‫ﻫﻴﭻ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﻤﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻭﺍﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻫﺮ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻯ ﻟﺤﻈﻪﻫﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰ ِﻡ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﻫﻢ ِ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﻳﺮ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ )ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ(؛ ﻳﺎ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻳﺨﺖ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺩ‪ :‬ﻳﻚ ﺗﺎﺑﻠﻮ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺠﺴﻤﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ »ﺍﺯ‬ ‫)ﺟﻮﻫﺮ( ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﻭﻳﮋﻩ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻘ ّﺪﻡ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ًﻻ ﻭ ﺑ ّﺬﺍﺕ‪،‬‬
‫‪17‬‬
‫ﺭﻳﺨﺖﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ«‪16‬ﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻭﺍﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ]‪«.[...‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺑﻪﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺖ ﻭ ِ‬
‫ﻓﻘﻂ ﺩﺭ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﺭﺳﻴﺪ ﻛﻪ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺛﺎﻧﻴ ًﺎ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﺮﺽ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ )ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ(‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺑﺎﺯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ﻫﻨﺮﻯ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻞ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺣ ِﺪ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ«؛ »ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺛ ِﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺑ ِﻊ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺮﻭﺯ ﻭ ﻇﻬﻮﺭﻯ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﻫﻨ ِﺮ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺌﺎﺗﺮﻯ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ‬ ‫»ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ« ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؟‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺲ‬
‫ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺩﮔﺮﺩﻳﺴﻰﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺸﺖﻫﺎ‪ .‬ﺗﺌﺎﺗﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺭﻳﺴﻤﺎﻥ )ﺁﺭﻳﺎﻥ ﮔﻢ ﺷﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺛﺎﺑﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻫﺰﺍﺭﺗﻮﻳﻰ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺟﺰﻣﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ« ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ(‪ .‬ﺍﺛ ِﺮ ﻫﻨﺮﻯ ﻗﻠﻤﺮ ِﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺮﻙ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ »ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ«‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ« ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻯ ﺣﺴﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ‬
‫‪19 18‬‬
‫ﻋﻠﻢ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ‪« .‬‬ ‫ﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﻳﺎ ِ‬
‫ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻨ ِﺮ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈ ِﺮ ﺍﻭ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺮﻭﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰ ﻫﻨ ِﺮ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺭﺳﺘﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻨ ِﺪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺑﻪﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ ﺑﻪ »ﺫﺍﺕ« )ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻞ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺳﺨﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﺔ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‬ ‫ﺟﺰﻣﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﺭﻫﺎ‬
‫»ﺍﻳﺪﻩ« ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ »ﻣﻌﻨﺎ‪ «20‬ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ( ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﺤﻮﻟﻰ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻫﻨﺮ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮ ﺑﮕﺬﺭﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫»ﺟﻮﻫﺮ«‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻓﻬﻢ ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ‬ ‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻴﺶﮔﻔﺘﺎ ِﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪:‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪﻣﺆﻟﻔﺔ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﺎﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺑﻪ ﺯﻭﺩﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻓﺮﺍﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺣﺲﺷﺪﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ )ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺷﻴﻮﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺮﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﺮﺳﻮﻡ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻭﺟﻪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺗﺼﺮﻳﺢ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ ‪ ...‬ﺟﺴﺖﻭﺟﻮﻯ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎﻯ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ‬
‫»ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺣﺲ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﻫﻨﺮﻫﺎﻯﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ ﺭﺍ«(‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﻣﻨﺤﺼﺮﺍً ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻮﺩ‪] ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ[‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫‪12‬‬
‫ﻼ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻭ ﺗﺌﺎﺗﺮ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﮕﻴﺮﻯ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ «.‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻳﺨﺖ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ؛‬‫ﻣﻰ‬ ‫»ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ«‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫)»ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪﮔﻴﺮﻯ«(‪» :‬ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻣﺎﻧﻨ ِﺪ ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ]ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ[‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺁﺭﺍﻣﺶ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺳﻠﻴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪» .‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ« ﺭﺍ ﺫﻳﻞ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﺣﺘﻴﺎﺝ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ]ﺩﻭﺭ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ[ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻨ ِﺮ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ‬
‫ﻛﻠﻰ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻯ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻨﺠﺎﻧﺪ‪» .‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ« ﺣﺴﺎﺳﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫‪13‬‬
‫ﻫﺪﻑ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪«.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺳﺎﻧﺪ؛‬
‫ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﺩ؛ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺣﺴﺎﺳﻴﺖ ﺑﺎ »ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ« ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻜﻨﺪ ﺟﺰ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﻓﺎﺭﻍ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ )ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ »ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ«‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫»ﺗﻌﺮﺽ« ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ ﻣﻨﺘﻘﻞ ﻛﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ(؛ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ»ﺑﻴﺎﻥ«‬
‫ﺗﻌﺮﺽ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻔﺲ‪ 21‬ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﺭ ﻭ ﺑﻪ »ﻫﻨ ِﺮ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ«‪ 14‬ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻫﻨ ِﺮ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ؟ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ؛ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻔﺲ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺟﺒﺎﺭ ﻭ ﻓﺸﺎ ِﺭ ﺣﺴﺎﺳﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫»ﺻﻔﺖ« ﻭ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﻮﺩﮔﺮﺍ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﻮﺩﮔﺮﺍ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﻨﺪﻳﺸﺪ‪ 22«.‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﺍﺷﺨﺎﺹ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻴﺖﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺶﻓﺮﺽ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﺷﻴﺎ‬
‫»ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺟﻪ«‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺫﺍﺕ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﺷﻴﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻘﺎﺵ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﻮﺩﮔﺮﺍ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻨﮓ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺘﻰﻫﻢ‬
‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻬﺮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺷﺨﺎﺹ ُﺻﻠﺐ ﻭﺍﻡ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﺪﻓﺶ ﻋﺮﺿﺔ ﺭﻭﻧﻮﺷﺘﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﺑ ِﺮ ﺍﺻﻞ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫»ﺟﻮﻫﺮ« ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﻬﻢ ﻣﻨﻈ ِﻮﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﺑﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻜﺎﺕ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﻪﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺪﻑ ﻧﻘﺎﺵ‬ ‫ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺤﺼﺮﺍً ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺣﺲﺷﺪﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ »ﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ« ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺷ ّﺪ ِﺕ ﻣﺤﻀﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺫﻳﻞ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻛﻠﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﮔﻨﺠﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺑﻮﻡ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺭﻧﮓ ﻭ ﻓﺮ ِﻡ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴ ِﺰ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻧﻰ‪ 23‬ﺍﺷﺘﺒﺎﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ »ﺷﻮﺭ ﻣﺤﺾ«ﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻘﺎﺵ ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ«‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬ ‫ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺷﻴﺌﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺎﺱ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺿﻌﻒ ﻋﺎﻃﻔﻰﺷﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺷ ّﺪﺕ ﻭ‬
‫»ﻣﻴﺎﻥ« ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻴﺰ ﻭ ﻣﻴﺰﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﺤﺾ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﻡﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ »ﺑﺎ« ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﺭﺳﺎﻧﺪﻥ ﭼﻬﺮﻩﺍﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﻮگ ﺑﺼﺮﻯ‪ 15‬ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺅﻳﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻗﺎﺋﻢ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﺋﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﻃﺮﻑ )ﺩﻭ ﻣﻴﺰ ﻳﺎ ﺩﻭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ( ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﺤﻨﻰﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺎﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﻴﭽﻴﺪﻩ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻃﺮﻑﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﻮﺩﮔﺮﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻨﺪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺩﺳﺘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﻯﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪52‬‬

‫ﺍﺻﻞ ﺗﻔّﺮﺩ‬
‫ﻧﺎﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻃﺮﻓﻴﻦ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻘ ّﺪﻡ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻓﺮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ؛‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚﺳﻮ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ »ﺷ ّﺪﺕ« ﻣﺤﺾ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﻢ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ‬
‫ﺍﮔﺮ ﺍﺻﻞ ﺗﻔّﺮﺩ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻓﺮﺩ )ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻓﺮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻓﻴﻦ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﻜﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺖ( ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺗﺎﺑ ِﻊ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍ ِﺭ‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪:‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺎﺕ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻜﺘﺔ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﻓﻮﺭﻓﻮﺭﻳﻮﺱ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺼﺎﺩﻳﻖ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ ﻛﻠّﻰ ﺳﺮﻭﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ ‪ ...‬ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺷ ّﺪﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻙ‬
‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﺩﻯ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺤﺼﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﺩ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﺳﺦ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ )ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺖ( ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺫﻳﻞ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﮕﻨﺠﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎ ِﻩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺫﺍﺕ )ﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻰء ﻫﻮ ﻫﻮ(‬ ‫ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ(‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺭﺍ )ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻓﺮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﺩﻯ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺤﺼﺮ‬ ‫ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺒﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﺪﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺎﺑ ِﻊ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭘﻴﺶ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﺩ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻓﺮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺒﻴﻨﻴﻢ ﺍﺳﺎﺳ ًﺎ »ﺩﻋﻮﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟«‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ِ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻓﺮﺩﻳﺖﺑﺨﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻓﺮﺩﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﺱﮔﻔﺘﺎﺭ ‪ 14/1/1974‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﻧﺴﻦ‪،‬‬
‫‪26‬‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺟﻨﺴﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻭ ﺣ ّﺘﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫»‪...‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻓﺮﺩﻳﺖﺑﺨﺶ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻘ ّﺪﻡ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺘﻰ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﺘﻔﺼﻴﻞ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺤﺚ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺮﺳﺶ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫‪27‬‬
‫ﻓﺮﺩﻯ ﻣﻘ ّﺪﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ‪«...‬‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺁﻳﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﺮ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻙ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ؟ ﻭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﻪ ِ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ِ‬
‫ﺭﺳﻴﺪ؟ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺮﺍﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﺳﮕﻔﺘﺎ ِﺭ ‪ 14/1/1974‬ﻣﻄﺮﺡ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻗﺪﺭ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻛﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻪ؟ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺳﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻢ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﮔﺰﻳﻨﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ (1 :‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻯ ﺑﺮ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ]ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ[ ﭼﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥﮔﺎﻩ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬ ‫ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ )ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻙ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ( ‪ (2‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؟« ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻗﺪﺭ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻛﻰ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺑﺮ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﻗﻴﺎﺱﺍﻧﺪ )ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻪ( ‪ (3‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﭼﻪ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻧﺎﮔﺰﻳﺮﻳﻢ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻰ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﻫﻴﭻ ﻗﺪﺭ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻛﻰ‬
‫ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﻭﺍﺣ ِﺪ ﺑﺴﻴﻄﻰ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻋﺎﺭﻓﺎﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻟﻔﻈﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻟﻔﻈﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ(‪ .‬ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫)ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻙ‬
‫»ﺍﺳﺎﺱ« ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﺩﻯ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﺩﻫﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﺮﺍﺩ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻯ؟«‪24‬؛ »ﻛﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﻔﺘﻨﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺘﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺸﺎﻓﺮﺩﻯ ﻭ ﻓﺮﺩﻳﺖﺑﺨﺶ‪» :‬ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ ﺭﺍ ِﻩ ﺧﺮﻭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻦﺑﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻟﻔﻈﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪...‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺩﻗﻴﻘﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ :‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ‪ :‬ﻣﻄﻤﺌﻨ ًﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﭼﻨﺪﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ]ﺑﺮ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ[ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ...‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﺑﻪﻧﺤﻮ ﻣﻠﻤﻮﺱ‬
‫ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﺮ ﻫﺮ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛‬ ‫ﭼﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؟ ]ﻗﺎﺋﻼﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻙ ﻟﻔﻈﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ[ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻘﻴﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ]ﻣﻌﻨﺎ[ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻥ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻈ ِﺮ ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﺗﻚﻣﻌﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ]ﻣﻌﻨﺎ[ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺟﻨﺲ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻮﻉﺷﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ]ﻣﻌﻨﺎ[ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍﻫﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ «.‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻴﺰ‬
‫ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ؛ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﺎ ﺍﻣﻮﺭﻯ ﺛﺎﻧﻮﻯﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻥ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻯ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﺟﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪ 28«.‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺻﺪﻕ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺟﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﺷ ّﺪ ِﺕ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻭ ﻗﻴﺎﺱﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻛﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺫﻳﻞ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ِ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﻫﺮ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﮔﻨﺠﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻋﺘﻘﺎﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺸﺎﺑ ِﻪ‬
‫»ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺟﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺶﺗﺮ ﺩﻳﺪﻳﻢ؛ ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺷ ّﺪ ِﺕ ﻣﺤﺾ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ‪ ،‬ﺳﺆﺍﻝ ﺍﺯ ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻰ )»ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟«(‬ ‫ﭼﻨﺎﻥﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪» :‬ﻭﺍژﺓ ﻫﺴﺖ )‪(to stin‬‬
‫ﺟﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺆﺍﻝ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ )»ﭼﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ؟«( ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺻﺪﻕ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤ ِﻮ ﻳﻜﺴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ )ﻣﺎﻳﻘﺎﻝ ﻓﻰ ﺟﻮﺍﺏ ﻣﺎﻫﻮ( ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮ ﺍﻭﻟﻰ ﻭ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮ ﺛﺎﻧﻮﻯ‪ «.‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ )ﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻰء ﻫﻮ ﻫﻮ( ﺑﻪﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ‬ ‫»‪...‬ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺩﻟﻴﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﺪﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﺩ‪:‬‬
‫ﮔﻰ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﻓﺮﺩﻯ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻌﻤﻴﻢ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؛ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﻪ ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻛﻠﻴﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﭘﺬﻳﺮﺩ ﻭ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺮ ﺍﺟﺘﻨﺎﺏﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺨﻤﺼﺔ ﺑﻰ ّ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻓﺮﺩﻳﺖ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺮ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮﻯ ﺍﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﻣﻨﻔﺮﺩ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﻣﻨﻔﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻪ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﺪ ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﻘ ّﻮﻡ ﻓﺮﺩﻳﺘﺸﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺟﻮ ِﺩ‬
‫ﺍﺻﻞ ﺗﻔّﺮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺣﻤﻞ‬ ‫ﺑﻪﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺷ ّﺪﺕ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﻪ ﻓﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻔﺮﺩ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺁﻥﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢﺷﻜﻞ ﺑﺎ ]ﻓﺼﻞ ﻭ ﺟﻨﺲ[‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻳﮕﺎﻧﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻼ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻥ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻓﺮ ِﺩ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺻﻞ ّ‬
‫‪25‬‬
‫ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻙ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻯ‬ ‫ﺟﺴﺖﻭﺟﻮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ «.‬ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ ﮔﺰﻳﻨﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻭﻝ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻧﻰ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ »ﺳﺮﻫﻢ«‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺼﻞ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻘﻞ ﻗﻮﻝ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺭﺍﻫﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚﺗﺮ ﺷﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺪﻑ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪53 1393‬‬

‫ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻣﻨﻔﺮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎ ِﻡ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﻳﻚ ﺫﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻳﺎ ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﻭ »ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ« ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺧﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﺭﻩ‬ ‫ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻙ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺳﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﺒﻨﺪﻯ ﻭ ﺑﺴﻂِ‬
‫‪29‬‬
‫ﭘﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﻳﻚ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺮﺽ ﺩﻳﺪ ﻣﺎ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ :‬ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻳﻚ ﺷ ّﺪﺕ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭﺟﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﻪ ﻭﺟﻬﻰ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺁﻛﺴﻔﻮﺭﺩﻯ ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ‪» ،‬ﺑﺰﺭگﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﺳﮕﻔﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺗﺄﻟﻴﻔﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﻴﺌﺖ‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺷﻤﺎﺭ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻯ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﺤﺾ«‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩـﻭﺟﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ِ .‬‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﺗﻚﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻬﻢ=ﻧﺰﻟﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻰﺷﻤﺎ ِﺭ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻮﺻﻮﻓﻰ ﻭﺍﺣ ِﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ ﻭﺟﻬﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺮﻯ »ﺧﻨﺜﻰ«‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﻭ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻴﻦ ﻭ ﻋﺎﻡ‪،‬‬
‫)‪ (Deus sive Natura‬ﺭﺍ »ﺑﻴﺎﻥ« ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺎ ِﻡ ﺑﻠﻨ ِﺪ‬ ‫ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻕ ﻭ ﻧﺎﻣﺨﻠﻮﻕ ﻻﺍﻗﺘﻀﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺰ ِﺩ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﮔﺮﭼﻪ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ« ﺑﻪ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻬﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﺍﻩ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻭ ﺻﻔﺎﺗﺶ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﺣﺎﻳﻞ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺍﻩ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺍﻩ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻕ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺍﻩ ﻧﺎﻣﺨﻠﻮﻕ‪....‬‬
‫ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﮔﺎ ِﻡ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻳﻜﺴﺎﻥ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪» .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻓﻘﻂ‬
‫ﻣﺸﻜﻞ ﻧﻈﺎ ِﻡ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ »ﻣﻌﻨﺎ« ﻳﺎ »ﺫﺍﺕ« ﺍﻣﺮﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺘﻀﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﺖ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣﺴﺐ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭ ﺩﺷﻤﻨﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻘﺮﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ »ﺧﺒﺮ ﺧﻮﺵ« ﺍﻋﻼﻡ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭﺭﻃﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻮﺷﻴﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﮕﺮﻳﺰﺩ ﻣﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻴﻢ‪:‬‬
‫»ﻣﻌﻨﺎ«‪» ،‬ﺫﺍﺕ« ﻳﺎ »ﺍﻳﺪﻩ« ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻘ ّﺪﺭ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺩﻭ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ‪،‬‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺧﻨﺜﻰ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﺶ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩ‪ «.‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﻭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻪﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ »ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪» .‬ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﺻﻮﺭﻯ«‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺑﺎ ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ »ﻣﻌﻨﺎ« ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻭ »ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﺣﺎﻟﺖﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺟﻪﻫﺎ«‪ .‬ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﺻﻮﺭﻯ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰﻯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﻥ« ﻧﻴﭽﻪﺍﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻳﺎ ﺷ ّﺪﺕ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫»ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻟﺰﻭﻣﺎ ﻋﺪﺩﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﺦ ﺗﻤﺎﻳ ِﺰ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺍﻣﺮ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻨﺪ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻳﺨﺖ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺩ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻤﺎﻳ ِﺰ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻤﺎﻳ ِﺰ ﻭﺟﻪﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻫﮕﻞ‬
‫ﻭ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺣﺲ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﺮﺩ‪» ،‬ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ«‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻟﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺻﻔﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ« ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺔ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﻭ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻓﺎﺭﻍ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﮔﺬﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﺮﺍ ِﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻳﺎ ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﭘﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻜﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ؛‬ ‫ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺩﭼﺎﺭﻧﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺧﻠﻘﺖ« ﻭ »ﺻﺪﻭﺭ« ﻭ ﻣﺸﻜﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ« ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻓﻬﻤﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﺩﻭﻡ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺖ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ ﺗﻜﺮﺍ ِﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﺮﺍ ِﺭ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺷ ّﺪﺗﻰ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺮﻙ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ »ﺑﻴﺎﻧﻰ«‪ 30‬ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺧﻨﺜﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺣﺲ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ«‪» ،‬ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻫﻮﻳﺖ«‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ »ﺟﻮﻫﺮ«‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻣﺮ ﻋﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻭ »ﻭﺣﺪﺕ« ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﺆﻟﻔﺔ‬ ‫ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ‬ ‫»ﺟﻮﻫﺮ«‬ ‫ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺪﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺎﮔﻔﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺳﻴﻄﺮﺓ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ ﺟﺰﻣﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ‬‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﭼﻨﺎﻥﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ ِ‬
‫]ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ[ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺯﻣﻴﻦﻟﺮﺯﺓ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ »ﺻﻔﺖ« ﻭ »ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﺑﻴﺎﻥ«‪ 31‬ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‬
‫ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻼ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﻭﺣﺪﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻫﺸﺎﻥ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬ ‫ﺳﻨﮓ »ﺟﻮﻫﺮ« ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻪ« ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺘﻰ ﻫﻢ ِ‬ ‫ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﻮﻳﺖ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ )ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﭘﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ(؛ ﻫﻮﻳﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ‪ (1‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ ِ‬ ‫ﺰ‬ ‫ﺗﻤﺎﻳ‬ ‫ﺍﻭﻝ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺩﺳﺘﺔ‬ ‫ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻗﺎﺋﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﺩﺳﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ‬
‫)ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻗﻮﺍﻡ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ(‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪ ،‬ﻭ ‪ (3‬ﺻﻔﺖ‪ .‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺻﻔﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﻫﺮ ﺻﻔﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫)ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻧﺔ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺷﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻳﺎ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺻﻔﺖﻫﺎ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ِ‬
‫ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭﺵ ﻛﺮﺩ(‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ‪ (1‬ﻭﺟﻪﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺎﻟﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ ‪ (2‬ﺻﻔﺖﻫﺎ؛‬ ‫ﺩﺳﺘﺔ ﺩﻭﻡ‪ :‬ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚﺳﻮ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ِ‬
‫ﻛﻢﻛﻢ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻪﮔﺎﻧﻪﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﻫﺮ ﻭﺟﻪ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﻭﺟﻪ‪ِ .33‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ‪ (1‬ﻭﺟﻪ‪ 32‬ﻭ ‪ِ (2‬‬
‫ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺒﻴﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺳﺨﻦ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺻﻔﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻨﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻭﺟﻬﻰ ﺍﺯ ِ‬
‫ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﺑﻪﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﺎﻟﻜﺘﻴﻜﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺫﺍﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺟﻪﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ِ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﺩﻳﺎﻟﻜﺘﻴﻚ‬ ‫ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﺭﺟﺎﺕ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺷﺪﺕ ﻭ ﺿﻌﻒ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻫﺮ ﺻﻔﺖ‬
‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﺨﺸﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬ ‫‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﺮﺍ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺟﻮ ﻫﻴﻮ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﻫﺮ ﻭﺟﻪ ﺩﺭﺟﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ‪ 34‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ِ ،‬‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻫﮕﻞ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻫﮕﻞ«‪ ،‬ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﺩِ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﺟﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺷﺪﺕ ﺧﺎﺹ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ ژﺍﻥ ﻫﻴﭙﻮﻟﻴﺖ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﭘﻴﭽﻴﺪﮔﻰ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺻﻔﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺻﻔﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ِ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮﻯ« ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﻫﮕﻞ ﻭ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺟﺪﺍﻝﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪ .‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮﻯ‪ ،‬ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﺑﺮ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻭ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺎﻟﺖﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰ ﻭ ﻋﻤﻴﻖﺗﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻌﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺟﻪﻣﻨﺪ‪ 35‬ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺩِﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ژﺍﻥ ﻫﻴﭙﻮﻟﻴﺖ ﻳﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍﻭ‪ ،‬ﺷﻜﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻰﺷﻤﺎ ِﺭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻋﺮﺻﺔ ﻭﺟﻪﻫﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺑﻴﺎﻥ« ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻴﭙﻮﻟﻴﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﻧﻜﺎﺗﻰ ﺑﺲ ﻣﻬﻢ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻑ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﻴﭙﻮﻟﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺣﺎﻟﺖﻫﺎ‪» ،‬ﺑﻴﺎﻥ« ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ؛ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺩﺭ ﭼﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﺔ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻫﮕﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻪﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﻮ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻄﻰ ﺗﻌﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺟﻪﻣﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺻﻔﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ؟ ﻫﺮ ﻭﺟﻪ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪54‬‬

‫ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻯ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﺎﻟﻜﺘﻴﻚ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ﺗﻀﺎﺩﻫﺎ ﺗﻐﺬﻳﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺎﺯﻭﻛﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﻛﻪ ﻇﺮﻳﻒﺗﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻨﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺴﻂِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺭﻭﺡ‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻧﻜﺘﺔ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ‪» :‬ﻫﻴﭙﻮﻟﻴﺖ‬
‫ﻭ ﻧﻬﺎﻧﻰﺗﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﺧﺒﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ]‪ «.[...‬ﺳﺎﺯﻭﻛﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﻮ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻨﻰ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻫﻴﭙﻮﻟﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ 36«.‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻴﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺨﺶ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻭﺭﺯﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﻜﺮ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺧﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻫﮕﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻧﮕﺎﺭﺵ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺑﺤﺚ‬ ‫ﻭﺍژﮔﺎﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺟ ّﺪﻯ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ؛ »ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﻮﺍﻇﺐ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺭﻣﺎﻥ ﭘﺮﻭﺭﺷﻰ«‪ 37‬ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﻮ ﻓﺮﺍﺯﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﻠﻬﻢ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺣ ّﺪ ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﻧﺸﻮﻳﻢ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺭﻭﺡ ﻫﮕﻞ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪:‬‬ ‫ِ ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬ ‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻫﻴﭙﻮﻟﻴﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﭘﻴﮕﻴﺮﻯ ﺳﻴ ِﺮ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻨﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ ﺗﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻈﻮ ِﺭ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻴﻞ ﺭﻭﺳﻮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻮﺑﻴﻨﮕﻦ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‪/‬ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫»ﻫﮕﻞ ِ‬
‫ﺣﺴﺎﺏ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍژﺓ »ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ« ﻭ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺎﺭﺏ ﺁﻣﻮﺯﺷﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺎﺗﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﺗﻘﺎﻯ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ‬
‫ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺟ ّﺪﻯ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻛﻪ »ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻫﮕﻞ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺭﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺧﺎﺹ ﺁﻥﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ [...] .‬ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻭﺻﻒ ﺳﺎﻳ ِﺮ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﺍﺳ ِﺮ ﺁﺛﺎ ِﺭ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ‬ ‫ﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺴﻂِ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﻘﻴﺐ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺁﻣﻮﺯﺵ‬
‫‪39‬‬
‫ﺩﻗﺎﻳﻖ ﻧﻈﺎ ِﻡ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻜﺮﺭ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ‪ «.‬ﻭﻟﻰ ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻭﺭﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﺗﻮﺍﺯﻯ ﻳﺎ ﻗﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺶﺗﺮ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮﮔﺎ ِﻩ ﻣﻨﺤﺼﺮﺍً ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮﮔﺎﻩ‬
‫ﺭﻓﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﺎﻣﻰ ﺟﻠﻮﺗﺮ ﺑﺮﺩ؟ ﺁﻳﺎ ﺗﻮﺍﺯﻯ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺑﻪ ُ ﺑﻌ ِﺪ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﻧﺶ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ‪ «.‬ﺑﻪ ﺯﻋﻢ ﻫﻴﻮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؟ ﺁﻳﺎ ﻧﻈﺎ ِﻡ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻫﮕﻞ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺑُﻌ ِﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﺪﺭﻳﺠﻰ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻤﺎﺭ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪» :‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺴﻂِ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺩﻳﺎﻟﻜﺘﻴﻚ ﻫﮕﻠﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑُﻌﺪﻯ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ؟‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭﺵ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﮕﻰ‬ ‫ﻃﻰ ﺁﻥ ﺳﻮژﻩﺍﻯ ﻧﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ِ‬
‫ﺩﻗﻴﻘﻪﺍﻯ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻫﮕﻞ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﻞ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺪ‪ «.‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺁﻳﺎ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻧﻘﺶ ﺭﺍ »ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ« ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﺍﺳ ِﺮ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻬﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺁﻣﻮﺯﺵ ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ؟‬ ‫ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻛﺎ ِﺭ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﻣﻨﻔﻰ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺣﺴﻰ‬ ‫ﻳﻘﻴﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﺮﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪» ،‬ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺭﺟﻮﻉ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪،‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺨﺘﺼﺎﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺢ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﮔﺰﻳﺴﺘﺎﻧﺲ ﻫﻴﭙﻮﻟﻴﺖ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺩﻗﻴﻖﺗﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺪ ِﺭ ﺟﺎﻣ ِﻊ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻭ‬
‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺭﺍﻫﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥﺑُﺮ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫»ﺩﻳﺎﻟﻜﺘﻴﻚ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭙﻮﻟﻴﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢ ﻧﮕﺎﺭﻧﺪﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺮﮔﻮﻳﻰ ﻣﻌﺎﻑ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺯﻭﺩﺗﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ« ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪» ،‬ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ«ﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﻮ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻘﺼﺪ )ﺍﮔﺮ ﻣﻘﺼﺪﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ!( ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺠﺎﺳﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﺰﺩ ﻫﮕﻞ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻴ ِﺮ ﺩﻳﺎﻟﻜﺘﻴﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ِﻩ ﻣﻴﺎﻥﺑُﺮ؟ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﺳﮕﻔﺘﺎ ِﺭ ‪ 24/9/1980‬ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺎﻣﻪﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫»ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ« ﺗﺎ »ﻣﻌﻨﺎ«‪» :‬ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪ ﻭ ﺣﺴﺎﺳﻴﺖ ﺩﻭ‬
‫ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﻣﺘﻨﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ »ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ‬ ‫ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻧﻤﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﭼﺸﻤﺔ‬
‫ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺧﺮﺩﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ ﺟﺒﺮ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ« ﻧﺎﻡ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ]ﺳﺮﭼﺸﻤﻪﺍﻯ[ ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﻴﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻴﺌﻰ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺭﺟﻮﻉ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺘﻦ‪ ،‬ﻛﻞ ﻣﺎﺟﺮﺍ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪ‪ .‬ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﻣﻰﻛﻮﺷﺪ‬ ‫ﺁﻥﻛﻪ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺳﺎﺕ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺸﻔﺶ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﻠﻰ ﺍﻋﻄﺎ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻧﻰ ﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﮕﻞ ﮔﺬﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺟﺒ ِﺮ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﻧﻴﺰ ﮔﺮﻳﺰﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺮ ِﺩ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻋﺎﻡ ]ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ[ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‬
‫‪38‬‬
‫ﻧﺒﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ «.‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺎﺟﺮﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺭﺳﻢ ﻳﻚ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺷﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪«.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻘﻞ ﻗﻮﻝ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺔ ﺩﻭﻣﻴﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﺔ ﻣﻮﺭ ِﺩ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻫﻴﻮ‬
‫»ﻧﻔﻰ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ« ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺰ ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺑﺎ ِ‬
‫ﺩﻳﺎﻟﻜﺘﻴﻜﻰ ﻧﻔﻰ ﻧﻪ ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻚ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﻴﭙﻮﻟﻴﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ‬ ‫ﺩ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺧﻮ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻰ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻔﻰ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﺷﺖ ﺳﻠﺒﻰ ﻳﺎ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﻳﻘﻴﻨﻰ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﺍﺭﺯﺷﻰ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻗﻄﻌﻴﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴﻴ ِﺮ ﺳﻔﺮﺵ ﺁﻥ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ‬
‫ﻧﻔﻰ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺏ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮﻯ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ ﻣﻰ‬
‫»ﻧﻔﻰ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ »ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺯﻳﺴﺘﺔ‬ ‫ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﺗﻮ ِﺭ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ِ‬
‫ﻧﻔﻰ ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨﺎﻗﺾ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻧﻔﻰ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ِ ،‬‬
‫ﺛﺎﻧﻮﻯ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻝ ِ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ً‬
‫ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺗﻨﺎﻗﺾ ﺻﺮﻓﺎ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎ ِﻩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻮﺗﻮﺭ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻨﺎﻗﺾ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﻮ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺄﻳﻴﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺯﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﺁﻭﺭﺩﻩﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬
‫)ﺷﻜﻞ ‪(1‬‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻞ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﻳﺎ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺻﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ ِ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪55 1393‬‬

 ‫ﺍﺭﻳﺐ ‪EY‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺳﺖ ‪ AX‬ﺭﺍ ﺭﺳﻢ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺳﭙﺲ ﺧﻂِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺧﻂِ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻃﻮﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻂِ ‪AX‬ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ‪ C‬ﻗﻄﻊ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﺑﻌﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ‪ E‬ﺧﻄﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻋﻤﻮﺩ ﺑﺮ ‪AX‬ﺭﺳﻢ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‬
‫ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ‪e‬ﻣﻰﻧﺎﻣﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺧﻄﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎﻡ ‪ y‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ‬
‫‪ Y‬ﺑﺮ ﺧﻂِ ‪ AX‬ﻋﻤﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺩﻭ ﺧﻂ ‪ e‬ﻭ ‪ y‬ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺍﺯﻯﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﻫﺮﺩﻭ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻂ ‪ AX‬ﻋﻤﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﺔ ﻣﺎﺟﺮﺍ‬
‫ﻛﻞ ﺧﻂِ ‪ AX‬ﺭﺍ ‪ x‬ﻣﻰﻧﺎﻣﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﻗﻀﺎﻳﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺧﻂِ ‪ AC‬ﺭﺍ‪ c‬ﻭ ِ‬
‫ﻣﺜﻠﺚﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﺸﺎﺑﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﻣﺜﻠﺚ ‪ XCY‬ﻭ ‪ACE‬ﻣﺘﺸﺎﺑﻪﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺴﺎﻭﻯ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» ...x-c)/y=c/e) :‬ﺣﺎﻝ‬
‫ﻫﺮ ﭼﻪ ﺧﻂ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ‪ EY‬ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ‪ A‬ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚﺗﺮ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﺘﺤﺮﻙ ‪ C‬ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻧﮕﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺧﻂﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﺍﺳﺖ ‪c‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻘﻄﺔ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ‪c/e‬ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ‪e‬ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﻛﻮﭼﻚﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬
‫ﻓﺮﺽ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ‪ 1‬ﻭ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﺔ ﻣﻔﺮﻭﺽ ‪45‬‬
‫)ﺷﻜﻞ ‪(2‬‬ ‫ﻣﺜﻠﺚ ‪ ACE‬ﺭﻓﺘﻪ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ ﻛﻮﭼﻚﺗﺮ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺟﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ 40«.‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﺭ ِ‬
‫ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﺧﻂ ‪ EY‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ‪ A‬ﻧﺎﭘﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺕ ‪y‬ﺑﻪ ‪ x‬ﻳﻚ ﻋﺪﺩ ﺻﺤﻴﺢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺍﻭﻗﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺣﺘﻰ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺧﻂ ﺭﺍﺳﺖ ‪ EY‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ‪ A‬ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ‪C‬‬
‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺷﻴﺐ ﻣﻨﺤﻨﻰ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ‪ y‬ﻓﻘﻂ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ‪x‬‬ ‫ﻭ ‪E‬ﺭﻭﻯ ‪A‬ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺧﻂﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﺍﺳﺖ ‪AC‬ﻭ ‪ AE‬ﻳﺎ ﻭ ‪e‬‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺕ ‪ y‬ﺑﻪ ‪ x‬ﻧﻪ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺍﻭﻗﺎﺕ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﺜﻠﺚ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ‪c/e‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﭘﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺷﻴﺐ ﻣﻨﺤﻨﻰ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﺁﻫﻨﮓ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ )‪ x-c)/y=c/e‬ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫‪ XCY‬ﭘﺎﺑﺮﺟﺎﺳﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻫﺎﺑﺰ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺕ ‪ y‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ‪ x‬ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺍﺭﺩﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﭼﻪ ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﺪ‪ c .‬ﻭ ‪ e‬ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﻛﻮﭼﻚﺗﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﻓﻴﻖ ﮔﺎﻟﻴﻠﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ ‪ y‬ﻧﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ‪ x‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﻴﭻﮔﺎﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺮ ﻧﻤﻰﺭﺳﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ‪ c‬ﻭ ‪ e‬ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﻼ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺑﻊ ﺳﺎﺩﺓ ‪ y=x2‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ‪ x‬ﺍﺯ ‪ 1‬ﺑﻪ ‪2‬‬ ‫ﻫﻢ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﻣﻄﻠﻘ ًﺎ ﻫﻴﭻ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ‪ x‬ﻭ ‪ y‬ﻫﻴﭻﺍﻧﺪ‪» :‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺍﮔﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ‪ 1‬ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ y ،‬ﺍﺯ ‪ 1‬ﺑﻪ ‪ 4‬ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬ ‫‪ c‬ﻭ ‪ e‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ‪ CE‬ﻭ ‪A‬‬ ‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ‬
‫‪ 3‬ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ‪ x‬ﺍﺯ ‪ 2‬ﺑﻪ ‪ 3‬ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪y ،‬ﭘﻨﺞ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻨﻄﺒﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪c ،‬ﻭ ‪e‬ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺴﺎﻭﻯ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﺳﻰ‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ‪ x‬ﺍﺯ ‪ 3‬ﺑﻪ ‪ 4‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪y ،‬‬ ‫ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭ ﺻﻔﺮ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮﻧﺪ )‪ ،(0=0‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬
‫ﻫﻔﺖ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ‪ x‬ﺍﺯ ‪ 4‬ﺑﻪ ‪ 5‬ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ‪ y‬ﻧُﻪ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ x/y=c/e‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻟﺔ‪ x/y=0/0=1‬ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺻﺪ ِﺩ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﺔ‬
‫ﻧﻜﺎﺕ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻰ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺁﻥ‪ x=y :‬ﻭ ﻣﺤﺎﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍﻛﻪ ﻓﺮﺽ ﻛﺮﺩﻳﻢ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﺔ‬
‫‪41‬‬
‫ﺷﺮﺣﻰﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ »ﺗﻐﻴﻴ ِﺮ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ« ﻣﻰﺭﺳﻴﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫‪(1‬‬ ‫‪ 45‬ﺩﺭﺟﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ‪c‬ﻭ ‪e‬ﻓﻘﻂ ﺩﺭ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ‬
‫‪42‬‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻓﻴﺜﺎﻏﻮﺭﻳﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻛﻤﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ »ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻮﺍﻓﻖ«‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ‪x‬ﻭ ‪y‬ﺻﻔﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺟﺒﺮﻯ ﻣﻌﻴﻨﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻮﻗﻒ ﻣﻰﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻋﺪ ِﻡ‬ ‫‪ c‬ﻭ ‪ e‬ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﻭ ﻛﻮﭼﻚﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﺷﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﻓﻖ ﻛﻤﻴﺖﻫﺎ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺗﻐﻴﻴ ِﺮ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺭﻭﻳﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺑﻪ‬
‫»ﺷﺪﻥ ﻣﺤﺾ« ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ »ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ« ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻭ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ ‪ x‬ﻭ ‪y‬ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺻﺪﺩ ﻓﺮﺍﭼﻨﮓ‬ ‫»ﻛﻮﻧﺎﺗﻮﺱ«‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﻋﺪﻡ ﺗﻮﺍﻓﻖ« ﻳﺎ »ﻗﻴﺎﺱﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ« ﻧﻪ ﺑﻦﺑﺴﺖ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻐﻴﻴ ِﺮ ‪y‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﺮﻙ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ‪x‬ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻨﺤﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ ﻣﺨﺘﺼﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻓﻴﻦ‬ ‫‪(2‬‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ‪x‬ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺗﻰ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻝ ﺍﮔﺮ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‪ dx :‬ﻭ ‪ dy‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ‪ x‬ﻭ ‪ y‬ﺻﻔﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﺸﺎﻥ )‪dx/‬‬ ‫ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ‪ dx‬ﻣﻰﺭﺳﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺯﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴ ِﺮ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ‬
‫‪ (dy‬ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻟﺶ‬ ‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ‪ ،‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴ ِﺮ ‪ y‬ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎﺑﻊ ‪ x‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪dy ،‬ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ‬
‫ﻃﺮﻓﻴﻦ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ؛‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﺸﺘﻴﻢ‪ :‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﻳﺪﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ‪dy‬ﻭ ‪dx‬ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎ« ﻳﺎ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ«‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﺤﺾ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﻴﭻ ﮔﺎﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺮ ﻧﻤﻰﺭﺳﺪ )‪ (dx≠dy‬ﻭ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪ dy/dx‬ﻣﻘﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﻌﻴﻨﻰ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺪﺍ ِﺭ ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﺁﻫﻨﮓ ﺗﻐﻴﻴ ِﺮ‬
‫ﺟﻮ ﻫﻴﻮ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﺔ ﻫﮕﻞ ﻭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ‬ ‫‪(3‬‬ ‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺕ ‪ y‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺤﻨﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻴﺐ ﺧﻂ ﻣﻤﺎﺱ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫‪ y‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ‪x‬ﻳﺎ ِ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻗﺾ ﺧﻮﺩﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﻪ‬ ‫»ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻫﮕﻞ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ‪x‬ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﺗﻤﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ« ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻏﻴ ِﺮ‬ ‫ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ‪ y‬ﻭ ‪ x‬ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﺻﻔﺮ ﻣﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺸﺎﻭﻳﺮﺷﺘﺮﺍﻭﺳﻰ‪ 43‬ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻛﺴﻴﻮﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻧﺸﺎﻥﺩﻫﻨﺪﺓ »ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻞ« ﻣﻨﺤﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﻣﻨﺤﻨﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪:‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺧﺎﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﺪﻳﻢ‪،‬‬ ‫»ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﻯ ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ« ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪56‬‬

‫ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺷﻜﻞ ‪ 3‬ﺩﻭ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻄﻖ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﺣ ّﺪﻯ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺎﻣﺔ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ‬ ‫‪(4‬‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺭﻓﺘﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﺍﺯ ‪virtuel/‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻯ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪﺍﺵ ﺧﻂِ ﻣﻤﺎﺱ‬ ‫‪ virtual‬ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺍﺯ ‪virtuel/‬‬
‫»ﻣﻴﻞ« ﻣﻨﺤﻨﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﻣﻨﺤﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺧﻄﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴ ِﺮ ﺷﻴﺐ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫‪ virtual‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺭﻃﻪﺍﻯ ﻋﻈﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ ‪ virtuel/virtual‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻣﻨﺤﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻤﺎﺱ ﻧﻪ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‬ ‫»ﻭﻳﺮﺗﻮﺋﻞ« ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻰ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ »ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ«‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻰ ﺟﺪﺍ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫»ﺧﻴﺰﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺘﮕﻰ« ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ »ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ«‪»،‬ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ »ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ« ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪﺍﻯ ﻓﺮﻭﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ‪» .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ«‬
‫ﻣﺠﺎﺯﻯ«‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻗﻮﻩ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ‬
‫»ﻭﻳﺮﺗﻮﺋﻞ« ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺴﻰ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺜﻠﺚ‬ ‫ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺑﺴﺎ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ؟ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻜﻞ ‪ِ 1‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﻮﺷﻮﻧﺪﺓ ‪» ACE‬ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ« ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ‪vituellement/‬‬
‫‪» virtually‬ﺣﻀﻮﺭ« ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﺪﻳﻢ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺛﺎﺑﺘﻰ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﻳﺪﺍﺩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﻮﺷﻮﻧﺪﺓ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺜﻠﺚ‬
‫ﺻﻼﺑﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﺭﺳﻢ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻓﺮﺍﻣﻮﺵ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﺜﻠﺚ ‪ XCY‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﺑﻌﺎﺩﺵ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻓﺶ ﺑﻨﮕﺮﻳﻢ‪،‬‬
‫ﻓﻀﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻃﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻣﺨﺘﺼﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻣﺜﻠﺚ‬ ‫ﺭﻭﻳﺪﺍ ِﺩ ﺗﻐﻴﻴ ِﺮ ‪ c‬ﻭ ‪ e‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺤﻮ ﺷﺪﻥ ِ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﭘﺎﺑﺮﺟﺎ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮﻯ ﻣﺜﻠﺚ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮ‬
‫»ﻣﺠﺎﺯﻯ« ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﺭﺳﻢ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫»ﻭﻳﺮﺗﻮﺋﻞ« ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺴﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺜﻠﺚ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺠﺎﺯﻯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ‪» ،‬ﺍﻣ ِﺮ‬
‫»ﻭﻳﺮﺗﻮﺋﻞ« ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻰ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﺣﺖ ﺑُﻌﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺷﻜﻞ ‪3‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺗﺮﺳﻴﻢ ﻳﺎ ﺗﻮﻟﻴ ِﺪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪،‬‬
‫ﻓﺼﻞ ﭘﻨﺠﻢ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﻦﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪:‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ‪ EY‬ﻭ ‪ A‬ﻓﺎﺻﻠﺔ ﺩﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺷﻜﻞ ‪ 1‬ﺑﺎ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚﺗﺮ‬ ‫‪(5‬‬
‫»ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ‪C‬ﻭ ‪A‬ﻳﺎ ‪ E‬ﻭ ‪ A‬ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﻛﻢﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺳﺮﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺮﻁِ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻫﻴﭻ »ﺑُﻌﺪ« ﻳﺎ »ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ«‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻧﻪ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻧﺎﻣﺔ ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭ ِﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻧﻮﻣﻦ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ «.‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ »ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ‬ ‫ﻓﻘﺪﺍﻥ ﺑُﻌﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﮔﻔﺘﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫»ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎ‪ «...‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺷﺘﺒﺎﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺘﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫»ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻰ« ﻳﺎ »ﻫﻴﭻ« ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺤﻮ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺷﺮﻁِ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ »ﻫﺴﺖ« ﻭ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺷﺮﻁِ ﻇﻬﻮ ِﺭ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ »ﻧﻮﻣﻦ«‬ ‫ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪) .‬ﺷﻜﻞ ‪ (3‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺟﺰ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪ؟ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ »ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚﺗﺮﻳﻦ« ﻧﻮﻣﻦ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﺔ ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻣﻦ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺷﻰء ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﺔ ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ »ﺍﺷﺘﺪﺍﺩﻯ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻪﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ‬
‫ﭘﺸﺖ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮﻯ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﺎﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻨﻰ ﭘﻨﻬﺎﻥ ِ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﻟﺐ »ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺩﺭﺟﺎ«‪ ،‬ﺑﻰ‬ ‫ﺷ ّﺪ ِﺕ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻣﻴﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫»ﺩﻭﺭ« ﺍﺯ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﺷﺘﺒﺎﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ »ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻣﻦ« ﻧﻪ ﺑﻮﺩﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ »ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ«‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﻴﭻ ﺑُﻌﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩﻯ؛ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺷﺮﻁِ‬
‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﺷﺪﻥ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺸﺖ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺷﺮﻁِ‬
‫ﭘﺲ ِ‬ ‫ﭘﻨﻬﺎﻥ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻣﻦ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻢ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ »ﺑﻮﺩ«‬ ‫ﺑﻰ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻧﮕﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ »ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﺴﻴﻦ« ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ؛ »ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ﻳﺎ »ﺫﺍﺕ« )‪ (Essence‬ﺑﻪﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻰ ﺍﺷﺘﺒﺎﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪«.‬‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﻯ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﺷﺮﻁِ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺎﺕ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺤﻮﺍﻯ‬ ‫‪(6‬‬
‫ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻫﻴﭻ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ »ﻣﺤﺎﺳﺒﻪ« ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫»ﺳﻨﺘﺰ« ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭘﻰ ﺑﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻢ‬
‫ﮔﺎﻩ »ﺗﺮﺍﺯ« ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﻫﻴﭻ ﮔﺎﻩ »ﻭﺍﺣﺪ« ﻳﺎ ﻗﺎﺑﻞﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﻓﺸﺮﺩﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻭ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻓﺸﺮﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺑﺮ »ﻭﺍﺣﺪ« ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪» .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﺗﺮﺍﺯ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺑُﻌﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﺤﻮﻳﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ »ﺑﺎﻗﻴﻤﺎﻧﺪﻩ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ‬ ‫ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺤﻮ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻳﻜﺴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﻭﺩ‪ :‬ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪ ﻣﮕﺮ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺍﻋﺪﺍ ِﺩ ﻛﺴﺮﻯ ﻭ ﺣ ّﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﻢ ﻓﺸﺮﺩﮔﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﻭ ﻓﺮﺍﮔﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻣﺠﻤﻮ ِﻉ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ‪،‬‬
‫‪44‬‬
‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻮﺍﻓﻖ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺷ ّﺪﺗﻰ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻛﻪ »ﻣﻴﻞ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪57 1393‬‬

‫ﺍﺛﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎﺱﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻰﻭﻗﻔﻪ ﺭﻳﺨﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﻴﻦﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺩﻩ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻰﻫﻴﭻ ﻣﻜﺜﻰ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭ ِﺩ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻰ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ‪ :‬ﺩﺭ ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻪﮔﺎﻧﺔ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺩﺓ ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﭼﻪ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ؟ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﭼﻪﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻭﺳﻄﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺳﻴﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺮﻥ ﻫﻔﺪﻫﻢ ﻭ ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﻗﺮﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ« ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻤﻘﻰ ﺟﺴﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﻘﻴﺐ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﺑﻘﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺮژﻯ ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺲ )ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻣﻮﺍﺭ )ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢﻫﺎ( ﺍﺷﺘﺒﺎﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻗﻠﻤﺮ ِﻭ‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﺑﻘﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻩ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺕ ﻭ ﻧﻴﻮﺗﻦ( ﺑﺮﺳﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻖ ﺟﺴﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﻗﻴﺎﻧﻮﺳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ِ‬
‫ﻋﻠﺖ ﻛﻤﺒﻮﺩ ﺟﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﻂ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﻛﻮﻧﺎﺗﻮﺱ« ﺑﺴﻨﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﺑﻰﻭﻗﻔﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺑﻪﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﺭﻝ ﺑﻮﻳﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺘﮕﺮﺍﻝ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ‪ ،‬ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺭﺳﺎﻧﺔ ﻓﻬﻢ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ‪ ،‬ﺧﺒﺮﻯ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺮﻥ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﺩﻫﻢ‪ ،‬ژﺍﻥ ﺑﻮﺭﻳﺪﺍﻥ )ﻳﻮﻫﺎﻧﺲ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ‪» .‬ﺣﺮﻑ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﻨﺪ«‪» ،45‬ﻫﻤﻬﻤﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺭﻳﺪﺍﻧﻮﺱ( ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻰ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ )ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻗﻮﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻌﻞ(‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ«‪» ،46‬ﻫﻤﻬﻤﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﻰﻧﺎﻡ«‪ .47‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻌﺎﺑﻴ ِﺮ ﺑﻼﻧﺸﻮﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻳﻰ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ »ﺍﻳﻨﺮﺳﻰ« ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ؛‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻖ ﺁﺷﻮﺑﻨﺎﻙ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﻧﺎﻛﺠﺎ«‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ِ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺑﻮﺭﻳﺪﺍﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ »ﺍﻳﻨﺮﺳﻰ« ﺳﺮﺷﺘﻰ ﺍﺷﺘﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﻪ »ﻛﺴﻰ« ﻫﺴﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ »ﭼﻴﺰﻯ«‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺳﻮژﻩﺍﻯ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺍﻯ‪ .‬ﺑﻼﻧﺸﻮ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺗﻐﻴﻴ ِﺮ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﻳﺎ ﺟﺎﺑﺠﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻣﻌﻴﻦ« ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ »ﺿﻤﺎﻳﺮ‬
‫»ﻛﻨﺶ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﺭﻣﺎﻧﺶ ﺗﻮﻣﺎﻯ ﮔﻤﻨﺎﻡ‪» ،‬ﺗﻮﻣﺎ« ﺭﺍ ﺷﻨﺎﻛﻨﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻳﺎ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ‬
‫ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ »ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ« ﺭﺍ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﻓﺘﻨﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ »ﺗﻮﻣﺎ«ﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺷﺨﺺ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫»ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ« ﻧﺰﺩ ﻛﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻧﻴﻜﻼﺋﻮﺱ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ‬ ‫»ﺑﺪﻧﻰ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍ ِﺭﺳﻤﻴﻮﺱ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭ ﻗﺮﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﻣﻮﺝ )ﭘﺎﺭﻩﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ( ﻏﻮﻃﻪﻭﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫ﭼﻨﺪ ﻧﺰﺩ ﮔﺎﻟﻴﻠﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ )ﻫﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ »ﺳﺮﻋﺖ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨﻰ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺵ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻏﻴﺮ ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ِ‬
‫ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ« ﺗﺎ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﺣﺴﺎﺏ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﻮﻳﻖ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﺪ(‪ .‬ﻫﺎﺑﺰ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻐﺎﻙ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍژﮔﺎﻥ ﺭﻭﺍﻧﻜﺎﻭﺍﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭﭘﻴﺶﮔﻔﺘﺎ ِﺭ‬
‫ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺗﻮﻓﻴﻖ ﮔﺎﻟﻴﻠﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﻬﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍژﮔﺎﻥ ﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ‪ .‬ﻗﺒﻞ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺭﻓﺘﻦ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺻﺪ ِﺩ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﺔ ﺷﺮﺣﻰ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﻳﻨﺮﺳﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻤﻖ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﻘﻰ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﺑﻪ ﺯﻭﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ »ﻛﻮﻧﺎﺗﻮﺱ«‬ ‫ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪﺟﺎﻯ »ﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ« ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰﻓﺮﺍﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍﻭ ﻛﻮﻧﺎﺗﻮﺱ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻨﺼ ِﺮ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺒﻮﻕ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻤﻰ ﺭﻭﺵﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ »ﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ«‪ 48‬ﺳﺨﻦ‬
‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻨﺼ ِﺮ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﻛﻮﻧﺎﺗﻮﺱ ﺭﺍ »ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺮﺍﻧﺘﺰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﺔ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ« ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ 49.‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺷﻮﺑﻰ ﺧﻮﻓﻨﺎﻙ ﻓﺮﻭ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻟﻮﻳﻨﺎﺱ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺍﺷﺘﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺗﺎ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺯ »ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ ﺣﺪّﻯ« ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ :‬ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ِ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺷﻴﻮﻩ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺑﻰ ﻧﺎﻡ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻴﺸﮕﻰ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺮﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﺮﺳﻮﻡ‬
‫ﺟﺴﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺁﺷﻮﺑﻨﺎﻛﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻋﻤﻖ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ‬
‫ﻧﺸﺎﻥ »ﻫﺴﺘﻰ« ﺭﻭﺑﺮﻭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺎﭘﺪﻳﺪ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺼﺎﺩﻓﻰ ﭘﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﻫﻤﮕﻮﻥ ﺷﺪﺕﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻨﺦ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭ ِﺩ‬ ‫)ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻰﻧﺎﻡ ﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ »ﻫﻮﺷﻴﺎﺭ« ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬
‫ﻫﻴﭻ ﻭﺟﻪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻴﻞﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺷﺪﺕﻫﺎ ﺁﻧﻰ ﺑﻴﺶ ﻧﻤﻰﭘﺎﻳﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﺏ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ(‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺷﺨﺺ ﻳﺎ ﻳﻚ ﭼﻴﺰ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻛﻞﱢ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﺑﻪ ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﺍﺯ‪mens‬‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻏﻴﺮ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺷﺨﺎﺹ ﻭ ﺍﺷﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﺔ ﺑﻰﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ »ﺑﻮﺩﻥ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ ‪...‬‬
‫ِ‬
‫»ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ« ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫‪ momentanea‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﻧﺸﺎﻥ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ«‪ il y a».il y a» ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺷﺨﺼﻰ ﻭ ﺑﻰﻧﺎﻡ ﻭ ِ‬ ‫ﺟﺴﺖﻭﺟﻮﻯ‬
‫»ﺫﻫﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻮﻗﺘﻰ«‪ .50‬ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﺓ ﻧﺎﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﮕﻰ ﺣﺎﻛﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻇﻬﻮ ِﺭ‬ ‫»ﺧﻸ ﺳﺮﺷﺎﺭ«‪» ،‬ﻫﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﺳﻜﻮﺕ« ﻳﺎ »ﻫﻤﻬﻤﺔ ﺑﻰﻧﺎﻡ ﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ«ﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻫﺎﻯ ِ‬
‫ﻧﺎﭘﺪﻳﺪﺷﺪﻥ ﻋﻨﺼﺮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 51.‬ﺫﻫﻦﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ ﻣﻘﺎﺭﻥ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﺷﻴﺎ ﻭ ﺍﺷﺨﺎﺹ ﺑﺮ ﺟﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ِ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﻮﻗﺘﻰ »ﻧﺎﻫﻢﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ«ﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ‪ il y a‬ﻭﺣﺸﺘﻨﺎﻙ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺁﺷﻮﺑﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﺎ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻪﮔﺎﻧﺔ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺟﺬﺑﺔ ﻋﺮﻓﺎﻧﻰ ﺧﺒﺮﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﻳﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺼﻞ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻣﻠﻬﻢ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺟﻮ ﻫﻴﻮ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻮﺳﺮﻝ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻨﺘﺰ‬ ‫ﺳﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﺾﻛﺎﻧﺖ )»ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺎﺝ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ«(‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ِﻧﻘﺪ ﻋﻘﻞ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﻚ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬
‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻫﻮﺳﺮﻝ ﺍﺯ »ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﺍﻧﻔﻌﺎﻟﻰ«‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﻭ‬ ‫ﺟﺴﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺁﺷﻮﺑﻨﺎﻙ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﭘﻮﻳﺎ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﺮﻯ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ؛ ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻪﮔﺎﻧﺔ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﻔﻌﺎﻟﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ »ﺍﻳﺪﻩ« ﻳﺎ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻄﺢ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺮﻭﻉ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺳﻪ ﮔﺎﻡ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﻨﺮﻫﺎﻯﻫﺎﻯﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪،‬‬
‫»ﻣﻦ« ﻓﺎﻋﻞ ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﻔﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﻌﺮﻭﺽﺷﺎﻥ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺩﻭﻡ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫)ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ( ﻳﺎ ﺫﺍﺕ )ﭘﺮﻭﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ( ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﻼ ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎ ﻭ ﺗﺌﺎﺗﺮ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ »ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺫﻫﻦ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺫﻫﻦ ‪ ...‬ﺭﺥ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﺴﺘﺎ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺍﻧﻔﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺳﻪ ﺑُﻌ ِﺪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ 52«.‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺳﻪ ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰﻫﺎ‪ .‬ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﺫﺍﺕ‪ /‬ﺍﻳﺪﻩ‪ /‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻣﺠﺎﺯﻯ ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫ﭘﻴﮕﻴﺮﻯﺷﻮﺩ‪«.‬‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻤﺎﺭ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ؛ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻪ ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﺑﺎ ﺳﻪ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻤﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﭘﻮﻳﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ‪ ،il y a‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻗﻴﺎﻧﻮﺱ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺑُﻌﺪﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺳﻴﻄﺮﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﺳﻮﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺗﻼﻃﻢ »ﻣﺎﺩﻩ« ﺍﺛﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ :‬ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺼﺎﺩﻓﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪58‬‬

‫ﻧﻔﺲ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻭ ﺟﺴﺖﻭﺟﻮ ﭘﻰﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺎﺳﺦﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫»ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﺏ« ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻤﻨﺪﻯﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑُﻌ ِﺪ ﻣﺴﻠّﻄﺶ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺟﺴﺖﻭﺟﻮ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻓﻌﺎﻻﻧﻪﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ‬
‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﭙﺮﻯ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻮﺍﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑُﻌ ِﺪ ﻣﺴﻠّﻂِ‬
‫ﺳﭙﺮﻯﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﻭﻣﻰﻛﺎﻫﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺳﺮﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺟﻴ ِﻪ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻤﻨﺪﻯ »ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ« ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﻧﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺳﺮﻧﻮﺷﺘﻰ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﻡ ﻣﻨﺘﻬﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺷﺒﺤﻰ ﻧﺎﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺍﺑﻌﺎﺩﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﻗﻴﺎﺱﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﭙﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺁﺭﺍﻣﺶ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ »ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﻋﻤﻖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ »ﺁﻥ«ﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ« ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺩﺭﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺗﻤﻬﻴﺪﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺧﻼﺹﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺟﺴﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺴﺘﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﻓﺸﺎﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻧﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ‬
‫ﺷﺒﺢ ﻣﺰﺍﺣﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻗﻴ ِﺪ »ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ« ﺑﻪ ﺑﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺷﺮﻁِ‬
‫ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻫﺠﺪﻫﻢ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻧﺎﺏ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻪ ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺮﺕ ﻋﺎﺩﺕ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﻭﻣ ِﺮ ﻟﻮﻳﻰ ﺑﻨﺎﭘﺎﺭﺕ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﺁﻥﮔﺎﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ ُﭼ ِ‬ ‫ﻟﺤﻈﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻋﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺴﺘﺔ ﺍﻧﻘﺒﺎﻇﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪AB, AB, :‬‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﭘﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑُﻌﺪﻯ ﻏﺮﻳﺒﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺳﺎﻳﻪ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﻜﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻮﻳﺖﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫‪…AB, A‬؛ ﻧﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ »ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻠﻰ«‬
‫ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﺔ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻮﺷﻨﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺎﻳﺔ ﻣﺰﺍﺣﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻣﻘﺎ ِﻡ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻭ ﺩﻏﺪﻏﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ‬
‫‪53‬‬
‫ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻚ ﺭﺍﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﺭﺳﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﻬﺎﺭ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻈﻢ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻧﺠﻴﺮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺪﺍﻋﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻴﻨﻪﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ّ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﺳﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪﭼﻴﻨﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪:‬‬ ‫‪» .AB‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻠﻰ« ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻚـﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺴﺘﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫»ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻣﻰﺍﻳﺴﺘﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻓﻘﻂ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﭘﺎﻳﺪ‪ 54‬ﻭ ﻣﺤﻴﻄﻰ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ »ﺍﺛﺮ«ﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻨﻘﺒﺾ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺑﺎ »ﺧﺴﺘﮕﻰ« ﻭ »ﮔﺮﻳﺰ« ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥﻫﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺁﺷﻮﺏ ﭘﺎﺭﻩ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺳﻞ ﺑﻪ »ﻋﺎﺩﺕ« ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ؛ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻃﻨﻴﻨﻰ ﺩﻭ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻓﻘﻂ ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻰ ﺳﻤﺞ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺻﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻢ‬ ‫»ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﻳﺴﺘﺎﺩﻥ« ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺯﻯ‪ ،‬ﺧﻼﺹﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺎﺱﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻰﻭﻗﻔﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺑﺴﻂ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻋﺮﺻﺔ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺭﻳﺨﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻳﻚ »ﻭﻗﻔﻪ« ﺩﺭ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺳﻴﻼﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺩﺳﺘﻮ ِﺭ ﻗﺎﻃ ِﻊ ﺟﺴﺖﻭﺟﻮﻛﺮﺩﻥ‪ ،‬ﭘﺎﺳﺦﮔﻔﺘﻦ ﻭ ﺭﺍ ِﻩ ﺣﻞ‬ ‫ﺑﻰﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ‪ il y a‬ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﻭﻗﻔﻪ« ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪ :‬ﻫﺮﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻳﺎﺩﺁﻭﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﻗﻔﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ؛ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺧﺴﺘﮕﻰ ﻭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭﻛﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻳﺎﺩﺁﻭﺭﻯ ﻳﻚ ﺯﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﺎﺩﺁﻭﺭﻯ ﻳﻚ ﺷﻬﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﻭﺗﻴﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺍﻩ‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺶ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺗﻼﺵ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺭﻓﻊ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻨﺎﺭﻛﺸﻴﺪﻥ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺍﺭﻭﺱ ]‪ [...‬ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺭ ِﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻧﺎﺏ ﻭ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﺩﻏﺪﻏﺔ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻗﺐ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻼﺵ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺗﻜﺮﺍ ِﺭ ﺑﻜﺮ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻣﻨﻪﻣﻮﺯﻳﻨﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻛﺠﺎ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻗﺪﺭﺗﻰ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ‬ ‫ﻛﻠﻰ« ﻗﻠﻤﺮ ِﻭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻏﺪﻏﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻧﻜﺸﺎﻑ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺍﺭﻭﺗﻴﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ؟«‪ 55‬ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺍﺯ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﭼﺮﺍ‬ ‫ﻃﻰ ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﺩﻭﻡ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻥ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ‬ ‫ﱢ‬
‫ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻦ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﭙﺮﻯﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ؛ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ‬ ‫ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺳﭙﺮﻯ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺑﻴﺶ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻧﺎﺏ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺧﺎﺹ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ ﻧﺎﺭﺳﻴﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﻬﺎ ِﺭ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ »ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻠﻰ«‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺮﻭ ﺑﺨﻮﺍﺑﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ :‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ‪.‬؟‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺑﻪﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﺳﺮﻭﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺠﺎﺯﻯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﺍﺷﺘﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ« ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮ ِﺭ ﻛﻠﻰ« ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‬
‫ﺍﻧﻜﺸﺎﻑ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥﻫﺎ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﻟﺐ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺗﻘﻮﻳﻤﻰ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﻤﺎﻫﻮ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﺭﻭ ﺍﺭﻭﺗﻴﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻏﻴﺮﻳﺘﻰ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﻘﺒﺎﻇﻰ ﺩﺭﺑﺮﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪﺓ ﭘﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﻋﺎﺩﺕ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺑﺴﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻋﺎﺩﺕ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﻧﺎﺳﺎﺯﮔﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﺪﺍﻋﻰ ﻣﻘ ّﻮ ِﻡ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻧﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﮕﻨﺠﺪ؛ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺟﺴﺖﻭﺟﻮﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﺩ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ« ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﺳﻮﻡ ﻧﻪ ﻧﺎﺭﻛﺴﻴﻮﺱ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﻛﺘﺌﻮﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎ ِژ‬ ‫َ‬
‫ﻭ ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺟﺎﻥ ﺑﺨﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻜﺔ ﻧﺎﺟﻮﺭ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ِ ﻧﺎﻣﺔ »ﺍﺩﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺘﻮﻟﻮژﻯ ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﻛﺘﺌﻮﻥ ﺷﻜﺎﺭﭼﻰﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺁﺭﺗﻤﻴﺲ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺱ« ﺩﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ »ﻧﺎﻣﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻪ ﻫﻤﺴ ِﺮ« ﻣﺎﻧﻴﻜﻪﻭﻳﭻ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺳﻪ ﺯﻥ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺍﻭ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻮﺯﻥ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻨﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﻭ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻣﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ »ﺍَﺩﻯ ﺭﺍﺱ« ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﮔﻮﻳﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻦﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺣﻴﻦ ﺩﮔﺮﺩﻳﺴﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﺤﻤﺎﻡ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻛﺘﺌﻮﻥ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫»ﺍَﺩﻯ« ﺑﺎ ﻫﻤﺴ ِﺮ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺎﻥ ﺷﻬﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺗﺮﻙ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻰﺧﺒﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻧﺎﺭﻛﺴﻴﻮﺱ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻪ ﺯﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺩﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﺮ ِﺩ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﻧﺎﺭﻛﺴﻴﻮﺱ ﻧﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﺏ ﺑﺮﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺮ ﻫﻤﺴ ِﺮ ﺍﻭ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ ﻭ ﻣﻰﻛﻮﺷﺪ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﻰ« ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﮔﻮﺯﻧﻰ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺩﻭﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﻭ ِﺭ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻭ ﻭ ﺷﻮﻫﺮﺵ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﻳﺎﺑﺪ ﺁﻳﺎ ﺷﻮﻫﺮﺵ‬
‫ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺍﻭﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺭﺍ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻬﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺮﻙ ﺍﻭ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺭﺟﻮﻉ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻴﺸﮕﻰ ﺍﻭ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮ ِﺩ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﻭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ :‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﻧﻔﺲ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ‬
‫ﺍﻭﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺷﺨﺼﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺟﺴﺖﻭﺟﻮ؛ ﺍﻟﺰﺍﻡ ﺳﺮﭘﻴﭽﻰﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ »ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ«ﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺁﺭﺍﻣﺶ‬
‫ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻔ ِﺮ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻫﻢ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ «.‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺭﻭﺯﻣﺮﻩ ﻭ ﻋﺎﺩﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ؛ ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻫﮕﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺎ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﺒﺮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ ﻭﺍﭘﺴﻴﻦ ﺩﻗﻴﻘﺔ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻦ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﭙﺮﻯﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻧﺠﻴﺮﻩﺍﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ‬
‫ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ »ﺧﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﻔﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻛﻨﻮﻧﻰ ﻣﻨﺘﻬﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪59 1393‬‬

‫ﭘﺬﻳﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﻭ ﺳﺮﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻛﻮﺭﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺘﮕﻰ« ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺍﺩﻳﭙﻮﺱ ﺁﻏﺎ ِﺯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﺗﺮﺍژﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺩﻳﭙﻮﺱ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﻏﻴﺮ« ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ »ﺧﻮﻳﺶ«‪.‬‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؟‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺭﺑﻄﻰ‬ ‫ﭼﻪ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺗﺮﺍژﺩﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺗﻬﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﺎﺩﻳﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ؛‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﺏ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺟﺮﺍ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺷﺪ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﻛﺮﺩ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺎﻧﻨ ِﺪ ﺗﺮﺍژﺩﻯﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺎﺏﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﺶ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﺩﻭ ﺍﻣ ِﺮ‬
‫ﺍﻳﺴﺨﻮﻟﻮﺱ ﻛﺴﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺣ ّﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻗﻴﻖﺗﺮ‪» ،‬ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺘﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﺯﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻫﻢﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩﻯ‬
‫»ﮔﺴﺘﺎﺧﻰ« ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻭ ﻋﺎﻟَﻢ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺪﺍﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺎ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻴﻔ ِﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥﺷﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺍﻧﻄﺒﺎﻕ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺗﺮﺍژﺩﻯ ﺍﺩﻳﭙﻮﺱ ﻧﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺍﻭ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻭ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻤﻴﻖﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺷﻜﻞ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻗ ًﺎ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﺏ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺧﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻛﻞ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ِ .‬‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﱢ‬ ‫ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﺳﻮﻡ ﺳﻪ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻃﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺎﺋﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺳﻮژﻩﺍﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﱢ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻣﻘ ّﻮ ِﻡ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﺭﺳﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﻬﺎ ِﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﻣﻦ«‬
‫ﻧﺨﺴﺖ‪ِ ،‬‬ ‫ﻟﻮﻳﻨﺎﺱ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﻭ ﺭﺍ ﻗﻮﺍﻡ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻯ ﺍﻧﻔﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﻭ‬ ‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻧﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﭘﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﺪﻳﻢ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﻣﻦ« ﻣﻨﻰ‬
‫ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﺔ ﻳﻚ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺒﻰ ﻳﻜﭙﺎﺭﭼﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﺭﻑ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻞ‬
‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﺳﻴﻄﺮﺓ ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺟﺰﻣﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ِ‬ ‫»ﻣﻦ« ﻧﺎﺭﺳﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻰﭘﻴﻮﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻭﭘﺎﺭﻩ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ »ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﻜﻰ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﻭﻣﻰﻛﺎﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻜﺮﺍ ِﺭ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﮔﺬﺷﺖ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﺷﻜﺎﻓﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‪ /‬ﺳﺮﮔﺬﺷﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‪/‬‬ ‫ﺣﺪﻯ« ﺳﺨﻦ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ )ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻮ(‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂِ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻘ ِﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ »ﻣﻦ« ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ »ﻗﺒﻞ« ﻭ ﻳﻚ »ﺑﻌﺪ« ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪:‬ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ »ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ« ﻭ ﻳﻚ »ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ« ﺗﻘﺴﻢ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺩﻗﻴﻘﺔ ﺑﻌﺪﻯ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻴﺸﮕﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻯ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ِ‬
‫ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻥ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﺁﺭﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻭ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺗﺒﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ »ﺧﺎﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ«‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﻗﻬﺮﻣﺎﻧﺎﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ؛ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫»ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩ« ﻳﺎ »ﺗﺒﺎ ِﺭ« ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺨﺸﻰ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﺣﺪﺕ‬ ‫ﻣﻬﻢ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﭼﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﻛﻠﻰ«‪،‬‬ ‫ﻃﻮﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ‬ ‫»ﻋﻤﻞ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﻭ‬
‫»ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﻳﻚﺑﺎﺭ ﺩﺭﻣﻘﺎ ِﻡ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﺭﺳﻴﺘﻰ ﺗﺮﻙﺧﻮﺭﺩﻩ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻦ‬‫»ﺭﻭﻳﺎﺭﻭﻳﻰ ِ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫»ﻋﻤﻞ=‪ .«x‬ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﺳﻮﻡ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺑﻰ ﻧﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ‬
‫‪56‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﺾ ﺗﻌﻴﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺧﻴﺰﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺘﮕﻰ ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷ ّﺪ ِﺕ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻛﻞ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ ﻋﻤﻞ « ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﺳﻮﻡ ﺩﺭﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺸﺎﻥ »ﻫﺴﺘﻰ«‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬
‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ )‪(mens momentanea‬؛ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ِﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﺷﻜﺴﺖﺧﻮﺭﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺷﻜﺴﺖﺧﻮﺭﺩﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺣﺎﺩﺙ ﻭ ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻗﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺑﺮﻭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻳﻢ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ( ﺩﺭ ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﺳﻮ ِﻡ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫)ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ‪n‬ﺍ ِﻡ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺷﺪﻩ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎ ِﻡ‬ ‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﻗﺎﺋﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺳﻨﺘ ِﺰ ﺳﻮﻡ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﺏ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ »ﺍﻳﺪﻩ«‬ ‫ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰ ﺗﻨﺸﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻻﻳﻨﺤﻞ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻦ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺒﻞ ﻭ ﺑﻌﺪ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﻣﻘﺎ ِﻡ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺷﺮﻁِ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ِ‬ ‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻯ ﻧﺎﻣﻤﻜﻦ! ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻨﺶ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺳﻨﺘﺰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﭘﺪﻳﺪ‬
‫ﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ‬‫ﺗﺒﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ »ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﻔﺼﺎﻟﻰ ﺩﻭ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺁﺷﺘﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺍﻳﺪﻩ«‪،‬‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫»ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ«‬ ‫ﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ‬ ‫ﺁﺷﺘﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ؛‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ«‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﺑﻴﻨﺸﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻳﻜﺴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻧﻴﺖ )ﻳﺎ‬ ‫»ﻫﻮﺷﻴﺎﺭ«ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬
‫ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﻠﻰ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫»ﻣﺎﺭ« ﻭ »ﻋﻘﺎﺏ«‪ .‬ﺷﺮﻁِ ﻇﻬﻮ ِﺭ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﮔﺮﭼﻪ ِ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍ ِﺩ ﻣﻜﺎﻥﻣﻨﺪِ( ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺗﻬﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ )ﺷﻜﻞ ‪ (3‬ﻭ‬
‫)ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻰﻧﺎﻡ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬
‫»ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ« ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ »ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮ«‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ »ﻣﺎﻭﺭﺍ«ﻯ »ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ« ﻧﻤﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻧﺎﺏ‬‫ﺷﻜﻞ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻰﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻨﺘﺰ‬
‫»ﺳﻄﺢ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ« ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ« ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﺧﻴﺰ ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺘﮕﻰ« ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ »ﻏﻴﺮ«ﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‬
‫ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﺏ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺷﺘﺒﺎﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺻﻠﺐ‬ ‫ﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺑﮋﻩ‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ‬ ‫ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﮔﺰﻳﺮ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ »ﻣﻦ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ(‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ‬
‫»ﺳﻄﺢ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ« ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﺍﺯ »ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ«‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﻫﻮﻟﺪﺭﻟﻴﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺮﺍژﺩﻯﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺷﺨﺺ ﻳﺎ ﻳﻚ ﭼﻴﺰ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ »ﺷ ّﺪﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ«‪ ،‬ﺳﻄﺤﻰ‬ ‫ﺳﻮﻓﻮﻛﻠﺲ ﺭﺟﻮﻉ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺗﺮﺍژﺩﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﺴﺨﻮﻟﻮﺱ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺷﺨﺎﺹ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﱢ‬
‫ﻛﻞ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺣﺲ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﻳﺮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺣ ّﺪﻯ ﺯﻳﺮ ﭘﺎ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﺧﺎﻃﻰ ﻛﻴﻔﺮ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﺪ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﺷﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫ﺭﻭﻯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ‪،‬‬ ‫)ﺳﻄﺢ ﻓﺎﺟﻌﻪ(‪ِ .‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺗﻘﺎﺹ ﭘﺲ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ؛ ﺣ ﱢﺪ ﺯﻳ ِﺮ ﭘﺎ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺘﻪﺷﺪﻩ ﺗﺮﻣﻴﻢ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﺔﺑﻰﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻃﻰ ﺳﻪ ﮔﺎﻡ‪» ،‬ﺍﻳﺪﻩ« ﻳﺎ ﺗﻜﺮﺍ ِﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻗﺒﻞ ﻭ ﺑﻌﺪ »ﻫﻢﻗﺎﻓﻴﻪ«ﺍﻧﺪ؛ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺮﺍژﺩﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﺴﺨﻮﻟﻮﺱ ﺩﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺪﺓ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻏﻴﺮﺟﺴﻤﺎﻧﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻟﻮﻻﻳﻰ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻣﻰﭼﺮﺧﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘﺎﻃﻰ ﻳﻜﺴﺎﻥ‬ ‫»ﺑﻮﺩﻥ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﻳﻚ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺮﺍژﺩﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻮﻓﻮﻛﻞ»ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻟﻮﻻ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ«؛‬
‫ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰ‪ ،‬ﺧﻴﺰﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺘﮕﻰ ﺑﻪﺳﻮﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺍژﺩﻯ ﺍﺩﻳﭗ ﺷﻬﺮﻳﺎﺭ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﻳﺮﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻂ ﺭﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺁﻏﺎ ِﺯ‬
‫ﺧﻴﺰﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺘﮕﻰ ﻧﺎﺏ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦﺟﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﺾ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻫﻮﻳﺖ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﭘﺮ ﺍﻓﺘﺨﺎ ِﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻟﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺩﻳﭗ ﻣﻄﻤﺌﻦ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ »ﺷ ّﺪﺕ«‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ »ﺭﻳﺘﻢ« ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪» .‬ﺭﻳﺘﻢ« ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻭ ﺗﺪﺑﻴ ِﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺷﻬﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻼﻛﺖ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺨﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ ﺑﻪﻫﻢ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﺮﻫﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻭﺭﻃﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﻫﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻴﺮﺯﻳﺎﺱ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﮔﻬﺎﻥ ِ‬
‫ﻣﻮﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﺷﻮﭘﻨﻬﺎﻭﺭﻯ‪ .‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺍ ِﻡ‬ ‫ﺩﻫﺎﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺭﻃﻪ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺷﻜﺎﻑ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ »ﻣﻦ«ﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻰ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﺳﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻌﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪ‬ ‫ﻗﺎﺗﻞ ﭘﺪﺭ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﻧﺒﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ »ﻣﻦ«ﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺎﺗﻞ ﭘﺪﺭ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ‬
‫»ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ« ﺩﺭ ﻧﻴﻔﺘﺎﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﺭﻳﺘﻢ« ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺎﻧﻨ ِﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺭﻃﺔ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺑﺮﻫﺔ ﻧﺎﻫﻤﮕﻮﻥ؛‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﺣﺪﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ‬
‫ﻛﺜﺮﺕ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﺏ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﮔﺬﺍﺭ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺷ ّﺪﺕ« ﺑﻪﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻗﺐ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻋﺘﺮﺍﺽﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ )ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻴﺮﺯﻳﺎﺱ( ﻭ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪60‬‬

26. la différence individuante. ‫ﻭﺣﺪﺕ‬
ِ ‫ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﺁﺷﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ؛ ﻭﺣﺪﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ِ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ‬
27. Différence et répétition, p. 57. ،‫ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻰﺷﻜﻞ ﻭ ﺑﻰﺗﻌﻴﻦ‬ِ ،‫ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺯﻣﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﺏ‬.‫ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
28. Cours Vincennes, 14/1/1974. .‫ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺭﻳﺘﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‬،‫ »ﺷﻜﻞﺑﺨﺶ«ﺍﻧﺪ‬،‫ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‬ ِ ‫ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬
29. Différence et répétition, p. 57. ،‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺍﺛﺮﻯ ﺧﻴﺎﻟﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻮﻳﻪ ﻣﺴﻴﺎﻥ‬
30. expressif. .‫ﻛﺜﺮﺗﻰ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﺍﺯ »ﭘﺮﺳﻮﻧﺎژﻫﺎﻯ ﺭﻳﺘﻤﻴﻚ« ﺑﻪ ﺷﻤﺎﺭ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ‬
31. Expression.
32. Mode. ‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺖﻫﺎ‬
33. essence de mode. .‫* ﺩﺍﻧﺸﺠﻮﻯ ﺩﻛﺘﺮﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺷﻬﻴﺪ ﺑﻬﺸﺘﻰ‬
34. undegrés de puissance. identique à soi.
35. Déterminations modales. 2. plan de récognition.
36. Deleuze’s Difference and repetition, Joe 3. La philosophie de Deleuze, François Zoura-
Hughes, continuum, 2009, p. 46. bichvili, puf, 2004, pp. 19-20.
37. Bildungsroman. 4. penser est représenter.
38. Jean Hyppolite, logique et existence, puf, 4em 5. Différence et répétition, Gille Deleuze, puf,
édition, 2002, p. 27. 2008, p. 172.
39. Deleuze’s Difference and repetition,p. -129 6. Différence et répétition, p. 170.
30. 7. Différence et répétition, pp. 177-8.
40. “letter to Varrigon”, Leibniz, in 8. Différence et répétition, p. 48.
philosophical papers and letters, selectet and 9. ressemblancesensible.
translated and edited by Leroy E. Loemker, ‫ﭘﺎﻭﺭﻗﻰ ﻣﻌﺮﻭﻓﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻫﻮﺳﺮﻝ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺎﺩ ﺑﻪ‬
ِ ‫ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ‬.10
Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1980, p. 545. ‫ﻧﻈﺮ »ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﻣﻔﺴﺮﺍﻥ« ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻛﻨﺎ ِﺭ ﺗﻮﻣﺎﺱ ﺁﻛﻮﻳﻴﻨﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬
41. changement de changement. ‫ »ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ‬:‫ﻭ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻙ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬
42. Incommensurable. ‫ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ‬،‫ﻣﻔﺴﺮﺍﻥ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻫﻮﺳﺮﻝ ﭘﮋﻭﺍﻙﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻮﻣﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻴﺎﺑﻨﺪ‬
43. pré-weierstrassien. ‫ ﻭ ﺷﻜﻮﻩ ﻭ ﺩﺭﺧﺸﺶ‬،‫ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ِ ‫ ﺩﺭ‬،‫ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﻋﻜﺲ‬
44. Différence et répétition, 286. :«‫ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ‬
ِ ‫ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻙ‬
ِ ‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ‬
45. on parle. Différence et répétition, p.91.
46. on murmure. 11. “univocity”, Daniel W. Smith, in Essays on
47. un murmure anonyme. Deleuze, Edinburgh University Press, 2012, p.
48. réduction matérielle. 38.
49. the history of calculus and its development, 12. Différence et répétition, p. 4.
Karl B. Boyer, Dover, 1959, p. 8-176. 13. Différence et répétition, p. 354.
50. Différence et répétition, p. 96. 14. l’art abstrait .
51. Différence et répétition, p. 96. 15. fugue visuelle.
52. Différence et répétition, p. 97. 16. Déformateurs.
‫ﭘﺎﻭﺭﻗﻰ ﻣﻬﻤﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ‬ ِ ‫ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ‬.53 17. Différence et répétition, p.78.
‫ ﻣﺘﺄﺳﻔﺎﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺠﺎﻝ ﻧﺎﭼﻴﺰ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺮﺡ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ‬.‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ 18. science du sensible.
‫ »ﺗﻜﺮﺍ ِﺭ‬،‫ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ‬.‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﺏ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺖ‬ 19. Différence et répétition, p.79.
:‫ﻛﻤﻴﻚ« ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﺳﺖ! ﺭﻙ‬ 20. Sens.
Différence et répétition, p. 123-4. 21. l’âme.
54. « le présent existe, mais seul le passé 22. Proust et les signes, Deleuze, puf, 2007, p.
insist… . » 123.
‫ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬،‫ »ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‬:‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪﺍﻯ »ﻭﻓﺎﺩﺍﺭﺗﺮ« ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻞ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‬ 23. Diversité.
«. ...‫ﺗﻘﺮﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‬
ّ ‫ﻓﻘﻂ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ‬ 24. Les Cours de Gille Deleuze, sur le site: www.
55. Différence et répétition,p. 115. webdeleuze.com, Cours Vincennes, 14/1/1974.
56. Différence et répétition. P. 146. 25. Différence et répétition, p. 56.

61 1393 ‫ ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ‬،81‫ ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‬،

‫ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ‪ :‬ﺁﺧﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﺛﺮ ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ )‪1995‬ـ ‪1925‬ﻡ( ﻛﻪ ﻣﺮگ ﻭﻯ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﻧﺎﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺷﻜﻮﻩ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﻧﺎﻡ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺶ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﻫﻢ ﻃﻨﻴﻨﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻧﻘﺪ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﭘﻮﻳﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺟﺬﺍﺑﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﻩﺍﺵ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻧﮕﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﻜﻮﻻﺱ ﺗﻮﺑﺮﻥ )‪Nicholas‬‬
‫‪ (Thoburn‬ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﻭ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ )‪Deleuze,‬‬
‫‪ (Marx and Politics‬ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝ ‪ 2003‬ﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺭﺍﺗﻠﺞ ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺳﺘﻮﺭ ﻛﺎﺭﺧﻮﺩ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻮﺑﺮﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﺎﺩ ﺩﭘﺎﺭﺗﻤﺎﻥ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻛﺎﻟﺞ ﮔﻠﺪﺍﺳﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ‬
‫ﻟﻨﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻰ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ ﺑﺨﺸﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﺁﻣﺪ ﻭﻯ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﻩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬

‫ﺩﺭﺁﻣﺪ‪ :‬ﺷﻜﻮﻩ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‬

‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪،‬‬
‫ﭼﻮﻥ ﻧﮋﺍﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻨﺮ ﻳﺎ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺮﺍ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻧﮋﺍﺩﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣ ّﺪﻋﻰ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻧﺎﺏ ﻭ ﺧﺎﻟﺺ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻮﺽ ﻧﮋﺍﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺳﺘﻤﺪﻳﺪﻩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺟﺎﺯﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺿﻌﻴﻒ‪ ،‬ﺁﺷﻔﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻮچﮔﺮ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻃﺮﺯﻯ ﭼﺎﺭﻩﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻧﮋﺍﺩ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‬
‫)ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ( ﻛﺴﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻤﻮﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻛﻤﻮﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﻭﺍ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺑﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﻧﺎﻣﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺷﻮﺩ‪) .‬ﻣﻮﺭﻳﺲ ﺑﻼﻧﺸﻮ(‬ ‫ﻭ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ‬
‫ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﺒﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺁﺧﺮﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﺶ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺮگ‬
‫ﺍﻭ ﻧﺎﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺷﻜﻮﻩ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﻧﺎﻡ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻓﺘﺢ ﺑﺎﺑﻰ ﺩﺭﺧﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻭ ﻭ ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻰ ﺟﺬﺍﺏ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﭘﻴﭽﻴﺪﮔﻰ‪ ...‬ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻜﻮﻩ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﺪ؟ ﺍﻭ ﭼﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻮﻉ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺑﺴﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺔ ﻧﻴﻜﻮﻻﺱ ﺗﻮﺑﺮﻥ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺑﻮﺩ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ؟ ﺍﺭﻳﻚ ﺁﻟﻴﺰ‪ 1‬ﻛﻪ ﺳﺮﮔﺮﻡ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻣﺤ ّﻤﺪﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺟﻤﺸﻴﺪﻯ‬
‫ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻭ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﺯﻳﺮ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺷﻴﺰﻭﻓﺮﻧﻰ ﺟﺎﻯ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ «.‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻧﺎ ِﻡ ﺧﺎﺹ‬ ‫‪zamanjamshid@yahoo.com‬‬
‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺷﺘﻐﺎﻝ ﺧﺎﻃﺮﻯ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻼﺕ »ﺟﻨﻮﻥﺁﻣﻴﺰ«‪ 2‬ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﭘﺲ ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻪ ﻗﺪﺭ ﻣﺎﻳﺔ ﺗﺄﺳﻒ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺘﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺁﺧﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﺛﺮﺵ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﺑﻨﻮﻳﺴﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻧﺶ ﺷﻜﻮﻩ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‪ 3‬ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ «.‬ﻭﻟﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺄﺳﻒ‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺭﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﻰﺣﺎﺻﻠﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺁﻟﻴﺰ ِ‬
‫ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺧﻮﺩِﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻏﻴﺎﺏ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺭﺍﺳﺘﻴﻨﻰ ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮ ﺷﻮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﺸﺤﻮﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎﺳﺖ‪:‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻮﺩ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﭘﺎﻙ ﻭ ﺗﺮﺍﺷﻴﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻏﺎﺯﻳﻦ ﺻﻔﺤﺎﺕ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ...‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻧﻰ ﺧﺎﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺁﻳﺪ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﺩ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﮕﺮﺩﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺧﻴﺎﻝ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺁﺳﻮﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻥ ﺷﺘﺎﺑﺰﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺳﺮﺳﺮﻯ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺩﻭ ﺟﻠﺪﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ‬
‫ﮔﻮﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺷﻴﺰﻭﻓﺮﻧﻰ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻫﻢﻃﻨﻴﻨﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﻼ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻳﺎﺩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻳﻘﻴﻨ ًﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺁﻧﺘﻰ ﺍﺩﻳﭗ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻮ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬ ‫‪Deleuze, Marx‬‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﭼﻨﺪ ﺑﺎﺭ ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻭ ﻭ ﮔﻮﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺴﻴﺴﺖﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ‬ ‫‪and Politics,‬‬
‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﭘﻮﻳﺎ ﻭ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒ ًﺎ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺶ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻩ‬ ‫‪Nicholas‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻓﻘﻂ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ »ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺎﻟﻴﺴﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎ ِﺭ«‪ 4‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫‪Thoburn, London:‬‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺫﻛﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺴﻴﺴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﮔﺎﻩ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻃﺮﺯﻯ‬ ‫‪Routledge, 2003.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪62‬‬

 ‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻭﺍ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻢ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﺩﻫﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻢ ﺩﺍﺩ ﻃﻨﻴﻦ ﻭ ﻟﺤﻦ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﻘﻴﺮﺁﻣﻴﺰ ﺍﻇﻬﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ »ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ« ﺩﺭ ﺁﻧﺘﻰ ﺍﺩﻳﭗ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐﺗﺮﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻋﺎﻣﻪﭘﺴﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺴﻰ ﺭﺍﺳﺖﻛﻴﺸﺎﻧﻪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺑﻰﮔﻤﺎﻥ‪ ...‬ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﺩﺭﺍﺯﻣﺪﺕ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻴﻞ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻣﺠﻮﺯ‪ 5.‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﻫﻢ ﻃﻨﻴﻨﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ «.‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﻋﻼﻗﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻟﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ ﺭﻭ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﺍﻧﺼﺎﻑ ﺭﻭﺍ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺘﻪﺍﻳﻢ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﻋﻮﺕ ﺁﻟﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺪﺍﺭﻙ »ﺁﻏﺎﺯﻯ‬ ‫ﻓﺰﻭﻧﻰ ﻧﻬﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﻳﺖ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﺔ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﺤﺼﺮﺍً ﺑﺮ ﺟﻨﺒﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺘﻤﺮﻛﺰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ« ﺑﺮ ﮔﺮﺩ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‬ ‫ﭘﻮﻳﺎﻳﻰ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻓﻜﺮﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻨﺘﻘﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﻠﻤ ًﺎ‬
‫ﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﺗﻮﻗﻒ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻧﻜﻪ ﮔﻮﻳﻰ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪـﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺘﻪ ﺗﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﻫﻮﺵ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ـ ﻳﺎ »ﺳﻮﺳﻴﻮﺱ«‪ ،‬ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺳﻴﻼﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﻩ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﻢ ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎﺩ ﻛﻨﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻣﻬﻨﺪﺳﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻗﻠﺐ ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺶ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻣﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺩﺭ ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺶ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺴﻴﺴﺖﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ﺣﺘﻰ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﻳﺖ ﻋﺮﺿﺔ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﻴﻜﺲ ﮔﻮﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﻭ ﻣﻦ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺴﻴﺴﺖﺍﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻓﻰ ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ )ﻫﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ ﻇﻬﻮ ِﺭ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻋﻼﻗﻪ ﺑﻪ ﭘﻮﻳﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺳﺒﻚ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ‪ ،‬ﻭﻟﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺴﻴﺴﺖﺍﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﺪ‬
‫ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﻣﺴﻠﻤ ًﺎ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎ ﻭ ﺑﻬﻨﮕﺎﻡ(‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﺎ ﻫﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰﺍﻯ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻭ‬
‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﻭﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻤﻨ ِﺪ ﺳﺮﺁﻣ ِﺪ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﻪ ﻭ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﮔﺮﻳﺰ ﺁﺳﺎﻥ ﻳﺎ ﻓﺮﺍﺭ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺎ ﺟﺬﺍﺏ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺍﻭﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻇﺮﻓﻴﺘﻰ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺔ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﺻﺶ ﻓﺎﻳﻖ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻭ ﻣﺨﺘﺺ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮﺷﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻳﺴﺘﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﺣﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ »ﻛﻤﻮﻧﻴﺴﻢ« ﻣﻰﻧﺎﻣﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﭘﻴﺶ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺯ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻨﺶ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻤﻮﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﻋﻄﻒ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ‬ ‫ﺳﻮﺳﻴﻮﺱ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ‪،‬‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﭘﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻼ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪﺍﺵ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ(‪ .‬ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ )ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﻧﻪ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺔ ﻫﻮﻳﺖ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﭘﻴﻜﺮﻩﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺣﺘﻰ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﺪ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‪ ،‬ﻛﻤﻮﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﻭﻧﺪ ﻣﺴﺘﻤﺮ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ »ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺑﺨﺎﻃﺮ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ« ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﭘﻴﻜﺮﻩﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬
‫ﺷﺘﺎﺑﺰﺩﻩ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺗﺴﺨﻴﺮ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺩﺭﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺤﺒﻮﺣﺔ ﺁﻥ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﻣﻰ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺗﺸﺪﻳﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻘﻮﻳﺖ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﺎﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨ ِﺪ ﺗﻨﻈﻴﻢ ﻭ ﻏﻠﺒﻪ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺳﻌﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻳﺎ ﺷﻜﻞ‬
‫ﺳﺮﺳﺮﻯ ﺍﺛﺮ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺭﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻴﻨﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻧﻘﺶ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻭ ﻋﻤﺪﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺩﻋﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﻮﺗﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺩﻭ ﺟﻠﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﻩ ﻛﻠﻰ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ﭘﺴﺎ ـ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﺍﻧﺔ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻗﻠﻤﺪﺍﺩ ﺷﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻣﺒﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ »ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ« ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﻮﺗﺎﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻣﻰ ﻛﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻧﻌﻄﺎﻑﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭﻛﺮﺩﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﭘﮋﻭﺍﻛﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺭ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ‬
‫‪6‬‬
‫ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻫﻮﻳﺖ ﭼﻴﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﺎﺗﻰ ﻧﺎﺑﺖﻭﺍﺭﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭﺍﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ »ﻫﺮ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺳﻔﺖ ﻭ ﺳﺨﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺷﻴﺰﻭﻓﺮﻧﻰﻧﺸﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﺩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻮﺍ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ« ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺒﺎﺕ »ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺟﻨﺴﻴﺖ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻮﺍﺭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﮔﻮﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﭘﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﻞﻭﺭﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺳﻔﺖ ﻭ ﺳﺨﺖ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻬﻨﻪ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺴﻮﺥ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ «.‬ﻭﻟﻰ ﺟﻨﺒﺔ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻫﻢ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪﻫﻢﻃﻨﻴﻨﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭﺍﻧﻪ ﺷﺎﻥ ﺳﺒﻜﺒﺎﺭ ﻭ ﺭﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﻋﻤﻮﻣ ًﺎ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﻛﻤﻮﻧﻴﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ ﭘﻴﺮﺍﻣﻮﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺟﺰﺋﻴﺎﺕ ﻳﻚ »ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﻛﻤﻮﻧﻴﺴﺘﻰ« ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻣﺴﻠﻤ ًﺎ ﺍﮔﺮ‬ ‫ﻛﻤﺘﺮ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻋﻼﻗﻪﻣﻨﺪﻳﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﻴﻨﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﭼﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﻧﻴﭽﻪﺍﻯ ﻭﺍﻡ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﻜﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻇﺮﻓﻴﺖ ﻫﻢﻃﻨﻴﻨﻰ ﻣﺆﺛﺮ ﻭ ﻣﻔﻴﺪ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‪ ،‬ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻼ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬ ‫ﺟﺎﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺄﺧﻴﺮ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺧﺘﻦ ﻭ ﻣﻮﻛﻮﻝ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﺩﺍﻳﻰ ﺯﻳﺒﺎﺗﺮ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﻳﺖ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ‬
‫ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻮﺽ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺷﺘﻐﺎﻝ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺑﺎ ﺳﻴﻼﻥﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺼﻒ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺭﻳﭽﻪ ﻧﮕﺮﻳﺴﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻮﺳﻴﻮﺱ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺗﺎ ﻧﻴﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻔﻮﻕ ﻭ ﭼﻴﺮﮔﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺲ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﺩ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﻣﺒﻬﻢ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺲ ﻭ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﺲ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭼﻨﺎﻧﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺷﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻤﺸﻐﻮﻟﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺭﻛﺴﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻫﮕﺬﺭ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﻛﻤﻮﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺎ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭ ﻫﻮﺍﻯ ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻥﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺗﻨﮕﻨﺎﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺏ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺁﺭﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻳﺎ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﻛﻤﻮﻧﻴﺴﻢ‬ ‫ﭼﻨﺎﻧﻜﻪ ﮔﻮﻳﻰ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮﺧﻮﺷﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﺯﺩﺍﻳﺎﻧﺔ ‪1968‬ﻡ )ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺟﻨﺒﺸﻰ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻣﻰﻧﺎﻣﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻛﻨﻮﻧﻰ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻨﺴﻮﺥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﮔﻮﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﮔﻔﺖ »ﮔﺎﻩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺑﺮ ﺁﺳﻤﺎﻥ ﮔﺎﻡ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻨﺒﺶ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪« .‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ («.‬ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﺒﺎﻝ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺸﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺯﻣﺎﻧﺔ‬
‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﻚﺗﺮ ﻭ ﻣﺤﺰﻭﻥﺗﺮ ﻣﺎ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻣﻨﺪ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻫﻤﺮﻳﺨﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻨﺎﻇﺮ ﻓﺰﺍﻳﻨﺪﻩ‬
‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺖﻫﺎ‬
‫‪1. Eric Alliez.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﻴﭽﻴﺪﮔﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎ ﺑﻬﺮﻩﻭﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺭﺁﻭﺭﻯ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ‬
‫‪2. Demented.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﻮﺗﺎﺭﻯ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻧﺎﺁﺷﻨﺎ ﻭ ﻏﺮﻳﺒﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬
‫‪3. Grandeur de Marx.‬‬
‫ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﭘﻨﺪﺍﺷﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﺳﺮﺧﻮﺷﺎﻧﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﭼﻮﻧﺎﻥ ﺑﺪﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﺷﻜﺎﻝ‬
‫‪4. Many materialisms.‬‬
‫‪5. Unlicensed desire.‬‬ ‫ﭼﭗﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﮔﺮﺩ ﺧﻮﺷﺒﻴﻨﻰﺍﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻤﺮ ﺑﭽﺮﺧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ‬
‫‪6. non-fetishized.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﻳﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻤﻠﺔ ﺑﻜﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﻣﺤﺎﻝ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪63 1393‬‬

‫ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ‪ :‬ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎﺭ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﺩﺍﻥ ﻓﺎﺭﺳﻰ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ »ﺍﻳﻤﺎﻧﻮﺋﻞ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ«‬
‫)‪ (Immanuel Kant‬ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺔ ﻣﻠﻴﺴﺎ ﻣﻚﻣﻬﻮﻥ )‪Melissa‬‬
‫‪ (McMahon‬ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺗﺒﺎﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ )‪Deleuze’s‬‬
‫‪ (Philosophical Lineage‬ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝ ‪ 2009‬ﺑﺎ ﻭﻳﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﮔﺮﺍﻫﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺟﻮﻧﺰ )‪ (Graham Jones‬ﻭ ﺟﺎﻥ ﺭﺍﻑ ‪ ((Jon Roffe‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ‬
‫ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺍﺩﻳﻨﺒﻮﺭﻭ ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﻩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬

‫ﻭﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺩﻛﻮﻣﺐ‪ ،2‬ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ‪،3‬‬

‫ﺑﺨﺶ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» :‬ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻳﻚ ﭘﺴﺎـﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ «.‬ﺩﻛﻮﻣﺐ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﺳﻪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ‬
‫‪4‬‬
‫ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ »ﻣﺮﺩ ﺍﻫﻞ ﻛﻮﻧﻴﮕﺰﺑﺮگ«‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺧﻄﻮﻁ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ‬
‫ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭﻯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ )ﻧﻔﺲ‪ ،‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺧﺪﺍ( ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﺁﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻔﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﺍﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺍﺟﺎﺯﻩ‬
‫ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﻦ ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻴﺖ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻋﻠﺖ ﺍﻭﻻﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻴﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻫﺪ ﻳﻚ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﻳﻢ‪ «.‬ﺩﻭﻣﻴﻦ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ‪ ،‬ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎﺳﺖ ﺑﺮ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻛﻨﺶﮔﺮ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﻳﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ‪ 5‬ﺭﺍ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺰﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺍﻝ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺍﻝ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ّ‬ ‫‪1‬‬
‫»ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‪ 6‬ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ...‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺎﻡ »ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ ﻛﻬﻨﺔ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‬
‫ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ ﺯﺍﺩﺓ ﻧﻘﺪﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻃﻼﻕ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ »ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ« ﺳﻮﻡ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻧﻈﻢ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻭ ﻧﻈﻢ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ‪ :‬ﻧﻈﻤﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻜﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺩﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺔ ﻣﻠﻴﺴﺎ ﻣﻚﻣﻬﻮﻥ‬
‫*‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺧﺼﻮﺹ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺳ ّﻴﺪ ﻣﺤ ّﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺳﻴﺪﻯ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻭﺍﺭﺩﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺩ ّﻗﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫‪sorooshseyyedi@gmail.com‬‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻭ ﺷﻬﻮﺩ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻌﻘﻮﻝ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺣﺴﻰ‪.‬‬
‫ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻀﺎﻣﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺗﻚﻧﮕﺎﺭﻯ ﻭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻫﻴﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﻝ ‪ 1953‬ﺗﺎ ﻭﺍﭘﺴﻴﻦ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﻻﺕ ﻭﻯ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻛﺮﻳﺘﻴﻚ ﻭ ﻛﻠﻴﻨﻴﻚ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌ ّﻬﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘﺪ‪ 7‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﭘﺴﻴﻦ ﻗﻄﻌﺔ ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪» ،‬ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ‪ :‬ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ«‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ »ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ«‪ 8‬ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺨﺼ ًﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻃﻰ ﻛﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻊ‪» ،‬ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻴﺴﻢ« ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ »ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻛﺮﺩ«‪ :‬ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﭼﺮﺧﺸﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻗﻄﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍژﮔﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻋﻰ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻏﻠﺐ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﻀﺎﻣﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰﺍﻟﻤﺜﻞ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻫﻴﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﻳﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ‬ ‫‪Deleuze’s Philosophical‬‬
‫‪Lineage‬‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺰ ﺍﺛﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬ ‫‪Graham Jones‬‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻧﻘﺎﺩﻯ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻔﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ‬ ‫‪and Jon Roffe‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻏﻠﺐ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﺗﻮﺳﻞ ﻣﻰﺟﻮﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﺪﻓﺶ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﺔ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬ ‫‪Edinburgh university‬‬
‫ﻭ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺍﺻﻠﻰﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺭﺍ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‬ ‫‪Press, 2009.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪64‬‬

 ‫ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻭ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻴﺎﺕ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩﺗﺮ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺍﮔﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﺮﺯﻯ ﺧﺎﺹﺗﺮ ﻧﺎﻇﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺻﻮﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺎﺩﺓ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ‬ ‫ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ »ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ« ﺗﺎ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺪﺍﻥﻫﺎ ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻠﻤﺔ »ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ« ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻰﺷﻚ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺗﻌﻠّﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﺻﻮﻝ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺍﺷﻐﺎﻝ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺪﺕ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻮﺍﺯﻥ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻧﻘﺎﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺻﻮﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺍ ِﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ »ﻧﻘﺪ« ﻋﻤﻠﻜﺮﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺷﻤﻨﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺖ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺩﺍﻣﻨﺔ ﺍﺻﻮﻝ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﺎﺣﻴﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﻔﺮﻭﺽ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﻭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﻟﺤﻦ ﺧﺎﺻﻰ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﮔﻮﻳﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺪ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ‬
‫ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻣﻬﻢ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺪ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻣﺤﺾ )ﻭﻳﺮﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﻝ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﻧﺎﺑﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﺴﻂ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻫﻴﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘ ًﺎ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ‬
‫‪ 1781‬ﻡ ﻭ ﻭﻳﺮﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﻭﻡ ‪ 1787‬ﻡ(‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﻛﻮﺷﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻛﻠﻰ ﻭ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﻰﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻋِﺪﺍﺩ ﺭﻗﺒﺎﻯ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺭﻗﺎﺑﺘﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺭﺳﺎﻧﺪﻥ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖﺁﻣﻴﺰ ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﻧﻘﺪﻯ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﻨﺶ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻧﻘﺪ »ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ« ﻭ »ﻛﺎﺫﺏ«‬
‫ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﺍ ِﻋﻤﺎﻝﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺭﺍ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﻨﺸﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ »ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ«‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺳﺘﻪﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻨﮕﺮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﺗﺮﺩﻳﺪ ﻛﺜﺮﺕﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺳﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﻛ ّﻤﻴﺖ )ﻭﺣﺪﺕ‪ ،‬ﻛﺜﺮﺕ‪ ،‬ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻴﺖ(‪ ،‬ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ )ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺳﻠﺐ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻧﻘﺪ ﻣﺠ ّﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﻋﻰ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﮕﺮﻯﻫﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖ(‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ )ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪ /‬ﻋﺮﺽ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﺖ ‪ /‬ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﻭ ﻣﺸﺎﺭﻛﺖ( ﻭ ﺟﻬﺖ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ؛ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﻮﺡ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﭘﻠﻮﺭﺍﻟﻴﺴﻢ‬
‫)ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ‪ /‬ﺍﻣﺘﻨﺎﻉ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‪ /‬ﻋﺪﻡ‪ ،‬ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ‪ /‬ﻋﺪﻡ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ(‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﻫﻠﺔ ﺩﻭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ )ﻋﻼﺋﻖ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻋﻘﻞ‪ ،‬ﻗﻮﺍﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ( ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺣﺴﺎﺳﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻘﺪ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺳﺘﻴﺰﻩﺟﻮﻳﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻨﺎ‬
‫ﺛﻨﻮﻳﺖ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮ ﻭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺘﺶ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮﻯ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻠﺰﺍﻡ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦﺩﻭ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺭﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻧﻤﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﺯ »ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ« ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ‪ ،‬ﻫﻢ‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﻋﻤﺪﺓ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ »ﭘﻴﺶ« ﻭ »ﭘﺲ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻰ ّ‬
‫ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘ ًﺎ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺁﻥ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﻣﺤﻞ ﻧﺰﺍﻉ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺳﻨﺖ ﻋﻘﻞﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ‬ ‫ﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﭘﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺍﺯ ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺳﻨﺖ »ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻴﺴﻢﻫﺎﻳﻰ« ﺳﺎﺯﮔﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻋِﺪﺍﺩ ﺭﻗﺒﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌ ًﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﮔﺰﻳﻨﺸﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﻭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺰ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﭘﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﺖ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﺎ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮﺷﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩﻯ ﺭﻭﺡ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺭﻗﺎﺑﺘﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ‬ ‫ﻫﻴﭻﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ »ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺮﺍﺝ ﻛﺮﺩ«‪ .‬ﻫﺮﺩﻭ ﺳﻨﺖ‬ ‫ﻧﻘّﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺭﺳﺎﻧﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻞ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻳﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﻓﺮﺍﮔﻴﺮ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻳﺎ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻤﺎﻧﻮﺋﻞ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ )‪1804-1724‬ﻡ(‬
‫ﻣﻮﻓﻘﻴﺖﺁﻣﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﺓ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻏﺎﺯﮔﺮ ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺧﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻔﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﺍﻩﺣﻞ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺏ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻧﻔﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﻧﻘﺪﻯ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﺪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﻣﻨﺴﺠﻢ ﻭ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻧﻈﻢﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ »ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﮕﻰ« ﻭ ﺗﻜﻴﺔ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﻨﺶ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻄﺒﻊ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺍﻧﺪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻫﻢ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻧﻘﺪ »ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ« ﻭ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺗﺄﻟﻴﻔﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫»ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ« ﻳﺎ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﺑﺮ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ‬
‫»ﻛﺎﺫﺏ« ﺗﻨﺸﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺭﺟﻮﻉ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﺪ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺩﻭ ﺭﻭﻳﻜﺮﺩ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻳﺎ »ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺣﻖ« ﺑﻪ ﻓﻜﺮ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﺒﺎﻧﻰ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺭﻭﻳﻜﺮﺩﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻳﺎ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻭﻇﻴﻔﺔ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ّ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮ‪ :‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥﻧﻬﺎﺩﻥ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻘﺖ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺿﻤﻨﻰ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﺪ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺍﻟﻬﺎﻡ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻌﻜﺲ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﮕﻮ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍژﮔﻮﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺖ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔﺁﺛﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺔ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ‪ ،‬ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎﻳﻰ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦﺷﺪﻥ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖﻳﺎﻓﺘﻨﻰ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦﺗﺮ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻣﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻭﻇﻴﻔﺔ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﻭ ﻛﻠﻰﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻫﻴﭻﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﻧﻔﻜﺎﻛﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﻬﺎ ﻧﻪ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ »ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ« ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ »ﺑﺸﺮﻯ« ﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﮕﻮ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ »ﺷﺎﻛﻠﻪﺳﺎﺯﻯ«‪ 9‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻄﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮﻯ ﻋﻠﻤﻰ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻤﻴﻢ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺭﻭﺍﻧﺸﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻄﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ »ﻃﺒﻖ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ »ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ«‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺑﺨﺶ ﺁﻣﻮﺯﺓ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺣﻜﻢ‬ ‫ﺣﻖ« ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻗﺘﻀﺎﺋﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻋﻼﻳﻖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻭﺿﻊ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﻣﺤﺾ‬ ‫ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ّ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻭ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺷﺎﻛﻠﻪﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﻛﺮﺩ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ »ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺣﻖ« ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻮﻡ ﺁﻥ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ‬
‫ﺷﻬﻮﺩﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺗﺎ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺍ ِﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻟﻜﻦ »ﺻﻔﺤﺔ ﺣﻖ«ﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻘﻞ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ّ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪65 1393‬‬

‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺧﺪﻣﺖ ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻧﻈﺎﻡﺑﺨﺶ‪ 12‬ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺩﺭ ﺑﺨﺶ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻮﺷﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ‬
‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥﺑﺨﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻼﺵﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ ﻣﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺍﺻﻮﻝ‬ ‫ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻭ ﺷﻬﻮﺩﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺗﺤﺎﺩ ﻛﺜﺮﺍﺕ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ‬
‫ﻭﺣﺪﺕ‪ ،‬ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﻭ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻉ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺭﺍﻫﻨﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥﺑﺨﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻮژﻩﻯ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ »ﻏﻴﺮﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ«‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻪ ﺍﺯ ّ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﻧﻬﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺭﺷﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻭ »ﺩﻭﺟﺎﻧﺒﺔ« ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﺎ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﺳﻨﺘﺰ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﻣﻴﻦ ﻧﻘﺪ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺪ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ )‪ ،(1788‬ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭ ﻧﻔﺲ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫]ﻳﺎ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ[ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻧﻔﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻬﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‪ 10‬ﺩﺭ ﺗﺨﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘ ًﺎ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻼﺵﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﻣﺎ ﻧﻘﺸﻰ ﻧﻈﺎﻡﺑﺨﺶ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﺪﺓ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪ 11‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﻭﺍﭘﺴﻴﻦ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﺗﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺍ ِﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻰ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﺎ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮﻯ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ّ‬ ‫ﺭﺷﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ ﻣﻈﺎﻫﺮ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻳﻰ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﻳﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ= ‪ x‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ]ﺍﺑﮋﻩ[ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﺔ ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺩﻭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈ ِﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﻮﺩﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮژﻩﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ« ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ‬ ‫ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﻰ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ّ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻡ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ »ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻧﻔﺴﺎﻧﻰ«‬
‫ﻧﻴﻮﺗﻨﻰ ﺍﺟﺴﺎﻡ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺘﻰ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ »ژﻧﺮﻳﻚ« ﻳﺎ ﻛﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺪﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻣﻮﺯﺓ ﺣﻜﻢ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺷﺎﻛﻠﻪ‬
‫ﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺤﻜﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﮕﻮ ّ‬
‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘ ًﺎ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺘﺤﺪﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ‪ ،‬ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺧﺎﺹﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻛﺜﺮﺗﺶ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺗﻮﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﺳﺮﻭﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻯ »ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ« ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻘﺎﻃﻊ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻛﻠﻰ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺎ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻣﻮﺍﺭ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﻧﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭ ﻛﻠﻰ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺷﻜﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎﺭﻳﻚ‪:‬‬
‫ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂﺷﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻳﻰ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻋﻠّﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺑﻰ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻛﺮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺭﻭﺍﻧﺸﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﺟﺴﺘﻦ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ »ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ« ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻭ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫»ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ« ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﻧﻬﺎﺩﻥ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺘﻰ ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺑﮕﻮﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﻋﻠّﻰ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ‬ ‫ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍ ِﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﻋﻠﻮﻡ ﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ ﻭ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﻓﻴﻞﻫﺎ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻨﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﺦ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﻮﺗﻦ ﻧﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺓ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﻰ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻧﻘﺎﺩﻯ‬
‫ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻛﻤﻜﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪﻥ ﻓﻴﻞﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻫﺮ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻰ‬
‫ﻓﻴﻞﻫﺎ ﻣﺤﻜﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺔ ﺩﻭﻡ‪ ،‬ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﮕﻰﺍﺵ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﻧﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻓﻴﻞﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻰ‪ 13‬ﺗﻜﻴﻦﺍﺵ ﺟﺪﺍ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻭ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺜﺎﻟﻬﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻋﻀﻮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﮔﺎﻩ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻋﻼﻗﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻧﺎﻣﺸﺮﻭﻃﺸﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺧﺎﺹﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﮕﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﺷﻤﻨﺎﻥﺧﻮﻳﺶ‬
‫ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩﺵ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻄﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﺸﺮﻭﻃﺶ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‪» ،‬ﺑﺰﺭگﺗﺮ«‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﺍﺣﻰ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﮕﺮﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﺯﻭﻛﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﻧﺒﺎﺷﻨﺪ؛ ﺍﺻﻮﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺗﻜﻴﻦ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﻘﺪﻯ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻴﺖ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﺑﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﺨﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻋﺎﺕ ﻭﻯ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻄﻮﺡ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﭘﺴﻴﻦ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻣﻬﻢ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺪ ﻗﻮﺓ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻣﺸﺮﻭﻃﺸﺎﻥ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﱠﻖ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺣﻜﻢ )‪ ،(1790‬ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺤﺚ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺻﻮﻟﻰ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫»ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ« ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻳﻚ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎﻯﻛﺎﻧﺖ‬
‫ّ‬
‫ﺗﺄﻣﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺧﺎﺹﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﮕﻰﺍﺵ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ »ﺗﺎ ّﻣﻰ« ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺶﺗﺮ ﺑﺪﺍﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻛﺮﺩﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺧﺪﺍ‪ ،‬ﻧﻔﺲ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﻟﺤﻦ ﺧﺎﺻﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻘﺪ ﻗﻮﺓ ﺣﻜﻢ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻧﺎﻡ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ »ﺣﻜﻢ«‪ ،14‬ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﻞ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ »ﺷﻰء ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ«‪ ،‬ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ »ﻫﻨﺮ ﺣﻜﻢﻛﺮﺩﻥ«‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﺰﺩ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﺎ‬ ‫ﻛﻞ ﻫﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻨﺪﺓ ﺣﺪ ﻧﺎﻣﺸﺮﻭﻁ ﻳﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻴﺖ ﻳﻚ ﺭﺷﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﮔﻮﻳﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﺍﺻﻮﻟﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ‪ .‬ﺑﺨﺶ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺷﺮﻁﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ‪ ،‬ﺟﺰﺋﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺪ‬
‫ﺩﻭﻡ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻧﻘﺪ ﻗﻮﺓ ﺣﻜﻢ ﻏﺎﻳﺖﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﺻﻞ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺮﻭﻁ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﻃﺒﻖ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ »ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻏﺎﻳﺎﺕ« ﻭﺿﻊ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺣﺬﻑ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺑﺎﺯﻯ‬
‫ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪﻩﺷﺪﻩ‬
‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻣﻮﺍﺭ‪ .‬ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﺑﺨﺶ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺪ ﻗﻮﺓ ﺣﻜﻢ‬ ‫ﺗﺨﻴﻞ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﻮﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﻭ ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﺔ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ؛‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ‬
‫ﺯﻳﺒﺎﻳﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ]ﻳﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻜﻰ[‪ ،‬ﺍﺻﻮﻟﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﻋﻘﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻮﺷﺪ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻧﺎﻣﺸﺮﻭﻁ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﺮ ﺭﺷﺘﺔ ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻜﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺣﻜﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﺯﻳﺒﺎ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭﺿﻊ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﺮﺽ ﺩﺭﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻥ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﺑﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﺴﻂ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻻ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺣﻜﺎﻡ ﺯﻳﺒﺎﻳﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺻﻮﻝ ﺣﻜﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻠﻮﺹ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺗﻮ ّﻫﻢ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻮ ّﻫﻢ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺑﺮﺗﺮ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺁﻥ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ‬ ‫ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺍﻧﺶﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻨﻰ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ »ﻋﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ‬‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻳﺎ ﻏﺎﻳﺖ ّ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦﺍﻧﺪ )ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫ّ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻈﺮﻯ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻳﻚ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ‬
‫ﻋﻼﻗﻪ«‪ 15‬ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻋﻘﻼﻧﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ(‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﻧﻘﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺧﺎﺻﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻧﺸﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻜﻰ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺣﻜﻤﻰ »ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ« ﺣﻜﻢ‬ ‫ﻋﻬﺪﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﺻﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﻢ ﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﻣﺎ »ﻋﺎﺭﺽ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ«‪ :‬ﻣﺎ ﺗﻮﺍﻓﻖ ﻳﺎ ﺗﻼﺋﻤﻰ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﻼ ﺍﻳﺪﺓ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺑﺴﺘﺮ ﻧﻘﺪ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ّ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪66‬‬

‫ﻏﺎﻳﺘﻰ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﺑﻬﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﺟﻮﻳﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ »ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ«‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻗﻮﺍﻯ ﻓﻜﺮ ﺧﻮﺩﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﺗﻜﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ‬
‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﻣﻴﻞ ﺑﻪ ]ﺗﺼﺎﺣﺐ[ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺭﺍﻫﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻨﻰ »ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﺷﻮﺩ«‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ‪ 16‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﻴﭻ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ّ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺑﮋﻩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺯﻳﺒﺎ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺍﻻ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺧﺼﻠﺖ ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﺔ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻣﻴﻞ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻓﻘﺪﺍﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﺩﺭ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺭﺥ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ »ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ« )ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﻧﺸﺎﻥﺩﺍﺩﻥ( ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻴﻞ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﮕﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺣﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻜﻰ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺘﺎ ﻛﻠﻰ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻜﻴﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻥ ﻧﻘﺪ‪ :‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻧﻘﺪﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺻﻔﺤﻪﺍﻯ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﻳﻴﻦ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩ ﻣﺘﺤﻮﻝﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ »ﻛﺸﻒ« ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺶﮔﺮﺍﻧﺔ »ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﻳﺘﻪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮﮔﺮﻯ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻛﺎﺷﻒ‬
‫ﻧﻘﺪ )ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ( »ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ« ﻭ ﻧﻘﺪ )ﻫﻴﻮﻣﻰ( »ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰ« ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻃﺮﺩ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺷﻒ ﻛﻮﻩ ﻳﺎ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺯﻳﺮﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ «.‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫»ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ« ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪ 19.‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺗﺄﻣﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ »ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ«‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﻳﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺠﺎﻣﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ‬
‫ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ]ﺭﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ[‪ ،‬ﺗﺎ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻮﺽ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺴﺖ ﺁﻥ )ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﺍﺻﻮﻟﻰ ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪﻯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ »ﻃﺒﻖ ﺣﻖ« ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ( ﻭﺿﻊ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﺤ ّﻮﻝ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺤﺚ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻫﻴﻮﻡ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩﻯ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ‬
‫»ﻏﺎﺋﻴﺖ ﻗﺼﺪﻯ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ«‪ ،20‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑُﻦ »ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮕﻰ«‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪﻫﺎ )ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻛﺎﺕ ‪(...‬‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﺍﺕ ﻣﺎ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺒﻰ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﻧﻘﺪﻯ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻥ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ‪» :‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮕﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺩﺭﺁﻭﺭﺩ؛ ﻭ ﺑﻰﺷﻚ‬ ‫ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺹﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ »ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ« ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮕﻰ ﺗﻬﻰﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻭ ﻓﻘﻴﺮﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﺩﺍﺩﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰ ﻭ ﭼﻪ »ﺍﺭﺯﺵﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ«‪» :‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻧﻔﻜﺎﻛﻰ ﺳﻔﺖﻭﺳﺨﺖ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻓﺎﻛﺖ ]ﻳﺎ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ[ ﻭ ﺣﻖ‪:‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﺍﺻﻮﻟﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻣﮕﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺑﻤﺎﻫﻮ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺼﺎﺩﻓﻰ‬
‫‪21‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﻌﻠّﻖ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺗﺄﻟﻴﻔﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺻﻮﻝ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻐﺰ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻈﺮﺍﺕ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻛﺮﺩ ‪ ...‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻧﻘﺪﻯ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺁﻥ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺣﻖ ﻣﺎﻟﻚ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ 17«.‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻔﻰﻛﺮﺩﻥ‬
‫»ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ« ﻣﺴﺎﻭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ »ﻓﺎﻛﺖ« ﻭ ﺭﻓﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺣﻖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﻪﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻭ ﺟﻨﺒﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺟﻨﺒﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﭘﺮﺳﻴﺪ ﺁﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻨﻰ ﻣﻘﺪﻡ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻫﻴﻮﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝﺗﺮ‬
‫ّ‬ ‫ﺗﻐﻴﺮ ﻭ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ »ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ« ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻔﻰ ﻭ ﻃﺮﺩ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻃﺮﺩ ِ‬
‫ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ّ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﺭﻭﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻫﻴﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻔﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻘﻮﻳﻢ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺫﺍﺗﻰ »ﺩﺭ ﭘﺲ« ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺗﻜﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺭﻭﻯﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ‬
‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﻯ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﻧﻘﺪﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺭﺯﺵﻫﺎ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻫﻴﻮﻡ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﻓﺮﺽ‬ ‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ ﻫﻴﭻﭼﻴﺰ‪ ،‬ﺣﺘﻰ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ‬ ‫ﻧﺰﺩ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ »ﺗﻮ ّﻫﻢ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ« ﻋﻘﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻋﻘﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻘﺪ »ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ« ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮﮔﺎﻩ ﺳﻮژﻩﺍﻯ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺁﻏﺎﺯﺩ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﻭﺳﻮﺳﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﺍ ﺭﻓﺘﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﺧﺎﺳﺘﮕﺎﻫﻰ‬
‫ﻭ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺳﺪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﭼﻪ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻄﻰ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻝ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ]ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ[ ﺩﺍﺩﻩﺷﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻞ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻛﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻞ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ »ﻧﻘﺪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰ« ﻫﻴﻮﻡ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺷﻮﺭﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺑﻨﮕﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻤﻠﻜﺮﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻬﻢ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻭ ﺗﺄﺛّﺮﺍﺕ ﻣﻰﺁﻏﺎﺯﺩ ﻭ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺳﺪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻴﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩ« ﻧﺎﻣﺸﺮﻭﻉ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺸﺨﻴﺺ ﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ‬
‫‪22‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ »ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﮕﻰ« ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻋﻘﻞ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢ ﺟﻨﺒﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﻮﻟّﺪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥﺳﺎﺯ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭘﻰ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺟﻨﺒﻪﺍﻯ »ﺁﻧﺘﺮﻭﭘﻴﻚ«‬
‫ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻘﺪ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻛﺜﺮﺕﮔﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺪﻝ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻤﻠﻜﺮﺩ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯﭘﻴﺶﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻧﻘﺪ »ﺗﺒﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ« ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ »ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ﻛﻨﺶﮔﺮ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺶﮔﺮﻯﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﺍﺭﺯﺵ‬ ‫ﻭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺑﺨﺼﻮﺹ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ‬
‫ﻭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻓﺎﻋﻞ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﻔﺮﻭﺽ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ »ﻭﺍﻻ«‬
‫ﺩﺭﺍﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ‪ :‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺭﻭﺵ‬ ‫)ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﺍﺩﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻛﻨﺶﮔﺮ( ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ‬
‫»ﺩﺭﺍﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ« ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ‬ ‫»ﭘﺴﺖ« )ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﻭﺩﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶﮔﺮ(‪ ،‬ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‬
‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻒ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ـ ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻰ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻨﻰﺗﺮ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﭼﻪ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﻳﺸﺘﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺁﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻏﺎﻳﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻛﺴﻰ؟‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻋﻼﻣﺖ ﻣﺮﻛﺰ ﺍﺭﺯﻳﺎﺑﻰﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؟ ﺁﻥ ﮔﺎﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﻮﺩﻯ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ‬
‫ﭼﻴﺰ ﺍﻋﻄﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺳﻤﻴﻨﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺭﻓﺘﻦ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨ ّﺰﻝ‬
‫ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻋﺎﺕ ﻣﺤﻮﺭﻯ ﺭﻭﺵ ﻧﻘﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﺎﻧﻨﺪﺓ ﻧﺰﺍﻉ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪﺷﺪﻥ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ »ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ« ﺭﺍ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ »ﻧﻤﻮﺩ«‪ 23‬ﺧﻠﻂ ﻛﺮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﻮﺭ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﺍﺭﺯﺵﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 18.‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪67 1393‬‬

‫ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻯ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺫﺍﺗﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺲ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﻳﺎ ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫ﭘﻨﻬﺎﻥ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ »ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺻﻞ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺗﺤﺖﺍﻟﻠﻔﻈﻰ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ«‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻳﻚ »ﺷﺒﺢ«‪ ،24‬ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺫﺍﺕ ]ﭘﻨﻬﺎﻥ[‬
‫ﺗﻘﺪﻡ ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺍﺑﻌﺎﺩ »ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ«‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ]ﺍﻳﻦ ﺫﺍﺕ[ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪» :‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺎﻟﺶ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﻌﺎﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑُﻦ ﻭ ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﺪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﺶ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻭ ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ؛ ﺷﺎﻛﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﻭ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﻯ ﺣﺴﻰ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻳﻜﺴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺎﻧﺪ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﺪ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟«‪ .‬ﺷﺮﻭﻁ ﻣﺬﻛﻮﺭ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫»ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ« ﻧﺰﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﺻﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩ ﺭﻭﺯﻣﺮﺓ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻮﻝ ﻗﺎﺑﻞﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻰ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮﻯ ﻣﻔﺮﻭﺽ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﺑﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻛﻤﻚ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﻣﻤﻜﻦ »ﻧﻘﺶﻫﺎﻯ« ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺒﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺗﺎ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻣﺴﻴﺮﻯ »ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰﺗﺮ« ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺳﺮﻭﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩﺁﻳﻴﻨﻰ ﺫﺍﺗﻰ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺤﻔﻮﻅ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻋﻘﻼﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻜﻰ‪.‬‬
‫ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪] ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ[ ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮﻯ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﻣﺄﻟﻮﻑ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ]ﻣﻰﺁﻳﻨﺪ[‪،‬‬ ‫ﻃﺒﻖ ﺭﻭﺍﻳﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻳﻚ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻧﻘﺪﻯ ﺷﻜﺴﺖ‬
‫ﻭﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭﻇﻴﻔﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮﻯ ﻭﻳﮋﺓ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻇﺎﻫﺮﺍً ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ‪ 25‬ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺤﻤﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺯﺵﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺖ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ‪ 26‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻔﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻣﺘﺤﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺎﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﻭ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻗﻮﺍ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺷﻬﺎﻯ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﻭ ﺗﻜﻴﻦﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﻭﺑﺮﻭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺍﻣﻮﺭﻯ »ﺩﺍﺩﻩﺷﺪﻩ« ﻭ ﻣﻔﺮﻭﺽ ﻧﮕﺮﻳﺴﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰﺷﺎﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻋﺪﻡ ﺗﻌﻴﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻋﺪﻡ ّ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺍﻣﻮﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺘ ًﺎ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺍﻣﻨﺔ »ﺗﻮﻫﻢ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ«‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻨﺶ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺎ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ّ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻤﺎﻫﻮ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻮﺷﺘﻦ ﻧﻘﺪ‪ :‬ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ‬ ‫ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ‬ ‫ﻭﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺩﻛﻮﻣﺐ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻛﻠﻤﺔ »ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ« ﺩﺭ ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺻﻮﺭﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ )ﺧﺪﺍ‪ ،‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻧﻔﺲ(‪ ،‬ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻭﺍژﻩﻧﺎﻣﺔ ﻣﺨﺘﺼﺮ ﺁﻛﺴﻔﻮﺭﺩ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﻭ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻓﻜﺮ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﭘﺴﻴﻦ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺔﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ «.‬ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪ‪ 28‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ »ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ‪ ،«...‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ‪،‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬
‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ »ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺭﺷﺘﺔ ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝ ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ «.‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﺟﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ »]ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ[ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﻪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮژﻩﺍﻯ )ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰ(«‪ ،‬ﻭ »ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ« ﺩﻟﻮﺯ »ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﺨﺶ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺭﻭﻧﺪﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎﺟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺫﺍﺗﻰ ﻳﻚ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺿﺪﻳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺮﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﻭ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.«.‬‬ ‫ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺮﺍﺝ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﺭﻭﻧﺪ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﻭ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻩ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﺤﻮﻝﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻃﻰ ﺁﻥ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﺓ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﻠّﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻘﻮﻳﻢ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﺪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎﺝ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺽ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﺩﮔﻰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫»ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻘﺎﺩﻳﺮ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻯ ﺭﺳﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺚ ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻪ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺍﻟﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻳﻚﭘﺴﺎـﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻠﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻮﻝ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻨﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻋﺎﺩﺕ ﺑﺮﺧﺎﺳﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪«.‬‬
‫ﺣﻘﺎﻳﻘﻰ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﻭ ﻛﻠﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻄﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﺳﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﺪ‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻳﻢ؛ »ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺩﺁﮔﺎﻩ« ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻗﺪﺭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺩﺍﺩﻩﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻋﻘﻞ ﻣﺤﺾ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻰ ﻭ ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻰ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭ ﻛﻠﻴﺖﺷﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﻰﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ« ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺭﺍﻳﺞ »ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮﻯ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﺪﻳﻮﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﺗﺄﻟﻴﻔﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺤﺾ‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ« ﺟﺎﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﻧﻔﻜﺎﻙ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻭ ﺷﻬﻮﺩﻯ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺁﻣﻴﺰﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻻﺯﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ‬
‫ﻼ »ﺳﮓ«( ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰ ﻣﻌﻤﻮﻟﻰ )ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭﻳﺎﺭﻭﻳﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮﻯ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮﻯ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪﺍﻯ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻳﺎ »ﻗﺎﺑﻞﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻰ« ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ﺗﺠﺰﻳﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻫﻴﭻ »ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ« ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﻣﻦ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﺁﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺜﻠﺚ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺰ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺁﻥ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻣﻜﺎﻥ )ﺣﺘﻰ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻴﺎﻝ(‪ ،‬ﻭ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻟﻌﻜﺲ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﻣﺜﻠﺚ ﻣﻔﺮﻭﺽ‬ ‫ﺑﮕﻴﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺣﻘﺎﻳﻘﻰ ﺑﻰﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ‪ ،‬ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﻭ ﻛﻠﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺍﻯ‪ 27‬ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑُﻦ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﺍﻳﻦﺩﻭ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﻰﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ ﺷﻬﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﻜﺲ‪ .‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺭﻭﻳﻜﺮﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺗﺎ ﺣﺪ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻯ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺷﻬﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖ ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻰ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻛﻠﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺼﺪﺍﻕ‬ ‫ﺑﺴﻂﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ«‬
‫ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺼﺪﺍﻗﻰ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﻤﺎﻫﻮ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻣﺼﺪﺍﻕ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰ ﻭ ﻣﻮﻟّﺪﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻝ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻭ ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﻛﻠﻰ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺣﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﺮ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﭘﺸﺖﺳﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻚ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪68‬‬

‫»ﭼﺘﺮﻯ« ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻮﺟﺐ ﺍﻧﺴﺠﺎﻡ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻨﺘﺰ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﻰ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﻭ ﺍﺑﮋﺓ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﻓﻖ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‬
‫ﻓﺮﺍﮔﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﺮﻃﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺁﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺷﺎﻛﻠﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﻣﻌﻘﻮﻝ ﻭ ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮ ﻣﻰﻧﻬﺎﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﺍﻣﺎﺗﻴﺰﺍﺳﻴﻮﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺷﺎﻛﻠﻪﻣﻨﺪﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺳﻨﺖ ﺟﺪﺍ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﺷﺎﻛﻠﺔ ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻣﻰﺁﻣﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻭﺿﻊ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢ ﻏﻴﺮﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻢ‬
‫‪29‬‬
‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﭼﻴﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺍﻳﻦﭼﻨﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﻯ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ »ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭﻯ«‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻭﺳﺎﻃﺖ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻌﻘﻮﻝ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻰ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻰ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ‬
‫‪31‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻓﺮﻭﻣﻰﻛﺎﻫﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﻭﺩﺳﺖ ﻧﺸﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﺑﻼﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ‬
‫»ﺩﺭﺍﻣﺎﺗﻴﺰﺍﺳﻴﻮﻥ« ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮ ﻧﻈﺎﺭﺕ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻪﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫»ﺳﮓ« ﻳﺎ »ﻋﻠﻴﺖ« ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﺼﺮﻯ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺤﻞ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺍﻝ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﻭ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﺣﻞﺷﺪﻥ ﺁﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ ﺗﺎ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺭﺍﻩﺣﻞ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺗﻰ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺘﻰ ﭘﺎﺭﺍﺩﻭﻛﺴﻴﻜﺎﻝ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻰ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﺗﻜﻴﻦ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺎﺯﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻠﻰ‪» :‬ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﮕﻰﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﺎﺳﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎﻣﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺓ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻠﻰ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻨﺎﻇﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻄﻰ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖ ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﻛﻠﻴﺖ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﻰ‬ ‫ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻴﺎﺗﻰ«‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ »ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ« ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﺤﺖ »ﺳﻨﺘﺰ‬
‫‪32‬‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻮﺟﺐ ّ‬ ‫ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻣﺤﺾ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖ »ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ« ﻳﺎ »ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﻋﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﮕﻮ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ«‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﻯ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ ﺷﻬﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ »ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻯ‬
‫ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮﻯ ﺟﺰ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺍﻭﻝ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﻜﻰ« ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻮﺷﺪ ﺗﺎ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻫﻨﺪﺳﻰ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺶ ﻛﺸﻴﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺗﻌﻤﻴﻢ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ »ﺷﺎﻛﻠﻪ« ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻧﻤﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﺪﺓ ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ ﮔﺰﻳﻨﺔ ﺧﻮﺑﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ »ﻗﺎﻋﺪﻩﻯ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ« ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭﺿﻊ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﮕﺮﻯﺷﺪﻩﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ .‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺟﺎﻯﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺁﭘﺎﺭﺍﺗﻮﺱ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﭼﻪ ﻧﻪ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺶﺗﺮ ﮔﻔﺘﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻣﺸﺘﻘﺎﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ »ﺷﺎﻛﻠﻪﻣﻨﺪ« ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻼ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ »ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ« ﺷﺎﻛﻠﻪﻣﻨﺪ ﺷﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﺷﺮﻁ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺭﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺟﺰﺋﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰﺗﺮ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻔﺲ‪ ،‬ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻴﺖ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻼ »ﺳﮓ« ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ ﺍﺻﻮﻝ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺷﺎﻛﻠﻪﻣﻨﺪ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺷﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫»ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ« ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺘﺸﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﺒﻬﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺶﺗﺮ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻛﺮﺩﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺳﺮﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺗﺄﻳﻴﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺗﻜﺬﻳﺐ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻭﺣﺪﺕﺑﺨﺶ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﻭ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ=‪ x‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻧﻮﻉ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺍﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺮﻛﺰﻳﺖﺑﺨﺶ ﻭ ﻛﻞﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻧﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻭﺣﺪﺕﺑﺨﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻭ ﺷﻬﻮﺩﻫﺎ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻧﻘﺪﻯ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺏ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺣﺘﻰ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ »ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ«‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﺳﮕﻔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻫﺔ ‪ 1970‬ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ »ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ« ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻋﻘﻞ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﺍﺭﻓﺘﻦ‬ ‫ﺷﺎﻛﻠﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺒﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﺯ »ﻗﺎﻋﺪﺓ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ« ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻣﺸﺨﺺﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻈﻴﻤﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﺮﺗﺮ‬ ‫»ﺍﺋﺘﻼﻑ« ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﺎ »ﻗﺎﻋﺪﺓ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ« ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﻧﻔﺲ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻧﺎﻣﺸﺮﻭﻁ ﻳﻚ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ‬ ‫ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﺣﺎﻛﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﻣﻠﻬﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻬﻢ »ﺷﺎﻛﻠﻪﺍﻯ« ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺷﻮﺩ ﭼﻪ؟ ﭼﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻋﺪﻡﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻌﺎﻝﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺷﻐﺎﻝﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﺍﻧﻨﺪﺓ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻳﺎ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻳﻚ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺮﻛﺎﺕ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺷﻬﻮﺩﻯ ﻣﺎﺑﻪﺍﺯﺍﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ]ﺑﺎﻟﻌﻜﺲ[ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻬﻮﺩﻯ ﻧﺎﺏ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻣﺎﺑﻪﺍﺯﺍﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬ ‫ﻼ ﺩﺭ »ﺭﻭﺵ ﺩﺭﺍﻣﺎﺗﻴﺰﺍﺳﻴﻮﻥ« ﺧﻮﻳﺶ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻘﻮﻝ ﻭ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﺷﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺼﻠﺖ ﻣﻤﺘﺎﺯ ﻳﻚ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ »ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ« ﺍﺯ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ »ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﻭ ﻧﻮﺍﺣﻰ ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﺔ« ﺁﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻃﻰ ﺁﻥ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺳﺎﻣﺎﻥﻣﻨﺪ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺳﻮژﻩﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺰ »ﻓﻀﺎﻳﻰ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ‬ ‫ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺭﺍ‪ 30«.‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﺪ ﻗﻮﺓ ﺣﻜﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ »ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻜﻰ« ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺳﺘﺎﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻃﺒﻖ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻨﺼﺮﻯ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ »ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺍﻳﻀﺎﺣﺶ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ«‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﺿﺮﻭﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ »ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ« ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﻰ‬
‫ﻋﻘﻼﻧﻰ ﻭﺍژﮔﻮﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺷﻬﻮﺩ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦﺷﺎﻥ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ »ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻭ ﺗﻬﻰ« ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺷﺮﻁ‬
‫»ﻧﺸﺎﻥﺷﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﺪ«‪ .‬ﺍﺣﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻜﻰ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﺍﺻﻮﻝ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﻟﺬﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻢ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦﺷﺎﻥ ﺭﻗﺎﺑﺖ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ّ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪69 1393‬‬

‫ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ »ﺍﻓﺰﻭﺩﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻜﻤﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﺻﻮﻟﻰ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻛﺎﻧﺖﺍﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﻟﺬﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻢ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﺑﻌﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﻗﻄﻌﺎﺕ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺍﻝ ﺩﺭ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﺸﺪﻳﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺨﻔﻴﻒ »ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ« ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎ‪ .‬ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﻭ ﺍﺣﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻜﻰ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻞﺷﺪﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ 37«.‬ﻭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘ ًﺎ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﺼﺪﺍﻗﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻚ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﺭﺥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻜﻢ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ِ‬
‫ﺣﻞﺷﺪﻥ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ‪» ،‬ﺁﻣﻴﺨﺘﻦ« ﻳﺎ »ﻓﺸﺮﺩﻩﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ« ﺩﻭ ﺟﺰء ﻳﺎ »ﺟﻨﺒﺔ«‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻜﻰ ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ ﻋﻘﻞ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﺨﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺣﺲ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ )ﻣﺼﺪﺍﻕ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﺔ ﺁﻥ ﻭ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺣﻞﺷﺪﻧﺶ( ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﻩ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻼﺕ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺧﺎﺻﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ‬
‫»ﺑﺪﻧﻰ« ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺗﻌﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪» .‬ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﻚ« ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻚ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ّ‬
‫ﺁﻏﺎﺯﻳﻦ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺤﻮ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺐ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺭﻭﻧﺪ ﺁﻣﻮﺧﺘﻦ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺁﻣﻮﺧﺘﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻏﺎﻳﺖ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎ ﺣﻞﻭﻓﺼﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻭﺍژﮔﻮﻧﺶ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻔﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻗﻮﺍ‪،‬‬
‫ﺳﻪ ﺑﺨﺶ ّ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺧﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻗﻮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻧﺰﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺧﺎﺻﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺣﺴﺎﺳﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ‪/‬ﺗﺨﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻤﻮﻟﻰ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﻣﺎ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺣﻞﻭﻓﺼﻞ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻮﺍ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻮﺭ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺼﺪﺍﻗﻰ ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪﺯﺍ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻜﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥﺳﺎﺯ‬
‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺷﻬﻮﺩ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻗﻮﺍ ﻣﻨﺘﻘﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺤﻮﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻳﻢ‪ :‬ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ‪] ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ[ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﺩ ﻭ ﻭﺍﺩﺍﺭﻣﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻧﻘﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ )ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ‪ ،‬ﻋﻘﻞ(‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﻝ ﻳﺎ »ﺭﻟﻪﺍﻯ«‪ 38‬ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻮﺍﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺍ ِﻋﻤﺎﻝ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺗﻼﺵﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻰﭘﺬﻳﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﻗﻮﺍ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺣﻞﻭﻓﺼﻞ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻳﺎ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﺍﻧﻨﺪﺓ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻗﻮﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺷﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺳﺎﻃﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﺑﺮﻧﻤﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﻨﺒﻪﺍﻯ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﻯ ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻜﻰ ﻣﺘﺮﺗّﺐ‬ ‫ﭘﻰ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻣﺎ ﻫﺮﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻮﺍ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﻧﺎﻓﺮﺟﺎﻡ ﻭ ﻋﺪﻡﺗﻌﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻮﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻳﺎﻟﻜﺘﻴﻚ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ّ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻘﺪ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺳﻨﺘﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﺮﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﻃﺮﺍﺣﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻥﺩﻫﻨﺪﺓ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ ﺗﺪﺍﻭﻡ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬
‫‪33‬‬
‫ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺁﻣﻮﺧﺘﻦ ﻭ »ﺷﺎﻛﻠﺔ« ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺧﺎﺹ‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻜﻰ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻧﺎﻫﻤﺨﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻗﻮﺍﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﻣﺎ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻛﺜﺮﺕﮔﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺭﺯﺵ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺣﺴﺎﺳﻴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ »ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺯﻧﺪﺓ«‪ 39‬ﺍﺳﺘﻤﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻓﺸﺮﺩﮔﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻫﻤﺨﻮﺍﻧﻰ‪ 34‬ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪:‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻳﺎﺑﻰ ﺗﺄﺛﺮﺍﺕ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ ﻭ ﺗﺨﻴﻞ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ »ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻟﺬﺕ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻧﺎﺏ« ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﺑﺮﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪﺓ ﻓﺸﺮﺩﮔﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺗﻨﺎﻭﺏ ﻣﺴﺘﻤﺮ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻟﺬﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻢ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻨﺎﻭﺏ ﺑﻪ ﻭﻳﮋﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻻﻯ ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻧﻘﺪ»ﺗﺒﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ«‬
‫ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﻃﻨﻴﻦﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ؛ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺨﻴﻞ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻙ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ »ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺪ ﻗﻮﺍﻯ ﻧﻤﻮﺩ ﺁﻥ ﺩﺭﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻻ‬ ‫»ﻋﻠﻤﻰﻛﻨﺶﮔﺮ«‬
‫ﻣﻰﺭﺍﻧﺪ« ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺄﺛﺮﺍﺕ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺠﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ »ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺩﻳﺎﻟﻜﺘﻴﻜﻰ ﻗﻮﺍ« ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻮﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ‬
‫‪40‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻜﻰﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺍﻧﺴﺠﺎﻡ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻫﻨﺮﻯ ﻛﻤﻚ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻴﻞ ﺑﺮﺍﻧﮕﻴﺨﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﮔﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﻧﻬﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺶﮔﺮﻯﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‪ :‬ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪]» :‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻻ[ ﻗﻮﺍﻯ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺭﺍ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺗﻼﺷﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻣﺒﺎﺭﺯﺍﻧﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻰﺳﺘﻴﺰﻧﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺍﺭﻫﺎﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺩﻭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺍﻣﺮ »ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻚ« ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ :‬ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻚ‬ ‫ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻗﻮﻩ ﻗﻮﺓ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺎ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺳﺮﺣﺪﺍﺗﺶ ﻣﻰﺭﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻗﻮﺓ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻧﻘﺪ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻛﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺭﺍﻧﺪﻥ ﻗﻮﺓ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ‬ ‫ﭘﺪﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﻭ‬
‫ﺣﺴﺎﺳﻴﺖ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻚ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺳﻮﻡ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻮﺷﺪ ﺍﺻﻮﻟﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻬﺎﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻗﻮﺓ ﻣﺰﺑﻮﺭ ﺑﻪﺧﻮﺩﻯﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺭﺳﻴﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﻗﻮﻩ ﻗﻮﺓ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻛﻨﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﮕﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻰﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮﺣﺪ ﻣﻰﺭﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﺮ ﻗﻮﻩ ﻗﻮﺓ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻗﺮﺍﺭﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﻳﺰﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ‬ ‫ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﻗﻮﺓ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺮﻭﺩ‪ .‬ﻗﻮﺍ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻤﻴﻖﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺳﻄﺢ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﺠﺎ‬
‫ﺁﭘﺎﺭﺍﺗﻮﺱ ﺍﺳﺘﺘﻴﻜﻰ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺳﻮﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩ »ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎﺝ«‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺶﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﻴﮕﺎﻧﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻗﻮﺍ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ‬
‫‪35‬‬
‫ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻗﻮﺍ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﺭﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻏﻮﺵ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﻨﺪ‪«.‬‬
‫‪36‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﮕﺮﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺟﻬﺎﺕ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺑﺴﻂ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻻ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩ‬
‫ﺍﺻﻮﻝ ﻋﻤﺪﺓ ﻧﻘﺪﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻣﺘﺤ ّﻤﻞﺷﺪﻥ ﺧﺸﻮﻧﺖ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻋﻴﻦﺣﺎﻝ ﺩﺳﺖﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰﺍﻯ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺑﺮﺗﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺁﻣﻴﺰﺩ‪ :‬ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻤﻮﺩﻯ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ »ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻯ‬
‫ﮔﻴﺮﺩ )ﻭ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺻﻞ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺨﻦ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺍﻋﺘﺮﺍﻓﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﻦ«‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻗﻮﺍﻯ ﻣﺎ ﺑﺴﻂ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﺗﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ( ﻭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻋﺪﻡ ِ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﻧﺎﺏ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ »ﻛﺎﺋﻮﺳﻤﻮﺳﻰ«‪ 41‬ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﭘﺴﻴﻦ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ّ‬
‫ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﻭ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺳﻪﺑﺨﺸﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮ‪ ،‬ﻧﺨﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪﺍﻯ ﻫﻢ ﺧﺸﻮﻧﺖﺑﺎﺭ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﺍﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮ«‪» ،‬ﻣﺼﺪﺍﻕ« ﻳﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ »ﻋﺪﻡ ّ‬
‫ﻣﺴﻴﺮﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻧﺸﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؟‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺮﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﺍﻧﻨﺪﺓ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ؛ ﺩﻭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮﻯ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻏﻴﺎﺏ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺁﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ؛‬ ‫ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺣﻞﺷﺪﻧﻰﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻳﺎ ﻗﺎﺑﻞﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﻧﺎﻇﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭ ﻣﺤﺾ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪70‬‬

 Greco. Preface by Daniel W. Smith. ‫»ﻛﺸﻒ« ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻛﻪ »ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰ‬
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1997. ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﺑﻤﺎﻫﻮ‬ 42
ّ ‫ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ‬،‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‬ ّ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻭ‬
43
«‫« ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬.‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‬ ّ ‫ ﻭ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻛﻪ‬LA determination
‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺖﻫﺎ‬ ‫ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻣﺤﺾ‬،‫ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻳﻚ »ﮔﺴﺴﺖ« ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‬
.‫* ﺩﺍﻧﺸﺠﻮﻯ ﺩﻛﺘﺮﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﻋﻼﻣﻪ ﻃﺒﺎﻃﺒﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ‬
ّ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬
:‫ ﻣﺘﻦ ﻓﻮﻕ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪﻯ ﻓﺼﻞ ﭘﻨﺠﻢ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﺳﺖ‬.1
Deleuze’s Philosophical Lineage, Edited by «‫ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻣﺤﻴﻂﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻋﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ »ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬.‫ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‬
Graham Jones and John Roffe, Edinburgh ‫ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﺑﻌﺎﺩﻯ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ »ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ« ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‬،‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺭﺥ ﺩﻫﺪ‬
University Press, 2009. ‫ﺍﺑﮋﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ؛ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻘﺶ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ »ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭ« ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ‬
2. Vincent Descombes. ‫ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺻﻔﺤﻪﺍﻯ ﺧﻮﺩﺁﻳﻴﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ‬:‫ﻧﻴﺰ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻧﻘﺸﻰ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‬
3. Modern French Philosophy. ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﮕﻰﻫﺎ ﺍﺷﻐﺎﻝ‬
.‫ ﻡ‬.‫ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺯﺍﺩﮔﺎﻩ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‬.4
‫ ﺍﻳﻦ‬.‫ ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻊ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺭﮔﺎﻩﻫﺎ‬،‫ ﺿﺮﺑﺎﻫﻨﮓﻫﺎ‬،‫ ﻛﻠﻜﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺮﻛﺎﺕ‬،‫ﺷﻮﺩ‬
5. Determination.
6. Representation.
:‫ﻧﺎﺣﻴﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﭘﺴﻴﻦ ﻗﻄﻌﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻧﮕﺎﺷﺖ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ‬
7. Critique. ‫ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﻧﺎﺏ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ‬:«‫ ﻳﻚ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‬:‫»ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ‬
8. Transcendental field. ‫ »ﮔﺬﺭﻯ« ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﻭﻫﻠﻪ‬،‫ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬،‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺫﺍﺗ ًﺎ »ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ« ﺍﺳﺖ‬
9. Schematism. ‫»ﺗﻌﻴﻦﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ«ﺍﻯ‬ّ ،‫ ﻣﻌﻠّﻖﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺮگ‬،‫ﺑﻪ ﻭﻫﻠﺔ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬
10. Reproduction. ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ »ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻓﺮﺩ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰﺍﻯ ﻏﻴﺮﺷﺨﺼﻰ‬
11. Recognition. ‫ ﻭ ﺭﺧﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺮﺍﺝ‬،‫ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺗﻜﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‬،‫ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
12. Regulative.
‫« ﻧﻜﺮﻩﺑﻮﺩﻥ‬.‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺣﻮﺍﺩﺙ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﺭﻫﻴﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
13. Quiddity.
14. Judgement. ‫ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ‬:‫ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬،«‫ﺍﺳﻢ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ »ﻳﻚ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‬
15. Disinterested. ‫ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻧﺸﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﺎ‬،‫ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻛﻨﺶ‬،‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ‬
ِ ‫ﺑﺮ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭﻫﺎﻯ‬
16. Event. ‫ ﻧﺎﻡ ﺧﺎﺹ‬.(‫ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻧﻴﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ )ﻳﺎ ﻫﻨﻮﺯ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻧﺸﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
17. What is Philosophy? P 37 /40. ‫ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ‬،‫ ﻭ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺑﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‬،‫ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻜﻴﻨﮕﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
.‫ ﻡ‬.«‫ »ﻧﻘﺪ‬:‫ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ؛ ﻓﺼﻞ ﺳﻮﻡ‬:‫ﻙ‬.‫ ﺭ‬.18 ‫ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬،‫ﻧﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻤﻌﻴﺖ ﺗﻨﻬﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‬
19. Empiricism and Subjectivity, p 88/94.
‫ﺁﻥ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺟﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺪ ِﻡ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭﺯﻥ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬
20. Intentional finality of nature.
21. Empiricism and Subjectivity, p 133/152.
.‫ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻧﺎﺿﺮﻭﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬،‫ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﻨﺪ‬
22. Empiricism and Subjectivity, p 91-2/86.
23. Appearance. ‫ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻭ ﻣﺂﺧﺬ‬
24. Apparition. 1. Qu’est-ce que la philosophie? Paris:
25. Transcendental. Editions de Minuit, 1991. What is Philosophy?
26. Transcendent. Trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Graham Burchell.
.‫ ﻡ‬.‫ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺘﻦ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺣﺮﻑ ﺁﻏﺎﺯﻳﻦ ﺑﺰﺭگ‬Being .27 New York: Columbia University Press, 1994.
28. Theorem. 2. Empiricisme et subjectivité. Paris:
29. Diagrammatical. PUF, 1953. Empiricism and Subjectivity. Trans.
30. Desert Islands, p 92.
Constantin Boundas. New York: Columbia
31. Difference and Repetition, p 365/285.
University Press, 1991.
32. Difference and Repetition, p 211/ 163.
3. L’ile déserte et autres textes. Paris:
33. Discord.
34. Accord. Editions de Minuit, 2002. Ed. David Lapoujade.
35. Essays Critical and Clinical, p 48-9/34. Desert Islands and Other Texts. Trans. Michael
36. Event. Taormina.
37. Difference and Repetition, p 246/190. New York: Semiotext(e), 2004.
38. Relay. 4. Différence et répétition. Paris: Presses
39. Living present. Universitaires de France, 1968. Difference
40. Difference and Repetition, p 125/ 94. and Repetition. Trans. Paul Patton. New York:
41. Chaosmos. Columbia University Press, 1994.
.‫ ﻡ‬.‫ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺘﻦ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺣﺮﻑ ﺑﺰﺭگ‬Difference .42 5. Essays Critical and Clinical. Trans.
43. Difference and Repetition, p 116/86. Daniel W. Smith and Michael A.

71 1393 ‫ ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ‬،81‫ ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‬،

‫ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ‪ :‬ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎﺭ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﺮﮔﺮﺩﺍﻥ ﻓﺎﺭﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ »ﺍﺻﻞ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ«‬
‫)‪ (Univocity‬ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﻣﻘﺎﻻﺗﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ )‪Essays‬‬
‫‪ (on Deleuze‬ﺑﻪ ﻗﻠﻢ ﺩﻧﻴﻞ ﺩﺍﺑﻠﻴﻮ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﻤﻴﺖ )‪Smith Daniel‬‬
‫‪ (W‬ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﻝ ‪ 2012‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﺍﺩﻳﻨﺒﻮﺭگ ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺎﻩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬

‫»ﺍﮔﺮ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﻣﺠﺎﺯ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ «.‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﻭﺳﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻝ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻳﻮﻓﺴﻜﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﺩﺭﺍﻥ ﻛﺎﺭﺍﻣﺎﺯﻭﻑ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍژﮔﻮﻥ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﻋﻜﺲ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻀﻴﻪ ﺻﺎﺩﻕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺧﺪﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﻣﺠﺎﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ «.‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ‬
‫ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺷﻘﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻬﻰ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﺿﺎﻣﻦ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻴﺎﺕ ﻧﺒﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 1.‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻼ ﻫﻨﺮ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﺯﻳﺒﺎﻳﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺻﺎﺩﻕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﺳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ ﺳﺮﺷﺎﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮ ﺧﺪﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻣﻌﻤﻮ ًﻻ ﺗﺮﺟﻴﺢ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻴﻢ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺟﺘﻨﺎﺏﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺁﻥ ﻋﺼﺮ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺻﻞ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ‪:‬‬
‫ﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﻛﻠﻴﺴﺎ ﺗﺤﻤﻴﻞ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻓﺮﺿﻴﺔ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺩﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﻧﻘﺎﺷﺎﻥ ﺑﺰﺭﮔﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ‪ :‬ﺍﻝ ﮔﺮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﺗﻴﻨﺘﻮﺭﺗّﻮ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﺟﻴﻮﺗّﻮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖ ﺑﺪﻝ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻘﺎﺵ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻘﺶ ﺧﺪﺍ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﺮﺳﻴﻢ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺗﺤﺖﺍﻟﻠﻔﻈﻰ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮ ﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻓﻮﻕﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﺓ ﺧﻂ‪ ،‬ﺭﻧﮓ‪ُ ،‬ﻓﺮﻡ ﻭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺧﺪﺍ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺎﺷﻰ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯﺍﻯ ﻛﺴﺐ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺤﺮﻭﻡ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ؛ ﺁﺗﻪﺋﻴﺴﻤﻰ ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺻﺎﺩﻕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ‬
‫ﻗﺮﻥ ﻫﺠﺪﻫﻢ‪ ،‬ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻔﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎ ﺑﺪﺍﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻳﻜﺴﺮﻩ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺳﻴﻄﺮﺓ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﻠﺰﺍﻣﺎﺕ ﻛﻠﻴﺴﺎﻳﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﺔ ﺑﺰﺭﮔﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ‪ :‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﻻﻳﺐ ﻧﻴﺘﺲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺔ ﺩﻧﻴﻞ ﺩﺍﺑﻠﻴﻮ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﻤﻴﺖ‬
‫*‬
‫ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖ ﺑﺪﻝ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰﺍﻯ ﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﻓﻮﻕﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺳﻴﺪ ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻮﺍﺩ ﺳﻴﺪﻯ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺧﺪﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻳﺮ ﺑﺎﺭ ﻭﻇﻴﻔﺔ ﺳﻨﺘﻰﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫‪sorooshseyyedi@gmail.com‬‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﺤﻤﻴﻞ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺭﻫﺎ ﺷﺪﻧﺪ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺍﺟﺎﺯﻩ‬
‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻨﺪ ﺍﺑﻌﺎﺩﻯ ﺧﻴﺎﻟﻰ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺑﻜﺸﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺧﺪﺍ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬
‫ﻣﺠﺎﺯ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻳﺎ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒ ًﺎ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪﺍﻯ )ﭼﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ( ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺭﻓﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻯ ﺗﻨﺪ ﺭﻓﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻏﻠﺐ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯﺷﺎﻥ ﺧﻄﺮﺍﺕ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﻪ ﺿﺪ ّﻳﺖ‬
‫»ﺳﻜﻮﻻﺭ«ﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﭘﺴﻨﺪﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻬﻨﻪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ُﻣﺪﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﭘﺮﻳﺸﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺳﻮﮔﻮﺍﺭﻯ ﺁﻧﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻘﺪﺍﻥ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬
‫ﺳﺮﺑﺮﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺍﻳﻤﺎﻥ ﺁﻧﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺒﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﺣﻴﺎ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﺷﻴﻔﺘﺔ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕﺩﺍﻧﺎﻥ ﺳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺼﻮﺹ ﺳﻨﺦ ﺩﺭﺧﺸﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻭ ﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ ﺑﻨﺎﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻊ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﻴﺮﻫﺎﻯ »ﻏﻴﺮﻣﻌﻤﻮﻝ« ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺭﻭﻯ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺭﺍﺳﺖﻛﻴﺸﻰ ﻣﺴﺪﻭﺩ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻇﺎﻫﺮﺍً ﺑﺪﺍﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﻴﺮﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺴﺘﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺑﻨﺪﺩ‪.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪72‬‬

 ‫ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺍﻃﻼﻕ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ؟ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﻻﺳﺘﻴﻚ‬ ‫ﻭﺳﻄﺎﻳﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻭ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﺓ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻗﺮﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺳﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺸﺨﺺﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺮﺩ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﻌﻤﻮﻝ ﺳﻨﺖ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺣﻞﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ‪ :‬ﭼﻨﺪﻧﻮﺍﻳﻰ‪ ،5‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ‪ 6.‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻞ »ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ« ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺮﻥ‬
‫»ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﭼﻨﺪﻧﻮﺍﺳﺖ« ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻛﻠﻤﺔ »ﻫﺴﺘﻰ« ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻰ ﺍﻃﻼﻕ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﺰﺩﻫﻢ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺮﻯ ﮔﻨﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻼ »ﺧﺪﺍ ﻫﺴﺖ«‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻗﺪﺭ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻛﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ؛ ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻋﻈﻴﻤﺶ ﺩﺭﺳﮕﻔﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻛﺴﻔﻮﺭﺩ‪ 2‬ﭘﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ »ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺖ«‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺳﻨﺦ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ »ﻋﻈﻴﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻧﺎﺏ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﻋﻜﺲ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﻮﺿﻌﻰ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﻌﻤﻮﻝ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺩ‬
‫»ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﺳﺖ«‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ ﻣﻰﮔﻔﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻜﺘﺐ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﺭﻭﺍﺝ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫)ﻛﻠﻤﺔ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ‪ dunce‬ﻣﺸﺘﻖ ﺍﺯ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻰ ﺳﺘﺎﻳﺶﺁﻣﻴﺰ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﺍﻃﻼﻕ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﺎ ﮔﻴﺎﻩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﭘﻴﺮﻭﺍﻥ ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺭﻓﺖ‪ 3(.‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻊ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺠﻰ ﻓﺎﺟﻌﻪﺑﺎﺭ ﺧﺘﻢ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ )ﭼﻨﺪﻧﻮﺍﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻼ ﺑﻪ‬‫ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺘﻰ ﻏﺮﻳﺐ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ‪ 1968‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺻ ً‬
‫ﻧﺎﻓﻰ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻴﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻧﺘﻪﺍﻳﺴﻢ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ(‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﺿﻊ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﻤﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺳﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺎﮔﻬﺎﻥ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺑﺪﻝ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻀﻤﻮﻥ ﻣﻬﻤﻰ‬
‫ﺳﻮﻣﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺣﺪ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺷﺪ‪ :‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻪ ﭼﻨﺪﻧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬
‫ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺸﺒﻴﻬﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺑﺪﻝ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﺔ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺷﺎﻟﻮﺩﺓ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﺨﺘﺎﺭ ﺭﺍﺳﺖﻛﻴﺸﻰ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﻣﺎﺱ ﺁﻛﻮﺋﻴﻨﺎﺱ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ )ﺣﺘﻰ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﺑﻴﺎﻥ«‪ 4‬ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯﺍﺵ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ؛ ﺩﺭﻭﺍﻗﻊ ]ﻃﺒﻖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ[ ﻗﺪﺭ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻛﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ (.‬ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻭ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺪﺭ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻫﻰ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺳﻨﺖ ﺗﺎ ّﻣﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ‬
‫ﺍﺳﻜﻮﻻﺳﺘﻴﻜﻰ ﻇﺎﻫﺮﺍً ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﭼﺮﺍ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺰﺍﻉ‬ ‫)ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺗﻮﻣﻴﺴﻢ( ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ )ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺕﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ( ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺻﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﺒﻬﻢ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ؟ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﻭﺍﺿﺢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺳﻪ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ )ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻫﮕﻞﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ( ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ‬
‫»ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰﻫﺴﺘﻰ«‬ ‫‪ 1968‬ﺗﺎ ‪ 1969‬ﻡ ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﻛﺮﺩ )ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰﺍﻯ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ( ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﺍﻭﺝ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺪﻝ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﭘﺴﻴﻦ ﻭﺍﺭﺙ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻨﺖ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦﻗﺪﺭ ﻧﺎﮔﻬﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ ﻧﺎﻡ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺤﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﺤﻮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺍﺛﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﮔﺬﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﺫﻛﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺑﮕﺬﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺑﻌﺪﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺪﺭﺕ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻳﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺮﻥ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻘﺶ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﻭ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺣﻀﻮﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺳﻴﺰﺩﻫﻢﺗﻮﺳﻂ‬ ‫ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ )ﻛﻪ ﺗﺰ ﺩﻛﺘﺮﺍﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ(‬ ‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻛﻮﺗﺎﻩ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺷﺪﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺷﻬﺎﺑﻰ‬
‫ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ‬ ‫ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺁﻏﺎﺯﮔﺮ ﺭﻧﺴﺎﻧﺲ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﻰﺩﺭﺧﺸﺪ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﻣﺤﻮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؟ ﻋﻠﻰﺭﻏﻢ ﺍﺩﻋﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ« ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻛﺸﻴﺪ‪ :‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰﺍﻧﻨﺪﺓ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﭻ »ﺳﻨﺖ« ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰﺍﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺮﻯ ﮔﻨﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻗﻴﻖﺗﺮ‪ :‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﮕﺮ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ؛ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒﺎ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻣﻄﻠﺒﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؟ ﻃﻰ ﺳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺎﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﺐ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱﭘﮋﻭﻫﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻋﻈﻴﻤﺶ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ‪ ،‬ﻟﻜﻦ ﻧﻪ ﻫﻤﺴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﭘﺮﺳﺶﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻗﻴﻖﺗﺮ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻔﺖ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻤﻴﻨﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺳﮕﻔﺘﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺁﻣﻴﺨﺘﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ ﻭﻯ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫»ﻏﺮﻳﺐﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻓﻜﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺁﻛﺴﻔﻮﺭﺩﭘﻴﺮﻭﻯ‬ ‫ﺯﺑﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺣﺎﺕ ﺳﻨﺖ »ﺍﺳﻤﺎء ﻗﺪﺳﻰ« ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺎﺳ ًﺎ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ «.‬ﺩﺭ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻰ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻢ ﻛﻮﺷﻴﺪ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻼ ﺧﻴﺮ( ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﮔﻔﺖ‪ :‬ﺑﻪ ﭼﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﺤﻤﻮﻝﻫﺎﻳﻰ )ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﺗﺎ ﺳﺮﮔﺬﺷﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﻏﺮﻳﺐ« ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻮﻍ ﻭ ﺍﻓﻮﻟﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻛﺮﺩ؟ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﻛﻨﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﮔﻮﻧﻪ »ﻣﺴﻴﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻰ« ﻏﻴﺮﻣﻨﺘﻈﺮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ‬
‫ﺗﻘﺎﻃﻊ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﭘﺮﺳﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻨﻢ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺭﺑﻄﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ‬
‫»ﻋﻈﻴﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺣﻴﺎ ﻛﺮﺩ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﻨﺎ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺭﺍ »ﺩﺭﺍﻣﺎﺗﻴﺰﻩ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ«‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻭ »ﺟﺎﻧﻰ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺨﺸﻴﺪ«‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺗﺤ ّﻮﻝ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﭘﺮﺩﺓ ﻣﺠ ّﺰﺍ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ ﺩﺍﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬ ‫»ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻧﻜﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﺔﻗﺮﻭﻥﻭﺳﻄﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻧﺎﺏ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ« )ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‪ ،‬ﻛﻠﻤﺔ »ﻫﺴﺘﻰ« ﻓﻘﻂ ﻭ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺩﺓ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﻗﺮﻭﻥﻭﺳﻄﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫»ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﺑﺎﺷﺪ(‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﻧﺘﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﺔ‬
‫ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯﺍﺵ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﻜﻮﻻﺳﺘﻴﻚ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﻌﻠﱠﻖ ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺶ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﱠﻖ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻭﻇﻴﻔﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﺮ ﻋﻬﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ]ﻳﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻤﺎ ﻫﻮ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ[‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺑﻨﺪﺩ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ ﺑﺎ ﭘﻴﺶﻛﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺗﺎ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻧﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﭘﺮﺷﻮﺭ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺮﻥ ﺳﻴﺰﺩﻫﻢ ﻛﺮﺩ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ؛ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪73 1393‬‬

‫ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺳﺒﺐ‪ ،‬ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻠﺰﺍﻣﻰ ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺳﺎﻥ ﺑﻮﺩ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺴﻢﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻼ ّ‬ ‫ﺣﻞ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻧﺎﺏ ﻭ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ )ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺘﻠﺰﺍﻡ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺻﻞ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻳﻚ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ(‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰﺍﻯ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻭ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ )ﺍﺳﺘﻠﺰﺍﻡ ﻗﻮﻯﺗﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻃﺒﻖ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺣﻔﻆ ﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ 7‬ﺑﻴﻨﺪﻳﺸﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ‬
‫ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻯ ﻣﺎﻭﺭﺍء ﻫﺴﺘﻰ(‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻨﺖ »ﺍﺳﻤﺎء ﺍﻻﻫﻰ«‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺧﻮﺭ ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ ﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻮﻛﻮ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻃﺒﻖ ﺁﻥ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ )ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﻼ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ »ﺷﺮﻁ ﺍﺻﻠﻰﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺟﺎﺯﻩ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬
‫ﺧﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﺭﺣﻤﺖ‪ ،‬ﺣﻜﻤﺖ‪ ،‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ( ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺣﻤﻞ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻠﻄﺔ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﮕﺮﻳﺰﺩ‪ «.‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺣﻤﻞ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺳﻠﺒﻰ؟‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﺒﻬﻢ ﺑﺮﺳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻔﻰ ﻓﻘﺮ ﻭ ﺿﻌﻒ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺏﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺸﺮﻭﻁ ﻳﺎ ﺳﻠﺐﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ِ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﻮﺟﺐ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؟ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ؟ ﺳﻨﺖ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ ﺩﻭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﻣﺘﻀﺎﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﺳﺖ؟‬
‫ﭼﻨﺪﻧﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﺮﺩ‪ :‬ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺳﻪ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬
‫ﻧﺎﺏ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻗﻄﺐ‪ ،‬ﺭﺍﺳﺖﻛﻴﺸﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﭘﺮﺩﺓ ﺩﻭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶﻫﺎ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﻧﺲ‬
‫ﺭﻭﻳﻜﺮﺩﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪﺭﻭﺍﻧﻪ ﺍﺗﺨﺎﺫ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻯﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺭﺟﻮﻉ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻣﻞﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺳﻠﺐ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ‪ ،11‬ﻭ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﻨﺞ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﭼﻨﺪﻧﻮﺍﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺳﻠﺐ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮﻯ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﺎﺕ ّ‬ ‫ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﺳﺖ«؛ ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻠﻤﻪ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺭ‬
‫ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ ﺩﻭ ﺭﻭﻳﻜﺮﺩ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺖ ﺭﺍﺳﺖﻛﻴﺸﻰ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻏﻠﺐ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﺵ‬
‫ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺳﻠﺐ ﻭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺏ‪.‬‬ ‫»ﺗﻮﭘﻮﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻚﻧﮕﺎﺭﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ؛‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ‬
‫ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﺳﻠﺐ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ »ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺳﻠﺒﻰ« ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺭ ﮔﺸﺖ )ﺑﻪ ﭘﻴﺮﻭﻯ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« )ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ‬ ‫ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﻣﺪﻳﻮﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﻮﻧﻴﺰﻭﺱ ﻣﺠﻌﻮﻝ(‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺏﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ( ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻻﻳﺐ ﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ‬
‫ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻣﺤﻜﻮﻡ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ »ﺗﻜﻴﻨﮕﻰﻫﺎ« ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ )ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻟﺒﺮﺕ ﻻﻭﺗﻤﻦ‪ 8‬ﻭﺍﻡ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻳﺎ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺳﻠﺒﻰ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ(‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ »ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ« ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ )ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻼ ﻣﺎﻳﺴﺘﺮ ﺍﻛﻬﺎﺭﺕ ﺗﺮﺟﻴﺢ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺩ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ‪ .‬ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ (.‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ »ﺑﻴﮕﺎﻧﻪ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﭼﻮﻥ‪ :‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ »ﺧﺪﺍ ‪ ....‬ﻧﻴﺴﺖ« ﺗﺎ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ »ﺧﺪﺍ ‪ ....‬ﻫﺴﺖ«‪ ،‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ »ﺍﻟﻒ ﻫﺴﺖ«‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻧﺸﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻻﻳﺐ ﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﻭ‬
‫ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ ﺟﻨﺒﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺁﻧﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺑﻜﺸﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﺒﻬﻢ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ »ﻓﺮﺍ‪-‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻯ«‬ ‫ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﻰﺟﻬﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯﻓﻜﺮﻯ‬
‫ﻳﺎ »ﻓﺮﺍ‪-‬ﺫﺍﺗﻰ« ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻗﺪﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺳﻠﺐ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻛﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻧﻮﺷﺖ؛ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻰﺗﻮﺟﻬﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻨﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ‬
‫ﺩﻭﺭ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺏ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺳﻠﺒﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ‬ ‫ﺷﮕﻔﺖﺁﻭﺭ ﻣﻰﻧﻤﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﺍﺛﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﻧﺪﻥ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻠﻜﺮﺩﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮﻯ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺏﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﻳﻢ )ﺧﺪﺍ ﺧﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻧﺎﺏ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮﺣﺪﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ( ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺳﻠﺐﻫﺎ )ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻠﻤﻪ ﺧﻴﺮ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ(‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ )ﻫﺴﺘﻰ( ﻭ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ )ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ( ﭘﻴﺶ‬ ‫»ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻣﺤﻮﺭ«ﺷﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮﻯ ﺳﻠﺐ ﻭ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺏ ﻫﺮﺩﻭ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﻳﻢ ﺗﺎ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﺑﻴﻢ )ﺧﺪﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺑﺰﺍﺭﻯ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‬
‫ﺧﻴﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺧﻴﺮﻯ »ﻗﻴﺎﺱﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ« ﻳﺎ »ﺑﻴﺎﻥﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ«(‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺑﻠﻨﺪﭘﺮﻭﺍﺯﻯﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰﺗﺮ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺗﻮﻣﺎﺱ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻪ ﺣﺪ‬
‫ﺁﻛﻮﺋﻴﻨﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﺖ ﻛﺮﺩ‪) .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‪ (.‬ﺁﻧﺠﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺑﻨﺎ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰ ﻓﻰﺍﻟﻮﺍﻗﻊ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻧﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺯﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ )ﺧﺎﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ(‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺭﺟﻮﻉ‬ ‫ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﻋﺎﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺷﺮﻁ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ »ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ« ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ )ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ(‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺳﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ )ﺧﺪﺍ‪،‬‬
‫ﻼ‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺧﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﻭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻧﻈﻢﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻋﻠّﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﺪﺍﻟﻴﺘﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺟﻬﺖ‪ 9.‬ﺍﻳﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻫﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻣﺜﻞ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺧﻴﺮ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ )ﺗﺸﺒﻴﻪ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﺳﻪ ﺻﺤﻨﺔ ﻣﻬﻢ ﭘﺮﺩﺓ ﺩﻭﻡ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺸﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺩ(‪.‬‬
‫ﻼ »ﺧﻴﺮ«‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ( ﻳﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻳﺎ »ﻭﺟﻪ ﺷﺒﻪ« ﻣﺮﻛﺰﻯ ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﺳﻨﺖ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍژﮔﻮﻥ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻳﻦﻣﻌﻨﺎ‪،‬‬
‫ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺑﺮﺗﺮ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺍﺷﺘﻘﺎﻗﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺯﺍﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻟﻌﻦ ﻭ ﻧﻔﺮﻳﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻥ ﺧﺮﻳﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻚﻧﮕﺎﺭﻯﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺮﺧﻮﺭﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ )ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ(‪ .‬ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺏ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ‪ :‬ﺩﺭ ﺳﺪﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ‬ ‫‪.1‬‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﻜﻰ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﻴﻮﻩ ﻗ ّﻮﺕ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻨﻔﻰ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺗﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻔﻆ‬ ‫ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﺪﻝ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻳﺰﺩﺍﻥﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻃﺮﺡﻫﺎﻳﻰﻣﻘﺪﻣﺎﺗﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﻣﻰﻓﻬﻤﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺘﻮﺗﺌﻮﻟﻮژﻯ‪ 10‬ﺷﺪ؛ ﻣﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻔﻊ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻬ ّﻮﺭﺁﻣﻴﺰ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ »ﻛﻔﺮﮔﻮﻳﻰ« ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﺮﺩﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﻩ )ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﺓ ﺍﻭﻧﺘﻴﻚ( ﻓﺮﺍﻣﻮﺵ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺛﺮ‬
‫ﺭﻭﻳﻜﺮﺩ ﺭﺍﻳﺞ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻔﻰ ﻛﺮﺩ ﺳﻠﺒﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰ‪ ،‬ﺁﭘﻮﻓﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺗﺎﻓﺎﺗﻴﻚ‪12‬ـ ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭﺍﺭﺙ »ﺧﻴﺮ« ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻰ ﻭ »ﻭﺍﺣﺪ« ﻧﻮﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ »ﺑﺮ ﻓﺮﺍﺯ«‬ ‫ﻋﻈﻴﻢﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﺻﻞ ﻧﺎﻣﺮﺳﻮﻡ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻛﺸﻴﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ »ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮﻯ« ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ :‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‪.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪74‬‬

 ‫ﻛﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺣﻴﺎﻧﻰ« ﺑﺎ ﺍَﻋﺮﺍﺽ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺳﻮﻡ ﺳﺮﻭﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻴﺎﻝ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﻭ ﺻﻔﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻴﻢ )ﻓﻜﺮ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﺎ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﻓﺮﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ(‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻛﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺘﺶ ﺟﺎﻫﻠﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ ﺧﺪﺍ )ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻓﻜﺮ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ( ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﻢ ﺑﺮ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻧﻮﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺎ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻭﺣﻰ‪ .‬ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﻢ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﺻﻮﺭﻯ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻣﻮﺯﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﻘﺪﺱ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ [ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﺷﮕﻔﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺗﺄﺳﻒ] ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎ ﻳﺎﺩﺁﻭﺭﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺒﺮﺍﻥ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺟﺴﺎﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ ﺻﻔﺖ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻗﻮﺓ ﺗﺨﻴﻠﻰ ﻗﻮﻯ ﻭﻟﻰ ﻓﻬﻤﻰ ﺿﻌﻴﻒ! ﺁﺩﻡ‪ ،‬ﺍﺑﺮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﻫﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ )ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ(‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ ﺑﻰﺧﺒﺮ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺪﻧﻮﺍﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻔﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﻭﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺍَﻋﺮﺍﺽ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻭ ﺩﻭﻡ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺧﺒﺮ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﻫﺮﻯ ﻭﻟﻔﺴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺳﻨﺖ ﻫﺮﻣﻨﻮﺗﻴﻜﻰ ﭘﺮﺳﺎﺑﻘﻪﺍﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍژﮔﻮﻥ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺳﻨﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ »ﺑﺮﺗﺮ« )ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ(‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻗﺮﻥﻫﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻓﻴﻠﻮﻥ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﺷﺪ؛ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﻦ ﻣﻘﺪﺱ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﻧﺒﻮﻍ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺁﻧﺠﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻨﻰ ﻋﻤﻴﻖ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻔﻰ ﻣﻮﺍﺿﻊ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﻭ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﺍﺗﻮﺭﻳﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻗﻠﻤﺪﺍﺩ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺄﻟﻮﻑ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ :‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ :‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻰ ﺣﻞ‬
‫ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﺍﻳﻦﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﺑﻮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﻣﺴﺎﻟﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﺎﺫﺏ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‪.‬‬
‫ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‪] Deus sive Natura ،‬ﺧﺪﺍ ﻳﺎ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ[‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﻣﺨﺘﺼﺮ‪ 13‬ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻧﻔﻰ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ )ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﻬﻢ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﺭﺍ ﭘﺎﻧﺘﻪﺍﻳﺴﻢ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕﺩﺍﻧﺎﻥ ﺍﻏﻠﺐ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻋﺮﺍﺽ‪ 14‬ﺧﺪﺍ ﺧﻠﻂ ﻛﺮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺨﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﻳﺎ ﺁﺗﻪﺍﻳﺴﻢ(‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘﺪﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﭘﻴﺮﻭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ‪َ ،‬ﻋ َﺮﺽ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻰء‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻡ ﻭ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺣﺘﻰ »ﻣﺮگ ﺧﺪﺍ«ﻯ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ‪ ،‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺁﺭﺍﻡ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻠّﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻀﺎﺡ ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ﻭ ﻣﻄﻤﺌﻦ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺣﺲ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺻﻔﺎﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺻﻔﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺿﻌﻰ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻗﺪﺭ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ ﺳﻠﺒﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻋﺮﺽ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻋﺮﺍﺽ ﻫﻴﭻ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺰﺩ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻴﺎﻥ ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰ ﺗﻮﻣﻴﺴﺖﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﻣﺨﺘﺼﺮ ﺳﻪ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻋﺮﺽ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﺳﻨﺦ‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻫﺮﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘﺪﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻋﻠّﺖ‪ :‬ﺩﻭﻣﻴﻦ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬ ‫‪.2‬‬ ‫ﻻﻳﺘﻐﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯﻟﻰ ﻭ ﺍﺑﺪﻯ‪،‬‬
‫ّ‬ ‫ﺧﺪﺍ ﺣﻤﻞ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ )ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻣﻞ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﻴﻮﻡ ﻭ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﺟﺐ ‪ ،(...‬ﻳﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺻﻔﺘﻰ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺣﻤﻞ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ )ﻋﻠﻢ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺻﻔﺖ ﻓﻜﺮ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﺑﺮ ﺻﻔﺖ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ(؛ ﺩﻭﻣﻴﻦ ﺳﻨﺦ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺣﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻗﺮﻭﻥ ﻭﺳﻄﺎ ﺳﻪ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻔﺎﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻳﺎ‬
‫»ﻣﺮگ ﺧﺪﺍ«ﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪ :‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻓﻴﻀﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،16‬ﻭ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺸﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ(؛ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘ ًﺎ ﺳﻮﻣﻴﻦ‬‫ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ ﻭﺻﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ )ﻋﻠّﺖ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ‪ّ ،‬‬
‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ‪،‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬ ‫ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ‪ 17‬ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺗﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﻉ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺗﻌﻠّﻖ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﺸﺨﺺﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ ّ‬
‫ﺁﺭﺍﻡ ﻭ ﻣﻄﻤﺌﻦ‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ )ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ( ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺧﺪﺍ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰﻯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ )ﻋﺪﺍﻟﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺨﺸﺶ‪ ،‬ﺭﺣﻤﺖ(‪ .‬ﺧﻄﺎﻯ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻋﺮﺍﺽ ﺧﻠﻂ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺮﺩﺭﮔﻤﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭘﺲ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﺍﺳ ِﺮ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ‪ ،‬ﺳﻠﺐ ﻭ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶﺣﺲ‬ ‫ﺗﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﺮﺍﺽ ﺍﺭﺯﺷﻰ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﺑﺪﺍﻧﻴﻢ )ﺧﻠﻘﺖﺑﺎﻭﺭﻯ‪ .(18‬ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻓﻴﻀﺎﻧﻰ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺘﻰ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺿﻌﻰ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻟﺶ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ]ﻋﻠّﺖ[ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﻄﺎ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻮﺑﺔ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻼ ﺧﻮﺭﺷﻴﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻧﻮﺭﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺣﺘﻰ ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺕ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺧﺮﺳﻨﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ‬
‫ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮﭼﺪ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﻭ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺗﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻗﺪﺭ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ‬ ‫)ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻧﻮﺭ( ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺷﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻭ ﻧﻮﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺟﻬﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ )ﺳﻨﺦ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺍﻋﺮﺍﺽ(‪.‬‬
‫ﺳﻠﺒﻰﻧﻮﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻴﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻛﺮﺍﺕ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻨﺎﻥ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﺰﺩ ﻓﻠﻮﻃﻴﻦ ﻭ ﻧﻮﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ّ‬
‫‪15‬‬
‫ﺍﻣﺎ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰـﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻓﻴﺾﻣﺤﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺎ ﻭﺍﭘﺴﻴﻦ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺞ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺴﻂ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻔﻰ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻨﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﻄﺎﻯ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‬
‫ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯﻫﺎﻯﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ‬ ‫ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖﺯﺩﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؟ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻣﻴﺴﺖﻫﺎ‪،‬ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﺷﺪﻩﺍﺵ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﻭﻯ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺴﻴ ِﺮ ﻣﺘﻦ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺪﺱ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻓﺮﺽ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﻓﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻫﺮﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻦ ﻣﻘﺪﺱ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﻫﺪﻑ ﻣﺘﻦ ﻣﻘﺪﺱ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﻣﺪﺭﻥﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ ﺭﺍﻩﺣﻠﻰ ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻴﺶ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ :‬ﺁﻳﺎ ﺧﺪﺍ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺩﺍﺭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻃﺎﻋﺖ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ؟ ﺭﺍﺳﺖﻛﻴﺸﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺎﻯ ﻣﻰﻓﺸﺮﺩ‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺳﺮﺳﭙﺮﺩﮔﻰ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺍﻧﺬﺍﺭﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻓﺮﺍﻣﻴﻦ ﻭ ﻗﻮﺍﻋﺪ ﺗﻀﻤﻴﻦ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪75 1393‬‬

‫ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ )ﺟﻮﻫﺮ(‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ )ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎﺳﺖ ﺷﻴﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ »ﺑﻴﺎﻥﻣﺤﻮﺭﺍﻧﻪ‪«22‬‬ ‫ﻋﺪﻡ(‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﺧﺪﺍ‬
‫ﺭﻧﺴﺎﻧﺴﻰﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺢ‪ 23‬ﻭ ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺢ‪ ،24‬ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻟﮕﻮ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﻧﺪ؛ ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺧﺪﺍ )ﻳﺎ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ( ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺧﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﮕﻮ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﺍﻧﺔ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﺓ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،25‬ﻭ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻋﻠّﻴﺘﻰ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﻟﮕﻮ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‬
‫ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺢ ﻭ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺢ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻓﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﺑﻤﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﺑﻤﺎﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺬﺭ‪-‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻳﻨﻪ‪،‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﻨﺪﻳﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﺷﺘﻰﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﻓﻴﻀﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺩﻭ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮﺍﻧﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺘﻰ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺩﻳﻮﻧﻴﺰﻭﺱ ﻣﺠﻌﻮﻝ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺳﻔﺖﻭﺳﺨﺖﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﭘﺎﻳﮕﺎﻥﻣﻨﺪﻯ‪ 26‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻮﺍﺣﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮﻯ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﮕﻮ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﻗﺮﻭﻥ ﻭﺳﻄﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺳﻪ ﺳﻨﺦ‬
‫‪1‬‬
‫ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺑﻰﭘﺎﻳﮕﺎﻧﻰ‪ 27‬ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻈﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺷﻜﻞ‪ ،‬ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖﺁﻓﺮﻳﻦ‪) 28‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻭ ﻋﻠّﺖ( ﻭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺣﺪ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﻭ‬
‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮ‪) 29‬ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ( ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﻣﺘﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕﺩﺍﻧﺎﻥ ﺗﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺭﻧﺴﺎﻧﺲ )ﻧﻴﻜﻼﺱ ﻛﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﻳﻮﮔﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﭘﺘﺮﺍﺭﻙ‪،‬‬
‫ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ؛ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﻭﻧﻮ‪ ،‬ﺍﻛﻬﺎﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻋﺎﺭﻓﺎﻥ ﺭﺍﻳﻦ(؛ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺣﺪﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ ﺍﺣﺘﺮﺍﺯ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﻣﺤﺼﻮﻝ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺍﺻﻞ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ )ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻯ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺑﺮ ﻓﺮﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ( ﻭ ﻓﻴﺾ )ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻯ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ( ﻧﻔﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﻭ ﺑﻰﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺎ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬
‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻭﺳﺎﻃﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺑﻌﻴﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﻯ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ )ﻭ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ( ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻏﺎﻳﻰﺍﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪» ،‬ﺯﻧﺠﻴﺮﺓ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ« ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﺎ ﺳﺮﺣﺪ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻜﺸﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻓﺮﻭﺩﺳﺘﻰ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﭘﺎﻳﮕﺎﻥ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺑﻰﭘﺎﻳﮕﺎﻧﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺭﻭﻧﺪﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﺑﺮﻫﺎﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺕ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻴﻢ )ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺁﺭﺧﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺻﻞ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ(‪» .‬ﺳﻨﮓ‪ ،‬ﮔﻞ‪،‬‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺪﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﻓﻴﻀﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺣﺪ‬ ‫ﺧﺮﺳﻨﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺟﺎﻧﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺟﻤﻠﮕﻰ ﻋﻈﻤﺖ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺑﻰﭘﺎﻳﮕﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻳﺎ »ﺧﺎﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ« ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻋﻠّﺖ )ﻭﺍﺣﺪ( ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ‬
‫ﺷﻜﻮﻫﻤﻨﺪ«‪ .‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﺮﺍﺝ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﻭﻧﺪﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ )ﻫﺴﺘﻰ( ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ‬
‫ﻛﻤﺎﻝﻣﻄﻠﻖ‬
‫ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺷﻮﺩ ﺩﻭ ﺗﺎ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ]ﻭ‬
‫ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﻓﻬﻤﺪ؛ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ[‪ .‬ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻓﻠﻮﻃﻴﻨﻰ ﻣﺮﺣﻤﺖ‪ :19‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒﻛﻨﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺧﺪﺍﺳﺖ‪) .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺗﻬﺎﻡ ﻣﺮﮔﺒﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺣﻤﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺨﺸﺶ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﺮﭼﺪ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﻭ‬
‫ﻫﺮ ﻛﻔﺮﮔﻮﻳﻰ‪ :‬ﻣﺘﻬﻢﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺣﻠﻮﻝ‪ ،‬ﺧﻠﻂﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺣﺪ »ﻧﻴﺴﺖ«‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ‬ ‫ﻋﺪﻡ ﺗﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ(‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻳﮕﺎﻥﻣﻨﺪ‪ 20‬ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭﺭﻯ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻜﻰﺷﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ‬
‫ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻓﺮﺍﻓﻜﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭﻧﺪ ﻭﺍﺭﻳﺎﺳﻴﻮﻥ ﻣﺴﺘﻤﺮ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﺣﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﺻﻞ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻛﻤﺘﺮ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺫﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻏﺎﺋﻴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﻫﺪﻓﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮕﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ )»ﺯﻧﺠﻴﺮﺓ ﻋﻈﻴﻢ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ«(‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻴﺎﺗﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﻳﻦﮔﻮﻧﻪ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ »ﺑﺎ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻗﻀﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺩﺍﻭﺭﻯ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺗﻮﺭﻳﺘﻪ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺮﺟﻌﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﻫﻰﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪2‬‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ )»ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﺩﺍﻭﺭﻯ«(‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺣﺪ‬
‫‪ .3‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺟﻬﺖ )ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ(‪ :‬ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺳﻮﻣﻴﻦ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺳﻠﺒﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺭﻭﺵ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﺟﺪﺍﻳﻰﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺟﻬﺖ‪ ،‬ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻋﻠّﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺟﻬﺖ‬ ‫ﻻﺯﻣﺔ ﺣﻔﻆ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ ﻋﻠّﺖﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﻓﺮﻳﺐ ﭘﻴﺸﻮﻧﺪ »ﺗﻚ« ﺩﺭ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ‬
‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫»ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﺨﻮﺭﻳﻢ؛ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ ﻃﺒﻖ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺎ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ‪ .‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻧﺎﻓﻰ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻧﺎﺳﺎﺯﮔﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﻋﻤﻴﻖ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺎﺯﮔﻰ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﭼﻨﺪﻧﻮﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﺳﮕﻔﺘﺎﺭ ﻣﻌﺮﻭﻑ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ »ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ« ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻨﺪ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺧﺎﺻﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻯ‬
‫)ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ(‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻀﻤﻮﻥ ‪ es gibt‬ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ :‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ »ﻫﺪﻳﻪ«ﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮ )ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ(‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻘﻞ )ﻳﺎ ﻓﻬﻢ( ﻭ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ‬ ‫)‪ (Gabe‬ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺁﻥ )‪ (It‬ﺍﻫﺪﺍ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 21.‬ژﺍﻙ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺧﻄﺎ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﻣﺤﻤﻮﻝﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻳﺪﺍ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﺄﺧﺮ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺘﺄﺛﺮ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﭘﺎﺩﺷﺎﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﮕﺬﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﻟﻮﻳﻨﺎﺱ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻀﻤﻮﻥ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺳﻠﺒﻰ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ )ﺳﻮﻣﻴﻦ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺍﻋﺮﺍﺽ(‪ .‬ﺑﺎﺯﻧﮕﺮﻯ ﺧﺎﺭﻕﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﺓ ﻻﻳﺐ ﻧﻴﺘﺲ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍﻫﻰ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻴﺶ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻻﻳﺐ ﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ‬
‫ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪﺍﻯ ﻻﻳﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ »ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ‬ ‫»ﺣﺎﻝ« ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺻﺎﺩﺭﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ]ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﭼﻨﺪﻧﻮﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﺣﺪﻯ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﺔ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﻓﻠﻮﻃﻴﻨﻰ ﻓﻴﺾ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﻢ[‪ .‬ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ )ﺣﺎﻟﺖ( ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻋﻠﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪76‬‬

 ‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻘﻞ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ )ﻳﺎ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ( ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﺍﺑﻨﺎﻯ ﺑﺸﺮ ﻳﻜﺴﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ )ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺁﻥ ﺧﺪﺍ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺟﺰ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﻭ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ(‪ .‬ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻥ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ »ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ«‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﺓ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫)ﺟﻬﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ( ﺩﺭ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻤﻠﮕﻰ ﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺪﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻭﻯ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻭﻯ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﻤﺎﻝﺷﺎﻥ ﻭﺯﻧﻰ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻫﻤﮕﻰ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﻞ‬
‫ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ]ﻳﺎ ﻣﻨﺘﺞ[ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ »ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺔ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ]ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻋﻘﻞ[ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﻟﮕﻮ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﺻﻞ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﺎﺗﻰ ﻧﺎﺳﺎﺯﮔﺎﺭ )ﻳﺎ ﻧﺎﻫﻢﻣﻤﻜﻦ‪/‬ﻣﺎﻧﻌﺔﺍﻟﺠﻤﻊ‪(30‬‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﻛ ّﻤﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﺓ ﺧﺪﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ »ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ«‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ )ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ(‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻔﻰ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﺰﻳﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺨﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺣﺴﺎﺑﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﻣﻞﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ‬
‫ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻨﻰ‪ 32‬ﺍﺯ ﺧﺎﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﺰﻳﻨﺪ )ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ(‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ »ﺑﺮﺩﮔﻰ« ﺯﺍﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ )ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻓﺼﻞ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ‪،(33‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻻﻳﺐ ﻧﻴﺘﺲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻋﻼﻡ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺟﺐ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﻭﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻋﻠّﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ َ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺍﺑﻠﻬﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﻳﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﻭ ﺧﻄﺎﻯ ﺑﺰﺭﮔﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢ‬
‫ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻟﻄﺒﻊ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺛﺒﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠﻞ ﺑﻰﺧﺒﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺨﺪﻭﺵ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻈﻢ ﻋﻠﻞ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻭ ﺍﺯﻫﻢﮔﺴﺴﺘﻦ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﺓ ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ )ﻳﺎ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﺓ ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺘﺄﺛﺮ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻣﻦ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺪﻧﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﻋﺪﻡ(‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺷﺎﻩ ﻳﺎ ﺧﻮﺩﻛﺎﻣﻪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﺑﺮ‬
‫»ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ« ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ )ﻳﺎ ﺫﻫﻦ ﻣﻦ ﺑﺎ ﺫﻫﻨﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ(‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﺑﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮﺵ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﮕﺬﺍﺭ ]ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻛﻞ ﻗﻮﻯﺗﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ّ‬ ‫ﺷﺎﺭﻉ[‪ ،‬ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﻔﺮﻭﺽ ﻭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﺎﺩﻑ ﻭ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ )ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ(‬
‫)ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻏﺬﺍ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ(‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ )ﻋﻘﻞ( ﮔﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻋﺪﻡ‬
‫»ﺍﮔﺮ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻭﻗﺎﺕ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺑﺪﻧﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﮔﺴﻠﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻧﺴﺠﺎﻡ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺗﻐﻴﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﺓ ﻭﻯ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬ ‫ﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﻳﺎ ّ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰﻣﺠﺎﺯ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﺑﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ )ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺳﻢ ﻣﺮﺍ ﺑﻴﻤﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ(‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺗﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻓﻘﺪﺍﻥ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻭﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩ‪ «.‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﻭﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺁﮔﺎﻩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﺍﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺗﺠﺰﻳﻪﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ؛ ﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﺓ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻝ‬ ‫ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻟ ّﺬﺕ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﮔﺎﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪﻧﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻣﺎ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﺧﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻧﻈﻢ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬
‫ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﺍﻟﻢ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﺁﻥ ﮔﺎﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻧﻰ ﺍﻧﺴﺠﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﮔﺎﻩ ﻫﻢ ﻋﻘﻞ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻳﻮﻓﺴﻜﻰﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺨﺎﻃﺮﻩ َ‬
‫ﺍﻓﻜ َﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﻣﺎ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﺓ ﻭﻯ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‪ ،‬ﺫﺍﺕ ﻭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖﺍﺵ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺭﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﺩﺭﺍﻥ‬ ‫ً‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﺫﻫﻦﻣﺎﻥ »ﻋﺎﺭﺽ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ« ﺩﺭﻙ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺻﺮﻓﺎ ﺑﺎﺧﺒﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺨﻨﻰ ﻣﻬﻤﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭﺍﻣﺎﺯﻭﻑ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺘﻤﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﻛﻤﺘﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ )ﻟ ّﺬﺕ(‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻛﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻫﻤﺔ ﻛﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍژﮔﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﻛﻤﺘﺮ )ﺍﻟﻢ(‪ .‬ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺧﺎﻃﺮ ﺧﻴﺮ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺻﻞ »ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ« ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﺪﺍ‬
‫ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻔﺘﺔ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺍﻃﻼﻉﺭﺳﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺭﺯﺵ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻃﻼﻋﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻩﺍﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻣﺤﻜﻮﻡ‬
‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﻣﻐﺸﻮﺵ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻮﺝ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺑﺸﺮﻯ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺤﻜﻮﻡ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻏﺎﻳﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻣ ّﺪﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻰﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﻋﻜﺲ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﺍﺗﻰ ﻧﺎﺑﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺗﺄﺛﺮﺍﺗﻰ ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠﻞ‬ ‫ﺩﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﺎﺕ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﺎﺗﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ ﻋﺪﻡ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﻀﻴﻪ ﺻﺎﺩﻕ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰﺷﺎﻥ )ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ(‪.‬‬ ‫ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﺯ ﻋﺪﻡ؛ ﻳﺎ ﺧﻴﺮ ﻭ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺗﺸﺮﻳﻌﻰ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ‬ ‫ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﻫﻤﻰ ﺳﻪﮔﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻣﺨﺘﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺧﺪﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝﻫﺎ‪] 34‬ﻳﺎ ﺗﺎﺛّﺮﺍﺕ[ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠﻞ ﺑﻰﺧﺒﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪﺍﺵ ﺩﺭﻙ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ )ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻛﻪﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﺑﻰﺧﺒﺮﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻭﺍژﮔﻮﻥﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﺍﺭﺿﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻈﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺟﻬﺖ‪ 31‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺟﻬﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﻋﻠﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ )ﺗﻮ ّﻫﻢ ﻛﻴﻬﺎﻥﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﺔ ﻋﻠﻞ ﻏﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﻨﻄﻖﺩﺍﻧﺎﻥ(‪ .‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‪ ،‬ﺧﺪﺍ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﻋﻤﻞ‬
‫ﻣﺠﺎﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﻏﺎﻳﺎﺕ(‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻧﮕﻬﻰ‪ ،‬ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺧﻮﻳﺸﺘﻦ ﺭﺍ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ )ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮ »ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺗﺨﻴﻠﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺴﻠّﻂ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﺓ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻗﺪﺭﺗﻰ ّ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ( ﻭ ﭼﻮﻥ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﻭ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ« ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ّ‬
‫ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﻋﻠﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻭﺍﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ )ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ(‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﺑﺪﻥ »ﭼﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﺮﺩ« )ﺗ ّﻮﻫﻢ ﺭﻭﺍﻧﺸﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﺔ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ(‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﻭﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻳﺎ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥﺩﻫﻨﺪﺓ ﻏﺎﻳﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻩ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺧﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﻗﺪﻳﺮ‪ 35‬ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻴﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻋﻠﻞ ﻏﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﭘﺬﻳﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯﻳﻦ ﺭﻭ‪ ،‬ﺧﺪﺍ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺭﺗﻜﺎﺏ ﻛﻨﺶ ّ‬
‫)ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪ( ﻳﺎ ﺍﺣﻜﺎﻡ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭﻯ )ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ( ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﻪﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺻﻔﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﻤﺔ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﻪ ﻫﺪﻑ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻣﺨﺘﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﺧﻮﺭ ﭘﺎﺩﺍﺵ ﻭ ﻣﺠﺎﺯﺍﺕ ﻭﻯ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ )ﺗﻮ ّﻫﻢ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰ(‪ .‬ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﺍﺕ )ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺕ( ﻭﻯ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻭﻯ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻮ ّﻫﻢﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﻣﺎ ﺗﻮ ّﻫﻤﺎﺗﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻘﻞ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪77 1393‬‬

‫ﻭﺭﺍﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺮﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﺮﻓﺎ ﻧﻴﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻳﻚ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛‬
‫ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩﺷﺪﻥ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯﻳﻦ ﺭﻭ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻳﻚ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺵ ﻧﻪ ﻭﺍﺟﺐ‬
‫ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﻪ ﻣﻤﺘﻨﻊ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻣﺎ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ‬
‫‪39‬‬
‫»ﺁﻳﺎ ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩ ﻣﺮﺍ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ؟ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ـ «‪ :‬ﭼﻨﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻴﻢ؛ ﻭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻣﻮﺍﺭﺩ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰﺍﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻮﺟﺐ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺳﺘﻴﺰﻩﺟﻮﻳﻰ ﻧﻴﭽﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﺳﻮﻣﻴﻦ ﻭ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ‬‫ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺯ ﻫﻢ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻠﻞ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺭﺍ ّ‬
‫ﭘﺮﺩﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻧﺎﺏ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺧﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ‬
‫ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻃﺮﺍﺣﻰ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﻋﺪﻡ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻃﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺗﺨﻴﻞ ﻣﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﻋﻄﻒ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﻫﻴﭻ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﺭﻭﻧﺪ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ‪ .‬ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ )ﺫﺍﺕ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻧﺎﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺗﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺓ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﮕﺬﺍﺭ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ(؛ ﻭ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺗﺰ ﻛﻠﻮﺳﻮﻓﺴﻜﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺧﺪﺍ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ )ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻫﺎ‪ 36‬ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﻻﻫﻰ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺿﺎﻣﻦ ﺍﺻﻞ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺣﺘﻰ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﭘﺎﺩﺷﺎﻫﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ]ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻟﺖﻳﺎﺑﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ )ﻳﺎ ﺧﺪﺍ( ﺭﺍ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ[ ﻳﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ(‪.‬‬
‫ﺣﺎﻓﻆ ﺣﻘﻮﻕ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻗﻠﻤﺪﺍﺩ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬ ‫ﻛﻞ ﺗﻼﺵ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﻨﻬﺎﻯ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﮕﺴﻠﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮ ّﻫﻤﺎﺕ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺖ‪ 40‬ﻳﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻣﺤﻮﺭ )ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻠﻞ ﻧﺎﺁﮔﺎﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺨﻴﻞ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺖ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺖ »ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ« ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺍﻣﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻣﺨﺘﺎﺭﺍﻧﺔ ﺫﻫﻦ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﺎ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻮ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ(‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺁﺯﻣﻮﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﺍﺕ ﺑﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﺴﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﺍﺕ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﺪﻑ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪﺩﺳﺖﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻔﻰ )ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ‪ (41‬ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺍﻓﻖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﺍﺻﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺍﺻﻞ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﺪ‪» :‬ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮓ‬ ‫)ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺩﻭﻡ(‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺷﻬﻮﺩ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﺔ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻓﻰﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﺨﻮﺍﻥﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺫﻭﺍﺕ ﺗﻮﺍﻓﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ )ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺳﻮﻡ(‪.‬‬ ‫)ﻛﻪ ﺗﺰ ﺩﻛﺘﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؛ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺳﺎﺯﺩ‬ ‫ﺗﺄﺛّﺮﺍﺕ ﻓ ّﻌﺎﻝ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﺍﺕ ﺑﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ‬
‫‪3‬‬
‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻫﺮﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻭﺳﺎﻃﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﮕﻦ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺘﻀﺎﺩ«‪.‬‬ ‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺢ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺳﻂ‬
‫ﺩﻭﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻰﺭﻏﻢ ﺩِﻳﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻳﺔ‬ ‫ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﻟﻚ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ :‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻛﻮﺷﺶ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫»ﭼﻴﺮﮔﻰ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ« ﺩﻝ ﻧﺒﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ »ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﺴﻴﻨﻰ ﻧﺎﺏ«‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫‪37‬‬ ‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ(‬
‫ﺣﻔﻆ ﺫﺍﺕ )ﻛﻮﻧﺎﺗﻮﺱ( ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﺍﺕ ﺑﺴﻨﺪﻩﺍﻯ ّ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﻰ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻳﻚ ﻧﻈﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻓ ّﻌﺎﻝ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎﺛّﺮﺍﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ‬ ‫ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺭ‬
‫ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ »ﻧﺎﻫﻤﮕﻦ«‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﻣﺪﻳﻮﻥ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ‬ ‫]ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ[ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺯﺍﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺁﻏﺎﺯﮔﺮ‬
‫ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰﺍﻯ ﭼﻮﻥ‪ :‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﻻﻳﺐ ﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﻭ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﺸﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺭﻧﺴﺎﻧﺲ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ‬
‫ﻓﻜﺮﻯ ﺍﻳﻨﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺭﺍﻧﺪﻥ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮﺣﺪﺍﺕ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻣﺤﻮﺭ«ﺷﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻧﺎﻓﻰ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؛ ﻧﺎﻓﻰ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺘﻌﻠﱠﻖ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻪ ﺣﺪ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﻋﺎﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ )ﺧﺪﺍ‪ ،‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺩ(‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ‪ ،‬ﺗﻚﻧﮕﺎﺭﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻢ‪ :‬ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﺨﺘﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻃﺮﺡﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺎﺗﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻋﻈﻴﻢ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﻭ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﻢ‪ :‬ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ»ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺷﺨﺼﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﺭﺍﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻣﻬﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ‬‫ﻣﺠﺒﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ّ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ«‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ ﺗﺰ ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ :‬ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ....‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻛﺸﻴﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻢﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﺍﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﺍﻧﻪ‪ 38‬ﺟﺎﻯ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻢ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﻭﺩﺳﺘﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻭ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ‬
‫ﻃﺮﺡ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﺳﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ ﻓﻮﺭﻓﻮﺭﻳﻮﺱ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ]ﻳﺎ ﻣﻨﺘﺞ[ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻃﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺍﺣﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺧﺎﺹ ]ﻳﺎ ﻓﺼﻞ[‪ ،‬ﺟﻨﺲ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬ ‫ﺣﻜﻢ ﻣﻰﺭﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻫﻤﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﺑﻤﺎﻧﺪ )ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ( ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺳﻪ ﻓﻴﮕﻮﺭ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻣﺤﻤﻮﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺘﻀﺎﺩﻯ )ﻓﺼﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﺹ( ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺻﻔﺎﺕ )ﺻﻔﺎﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕﺩﻗﻴﻖﺗﺮ‪:‬‬
‫ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻝ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﻧﺪ ﺗﺨﺼﻴﺺﻳﺎﺑﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﺎﺗﺶ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ(‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻋﻠّﺖ )ﺧﺪﺍ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺳﺮ ﺟﺪﻭﻝ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻨﻰ‪ ،‬ﻛﺜﺮﺗﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﺳﺖ(‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺟﻬﺖ )ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭﺍﺟﺐ‬
‫ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﺤﺖ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺷﺮﻁ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻭﺍﺟﺐ ﺍﺳﺖ(‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻪ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺘﻰ ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺱ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﺷﺪﻩ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺑﺎﻻﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﺟﻨﺎﺱ ﻳﺎ »ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ«‬ ‫»ﻧﺎﺏ« ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻫﻴﭻ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ؟‬
‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪78‬‬
 ‫ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﭼﻪ ﻣﺸﻜﻠﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؟ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻋﻤﻠﻜﺮﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻰ ﻧﺎﺑﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﺷﻬﺮﺕ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮﻯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﭼﻬﺎﺭ ﺍﺻﻞ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢ ﻓﺮﻭﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ :‬ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺟﻨﺲ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻭﺿﻊ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‬ ‫ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﻣﺤﻤﻮﻝﻫﺎ )ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺧﺎﺹ(‪ ،‬ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ )ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻓﺮﺩﻯ(‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺿﻊﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺯﻳﺮ ﭘﺎ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺍﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﻓﺘﻦ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﺣﻜﻢ )ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ژﻧﺮﻳﻚ(‪ .‬ﺧﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﺎﺭ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﮔﺎﻧﺔ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﺹ‪ .‬ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻰ ﻛﻠﻴﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ‬ ‫ﻣﻜﺮﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‬ ‫»ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻮﺗﻴﻒﻫﺎﻯ ّ‬
‫ﺷﺒﻪ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ )ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ( ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ »ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﻓﺮﺩ ّﻳﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺟﺰﺋﻰ‬ ‫»ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ« ﺩﺭ ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬
‫)ﻓﺮﺩ( ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎﺑﻊ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻛﻠﻰ )ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ( ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻗﺮﻭﻥﻭﺳﻄﺎﻳﻰ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺳﻠﻄﺔ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻳﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺗﺼﻮﺭﻯ ﭼﻨﺪﻧﻮﺍ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻊ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﺑﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻛﻠﻰ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ؟ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻧﺎﻇﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﺄﻟﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺧﺎﺹ‪ :‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ :‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎ »ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ«‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻌﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻓﺮﺩ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻣﮕﺮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ ﻫﺮ ﺍﺑﮋﺓ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺣﻤﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ )ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﺎﺏ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﭼﻮﻥ ﻫﺮ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﺳﺖ(‪ .‬ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬
‫ﺗﺰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﻣﻨﺘﻬﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ‬
‫ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺘ ًﺎ ﺟﻤﻌﻰ‪ 44‬ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺩﻫﺪ )ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻌﻰ(‬ ‫ﺍﻃﻼﻕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻛﻠﻤﺔ‬
‫ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻬﻢ ﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﺩﻳﺖﺑﺨﺶ‬ ‫»ﺗﻌﻴﻨﺎﺕ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ّ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ )ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺻﺮﻑ ﺩﺭ ﺷﺒﻜﺔ ﺗﺸﺎﺑﻬﺎﺕ(‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ« ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻤﻮﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﺔ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ‪.‬‬
‫ژﺍﻙ ﺩﺭﻳﺪﺍ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺎﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﺄﺧﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﮔﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺑﺮﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﺟﻨﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺧﻮﻳﺶ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ‬ ‫ﭘﺲ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ ﻫﻴﭻ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺟﻨﺴﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺮﻑ‬
‫ﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪﺍﻯ )ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻰ( ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؛ ﺍﮔﺮ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺩﻗﻴﻘﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ :‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎ »ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ«‪ .‬ﺣﻤﻞﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﺷﺎﻥ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺷﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺟﻨﺴﻰ ﻓﺮﺍﮔﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﻓﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺘﺄﺛﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎﻯ ژﻧﺮﻳﻚ ﻭ ﺧﺎﺹﺷﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﮔﺎﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻨﺲ »ﻫﺴﺘﻰ« ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﻭ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺣﻤﻞ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻟﻮﻳﻨﺎﺱ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﮔﺸﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺮ ﻓﺼﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ژﻧﺮﻳﻚ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻀﻤﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﻮﻟﻰﺍﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻠﻤﺔ »ﻫﺴﺘﻰ« ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﮔﺎﻩ ﻇﺎﻫﺮﺍً ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﺨﻰ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﺦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؛ ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﺟﻨﺲ‬
‫ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕﺳﻠﺒﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻐﺎﻙ ﺗﻔﻜﺮﻯ ﺑﺪﻧﺎﻡ ﺩﺭﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻩﺍﻳﻢ‪ :‬ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻏﻴﺮﺫﺍﺗﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﻰﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﺎﻣﺸﺨﺺ‪ ،‬ﻏﻴﺮ ﺟﻨﺴﻰ‪ ،‬ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪﺍﻯ‪ .‬ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﮔﻴﺎﻩ‬ ‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﭼﻨﺪﻧﻮﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪﺍﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ‪،‬‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺻﻮﺭﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ ﺗﺎ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻭ ﻫﮕﻞ‪ ،‬ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﺑﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﻧﺰﺩ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮﺩﻭﻯ‬
‫ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻗﺎﺋﻞ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺁﻛﻮﺋﻴﻨﺎﺱ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺮ ﻫﺮﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ ]ﻳﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ[ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻃﻼﻕ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؟‬ ‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻌﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ﺷﮕﻔﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺳﻨﺦ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺭﺍﻩﺣﻞ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻀﻞ‬ ‫ﺻﻮﺭﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺣﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ )ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺐ(‪.‬‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻗﺎﺑﻞﺩﺭﻙ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫»ﺗﻨﺎﺳﺒﻰ«‪42‬ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻻﺯﻡ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ‬
‫)ﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ ﻛ ّﻤﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺷﺘﺪﺍﺩﻯ(‪ .‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺷﺘﺪﺍﺩ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﻛﻠﻤﻪ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﺑﻴﻢ )ﺍﻟﻒ‪:‬ﺏ‪:‬ﺝ‪:‬ﺩ(‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻘﻮﻻﺕ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﻩ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺑﺪﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ؟ ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺷﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪ ﻣﺮﺍﺗﺒﻰ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﺔ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﺷﺎﻥ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻓﻌﻠّﻴﺖﻳﺎﺑﻰ ﻳﻚ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻧﻘﺶ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﺔ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ )‪ (pros hen‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﺟﺰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﺷﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﻫﺮﺁﻧﭽﻪ »ﻫﺴﺖ« ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻫﺮﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‬
‫)ﻳﺎ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﺷﺎﻥ(‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻴﻒ‪ ،‬ﻛﻢ‪ ،‬ﺃﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ )ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ(‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬
‫ﻏﻴﺮﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪﺍﻯ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ »ﻓﻬﻢ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ« ﺗﻮﺯﻳﻌﻰ ﻭ‬
‫‪43‬‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻛﻴﻔﻰ )ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ( ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ‬ ‫»ﺣﺲ ﺳﺎﻟﻢ« )ﻳﺎ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ( ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻳﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪79 1393‬‬

‫ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻛﺜﺮﺕﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﻗﺎﺑﻞﺳﻨﺠﺶ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ )ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ( ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺣﺎﻭﻯ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ«؛ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﻼ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ »ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﺎﻃﻖ« ﺍﺳﺖ(‪،‬‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﭘﺮﺳﻴﻢ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻳﻚ ﭼﻴﺰ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ )ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺳﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎﻳﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻛﺪﺍﻡﺍﻧﺪ؟ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺍﻃﻼﻕ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﺔ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺩ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎﻳﻰ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﺧﺎﺻﻰ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؟‬
‫ﻣﻄﺮﺡﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﻏﻴﺮﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪﺍﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺣﺎﻓﻆ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﭼﺮﺧﺶ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﻣﻬﻢ ﺩﺭ‬
‫‪46‬‬
‫ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺩﺭﻙ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﺼﻞﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﺘﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺭﻭﻯﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻴﺎﺕ‪ 45‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ‬
‫ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩﺷﺎﻥ‪» :‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﺷﺪﺕ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﻫﻤﮕﻨﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺎﻧﺘﺴﻢ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺰﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻭ‬
‫ﻋﺪﻡ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ‪ :‬ﺗﻀﺎﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻙ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﺰﺩ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ‪ ،‬ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﺎﻃﻖ ]ﻳﺎ ﻋﺎﻗﻞ[ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﮔﺎﻩ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺼﺎﺩﻳﻖ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ «.‬ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻝ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﻏﻴﺮﻋﻘﻼﻧﻰ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻋﺮﺍﺿﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ »ﻣﻮﻧﻴﺴﻢ=ﭘﻠﻮﺭﺍﻟﻴﺴﻢ« )ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ= ﭼﻨﺪﻧﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ(‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺫﺍﺗﻰﺍﺵ ﻣﻨﺤﺮﻑ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ؛ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ ﻣﺎﻧﻊ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺟﻨﺴﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ ﮔﻰ ﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎﻯ )ﺧﺎﺹ( »ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ«‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﮔﺎﻩ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﻜﺲ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺗﻼﺷﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻼﺷﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺤﻘﻖﺑﺨﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ‪،‬‬
‫)ﻓﺮﺩﻳﺖﺑﺨﺶ( »ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ« ﻭ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭﻣﻴﻦ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺫﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺭﻭﺑﺮﻭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‪ 47.‬ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺻﻞ ﻫﺴﺖ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺗﺎ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘﺶ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ‪) :‬ﻧﺎـ(ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ‬ ‫)ﺫﺍﺕ(‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺮﺣﺴﺐ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻗﺎﺩﺭ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫)ﻗﺪﺭﺕ( ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻋﻤﻠﻰﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪48‬ـ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ »ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ« ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‬ ‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻫﺮﺯ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩﮔﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻭ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻰ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻫﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ‪ ،‬ﻻﺟﺮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻐﺎﻙ‬ ‫ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻜﻨﻢ ﺗﺎ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ ﻳﺎ ﭼﻨﺪﻧﻮﺍ ﺩﺭﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﻏﻠﺘﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﺨﺸﻢ؟ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﺍﻡ ﭼﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻢ ﻛﺮﺩ؟‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻧﻔﻰ ﻓﺮﻭﺩﺳﺖ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ‪ .‬ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬ ‫ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺭﻳﻚ ﺍَﻟﻴﻪ‪49‬ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺁﻧﺎﻟﻮژﻯ‪ ،‬ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰ )ﺍﻧﺘﻮـﺗﺌﻮﻟﻮژﻯ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻣﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰـﻳﺰﺩﺍﻥﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ( ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ )ﺍﻧﺘﻮـﺍﺗﻮﻟﻮژﻯ‪ .(50‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭼﺮﺍ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻣﻴﻦ ﻭ ﻭﺍﭘﺴﻴﻦ ﭘﺮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻧﺎﻇﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻤﻠﻰﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﺑﺨﺸﻴﺪﻥ‬
‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﺤﻮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؟ ﺗﺸﺨﻴﺺﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‪ :‬ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺍﺟﺎﺯﻩ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺷﺨﺺ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺩﺷﻮﺍﺭ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﻭﺍﻧﻤﻮﺩﻩ« ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﺤﻮ ﻣﺘﺤﻘﻖ ﺷﻮﺩ؟ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﻜﺲ‪ ،‬ﺗﺤﺖ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻭﺍﻗﻌ ًﺎ ﻣﻴﻞ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺳﺮﻧﻮﺷﺖ ﺩﭼﺎﺭ ﺷﺪﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﻭﺍﻧﻤﻮﺩﺓ» ﻛﻠﻮﺳﻮﻓﺴﻜﻰ‬ ‫ﺟﺪﺍﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ؟ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺮﻭﺑﻠﻤﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺿﺪـﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻥﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﺴﺖ؛‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰـﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰﺍﻯ )ﻭ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩﻯ«‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺯﻣﻴﻨﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ »ﺟﺬﺍﺑﻴﺘﻰ« ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺖ )ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻇﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ( ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺷﻴﺰﻭﻓﺮﻧﻰ ﺑﺴﻂ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺭﺍ »ﻭﺍﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ«‪ 51‬ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ(‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺎﻧﻮﺋﻞ ﻟﻮﻳﻨﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﺳﺮﻫﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯ«‪ 52‬ﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﻄﻠﺐ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻨﺪﺓ ﺩﻭ ﺭﻭﻳﻜﺮﺩ‬
‫ﺻﺎﺩﻕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺗﻴﺮﻯ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺩﺍﻧﺲ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ ﭘﺮﺗﺎﺏ‬ ‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﭘﺮﺗﺎﺑﺶ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺪ ﺍﻻﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﺭﺗﺪﻭﻛﺲ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻟﻮﻳﻨﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﻣﻘﺪﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﺔ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ‬ ‫ﻼ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ( ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ »ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ« ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ )ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬
‫ﺑﻬﺮﻩ ﺑﺮﺩ‪ 53.‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻭﻇﻴﻔﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺭﺳﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻧﺰﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ )ﻭ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ( ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻼ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺰﺍﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺻﺎﻑ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻄﻖ‪») est‬ﻫﺴﺖ«( ﺟﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺭﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﺑﻼﻭﺍﺳﻄﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺧﻮﺩﺷﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ )ﺷﺪﺕ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ‪») et‬ﻭ«( ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ »ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺳﺮﻧﮕﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺟﺔ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ(‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ« ﻭ ﺭﻭﺍﺑﻂ ﺭﺍ »ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺟﺎﻯ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ؛‬
‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﺷﻮﺩ«‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻛﻞ ّ‬ ‫ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ ﻭﻯ ﺭﺍﺟﻊ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺭﻭﻯ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺗﻌﻤﻴﻖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺑﺮﺭﺳﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪﺍﻥ ﻣﻨﺘﻬﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﺄﺧﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﺍﺑﺪﺍﻉ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻤﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ »ﺻﻔﺤﺔ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻏﺪﻏﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻤ ًﺎ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ«‪» ،‬ﺧﺎﺭﺝ«‪» ،‬ﻭﻗﻔﻪ«‪ 54‬ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ‪ .‬ﺩﺍﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻨﻮﺍﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﺴﻂ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺭﺍﻩﺣﻠﻰ‬
‫ﺩﻫﻨﺪﺓ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﻚ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺣﺮﻛﺘﺶ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﻪ ﻋﺮﺿﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻙ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪80‬‬

‫‪26. Hierarchy.‬‬
‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺖﻫﺎ‬
‫‪27. Anarchy.‬‬
‫* ﺩﺍﻧﺸﺠﻮﻯ ﺩﻛﺘﺮﺍﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﻋﻼﻣﻪ ﻃﺒﺎﻃﺒﺎﻳﻰ‪.‬‬
‫‪28. Natura naturans.‬‬
‫‪ .1‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻴﺖ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻒ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻗﺮﻭﻥ ﻭﺳﻄﻰ‬
‫‪29. Natura naturata .‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺭﺑﺎﺏ ﻛﻠﻴﺴﺎ ﻣﺘﺄﺳﻔﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﺓ‬
‫‪30. Incompossible.‬‬
‫ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎﺭ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺠﻮﺯ ﻫﺮ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﻰ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﻣﻰ ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺭﺩ! )ﻡ(‬
‫‪31. Modal logic.‬‬
‫‪2. Opus Oxoniense.‬‬
‫‪32. Genetic.‬‬
‫‪ .3‬ﻛﻠﻤﺔ ‪ dunce‬ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ »ﺍﺣﻤﻖ« ﻭ »ﺳﺎﺩﻩﻟﻮﺡ«‬
‫‪ .33‬ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻓﺼﻞ ﻣﺬﻛﻮﺭ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺑﺮﺩﮔﻰ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻳﺎ ﻗ ّﻮﺕ ﻋﻮﺍﻃﻒ«‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻛﺴﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺎﺻﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻣﻮﺧﺘﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻇﺎﻫﺮﺍً ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ‬
‫ﻡ‪.‬‬
‫ﺧﺼﻤﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻭﻣﺎﻧﻴﺴﺖﻫﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﻜﻮﺗﻮﺱ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪.‬ﻡ‪.‬‬
‫‪34. Effects.‬‬
‫‪4. Expression .‬‬
‫‪35. Provident.‬‬
‫‪5. Equivocity.‬‬
‫‪36. Existences.‬‬
‫‪6. Analogy .‬‬
‫‪37. Conatus.‬‬
‫‪7. Difference-in-itself.‬‬
‫‪38. Free necessity.‬‬
‫‪ Albert Lautman: .8‬ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ )‪1908‬ـ‪1944‬ﻡ( ﻛﻪ‬
‫‪ .39‬ﺗﻠﻤﻴﺤﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﭘﺴﻴﻦ ﺑﻨﺪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺁﻧﻚ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‪» :‬ﺁﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺗﺨﺼﺼﺶ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺭﻳﺎﺿﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬ﻡ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩ ﻣﺮﺍ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ؟ ﺩﻳﻮﻧﻴﺰﻭﺱ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻣﺼﻠﻮﺏ«‪.‬‬
‫‪9. Modality .‬‬
‫‪Nietzsche; Friedrich; Ecce Homo &The Anti-‬‬
‫‪10. Onto-theo-logy .‬‬
‫‪Christ; Translated by Thomas Wayne; Algora‬‬
‫‪11. Eminence.‬‬
‫‪ .98.‬ﻡ ‪Publishing: 2004; p.‬‬
‫‪ .12‬ﺁﭘﻮﻓﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺳﻠﺒﻰ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺗﺎﻓﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰ‪.‬ﻡ‪.‬‬
‫‪40. Modal .‬‬
‫‪13. Short Treatise.‬‬
‫‪41. Transcendental.‬‬
‫‪14. Propria (properties).‬‬
‫‪42. Proportionality.‬‬
‫‪15. Tractatus Theologico-Politicus.‬‬
‫‪ .43‬ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ »ﻓﻬﻢ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ« ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﻣﺤﺾ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺍﺑﮋﺓ‬
‫‪16. Emanative.‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﺾ=‪ x‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﮕﻰ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ‬
‫‪ .17‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ )‪ transitive‬ﻳﺎ ‪ :( transient‬ﺭ‪.‬ﻙ‪ :‬ﻗﻀﻴﺔ ‪ 18‬ﺑﺨﺶ ﺍﻭﻝ‬
‫ﻧﻔﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺍﺑﮋﺓ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻛﺸﻴﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ )ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻓﺎﺭﺳﻰ‪ :‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ؛ ﺑﺎﺭﻭﺥ؛ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ؛ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻣﺤﺴﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﮕﻴﺮﻯ؛‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻟﺐ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻧﻔﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ‬
‫ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻣﺮﻛﺰ ﻧﺸﺮ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻫﻰ‪ ،1390 ،‬ﺹ ‪.40‬ﻡ‪.‬‬
‫ﭘﻴﺶﻓﺮﺽ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑُﻦ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﻘﺼﻮﺩ‬
‫‪18. Creationism.‬‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ »ﺣﺲ ﺳﺎﻟﻢ« ‪ good sense‬ﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻗﻮﺍ‬
‫‪19. Gift .‬‬
‫)ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺣﺲ ﻭ ﻓﺎﻫﻤﻪ ﻭ ﻋﻘﻞ( ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮓ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﮕﺮﺍ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‬
‫‪20. Hierarchical.‬‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﺑﮋﺓ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻨﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺗﺎﺛﻴﺮ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻫﻤﺴﺎﻥ‬
‫‪ .21‬ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺁﻟﻤﺎﻧﻰ ‪) es gibt‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ »ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ«‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ ‪there‬‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺲ ﺳﺎﻟﻢ ﻭ ﻓﻬﻢ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﺓ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻯ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ‬
‫‪ is‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﮕﻠﻴﺴﻰ( ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺗﺤﺖﺍﻟﻔﻈﻰ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪» :‬ﺍﻭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ«‪ .‬ﻭ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻧﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺟﺰ ﺑﺎﺯﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻰﺷﺪﻩ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﺫﺍﺕ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ »ﺍﻭ«ﻳﻰ ‪ It/es‬ﻛﻪ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺮﺗﻜﺐ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬ﻡ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‪ .‬ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﺟﻤﻠﮕﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﻮﺭﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﺫﺍﺗﻰ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺗﻠﻘّﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ‬
‫‪22‬‬ ‫‪. Expressionistic .‬‬
‫ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺭﻭﻧﺪ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﻭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ‬
‫‪23‬‬ ‫‪. Implicare .‬‬
‫ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﺟﺰ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪.‬ﻡ‪.‬‬
‫‪24‬‬ ‫‪. Explicare.‬‬
‫‪44. Collective.‬‬
‫‪» .25‬ﺷﺎﻣﻞﺷﺪﻥ« ﻳﺎ »ﺷﻤﻮﻝ« ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑﺮ ‪ complicate‬ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ‬
‫‪45. Morality.‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺑﺮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺎﻟﺔ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺢ ﻭ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺢ ﺭﺍ‬
‫‪46. Ethics.‬‬
‫ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ]ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺢ ﻭ‬
‫‪47. Existence.‬‬
‫ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺢ[ ﺿﺪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺻﻞ ﺳﻨﺘﺰ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪.complicatio :‬‬
‫‪48. Effectuated.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻮﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻥﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ »ﺷﻤﻮﻝ« ﺍﻏﻠﺐ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺩﺍﺧﻞﺑﻮﺩﻥ ]ﻳﺎ ﺷﺎﻣﻞﺷﺪﻥ[‬
‫‪49. Eric Alliez.‬‬
‫ﻛﺜﺮﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺩﺍﺧﻞﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺜﻴﺮ‪ .‬ﺧﺪﺍ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫‪50. Onto-ethology.‬‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ »ﺷﻤﻮﻟﻰ« ‪ complicatively‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‬
‫‪51. Simulate‬‬
‫ﻫﻢ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺢ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺗﻠﻮﻳﺢ ]‪Deleuze; Gilles;) .«[...‬‬
‫‪52. Assemblage/ agencement.‬‬
‫‪Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza; Translated‬‬
‫‪ .53‬ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻋﺼﺮ ﺗﺮﺍژﻳﻚ‬
‫‪;1990 :by Martin Joughin; Zone Books; New York‬‬
‫ﻳﻮﻧﺎﻧﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻡ‪.‬‬
‫‪ 16.p‬ﻡ‪.‬‬
‫‪54. Interstice.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪81 1393‬‬

 ‫ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ‬ ‫‪.1‬‬
‫ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﺗﻮﺟﻬﻰ ﻋﺎﻣﺪﺍﻧﺔ ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺳﻨﺖ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﻣﺘﻮﺟﻪ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺷﺪﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺳﺨﻦ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺣﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻣﺎ ﺑﭙﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﮔﻔﺘﻦ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ »ﺧﻮﺩ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ« ﻧﺎﺩﻳﺪﻩ‬
‫ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺼﻴﺮﺕ ﻣﻬﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺑﺎﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﺻﻮ ًﻻ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻋﺪﻡ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫)ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ( ﺑﺪﻝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻤﺖ ﻧﻴﻬﻴﻠﻴﺴﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻫﺪﻑ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻯ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺸﻨﺎﺳﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ‬
‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺸﻨﺎﺳﺪ »ﺧﻴﻠﻰ ﻛﻢ‪ ....‬ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒ ًﺎ ﻫﻴﭻ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻧﮕﺮﺍﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻴﻬﻴﻠﻴﺴﻢ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﻯ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺘ ًﺎ ﺍﺯ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺑﺎﻭﺭﻯ‬
‫ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻨﺖ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺴﻮﻧﺪ »ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ« ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻋﻼﻗﻪ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺖ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﺭﻭﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﺠﺒﻮﺭ ﻫﻢ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻴﻢ ﻓﻘﻂ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ‬
‫ﺑﺸﻨﺎﺳﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺳﺨﻦ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻗﺴﻤﻰ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﮔﺸﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻣﻨﺪ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﺑﻰﻃﺮﻓﺎﻧﻪ ﻳﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻳﺎ‬
‫*‬
‫ﻧﺒﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﻧﺰﺩ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻬﺪﻯ ﭘﺎﺭﺳﺎ‬
‫ﺧﺎﺹ )ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ »ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ«( ﻣﺤﻮﺭﻳﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻣﻌﺮﻑ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‬ ‫‪Mehdi.parsa.kh@gmail.com‬‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﻏﻠﺒﺔ ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻳﺎ ﺑﺮ ﻏﺮﻳﺰﻩ‬
‫ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺠﺒﻮﺭ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ ﺍﺯ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ‬
‫ﺑﻨﮕﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻭﻯ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺑﺒﻴﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﻭﻯ‬
‫ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺧﺖ؛ ﺩﻳﺪﻥ ﺑﺎ ﭼﺸﻢ ﻋﻘﻞ؛ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻘﻞ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﻔﺎﺭﻕ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺟﺪﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺟﺪﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻼﻳﻖ ﻏﺮﻳﺰﻯ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺵ‬ ‫‪Difference and‬‬
‫ﺁﻣﺪﻥﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺑﺪ ﺁﻣﺪﻥﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻮ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﺳﻮ‬ ‫‪Repetition, trans.‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺭﺍﻧﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺳﻜﻪﺍﻯ ﺿﺮﺏ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻴﺶ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫‪Paul Patton,‬‬
‫ﺳﻜﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺭﻭﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺤﻮ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﻠﺰﻯ ﻧﺎﺏ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺧﻮ ِﺩ‬ ‫‪Columbia University‬‬
‫ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻳﻚ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭ ﮔﺮﻳﺰﻯ ﺍﺯ ﭼﺸﻢ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻏﺮﺍﻳﺰ‪،‬‬ ‫‪Press, New York,‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺵ ﺁﻣﺪﻥﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺑﺪ ﺁﻣﺪﻥﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻳﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺩﺭﻭﻍ‬ ‫‪1994.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﻄﻮﺭﺓ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻧﻪ‪ .‬ﻣﻮﺿﻌﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ ﺑﻨﮕﺮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺩﻋﻮﺕ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺍﻓﺴﺎﻧﻪﺳﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﺎﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻣﺎﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﻳﺖﻫﺎﻳﻤﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﻫﺮﻛﻮﻝ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﻳﭗ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺳﻘﺮﺍﻁ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﺘﺮﭘﺴﻴﺎﺩﺱ‪.‬‬ ‫‪The Logic of Sense,‬‬
‫ﺗﻼﺵﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺭﺍﺳﺘﺎ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫‪trans. M. Lester,‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﺍﺯﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺘﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫‪ed. C.V. Boundas,‬‬
‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺍﺯﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎ ﺍﮔﺰﻳﻴﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻦ‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫‪Columbia University‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺲ ﻛﺸﻒ ﻭ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺲ ﺧﻠﻖ‬ ‫‪Press, New York,‬‬
‫ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻰ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫‪1990.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪82‬‬

 ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ‪ ،‬ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ‪ ،‬ﻟﻮﻳﻨﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻩﺍﻯ ﻟﻜﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﺩﺭﻳﺪﺍ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺍﺯﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﮔﺮﻳﺰ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻴﻬﻴﻠﻴﺴﻢ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖﻣﺤﻮ ِﺭ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﭘﺮﺳﺸﮕﺮ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﻗﺪﺍﻡ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻨﺘﻘﺪ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﻬﻴﻠﻴﺴﻤﻰ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻓﻖ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺮﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺑﺮﻣﻼ ﺷﺪ؛ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻭﻟﻮﻳﺖ‬ ‫ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺼﻴﺮﺕ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﺗﺌﻮﺭﻳﺎ ﻭ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬ ‫ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺍﺯﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻓﻖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ ﺣﻤﻠﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﻰﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻣﺎ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﺮﺍﻣﻮﺷﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪﻩﻫﺎ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭘﺮﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﻳﻚ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺭﻓﺘﺎ ِﺭ ﭘﺮﺳﺸﮕﺮ‪.‬‬
‫ﻃﻠﺒﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﻟﻮﻳﻨﺎﺱ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻴﺖ ِ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺍﺯﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻏﻴﺮﻳﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ »ﻫﻤﺎﻥ« ﻓﺮﻭﻣﻰﻛﺎﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻟﻜﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ »ﻧﻈﺎﺭﻩ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ«‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭـﺟﻬﺎﻥـﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ‬
‫»ﻣﻦﻣﺤﻮﺭ« ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ ﻭ ﺁﺭﻣﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻰﻧﻮﻳﺴﺪ‪» :‬ﭼﻮﻥ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻏﺎﻟﺒ ًﺎ ﻭ ﻣﻨﺤﺼﺮﺍً ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ‬
‫ﺧﻴﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﭘﺪﻳﺪﺓ ﺩﺭـﻫﺴﺘﻦ ﻧﺸﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﻫﻢ ﻧﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻳﺪﺍ ﺑﻪ »ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ« ﻛﻪ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮ ﻭﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻧﺎﻧﻈﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺩﻭﻫﺰﺍﺭ ﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺔ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻧﻈﺮﻯ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻠﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻘﺪﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﻓﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥﺷﺎﻥ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﺭـﻫﺴﺘﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻓﻬﻢ ﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩﻳﻨﻪﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﻉ‬
‫ﻋﻄﻔﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﮔﻤﺮﺍﻫﻰ ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﺩﺭـﺟﻬﺎﻥـﻫﺴﺘﻦ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺿﺪ ﻫﮕﻠﻰ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻫﮕﻠﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻫﻢ ﺩﻗﻴﻖﺗﺮ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ‬ ‫‪.2‬‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺟﻬﺘﻰ ﺍﮔﺰﻳﺴﺘﺎﻧﺴﻴﺎﻝ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭـﻫﺴﺘﻦ ﻣﺸﻬﻮﺩ ﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪ 1«.‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﮔﻔﺘﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻗﻮﻝ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻘﻞ ﺷﺪ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻤﺪﺍﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬
‫ﺳﻮژﻩ ﻋﻼﻗﻪﺍﻯ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭـﺟﻬﺎﻥـﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺍﻭﻟﻮﻳﺖ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩ ﻛﺮﺩﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻦ ﻭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﻯ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﺭ »ﺟﻬﺘﻰ ﺍﮔﺰﻳﺴﺘﺎﻧﺴﻴﺎﻝ« ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺣﻞ ﻣﻌﻀﻞ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﺭ ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺘ ًﺎ ﺍﺯ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺑﺎﻭﺭﻯ ﺳﺨﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻧﺎﻧﻈﺮﻯ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﻭ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻰﺗﻮﺟﻪ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭﺩ ﻫﮕﻞ ﻭ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﮔﻔﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻨﺖ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﻧﻤﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﻓﻜﺮ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻴﻬﻴﻠﻴﺴﻤﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺘﻴﻢ ﺩﺭﮔﻴﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻼﺵ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺭﺍ ﻃﻮﺭﻯ ﻋﻮﺽ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﻋﻄﻔﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺳﻨﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﭘﺴﻮﻧﺪ »ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ« ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻋﻼﻗﻪ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺑﺸﻨﺎﺳﻴﻢ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺑﺤﺚ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻰﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﻧﮕﺮﺍﻥ ﺁﺳﻴﺒﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﻳﺘﻪ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺖ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻨﺖ ﺯﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺤﻮﺭﻳﺖ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻫﻤﺰﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺎﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ؛ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻗ ًﺎ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﻳﺘﻪ‪ .‬ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺟﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ‬
‫ﺻﺤﺒﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻛﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﻭ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﺵ ﺍﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‬ ‫ﺳﻮژﻩ ‪ /‬ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺳﻌﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺭﺍ ﻃﻮﺭﻯ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻳﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﺮﺍﻣﻮﺷﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﺵ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻼ ﺗﻮﺟﻬﻰ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻬﻢ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﭘﺬﻳﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﺻ ً‬ ‫ﻣﺸﻜﻞ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﻳﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻀﻄﺮﺏ ﻭ ﭘﺮﻳﺸﺎﻥ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬ ‫ﻟﻮﻳﻨﺎﺱ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﺪﺑﻴﻦ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﻮژﺓ ﻟﻮﻳﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻭ ﭼﻬﺮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻟﻜﺎﻥ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﭘﻰ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺷﻜﻞﺩﻫﻨﺪﺓ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻣﻦ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﮔﺮ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﺵ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﻳﻢ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺭﻭﻳﺪﺍﺩﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺷﻜﺎﻑ ﺧﻮﺭﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻼ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﻬﺮﻩﻫﺎ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﻣﺜ ً‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﺑﮋﺓ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺗﺼﺎﺩﻓﻰ ﻏﻴﺮﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﺎﺩﻑ ﺗﺮﻭﻣﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻧﻘﺶ ﭘﺮﺭﻧﮕﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺭﺍ ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻴﻬﻴﻠﻴﺴﻢ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻳﺪﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﻭ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ« ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﻗﺴﻤﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻧﻴﺮﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻨﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻭﻯ‬ ‫ﺳﺨﻦ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ؛ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﺰ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺿﻼﻉ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ‬ ‫ﻟﻮﻳﻨﺎﺱ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺭﺍﻯ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮﻯ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺣﻮﻝ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴﺌﻮﻟﻴﺘﻰ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ‬
‫ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺣﻮﻝ ﺍﺳﺘﻤﺮﺍﺭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﺓ ﺗﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﺭﻭﻡ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻟﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻋﻨﺼﺮ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺰﺍﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺔ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪83 1393‬‬

‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ؟ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻱ ﺍﻳﻦﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ »ﺟﻮﻫﺮ« ﻭ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ ﻧﻘﺶ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﮔﻮﻧﺔ‬
‫»ﻋﺮﺽ« ﺻﺤﺒﺖ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ »ﺟﻮﻫﺮ« ﻭ »ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ« ﺻﺤﺒﺖ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻻﺗﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻋﻼﻗﻪﺍﺵ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ‬
‫ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ »ﺟﻮﻫﺮ« ﻭ »ﻋﺮﺽ« ﺟﺒﺮ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻏﻨﻰﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﻰ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻋﺮﺍﺿﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻣﻲﺁﻳﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻳﻜﺒﺎﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ‬
‫ﻣﻲﺷﻮﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺑﻲ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ؛ ﻫﺮ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻱ ﺍﻋﺮﺍﺽ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ »ﺑﻴﺎﻥ« ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﺎ »ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻱ« ﮔﺮﻩ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﻧﮕﺮﺍﻥ ﺍﺧﻄﺎﺭ ﻛﺎﻧﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺭﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻛﻪ »ﺟﻮﻫﺮ« ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺸﻨﺎﺳﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻭﻯ‪ ،‬ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎ ًﻻ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ‪» ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ« ﻭ »ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻱ« ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﻛﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ‬
‫ﻛﻪ »ﺑﻴﺎﻥ«‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻲ ﺧﺎﺹ‪» ،‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ« ﺭﺍ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻲ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻋﺠﻮﻻﻧﻪ ﻭ ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ »ﺟﻮﻫﺮ« ﺑﻪ ﺑﻲﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻲﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﺿﻠﻊ ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬
‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻣﺎ ﻧﻤﻲﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨﻲ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻝ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﻇﻬﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺁﻣﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻭ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛‬
‫ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻲ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻲ ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ »ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ«‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭ‬
‫ﻣﻲﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻲﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻱ‬ ‫ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺳﺨﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻲﺁﻭﺭﺩ؛ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ »ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ«‬
‫ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ »ﺟﻮﻫﺮ« ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؛ »ﺟﻮﻫﺮ« ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻲ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻤﺘﺪ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻧﻜﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﻣﻌﻀﻞ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ‬ ‫»ﻓﻜﺮ«؛ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬
‫ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻥ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﻲﺩﻫﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﺧﻼﻗﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﻜﺮ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻴﻢ ﺗﺼﻮﻳ ِﺮ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﺑﻴﺶ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻭ ‪ ...‬ﺑﻪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺩﻭﻡ )ﻓﻜﺮ( ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﭼﻪ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؟ ﭼﺮﺍ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳﺮ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺗﻰ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ُﻣﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ؟ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻰ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻥ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻬﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺁﻥ »ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ« ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﻓﺘﻰ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺎﺗﻲ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻃﻮﺭﻯ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫»ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺣﺎﻝ« ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﺍﻱ‬
‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻼ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺻ ً‬ ‫ﻫﻴﭻ ﮔﺎﻩ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺑﺎﻗﻲ ﻧﻤﻲﻣﺎﻧﺪ؛ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺡ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‬
‫ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﭙﺎﺭﭼﮕﻲ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪﺍﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺑﺎ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻱ‬ ‫ﻣﻲﮔﻮﻳﻴﻢ »ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ«‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ »ﺣﻀﻮﺭ« ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪﺍﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪،‬‬
‫)‪ .(immanence‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺧﻠﻘﺖ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺭﺥ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﭼﻄﻮﺭ ﻣﻲﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺁﺯﺍﺩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﻤﻴﻢ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؟ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺧﻠﻘﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ‬ ‫ﺑﮕﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺭﻭﺡ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻱ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺗﺰﺭﻳﻖ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻴﻨﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺷﻴﻮﺓ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻱ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ »ﺍﺳﺘﻤﺮﺍﺭ« ﻧﺸﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﻄﻮﺭ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺭﻭﺡ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؛ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﭼﻪ‬
‫ﺧﻠﻘﺖ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺥ ﻣﻰ ﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﻲﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲﺍﻱ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﭘﺲ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺧﻠﻘﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻠﻘﺖ ﻭ ﺧﺎﻟﻖ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ‪» ،‬ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ« ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؛‬
‫ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﻴﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺘﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻱ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺡ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺟﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺍﺻﻠﻲ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺪﻝ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻱ ﻭ ﺣﻴﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬
‫ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻱ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻱ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﻨﺖ ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻰ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺡ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺩﻳﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻧﮕﺮﺵ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ ﺩﻋﻮﺕ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﭘﻮﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻫﻢ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺧﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻛﺎﺭﺕ ﺗﺎﺑﻊ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺳﻨﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬
‫ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺍﺭﻭﻳﻦ ﮔﻮﺷﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺭﺍ ﻳﺎﺩﺁﻭﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪» ،‬ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ« ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺍﻭﻝ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩ ﻛﻪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻋﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺪﻝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺠﺒﻮﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻨﻲ ﺑﺮ ﺁﻥ ﺣﺎﻛﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻧﮕﺮﺵ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰﻣﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺵ ﺩﻫﻴﻢ ﻣﻰﺑﻴﻨﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺮﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﺐ ﺑﺪﻝ‬ ‫ﻼ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨﻲﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻑ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‬ ‫ﻗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻱ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺍﺩﻩ« ﻣﻲﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ؛ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﻧﻮﻣﻨﺎﻝ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺍﻗﺘﺒﺎﺱ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ »ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻱ« ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻘﺪ ﺩﻭﻡ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ »ﺍﺧﻼﻕ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻲ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻭ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻲﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻜﺘﻪ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻱ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ »ﻗﺪﺭﺕ« ﻳﺎ »ﻧﻴﺮﻭ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺍﺷﻴﺎ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻣﻲﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ ﻭ ﻣﻲﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻱ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ‬
‫»ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ« ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﺎﺯﻣﻲﮔﺮﺩﺩ؛ »ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻱ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻲ« ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺟﺴﺖﻭﺟﻮ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻣﻲﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ« ﻫﻴﭻ‬ ‫ﺣﻤﻠﺔ ﺟﺪﻱ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻥﮔﺮﺍﻳﻲ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻲ ﺑﺎ »ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻲ« ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﮔﺬﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻲ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻱ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻱ ﺟﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺟﻮ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪84‬‬

 ‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ »ﺯﻣﺎﻥ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ »ﻫﺴﺘﻲ« ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ »ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ« ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻝ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻣﻲﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻏﺮﻳﺰﻩ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻱ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻲ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺠﺎﺯﻱ؛ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪﺍﻱ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻲﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﻴﺒﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﻏﻠﺘﺎﻧﻴﻢ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺘﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺭﻭﻯ ﭘﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻲﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﮔﻔﺖ‪» :‬ﺣﺎﻓﻈﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ«؛ ﻣﺎ ﻣﻌﻤﻮ ًﻻ »ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ«‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺎﻧﻊ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺟﺎﻟﺐ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﻭﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺭﻭﺍﻥﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ ﻣﻲﺩﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻓﻜﺮ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫»ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻲ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻲﺑﺮﺩ؛ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﭻﮔﺎﻩ ﻛﺎﺭ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻧﺒﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﻭﺡ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺟﺎﻧﺪﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫»ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ« ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺑﻪ ﭼﺎﺭﻟﺰ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﻭﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻧﺘﺨﺎﺏ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺳﻨﺪﺭﺱ ﭘﻴﺮﺱ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﻋﺒﻮﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻧﻔﺲ ﻭ ﺑﺪﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻭﻯ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﭘﻴﺮﺱ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻪ )‪(index‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﮔﺎﻣﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﻩ ﻧﻔﻰ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺪﻳﻦ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺰ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﺳﻮﺳﻮﺭ‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻌﻀﻞ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ ﻧﻴﻬﻴﻠﻴﺴﻢ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺯﻳﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺍﻥﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» ،‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ« ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ »ﻧﻤﺎﺩ«‬ ‫ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﭼﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﻗﺮﺍﺭﺩﺍﺩﻱ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻗﺪﺭ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺑﺪﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺏ ﻛﭙﺮﻧﻴﻜﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻮﺳﻮﺭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﺎ ﺭﻭﺍﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻓﻜﺮﺵ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ ﺩﻳﺪﻥ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﭘﻴﺮﺱ‪» ،‬ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻪ« ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻭﻯ‪ ،‬ﺟﺰ ﻧﻘﺪ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪» .‬ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻪ« ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺍﻱ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ؛‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺟﻬﻰ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﺍﻱ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻓﻘﻂ‬ ‫ﺑﺤﺮﺍﻥﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺤﻮﺭ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺭﻭﺍﻥ‪ .‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﭘﻴﺮﺳﻲ »ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻲ«‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻣﺴﻴﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﮕﻞ‪ ،‬ﻫﻮﺳﺮﻝ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﻓﻜﺮﻯ ﺁﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺖ؛ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ؛ ﭼﻴﺰﻱ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﻨﺤﺮﻑ ﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﺔ ﺑﻰﺗﻮﺟﻬﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻗﻲ ﻣﻲﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺣﺘﻰ ﻃﻌﻨﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ ﻓﻜﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺩﺍﺯﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺘﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﻢ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻣﺠﺎﺯﻯ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺍﺯﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎ ﺍﮔﺰﻳﻴﺪﻥ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫‪.3‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺨﺮﻭﻁ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻤﻨﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻲ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ ﺑﺎ ﺯﻳﺴﺘﻦ‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﺍﺿﺎﻓﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ »ﻫﺴﺘﻲ« ﺩﺭ »ﻇﺮﻑ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ«‬
‫ﺍﻧﺒﺴﺎﻁ ﻭ ﺍﻧﻘﺒﺎﺽ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺲ ﻛﺸﻒ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩﻱ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻤﻨﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ »ﺯﻣﺎﻥ« ﻭ‬
‫ﺳﻄﺢ ﻣﻘﻄﻊ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺨﺮﻭﻁ ﺍﺳﺘﻤﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺭﺟﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺲ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ‬ ‫»ﻫﺴﺘﻲ« ﻳﻜﻲ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ؛ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻜﺘﺔ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺍﻧﻘﺒﺎﺽ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺒﺴﺎﻁ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﮔﻮﻳﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻰ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻠﻰ »ﺍﺳﺘﻤﺮﺍﺭ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﮕﺮﺵ ﺳﻨﺘﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺷﻴﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﺟﺎﺕ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺷﻴﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻲﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﻣﻰﮔﺸﺎﻳﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻏﺬﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺟﺪﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﮕﺮﺵ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺮﺗﻴﺒﻲ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺗﻲ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ »ﺯﻣﺎﻥ« ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﺎ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻫﺮ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺎﻫﺎ ﻳﻜﻰ‬ ‫ﻟﺤﻈﺔ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻲ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻟﺤﻈﺎﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﻧﻘﺒﺎﺽ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﺍﻧﺒﺴﺎﻁ‪ .‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﻧﻘﺒﺎﺽ‬ ‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻏﺎﻳﺐﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﺭ ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﻧﺒﺴﺎﻁ‪ .‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ »ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺣﺎﻝ« ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻫﻴﭻ ﮔﺎﻩ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺑﺎﻗﻲ ﻧﻤﻲﻣﺎﻧﺪ؛‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﻨﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺭﻭﺍﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺁﻥﭼﻪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻲﮔﻮﻳﻴﻢ »ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ«‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ »ﺣﻀﻮﺭ«‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻱ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ »ﺍﺳﺘﻤﺮﺍﺭ« ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﻣﻨﺒﺴﻂ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﻜﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ »ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺧﻄﻲ« ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺧﻄﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺒﺴﺎﻁ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺣﺴﻰ ﺍﻧﻘﺒﺎﺽ ﺁﻥ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻫﺮﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﻭﻗﺎﻳﻊ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺸﺖ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻲﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻲﮔﺬﺭﻧﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻱ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﮕﺮﺵ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻣﻲﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻱ ﭘﻮﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻲﮔﺬﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻭﻗﺎﻳﻊ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻲﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻭ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻲ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻳﻚ ﺷﻲء ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﺠﺎﺯ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ‪» ،‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ« ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻱ ﻛﻪ ﺭﻭﻱ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ‬
‫ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﻣﺠﺎﺯﻱ«‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻲ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪» .‬ﻣﺠﺎﺯﻱ« ﺩﺭ ﺩﻝ‬ ‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؛ ﺑﻠﻜﻪ »ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ« ﺩﺭ ﺍﺳﺘﻤﺮﺍﺭﻱ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦﺟﺎ ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻭ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؛ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻲ ﺍﻳﻦ »ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ »ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ« ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻜﻲ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻱ ﻣﺠﺎﺯ؛ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺠﺎﺯﻱ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺤﺚ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ »ﻣﺠﺎﺯ« )‪ (virtuality‬ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺠﺎﺯﻱ ﭼﻴﺰﻱ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ »ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻲ« ﻫﻢ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﻪ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ‬
‫ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺭﺍﻩ ﻣﻲﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺩ؛ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﮕﺮﺵ ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ‪ُ ،‬ﻣﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ؛‬ ‫ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻧﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﻭﻱ »ﻫﺴﺘﻲ« ﻫﻤﺎﻥ »ﺯﻣﺎﻥ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ‬
‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﺵ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ »ﻫﺴﺘﻲ« ﻛﻪ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪85 1393‬‬

‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﭼﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؟ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻔﻰ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‪ :‬ﺳﻬﻢ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ‬ ‫‪.4‬‬
‫ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺗﺎ ﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻳﻦﺗﺮﺗﻴﺐ ﺗﺨﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥﺑﻴﻨﻲ ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ‬
‫ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﻣﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﺨﻴﻞ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﭘﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﻭ ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺨﻴﻞ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻳﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭼﻪ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻃﻮﺭ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﻣﻲﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؟ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺣﺸﺮﻩ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﻓﻜﺮ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺨﺸﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻲﺷﻨﺎﺳﻲ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻱ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻜﺮ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﻓﺮﺁﻳﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺎﻟﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﻣﺎ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺑﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﭼﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻜﻨﺪ«‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺧﺎﺭﻕﺍﻟﻌﺎﺩﻩﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻝ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺧﻼﻗﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺧﻴﺎﻝ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬
‫ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻛﺎ ِﺭ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﻭﺡ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ‬ ‫ﻻﻳﺐﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﻣﻲﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺧﻼﻕ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺧﻼﻗﻴﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺗﺤﻮﻝ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ‬ ‫»‪ «x‬ﻭ »‪ «not x‬ﺳﺮ ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻣﺴﺌﻮﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ‪ x‬ﺳﺮ‬ ‫»‪ «dx‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻳﻔﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ِ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺌﻮﻟﻴﺖ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻯ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺪﺭﻳﺞ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺑﭙﺬﻳﺮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﺩﻩ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﺟﺴﺎﺭﺕ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺷﻰ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻱ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﻧﺪ؛ ﭘﺲ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ«‪،‬‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺑﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻭﺭﺍﻯ‬ ‫»ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻲ« ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ »ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻲ« ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﺷﻴﺎ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺴﻮﺳﺎﺕ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺯﺍﻭﻳﻪ‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﺪ ﺑﻲﻃﺮﻓﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ ﻭ ﺑﻔﻬﻤﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﻭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰﺍﻯ ﺍﺩﺑﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺭﻭﺡ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﻫﮕﻞ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺭﻭﺡ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻧﻬﺎﺩﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺎ ﻧﻤﻲﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻫﺎﻱ‬
‫ﻭﻯ ﻋﻴﻨﻴﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺟﺎ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺭﻭﺡ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﻲ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺒﻴﻨﻴﻢ ﻭ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻫﺎ ﺑﺎﻫﻢ‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩﻱ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﻭﺣﻤﻨﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺭﻭﺡ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻱ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻱ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻟﻜﺎﻥ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺳﻮژﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺗﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﻭ »ﺷﺪﻥ« ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻳﻚ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻌﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺗﺰﺭﻳﻖ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺭﻭﺡ ﺩﺭ ﺑﻄﻦ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﺜﻞ ژﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﻭ ﻫﺮ ﻧﻘﻄﻪ ﺳﺮﺷﺎﺭ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻠﻮﻝ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺁﻥ ﺳﻠﻮﻝ ﺗﺒﺪﻝ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﺎ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻱ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺳﻮژﺓ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺭﻭﺡ ﺩﺭ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺍﻳﺪﻩﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻠﻮﻯ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺭﻭﺡ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ؛ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﺎ ﻧﮕﺮﺵ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ‪» ،‬ﺭﻭﺡ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻣﻲﺑﺮﺩ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻲ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﻣﻦ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺑﮋﻩ‬
‫ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻝ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻲﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ »ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻲ« ﺷﻜﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻜﺎﻑ ﺧﻮﺭﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﮕﺮﺷﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻭ ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﮕﺮﺵ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ‪ ،‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻲ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺑﺮﺍﻱ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻣﺎ؛ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻭ ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﭼﻨﺪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻝ ﺧﻮﺩ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺁﻥ ﻧﮕﺮﺷﻲ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻭ ﻋﻠﻢ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻔﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻃﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﻣﻲﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺮﻭﻛﺎﺳﺖ ﻣﻲﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦﺟﺎ ﺣﻘﺎﻳﻖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﻭ ﻋﻠﻢ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺒﻊ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﻣﻨﺒﻊ ﺣﻘﺎﻳﻖ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻭﻝ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻣﺠﺎﺯﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﻭﻝ ﻣﺠﺎﺯﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﺎﺣﺚ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻭ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻓﺮﻭﻛﺎﺳﺖ ﺁﻥ‪ .‬ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ »ﺑﻮﺩﻥ« ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺗﺎ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺛﺮﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫»ﺣﻀﻮﺭ« ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﮕﺮﺵ ﺍﻓﻼﻃﻮﻧﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻳﻌﻨﻲ »ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ«‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺍﺩﺑﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻱ ﻧﺰﺩ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؛ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ »ﺑﻮﺩﻥ« ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻱ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﺷﻴﺎ ﺳﺮﻭﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺩﺑﻲ‬
‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩﺍﻱ ﺭﺍ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻲﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻣﻲﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺍﺷﺒﺎﺡ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻑ ﺯﺩ؛ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ُﻣﺮﺩﮔﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻫﻨﻮﺯ ﻧﻴﺎﻣﺪﮔﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻧﺸﺎﻧﻪﻫﺎ ﻭ ‪...‬‬ ‫ﺑﻪ »ﺷﺪﻥ«‪» ،‬ﭘﺎﺭﺍﺩﻭﻛﺲ«‪ ،‬ﻭ »ﺗﺨﻴﻠﻲ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻣﻲﻛﻨﺪ«‬
‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﺟﺰﻣﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻃﻮﺭﻯ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻄﻖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﻰ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺳﺨﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺒﻴﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﺘﻦ ﻋﻠﻤﻰ‬
‫ﺑﻰﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻉ ﺑﻪ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻟﻮﻳﻴﺰ ﻛﺮﻭﻝ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﺳﺮﻭﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﺑﺎ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰﻫﺎ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻧﻴﺰ‬
‫ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺁﻟﻴﺲ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺮﺯﻣﻴﻦ ﻋﺠﺎﻳﺐ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺪﻭﻳﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺟﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﻳﻤﻦ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺗﻘﺪﻡ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺍﺭﺟﺎﻋﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺎﺩﻭﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺍﺩﺑﻰ‬ ‫ﺷﺎﻋﺮ ﺍﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺭﺍ ﺧﺴﺘﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮﻭﺯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﻧﮕﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺍﺩﺑﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺤﻮﺭ ﻣﻨﻄﻖ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﻳﺰﺍﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻣﺘﻦ ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺧﻴﺎﻟﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺩﺑﻰ ﺑﻴﻨﺪﻳﺸﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﺣﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻭﻳﮋﻩ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ‪ ،‬ﺷﻴﻤﻰ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺯﻳﺴﺖﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮ ﭘﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻴﺎﻝﺑﺎﻓﻰﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺧﻴﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻤﻰ‪.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪86‬‬

 ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﻭ ﻏﺮﻳﺰﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﺘﻴﻼﻯ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭ ﻧﻬﻰ‬ ‫ﻧﮕﺮﺵ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﭼﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﺁﻥ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺤﻰ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﺠﻴﺐ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺯﻳﺮﺍ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺎﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺧﻼﻕ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻧﻪ ﻣﻨﻘﺎﺩ‪ ،‬ﻓﻌﺎﻝ ﺑﺎﺭ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻧﻪ ﻣﻨﻔﻌﻞ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻼ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪﺍﻯ ﻳﺎ ﺧﺒﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺻﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺻ ً‬
‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺩﺑﻰ ﻭ ﻫﻨﺮﻯ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺰﻳﻦ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺷﻜﺎﻝ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻛﻤﻚ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ‬ ‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﻭﺍﭘﺴﻴﻦ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺮﺑﻰ ﺍﺷﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺮﺑﻰ ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﻓﺮﺍ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﻭ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺧﻴﺎﻝ« ﻧﺎﻡ ﻧﻬﺎﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺘﻮﺣﺎﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﻔﻜﺮﺵ ﺭﺍ »ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ‪ ethics‬ﻭ ‪ ،morality‬ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﻭ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ‬ ‫ﻣﻜﻴﻪ ﺻﺮﺍﺣﺘ ًﺎ ﺍﻋﻼﻡ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺧﻴﺎﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺳﻌﻰ‬
‫ﺯﻭﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺱ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻗﻮﺓ ﺧﻴﺎﻝ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻔﺲ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﻴﺎﻝ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺩﻫﻴﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﭼﺮﺍ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺮﺑﻰ ﺍﻇﻬﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻴﺎﻝ ﺑﺮﺯﺥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻭﻳﮋﮔﻰ ﺑﺮﺯﺥ‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺯﺥ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﻋﺪﻡ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﺯﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ »ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺘﻦ« ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻧﻔﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻭ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺮﺑﻰ‬
‫ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﺍﻇﻬﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻧﻤﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻃﻮﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﺧﻮﺏ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﻭﻍ ﻧﮕﻮﻳﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻝ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺧﻴﺎﻝ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺟﺰ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺧﻴﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺩﻭﺳﺖ ﺑﺪﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻣﺎ ﺷﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﺯ ﻋﺪﻡ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺧﻴﺎﻝ ﺑﺮﺯﺥ‬
‫ﻃﻮﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻭﺍﻧﻤﻮﺩ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺣﻖ ﻭ ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻮ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺳﻮ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ‬
‫ﺷﺮﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺷﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﺒﻮﺩﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ‪ِ ،‬‬ ‫ﺧﺪﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﻗﻴﺎﺱ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺗﺨﻴﻞ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺧﻠﻖ )ﺗﺨﻴﻞ( ﻛﺮﺩ‬
‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﺪﻑ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻳﻜﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺯﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻏﻢ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻴﻬﻴﻠﻴﺴﻢ ﻫﻤﺬﺍﺕ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﻗﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ‪،‬ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ‪،‬ﻟﻮﻳﻨﺎﺱ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ 2.‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺮﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﺤﻮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮگ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺷﺨﺺ ﺭﺍ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥ ﺗﺎ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻩﺍﻯ ﻟﻜﺎﻥ‪،‬ﻭ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺮﺑﻰ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﻣﻰ ﺩﺍﻧﺪ؛ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﷲ‪،3‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻛﺴﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﺠﻠﻰ ﺍﷲ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺧﻴﺎﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻳﺪﺍ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﮔﺮﻳﺰ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻴﻬﻴﻠﻴﺴﻢ‬
‫ﺧﺪﺍ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﻧﻤﻰﻣﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻭ ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻴﻬﻴﻠﻴﺴﻢ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺗﺠﻠﻰ ﺧﺪﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ ﻣﺨﻠﻮﻗﻰ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺁﻥ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﺪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖﻣﺤﻮ ِﺭﻏﺮﺑﻰ‬ ‫ﻏﻤﺒﺎﺭ ﺩﭼﺎﺭ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﮔﻔﺘﻪﺍﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﺪ ﻣﻌﺪﻭﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﮔﻔﺘﻪﺍﻳﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻌﺎﺭﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﻟﻮﻳﻨﺎﺱ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﮕﻮﻳﻴﺪ »ﻧﻪ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻣﻌﺪﻭﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ« ﺑﺎﺯ ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﮔﻔﺘﻪﺍﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺌﻮﻟﻴﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻴﺎﻳﻴﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰﺍﻗﺪﺍﻡﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺧﻴﺎﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺩﻭ ﻗﺴﻢ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﻣﺘﺼﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺑﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﺑﺒﺮﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ؟ ﺁﻧﻬﺎﻣﻨﺘﻘﺪﺁﻥﻧﻴﻬﻴﻠﻴﺴﻤﻰ‬ ‫ﺣﻴﻮﺍﻧﺎﺕ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻣﻨﻔﺼﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﺧﻴﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﻌﻀﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ 4«. ...‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺮﺑﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺧﻴﺎﻝ ﻣﻨﻔﺼﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻦ ﻭ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻛﺮﺩ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﮕﻞ‪ ،‬ﺳﺎﺭﺗﺮ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﺧﻰ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺷﺘﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺑﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺳﺘﻨﺒﺎﻁ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻫﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺌﻮﻟﻴﺖ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻟﻮﻳﻨﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﻳﺪﺍ‪ ،‬ﻫﺎﺑﺮﻣﺎﺱ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﺍﺕ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺼﺪﺍﻕ ﺧﻴﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻬﻢ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻴﺎﻟﻰ ﻫﺴﺖ‬
‫ﻭ ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﺭﻭﺭﺗﻰ‪ .‬ﺑﻌﻀﻰ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﻫﻨﺮﻣﻨﺪﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﻮﺍﻧﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﻣﻼ ﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻨﻔﺼﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻇﺮﻑ ﺫﻫﻦ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﻳﻨﺎﻣﻴﺖﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻌﻀﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺁﺭﺍﻡﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺻﺒﻮﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؛ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻠﻘﺖ ﺗﺨﻴﻞ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺁﺩﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺬﺍﺑﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﺩﻡﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺑﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺷﻤﺎ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻓﺮﺯﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺧﺪﺍ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﺧﻴﺎﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻋﻘﻞ‪ .‬ﺧﻠﻘﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺑﺮ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺩﻭﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﺪ ﺩﻭﺳﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺷﺒﻴﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؟‬ ‫ﺑﺨﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﻻﻯ ﺳﺮ ﻛﺴﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺨﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭﺗﻮﻥﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؛ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍﻯ ﻋﺎﻟﻢ ﺳﺘﺎﺭﮔﺎﻥ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻭ ﻣﺂﺧﺬ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺶ ﺷﻜﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﺗﺼﺎﻝ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻘﻠﻰ‬
‫‪ .1‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺭﺗﻴﻦ ﻫﺎﻳﺪﮔﺮ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﻜﺮﻳﻢ ﺭﺷﻴﺪﻳﺎﻥ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻨﻔﺼﻞ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺧﺪﺍ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻝﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﻧﻰ‪.1389 ،‬‬ ‫ﻋﻘﻼﻧﻰ ﺧﻠﻖ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻠﻖ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺷﻌﺒﺪﻩﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .2‬ﺍﻟﻔﺘﻮﺣﺎﺕﺍﻟﻤﻜﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻴﻲﺍﻟﺪﻳﻦ ﺍﺑﻦﻋﺮﺑﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﺮﻭﺕ‪ :‬ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺐ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺳﻌﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ‪.2006 ،‬‬
‫ﺍﺣﻴﺎ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﺧﻴﻠﻰ ﺯﻭﺩ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺟﺬﺍﺑﻴﺖﻫﺎﻳﺶ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺖﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺍﻣﻮﺷﻰ ﺳﭙﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻭ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫* ﺩﻛﺘﺮﺍﻱ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻩ ﻋﻼﻣﻪ ﻃﺒﺎﻃﺒﺎﻳﻰ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻛﺴﻞ ﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺟﺬﺍﺏﺗﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻃﻠﺐ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻲ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.80‬‬ ‫‪.1‬‬ ‫ﺷﮕﻔﺖﺁﻭﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺑﻦ ﻋﺮﺑﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﻳﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻔﺘﻮﺣﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻜﻴﺔ ‪،‬ﺝ ‪ ،2‬ﺹ ‪.313‬‬ ‫‪.2‬‬
‫ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺌﻮﻟﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﺑﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ‬ ‫‪.5‬‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.309‬‬ ‫‪.3‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﻭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.442‬‬ ‫‪.4‬‬
‫ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺪﻑ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻯ ﺭﻫﺎ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪87 1393‬‬

 ‫‪1‬‬
‫ﻃﻮﻻﻧﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻗﺮﻥ‬
‫ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ِ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳ ّﻨﺖ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬
‫ﺳﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻫﻰ ﻣﺘﻌ ّﺪﺩﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺪﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺴﺘﻢ‪ّ ،‬‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﻭ ّ‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﭘﮋﻭﻫﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﻭ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﻓﻜﺮ‬
‫ﺗﻔﻜﺮ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻭﺍﺧﺮ ﻗﺮﻥ ﻧﻮﺯﺩﻩ ﺑﺎﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ّ‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﺳﻪ ﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪:‬‬
‫ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﺍ ّﻭﻝ‪ :‬ﺍﺯ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﻭﺍﺧﺮ ﻗﺮﻥ ﻧﻮﺯﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺍﻭﺍﻳﻞ ﻗﺮﻥ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ‪ :‬ژﻭﻝ ﻻﮔﻨﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﻴﻞ ﺁﮔﻮﺳﺖ ﺷﺎﺭﺗﻴﻪ ﺁﻟﻦ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺴﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ّ .‬‬
‫ﻟﺌﻮﻥ ﺑﺮﻭﻧﺸﻮﻳﻚ ﻭ ﻭﻳﻜﺘﻮﺭ ﺩﻟﺒﻮﺱ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﺗﻌﻠّﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﺩﻭﻡ‪ :‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻭﺍﺧﺮ ﺩﻫﺔ ﭘﻨﺠﺎﻩ ﺗﺎ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺒ ًﺎ ﺩﻫﺔ ‪ 1980‬ﺭﺍ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺩﺭﺱﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﺮﺩﻳﻨﺎﻥ ﺍَﻟﻜﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﺭﺳﻴﺎﻝ ﮔِﺮﻭ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻜﺴﻨﺪﺭ ﻣﺘﺮﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻟﻮﺋﻰ ﺁﻟﺘﻮﺳﺮ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻣﺘﺪﺍﺩ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﺍﻭﻝ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥ ﺳﻮﻡ‪ :‬ﻋﺼﺮ ﺷ ّﺪﺕﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﻴﺌﺮ ﻣﺸﻘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺗﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﻟﻴﺒﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺌﺮ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻴﺲ ﻣﻮﺭﻭ ﻭ ﺁﻧﺘﻮﻧﻴﻮ ﻧﮕﺮﻯ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﺷﺎﺧﺺ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭﺭﺍﻥﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻭﻡ ﻭ ﺳﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﺷﺎﻫﺪ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻯ ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺔ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺸﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻧﻪ )‪(immanentisme‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﻧﻘﺪ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﺑﺎﻭﺭﻯ‬
‫)‪ (transcendantalisme‬ﻫﺴﺘﻴﻢ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﻛﺸﻒ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﺓ‬
‫ﻧﻈﺮﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﻮﺭﻳﺖ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﻣﺔ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻠّﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﻤﺔ ﺩﻭﻡ ﻗﺮﻥ ﺑﻴﺴﺖ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ ﺁﻧﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯﺧﻮﺍﻩ ﻫﻠﻨﺪﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺑﻦ ﺧﻠﺪﻭﻥ‬
‫»ﭼﺮﺧﺶ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ« ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ‬

‫ﺑﺎﺯﺧﻮﺍﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎﻯ ﺩﻫﺔ ‪1960‬ﻡ‪ ،‬ﺑﻬﺮﻩﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻧﺘﺎﻳﺠﻰ‬

‫ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﮕﻰ‪:‬‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ‪ ،‬ﺍﺧﻼﻕ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﻴﺮﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻮﻳﻨﻰ ﺳﻮﻕ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺳ ّﻨﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﻪ ِ‬
‫ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ ﻧﺎﻛﻴﻬﺎﻧﻰ )‪(acosmic‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﻣﺎﻧﺘﻴﺴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻟﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻏﻴﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺗﻤﻬﻴﺪﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻪﺩﺳﺖ ﻫﮕﻞ‪ ،‬ﺗﺤﻜﻴﻢ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺭﻳﺸﻪ ﺩﻭﺍﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﺳﻴﺮ‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﺩﻫﺔ ‪ ،1960‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺘﺔﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺘﻰ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﺘﻮﻧﻴﻮ ﻧﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﭘﻨﺞ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﻳﺴﻢ ﺳ ّﻨ ِ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺗﺠﺪﻳﺪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ﺗﺠﺪﻳﺪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻳﺎ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ‬ ‫*‬
‫ﺭﺿﺎ ﻧﺠﻒﺯﺍﺩﻩ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ »ﻋﻤﻖ« ﺑﻪ »ﺳﻄﺢ«‬
‫‪najafzadeh.reza@gmail.com‬‬
‫ﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﻳﺴﻢ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺘﻰ ﺳﻄﺤﻰ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻇﺎﻫﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﺍﺭﺍﺋﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺓ »ﺳﻄﺢ«‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻪ ﺷﺪ؛ ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻓﻖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺟﺒﺮ ﻭ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻨﻄﺒﻖ‬
‫ﭘﻴﺶ ﺭﻭ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﺮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺘﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺟﺒﺮ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎ ِﺭ ِ‬
‫)‪ (liberta dell` a-venire‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺁﻥ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺗﺠﺪﻳﺪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻏﺎﻳﺖﻣﻨﺪﻯ ﻳﺎ ﻫﺪﻑﻣﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻏﺎﻳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻫﺪﻑ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ ﻭ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺑﺪﻝ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ »ﻇﺎﻫﺮﻯ«‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﺘﻮﺍﻯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻏﺎﻳﺖ ﻗ ّﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪88‬‬

 ‫ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻓﻜﺮ ﺍﻭ ﺍﺳﺘﻮﺍﺭ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺓ‬ ‫ﺗﻤﻠّﻜﺶ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺑﻜﻮﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ‬
‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻗﺮﻥ ﻫﻔﺪﻫﻤﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻟﻔﺎﻅ ﻭ ﺗﻌﺎﺑﻴﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﻜﻮﻩ ﻧﺴﺘﻮﺩﻩ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻧﻈﻢ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻫﻢ ﺷﻜﺴﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﻪﻃﺮﺯﻯ ﺍﻏﺮﺍﻕﺁﻣﻴﺰ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻏﺎﻳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻫﺪﻑ ﺗﺎﺑﻌﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺭﺍ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺗﻮﺻﻴﻒ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺳﺮﮔﻴﺠﺔ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻧﺪﻫﻰ ﻋﺎﻟَﻢ ﺑﺪﻝ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﻔﻌﺎﻝ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺴﺘﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﺳﻮﻕ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﻴﻬﻮﺩﻩ ﺗﻼﺵ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﮕﺮﻳﺰﻧﺪ؛‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺪ‪ .‬ﻓﻌﻞ ﺑﺎ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﺴﻴﺢ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﺰﺭگﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻓﻼﺳﻔﻪ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘ ًﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫‪ ...‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻓﻖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻌﻞ ﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺷﺪ؛ ﻓﻌﻞ ﻭ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺟﺰ ﺭﺳﻮﻻﻥ ﻭ ﺣﻮﺍﺭﻳﻮﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻣﺰ ﺩﻭﺭ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺷﺪﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺕ ﻧﺎﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺍﻭ »ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ«‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ....‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺪﻳﺪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺳﻮﻡ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻖ‬
‫ﻃﺮﺍﺣﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺓ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ّ ،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻯ ﺍﻟﮕﻮﻫﺎﻯ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﺖ )ﻳﻚ‪ ،‬ﭼﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ(‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ‬
‫ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻧﺎﺏﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺓ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ‪ .‬ﮔﺴﺘﺮﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺴﻠﻴﻢ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼ‬ ‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﻗﺘﺪﺍﺭ )ﺣﺎﻛﻤﻴﺖ(‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻳﺔ‬ ‫ﻫﺎﺑﺰﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺽ‬ ‫ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻖ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻋﺎﺩﻩ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ؛ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﻩﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻛﻤﺘﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﻧﮕﺮﻳﺴﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻄﺮﺡ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻨﻚ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‬
‫‪2‬‬
‫ﻣﻴﺰﺍﻥ ﺍﻭﻫﺎﻡ‪ ،‬ﺍﺣﺴﺎﺳﺎﺕ ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺷﺎﻳﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻛﺎﺕ ﺧﻄﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻟﻘﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻫﻢ ﺷﻜﺴﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺪﻳﻞ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺷﺎﺧﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﻪﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺎ ِﺭ ﺧُ ﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻼﺷﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﻘ ّﺪﻣﺎﺗﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻓﻬﻢ ﺍﺑﻌﺎﺩﻯ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﻣﻮﻛﺮﺍﺳﻰ ﺍﻧﺒﻮﻩﺧﻠﻖ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﻳﺴﻢ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﻧﺎﻇﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﺛﺮﮔﺬﺍﺭﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻙ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ُﮔﺸﺎﻳﺶ ﻣﻴﻠﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩﺣﻜﻢ ِ‬
‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥﻧﺴﻞ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻚﻧﮕﺎﺭﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ )ﻻﻳﺐ ﻧﻴﺘﺲ‪ ،‬ﻛﺎﻧﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺳﺘﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺩﻭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻫﻴﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ(‪ ،‬ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺶ ﻭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ »ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺩﺭﻫﻢ‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺪﻳﺪﻧﻈﺮ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ ﻭ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻌﺪﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺏ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻣﺤﻴﻄﻰـﻛﻴﻬﺎﻧﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ِ‬
‫ّ‬ ‫ﻛﺮﺍﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻰ‬ ‫ﻏﻨﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺮﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻓﻖ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻣﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺍﻣﺮ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥﻗﺪﻳﻢ‬
‫ﺲ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﺲ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﺆﺳ ِ‬
‫ﻣﻔﺼﻞﺑﻨﺪﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﻭ ّ‬
‫ﻭ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻧﻮﺷﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺍﺳﻮﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻫﺪﺍﻑ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻠﻄﻨﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻮﻫﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺶ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻ ًﺎ ﺩﻭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﺑﻴﻨﺎﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺧﻼﻕ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺧﻼ ِﻕ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﺍ ِﻩ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻣﺪﻯ ﻭ »ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ« ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭼﺸﻢﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ‪ ،‬ﺗﺒﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﻛﺮﺩ؛ ﻳﻜﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻫﺮﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻏﺎﻳﺖﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻋﺮﺽ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﻡ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺗﺠﺪﻳﺪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﭘﻨﺠﻢ ﺑﺮ ﺗﺠﺪﻳﺪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻦ ﺗﻜﻴﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮﻯ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻋﺎﻟَﻢ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﻮﺷﺶ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺎ ّﺩﻩﺑﺎﻭﺭﻯ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎ ّﺩﻩ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻐﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﺁﻫﻨﮕﻰ‬ ‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻡ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺘﺤﻜﺎ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺲ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻴﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﺆﺳ ِ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩ ﻳﺎ ِّ‬
‫ّ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺗﺰ ﺩﻭﻡ‬ ‫ﺧﻼﻕ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺑﺎﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﺎ ّﺩﻩ ﺍﺯ ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ّ‬
‫ﺩﻛﺘﺮﻯﺍﺵ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﺔ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺗﻜﻤﻴﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺗﺒﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﮕﺮﻳﺴﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﺎﺯﻭﻛﺎ ِﺭ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ‬
‫ﻣﺎ ّﺩﻩﺑﺎﻭﺭﺍﻧﺔ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻠﻘ ِّﻰ ﻣﺘﺎﻣﻮﺭﻓﻴﻚ ﻳﺎ ﺩﮔﺮﺩﻳﺴﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻋﺎﻟَﻢ‬
‫ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﻫﻢ ﻭ ﻧﺎﻫﻤﮕﻮﻥ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﻭﻯ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺏ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻣﻤﻠﻮ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻤﻬﻴﺪ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦﭼﻨﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻰ‬ ‫»ﻧﮕﺮﺵﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﺎﻡ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺣﻞﻧﺸﺪﻩ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‬ ‫‪1‬‬
‫ﻛﻤﺎﻝ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺳﻴﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺟﺰﺗﺮ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻭﻯ ﻣﺘﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﻣﺸﺨّ ﺼﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‬ ‫‪2‬‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔﻋﻤﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﻭ ُﺟﻨﮓﮔﻮﻧﺔ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺛﺮﮔﺬﺍﺭﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﻪ‬ ‫ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‬‫ّ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺩﺳﺖﻛﻢ ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﻗﺪﻳﻢ ﻭ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﻞ ﺩﻭﻡ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﻌ ّﺪﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺏ ّ‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﻮﻳﻦ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻭﻯ ﻭ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ‬ ‫ﻧﻮﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻ ًﺎ ﺩﻭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﻛﺮﺩ؛ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺗﺰ ﺩﻭﻡ ﺩﻛﺘﺮﻯﺍﺵ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﻭ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﭘﮋﻭﻫﺎﻥ »ﻏﻴﺮﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ« ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻤﻴﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻰ ﻣﻮﺟﺰﺗﺮ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻛﻤﺘﺮ ّ‬ ‫ﺍﺧﻼﻕ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ .‬ﻫﻢﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻭﻯ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ ﻣﻬﻢ »ﺳﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺍﺛﺮﻯ ﭼﻪﺑﺴﺎ ﻏﻴﺮﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮﻯ ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ﺍﻗﺒﺎﻝ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ« ﺭﺍ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺳﻤﻴﻨﺎﺭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﺮﮔﺰﺍﺭ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﭘﮋﻭﻫﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﻪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﮕﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﻳﻜﻞ ﻫﺎﺭﺕ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ً‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﻳﺴﻢ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻭﻯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻌﻀﺎ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﻃﻮﻻﻧﻰﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻓﺼﻞ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺮﺡ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺎﺭﻛﺖ ﻓﻠﻴﻜﺲ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻣﺘﺠﻠّﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‪،‬‬
‫ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﻟﻄﻒ‪ ،‬ﻫﻢﭼﻮﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﺟﻠﺪﻯ ﺳﺮﻣﺎﻳﻪﺩﺍﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺷﻴﺰﻭﻓﺮﻧﻰ ﺑﻮﻳﮋﻩ ﻫﺰﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺳﻠﺴﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻳﺎﺩﺩﺍﺷﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻘ ّﺪﻣﺎﺗﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮﻯ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻓﻼﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻟﺒ ّﺘﻪ ﻭﺍﭘﺴﻴﻦ ﺍﺛﺮ ﻭﻯ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺳﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﻓﻘﻂ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻯﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﺏ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪89 1393‬‬

‫ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣ ّﺘﻰ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻝ ‪ 1968‬ﻡ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻻﻳﺐ ﻧﻴﺘﺴﻰ؛ ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻻﻳﺐ ﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﺪﻳﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺑﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﻳﺮﻳﺎﺏ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﻣﻌﺪﻭﺩ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺗﺎ ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﻋﻤﺮ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺔ ﻣﻘﺪﻣﻪ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﻳﺎ ﻓﺼﻞﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﺮﭼﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺼﻠﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺎﻡ »ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ« ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﻣﺤﺾ‪،‬‬‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﺑﺎﺯﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻢﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ِ‬ ‫ﻭﻗﻮﻑ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺔ ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻓﺼﻞ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﺑﻪﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺹ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺵﺑﻴﻦ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫‪6‬‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻘﻄﺔ ﺗﻤﺮﻛﺰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ‪expression‬‬
‫ﻃﺮﺡ ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ ﺑﻪﻛﻠﻰ ﻳﻚ »ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺓ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻭﻯ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 3.‬ﻃﺒﻖ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮﻯ ﺩﻭ ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪:‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻓﺮﺩ ﺑﻪﺷﻴﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻳﻜﻰ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﺩﻻﻟﺖ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﮔﺴﺘﺮﻩ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ 7«.‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﻭ ﺗﻠﻘ ِّﻰ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻗﺾ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺍژﻩ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻜﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮﻯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﺩﻭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺳﻄﺢ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻳﺪﺓ »ﻃﺮﺡ« )‪ (planifier/plan‬ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻢ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﻃﺮﺡ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮﻯ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻤﺎﻥ ﻳﺎ ﺭﻳﺸﺔ ِ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﻯ‪ .‬ﻃﺮﺡ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼﻳﻰ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺳ ّﻨ ِﺖ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮﻯ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻛﺴﭙﺮﺳﻴﻮﻧﻴﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻃﺮﺡ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻃﺮﺡ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﻯ ِ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﺎﻫﻨﮓ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺗﺎ ﭼﻪ ﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﻩ ﻣﻮﺿِ ِﻊ ﺍﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳ ّﻨﺖ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬
‫‪4‬‬
‫»ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﻰ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪﺧﻮﺑﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﻭ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳ ّﻨﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻣﻮﺱ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮﻯ ﻧﻪ »ﺻﺪﻭﺭ« ﻭ »ﻓﻴﺾ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺎﺕ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﭘﻴﻤﻮﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻋﺮﺽﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﺷﺘﺪﺍﺩﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫)‪ُ (intensive ordinates‬ﭘﺮ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﻰ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻﮔﺎﻩ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﻼ ﺁﺷﺘﻰ ﻧﻜﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻪﺟﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻥ ﮔﻼﻭﻳﺰ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ‬
‫‪8‬‬
‫ﺷﺪ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ‬
‫‪3‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻜﺘﺔ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ‬
‫ﻻﻳﺐ ﻧﻴﺘﺴﻰ؛‬
‫)‪ (éthique/ethics‬ﻭ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻴﺎﺕ )‪(moralité/morality‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ »ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺭﺑﻄﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻴﺎﺕ‬ ‫ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺭﻓﺘﺎﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ )‪ (ethology‬ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ؛‬ ‫ﻻﻳﺐ ﻧﻴﺘﺲ‬
‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺳﺮﻋﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺁﺭﺍﻡ‪ ،‬ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭﻣﺪﻳﻮﻥ‬
‫ﻭ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﭘﺬﻳﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺓ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﺎ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ‪ :‬ﺷﻤﺎ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﻴﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﭼﻪ ﺧﻴﺮ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺷﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺷﻤﺎ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﻴﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺪﻥ ﻳﺎ ﺫﻫﻦ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﭼﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﻯ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺺ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺨّ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻦ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻴ‬
‫ّ‬ ‫ﺍﻯ‬‫ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻜﻨﺪ‪ 9«.‬ﺑﻪ ﻳﺎﺩ ﺑﻴﺎﻭﺭﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﺎ ِﺩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻓﺮﺩﻳﻨﺎﻥ ﺍَﻟﻜﻴﻪ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫»ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺢ« ﻭ »ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ«‪ .‬ﻭﻯ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﺪﺓ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮﻯ ﺑﺮ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺑﻴﻮﻟﻮژﻳﺴﻢ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ِ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﻮﻕﻫﺎﻯ ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺑﻴﻮﻟﻮژﻯ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺗﺤ ّﻮﻝ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﻻﻳﺐ ﻧﻴﺘﺲ ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮﮔﺬﺍﺭ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻏﻴﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻔﺎﺳﻴﺮ ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﻏﺮﺑﻰ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﺪﻩ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺩﻭ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪ ﺣﺎﺋﺰ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻧﻈﺮﻯ ﺑﺰﺭﮔﻰ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺴﻨﺠﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﺪﺓ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﺮﺯﻯ ﭘﺮﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻠّﻰ ﻧﺎﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺎ »ﺻﺪﻭﺭ« ﻭ »ﺍﻓﺎﺿﻪ« ﻭ‬
‫‪5‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺷﺄﻧﻰ ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﻪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ :‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻧﻪ ﻭ‬ ‫»ﺗﺸﺮﻳﺢ« ﻭ »ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ« ﻳﻜﻰ ﭘﻨﺪﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻧﺎﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻧﻪ‪ .‬ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ‬ ‫ﺑﻪﻋﻼﻭﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﻮﺭ ﺗﺄ ّﻣﻼﺕ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ »ﺟﻮﻫﺮ« ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺭﺍﻧﺔ »ﻏﺮﻳﺰﻩ« ﺩﺭﻧﻴﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ 10.‬ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺔ ﺷﺄﻥ ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﺔ‬ ‫»ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻴﻞﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﺑﻌﺎﺩ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﻭ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺣﺼﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ »ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻣﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻧﺒﺎﻝ ﺍﻳﺪﺓ ﻛﻠّﻰ ﻭ ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﺍﺟﺰﺍ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭﺍﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﻌﻄﻮﻑﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ‪،‬‬
‫ﻋﺎﻃﻔﻰ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻓﺎﻗﺪ ﺍﻳﺪﺓ »ﻛﻞ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﺮﺩ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺷﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺩﺳﺖﻛﻢ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﺪﻥ ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺓ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺟﺰء ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺳﺎﻛﻦ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻘﺶﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﻈﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﻭﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻜﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺭﺩ ﻳﺎ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﻣﻘﻮﻟﻪ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .1 :‬ﺳﺮﺷﺖ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﮔﺮ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﻯ ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ‪. 2‬‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢﺑﻨﺪﻯ‪» ،‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰﺑﻮﺩﻥ« ﺩﻭ ﻗﺴﻢ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﮔﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻭﻯ ﺳﺮﺷﺖ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻳﺎ ﺍﺷﻴﺎﻯ ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻻﻳﺐ ﻧﻴﺘﺲ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪90‬‬

 ‫»ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﺍﻳﺪﺋﻮﻟﻮژﻯ« ﻭ »ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ« ﺑﻪﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﺍ ّﻭﻝ ﻛﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﻣﻔﺎﻫﻴﻢ‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺄﺳﻴﺲ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﭘﺎﻳﺔ ﺍﻧﺴﺠﺎﻡ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ؛ ﺑﻪﺷﺮﻃﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﺎ ﻗﺪﺭﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ ﺳﺘﺎﻳﺶ‬
‫ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺒﻮﻩﺧﻠﻖ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻴﻢ ﻣﺸﺘﺎﻗﺎﻧﻪ ﻣﻨﺘﻈ ِﺮ ﻫﺮﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﻳﮕﺎﻧﺔ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻓﻰ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﺎﻥ ﻣﻌﻤﻮ ًﻻ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺑﻪﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻓﻌﻞ ﻣﻘﺎﻭﻣﺖ ﻭ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﺑﺎﺷﻴﻢ؛ ﻭ ﺣ ّﺘﻰ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﻭﻩ ﺩﻭﻡ ﻛﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻰ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬
‫ﻭﺍژﺓ »ﻋﺸﻖ« ﺭﺍ ﺩﻭﺳﺖ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺣ ّﺘﻰ ﺍﮔﺮ ﭘﺴﺎﻣﺪﺭﻥﻫﺎ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻨﻰ ﺟﻨﺒﺸﻰ ﻭ ﺳﺎﺋﻘﻰ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ‬ ‫ﻋﺎﻃﻔﻪﺍﻯ‪ ،‬ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻮﺍﻃﻒ‪ّ ،‬‬
‫ﺑﺮﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻣﻴﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺯﺍﻳﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﺭﺍ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻩﺍﻳﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ »ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﻳﺎﺭﻭﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺷﻮﺭ ﺗﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺣﺰﺏ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﺷﺘﻴﺎﻕ ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺗﻮﺍﺿﻊ ﻛﺎﺫﺑﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦﭼﻨﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻨﺤﺼﺮ ﺑﻪﻓﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺻﻴﻞ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﻋﺸﻖ ﺑﻪﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻣﻨﺪﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻋﺎﻃﻔﻪ ﺻﺤﺒﺖ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ؛ ﻋﺎﻃﻔﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ« ﺑﻪ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﻯ ﺑﻪﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ »ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ِ‬
‫‪13‬‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺎﺑﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺁﻣﻮﺯﺩ ﻛﻪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻧﺎﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﭘﺎﻳﻴﻦﺗﺮ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺘﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ ﺑﺎﺯﺧﻮﺍﻫﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ » ُﻗﻮﺍﻯ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ ﻭ‬
‫ﮔﺸﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ )ﻭ‬ ‫ﻭﻳﺮﺍﻥﮔ ِﺮ ﺑﻰﻧﻈﻴﺮ«‪ .‬ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻧﻘﺪ ﻭ ﻭﻳﺮﺍﻥﮔﺮﻯ ﺁﻧﺎﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺄﻳﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺷﺎﺩﻯ‪،‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺳﻨﺪ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﺩﺭ ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺶﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ( ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺁﻥ ّ‬ ‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮﺍﺑ ِﺮ ﻛﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻛﻴﺶ ﺗﺄﻳﻴﺪ ﻭ ﺷﺎﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﭼﺮﺍ ﻫﮕﻞ ﻧﻪ؟‬ ‫ﻫﺮﻯ ﻭﻟﻔﺴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺍﺩﻭﻳﻦ ﻛﺮﻟﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻟﺌﻮ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻭﺱ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻜﻪﺗﻜﻪ ﻭ ﺳﺮﻛﻮﺏ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻭ »ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ «.‬ﺍﻟﺒﺘﻪ ﻧﺒﺎﻳﺪ ﺩِﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺮﺍﻣﻮﺵ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻰﺟﺎﻟﺐ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﺎﺳ ًﺎ ﭘﺎﺭﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻤﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﺳﻮﻳﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻈﻴﻤﻰ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﺎﻥ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻭ ﺷﺎﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﺧﺼﻤﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ ﻫﮕﻞ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫»ﺧﺐ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ُ :‬‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺯﺍﻧﮕﺎﻥ ﻓﻠﻮﺭﺍﻧﺲ ﺳﺎﻝﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺩﻻﻟﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﻴﺮﺍﺙﺑ ِﺮ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﻳﻢ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﭘﺮﺳﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻫﮕﻞ ﻧﻪ؟ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻰ ﺟﺎﻟﺐ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪:‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﻷﺧﺮﻩ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫»ﺧُ ﺐ ﺑﺎﻷﺧﺮﻩ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻧﻘﺶ ﺧﺎﺋﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ! ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻧﻘﺶ ﺧﺎﺋﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺑﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺖ ﺳﻨﮕﻴﻦ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺠﺴﻢ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻫﮕﻞ ّ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ! ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺳﻨﮕﻴﻨﻰ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ؛ ﻭ ﻫﻢﺳﺎﺯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻏﺮﻕ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺪﺭﺍﺝ ﻣﺮگ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ «.‬ﻫﮕﻞ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻭ ﺩﻳﻦ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﺎﻅ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻃﺮﺯﻯ ُﻣﻬﻠِﻚ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻔﻰ ﺗﺴﻠﻴﻢ ﻛﻨﺪ‪» .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺗﺠﺴﻢ‬‫ﺩﺭ ﻫﮕﻞ ّ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﺎﻟﻜﺘﻴﻚ ﻧﻔﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺷﻨﻮﺩ«‪ .‬ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺘ ًﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻴﻦﺧﻮﺍﻫﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺖ‬ ‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺯﺑﺎﻥ ﺧﻴﺎﻧﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺧﻮﺍﻩ‬ ‫ﺑﺨﺶ ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺗﻨﺎﻗﺾ‪ ،‬ﻫﮕﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻟﻬﺎﻡ ِ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩﻥﺑﺎﺭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻨﮕﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺍﻩ ﺩﺭ ﭼﭗ؛ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻳﺖ؛ ﻫﻢﭼﻨﺎﻥﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫‪11‬‬
‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻏﺮﻕ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻨﻮﻛﺮﺍﺳﻰ ﻭ ﺑﻮﺭﻭﻛﺮﺍﺳﻰ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ‪.‬‬
‫‪4‬‬
‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﺮﻯ ﻭﻟﻔﺴﻮﻥ ﻭ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﻪ ﻣﺎﺭﺳﻴﺎﻝ ﮔِﺮﻭ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬
‫ﺳﻨﮕﻴﻨﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﻓﻴﻠﻮﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ ﺑﻪﺩﺳﺖ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻔﺎﺳﻴﺮ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‬
‫ﺗﻤﺎﻡ؛ ﻭ ﻫﻢﺳﺎﺯ‬ ‫ِﺣﻴﺎﻯ ﻓﻴﻠﻮﻟﻮژﻳﻚ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍ ِ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺑﺎ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻇﻬﻮﺭ ﺭﺳﻴﺪ‪ .‬ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﺁﻟﻜﺴﻨﺪﺭ ﻣﺘﺮﻭﻥ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻭ‬
‫ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻭ ﺩﻳﻦ ﻭ‬ ‫ﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺘﺔ ﺁﻏﺎﺯﻳﻦ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺎﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﻧﮕﺎﺷﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﭼﻬﺎﺭ‬
‫ﻧﻀﺞ ِ‬ ‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻣﻨﺪﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻨﺪﮔﺎﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻣﺘﺮﻭﻥ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻋﻤﺪﻩ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ؛ ﺩﻭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺖﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺩﻭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﺳﺎﻝ ‪ 1968‬ﻡ ﻣﻨﺘﺸﺮ ﻛﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺪﺭﺍﺝ ﻣﺮگ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻭ ًﻻ‪ :‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻓﻰ ﻣﺎﺗﺮﻳﺎﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﻗﻠﻢﺩﺍﺩ ﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﻮﻳﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺘﺎﺏﻫﺎ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺭﺍ ﻭﺍﺩﺍﺷﺘﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻫﻮﺍﻯ ﺩﻫﺔ ‪ 1960‬ﻡ‬
‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺪﺍﻥ ﻓﻬﻢ ﺭﺋﺎﻟﻴﺘﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺭﺍﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺮ ﻗﺪﺳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ َﻣﺘﺮﻭﻥ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮﻯ ّ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻨﻔّﺲ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺳﺎﻳﺔ ﺍﺑﺘﻜﺎ ِﺭ‬
‫ﺮﺍﻥ ﻗﺮﻭﻥ‬ ‫ﺛﺎﻧﻴ ًﺎ‪ :‬ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﺑﺰﺭﮔﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻗﺘﻔﺎﻯ ّ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜ ِ‬ ‫ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻭ ﻣﻜﺎﺗﺐ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﺘﺎﻟﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﭙﺎﻧﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﺘﺤﺪﻩ ﻭ‬
‫‪12‬‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺔ ﻳﻬﻮﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻏﻠﺐ ﺗﻔﺎﺳﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺮﻳﻜﺎﻯ ﻻﺗﻴﻦ ﺗﻜﺜﻴﺮ ﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﺩﺭ ﭘﮋﻭﻫﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﺎﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﻟﺔ »ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﭘﺴﺎﻣﺪﺭﻥﻫﺎ« ﻧﻮﺷﺘﺔ ﺁﻧﺘﻮﻧﻴﻮ ﻧﮕﺮﻯ )ﺩﺭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ‬
‫ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺴﺎﺋﻞ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻴﻤﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯ( ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺎﺗﻰ‪-‬ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺟﻴﺎﻧﻰ ﻭﺍﺗﻴﻤﻮ‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﻮﺗﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺑﻮﺩﺭﻳﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺭﺗﻰ‪ ،‬ﭘﺎﻭﻝ ﻭﻳﺮﻳﻠﻴﻮ ﻭ ﺑﺮﻭﻧﻮ ﻻﺗﻮﺭ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﺍﻣﺘﻨﺎﻉ ﺟﻤﻊ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺩﻳﺎﻧﺖ ﻭ ﻋﻘﻼﻧﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻳﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ ﺟﻤﻼﺕ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ‬
‫ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺍﺳﺘﻘﻼﻝ ﺫﺍﺗﻰ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﻘﺮﺍﺕ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﺎﻥﮔ ِﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﺮﺷﺖ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺗﺮﺑﻴﺖ ﻳﻬﻮﺩﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺍﻧﺶ ﻭﺳﻴﻌﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺏ ﻣﺘﻮﻥ ﻋﺒﺮﻯ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺣﻴﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯﺧﻮﺍﻫﻰ ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺘﺔ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺑﻨﻰﺍﺳﺮﺍﺋﻴﻞ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺩﻭﻟﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻳﻬﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻴﻢ ﺷﺮﻳﻌﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪:‬‬
‫ﻧﺺ ﻣﻘﺪﺱ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﺗﺄ ّﻣﻼﺕ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ‬‫ﻳﻬﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ّ‬ ‫ﻣﺪﻳﻮﻥ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﻣﺘﺮﻭﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﺸﻒ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻧﺺ ﻣﻘ ّﺪﺱ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﭘﺮﺗﻮ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﺔ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺭﻭﺷﻨﮕﺮﻯ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ ﺑﺎ ّ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ً‬
‫ﻣﺎ ﺍﺟﺎﺯﻩ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ »ﺍﻳﻦ« ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ؛ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺩﻗﻴﻘﺎ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪91 1393‬‬

‫ﻗﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻻﺯﻣﺔ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺳﺮﺍﺳﺮ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻓﺎﻉ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻴﺮﺍﺙ ﻓﻜﺮ ﻋﻘﻼﻧﻰ ﻳﻬﻮﺩﻯ ﻭ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻧﻮﻳﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﻓﺼﻞ ﺑﻴﺴﺘﻢ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻣﺠﺰﺍ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭﻯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺑﺰﺭگ‪ ،‬ﺁﺷﻜﺎﺭﺍ ﺑﺎ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺹ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻋﻘﻞﮔﺮﺍ ﻭ ﻧﺺﮔﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺩﻳﺎﻧﺖ ﻳﻬﻮﺩ ﺭﻭﻳﺎﺭﻭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺩﻭ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻋﻘﻞﺑﺎﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺣﻜﺎﻡ ﺗﺌﻮﻟﻮژﻳﻚ ﻭ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ‬
‫ﻭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺒﺎﻝ ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯﺧﻮﺍﻫﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻗﺮﺍﺩﺍﺩﮔﺮﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﺎﻧﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻳﻬﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺳﻼﻡ ﺑﺮ ﺳﺮ ﻣﻬﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﺳﻴﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﻧﺺ‬
‫ﭘﺮﺳﺶﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯﺧﻮﺍﻫﺎﻥ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻰ ﺩﺭﺧﻮﺭ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺳﻮﻳﺔ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻧﺎﺩﻳﺪﻩ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻤﻚ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻛﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻧﻮﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺟﻤﻠﻪ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﺛﺎﻟﺜ ًﺎ‪ :‬ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮﻣﻨﻮﺗﻴﻚ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ »ﭘﺴﺎﺳﻜﻮﻻﺭﻳﺴﻢ«‬
‫»ﻛﻮچﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪ :‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﮓ« ﺩﺭ ﻫﺰﺍﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺻﺎﻑ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪ ﻭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﺟﻌﻴﺖ ﻋﻘﻞ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﻭﺣﻰ‪،‬‬
‫ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻰ ﺍﺣﺘﻤﺎﻟﻰ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ :‬ﺩﺭ ﺑﻬﺘﺮﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺟﻌﻴﺘﻰ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺸﺮﻭﻁ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﺔ ﻋﻘﻼﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻠﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪-‬ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﻣﺘﻨﺎﻉ ﺟﻤﻊ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻭ ﻭﺣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺘﺔ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﺣﻰ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ »ﻳﻘﻴﻦ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ« ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪ ﻭﻯ‪،‬‬
‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻔﺮﻭﺿﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻣﺠﺪﺩ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻞ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺭﺳﺘﮕﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥﻫﺎ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻗﺎﺋﻢ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺑﻴﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪﻋﻼﻭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺍﻳﻠﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮﻯ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻳﺎ ﻧﻬﺎﺩ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‬ ‫ﺻﺤﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻄﻼﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫»ﺍﻃﺎﻋﺖ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻋﻘﻞ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ّ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺻﻞ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﺼﻮﺹ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺁﺛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺳﺨﻦ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ »ﻛﻮچﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪ :‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﮓ« ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺑﺮﺟﺴﺘﻪﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﺎﺷﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻮﺿِ ِﻊ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺳﻬﻢﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯـﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﻪ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯﺧﻮﺍﻫﻰ ﻭ ﺳ ّﻨﺖ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﻣﺸﺮﻭﻃﺔ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﺁﮔﺰﻳﻮﻣﺎﺗﻴﻚ ﺗﻨﻈﻴﻢ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺎﺗﻰ ـ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ‬‫ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎﺕ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ‪ :‬ﺩﻭﻟﺖ‪ ،‬ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ‪ِ ،‬‬
‫ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺟﻨﮕﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ ﺟﻨﮕﻴﺪﻥ ﻭ ﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺖ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻫﺮﻯ ﻭﻟﻔﺴﻮﻥ‬
‫ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ )ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ( ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻳﻚﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻭ ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻤﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺭﻭﺍﻗﻰﻣﺴﻠﻚ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ّ‬
‫ﻭ ﺧﺸﻮﻧﺖﭘﺮﻫﻴﺰﻯ ﭼﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺟﺰ ﺑﻪﻃﻮﺭ ﺳﻠﺒﻰ ﺳﺨﻨﻰ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺭﺳﻴﺎﻝ ﮔِﺮﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻣﻮﺱ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ )ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ( ﺟﻨﮓ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬
‫»ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺘﻰ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ« ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺳﻮﻳﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ »ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ«‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻀﻤﺤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺟﻠﻮﻯ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻓﻴﻠﻮﻟﻮژﻳﻜﻰ‬
‫ﺳﺨﻦ ﺿ ّﺪﻫﺎﺑﺰﻯ‪ ،‬ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺭﺍﺩﻳﻜﺎﻝ ﺭﻭﺯﮔﺎﺭ ﻣﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺑﻪﺩﺳﺖ ﺩﺍﺩﻧﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯﺧﻮﺍﻫﻰ ﺭﻭﺍﻗﻰﻣﺴﻠﻜﺎﻧﺔ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻳﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺳﺘﺮﺍﺗﮋﻳﺴﺖﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺳﺨﻦ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪﺷﻨﺎﺳﻨﺎﺳﺎﻧﺔ ﺿ ّﺪﻋﻘﻞ ﻗﺮﻭﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯ ﻓﻠﻮﺭﺍﻧﺲ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻔﺎﺳﻴﺮ‬
‫ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺔ ﻏﺮﺏ ﺗﻤ ّﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﺸﻒ‬ ‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪﮔﺸﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺳ ّﻨﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺸﻒ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﮕﻰ ﻓﻜﺮ‬
‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺎ ﺳ ّﻨﺖ ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯﺧﻮﺍﻫﻰ ﻧﺌﻮﺭﻭﻣﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯﻯ ﺑﻪﻛﻠّﻰ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﭼﺎﺭﭼﻮﺏ ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺘﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺁﮔﺰﻳﻮ ِﻡ ‪ 1‬ﻭ ﻗﻀﻴﺔ ‪ 1‬ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ »ﻛﻮچﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪:‬‬ ‫‪ libertatemphlosophandi‬ﻳﺎ »ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺗﻔﻠﺴﻒ« ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫ﻋﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﮓ« ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﺸﺨﻴﺺ ﺩﺍﺩ‪:‬‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻨﻴﺖ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺻﺪﺭ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺎ ِﻡ ِ‬
‫ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﺍﺛﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣﻔﻆِ‬
‫ﺁﮔﺰﻳﻮﻡ ‪ :1‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﮓ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﺠﻠّﻰ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪:‬‬
‫ﻗﻀﻴﺔ ‪ :1‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻴﺖ ﻧﺨﺴﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺍﺳﻄﻮﺭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺣﻤﺎﺳﻪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ ﻭ‬ ‫‪TractatusTeologico-‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻯﻫﺎ ﺗﺼﺪﻳﻖ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫‪politicuscontinens dissertations aliquot,‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺎﺗﻰ‪-‬ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﺨﺶ‬ ‫‪quibusostenditurlibertatemphilosophandi‬‬
‫»ﺍﻳﻤﺎﻥ ﻛﻠّﻰ« )‪ (universal faith‬ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻢﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻧﺠﻴﻞ‬ ‫‪non tantumsalvapietate et reipublicae pace‬‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻤﺎﻥ ﻛﻠّﻰ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﺎﻭﺭ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺧﺪﺍﻯ ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ ﻭ ﻋﺎﻟ ِﻢ ﻣﻄﻠﻘﻰ‬ ‫‪posse concede, se eandemnisi cum pace‬‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭﺍﻥ ﺗﻮﺑﻪﮔﺮ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺎﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻳﻤﺎﻥ ﻫﻤﭽﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰ ِﻡ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﮔﻨﺎﻩ ِ‬ ‫;‪reipublicaeipsaquepietatetolli non posse‬‬
‫ً‬
‫ﻋﺒﺎﺩﺕ ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻋﺒﺎﺩﺗﻰ »ﻣﻨﺤﺼﺮﺍ ﻣﺘﻀ ّﻤ ِﻦ ﻋﺪﺍﻟﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ »ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺎﺗﻰـﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺷﺎﻣﻞ ﭼﻨﺪﻳﻦ ﮔﻔﺘﺎﺭ ﻛﻬﻨﺸﺎﻥ‬
‫ﻧﻴﻜﻮﻛﺎﺭﻯ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻋﺸﻖ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺴﺎﻳﮕﺎﻥ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻬﺎﻳﺘ ًﺎ‪ ،‬ﻃﺒﻖ ﺍﻳﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺗﻔﻠﺴﻒ ﻣﺠﺎﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﭘﺮﻫﻴﺰﻛﺎﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺛﺒﺎﺕ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬
‫ﻛﻠّﻰ‪ ،‬ﻛﺴﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ ﮔﻨﺎﻫﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺎﻳﺪ ﻭ ُﻣﻠﻬﻢ‬ ‫ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺗﻔﻠﺴﻒ ﻣﺴﺎﻭﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻄﺮ ﺍﻓﺘﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﻋﺸﻖ ﺧﺪﺍﻭﻧﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» ،‬ﻣﺴﻴﺢ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﺭﻭﺡ ﻣﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﺪ ﻭ ﻣﺴﻴﺢ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻄﺮ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻥ ﺻﻠﺢ ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﭘﺮﻫﻴﺰﻛﺎﺭﻯ‪«.‬‬
‫‪14‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻭﺳﺖ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺻﻠﺢ ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯ«‬
‫ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺗﻔﻠﺴﻒ‪ ،‬ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻨﻜﻪ ﺑﺎ »ﭘﺎﺭﺳﺎﻳﻰ ﻭ ِ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪92‬‬

‫ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻣﺨﻔﻰ )‪((secret power (puissance‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﻋﻜﺲ؛ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﻰ ﻣﻼﺯ ِﻡ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻭ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻙ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺮ‬
‫ّ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﺒﺴﺘﮕﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻯ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ »ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻥ ﻭﺣﻴﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﻟﻬﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﻋﻄﺎ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ «.‬ﺑﺨﺶ‬
‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﺤﺼﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺔ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﭘﻴﻜﺮﺓ ﺟﻨﮕﻰ ّ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺮﻭﺽ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯﺧﻮﺍﻫﺎﻧﻪ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﻪ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻ ًﺎ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﻚ )‪ ((organic power (pouvoir‬ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﻠﺴﻮﻑ ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯﺧﻮﺍﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺨﺶ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻔﺼﻞﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﭘﺘﺎﻧﺴﻴﻞ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﺎﻳﻨﺪﮔﻰ ﻣﺤﻠّﻰ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ‪ puissance‬ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﺭﺳﺎﻟﻪ ﻗﺼﺪ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ »ﺍﻳﻦ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺩﺍﺩ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﭘﻴﻜﺮﺓ ﺩﻭﺭﻯ ﻳﺎ ﺣﻠﻘﻮﻯ ﺩﺭﻳﻚ ﻓﻀﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻠﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺁﻧﻜﻪ ﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺣﻖ ﻣﻘﺎﻣﺎﺕ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻄﺮ ﺍﻓﺘﺪ«‪،‬‬
‫ﭘﻴﻜﺮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﻈﻴﻢ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻣﺪﺭﻥ ﺭﺍ ﭼﻨﺪﺍﻥ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻗﺒﻴﻠﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﻋﺮﺏ‬ ‫ﻭ »ﺍﻳﻦ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺮﺣﺎﻝ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ «.‬ﺳﺮﻛﻮﺏ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ‪/‬‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﻳﺴﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﭘﻴﻜﺮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻤﻌﻰ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺣﺎﺷﻴﻪﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺻﻠﺢ ﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯ‪ .‬ﻓﻘﺪﺍﻥ ﺁﺯﺍﺩﻯ‬ ‫ﺣﻖ ﻣﺴﺎﻭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻄﺮ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩﻥ ِ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﺍﻗﻠﻴﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﮕﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ؛‬ ‫ﺗﻤﺎﻣﻰﺟﻤﻬﻮﺭﻯ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺳﺖﺧﻮﺵ ﮔﺰﻧﺪﻯ ﻋﻈﻴﻢ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺳﺎﺧﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻼ ﭘﻴﺶﺑﻴﻨﻰﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ؛ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﻧﺘﺎژﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺧﺎﺹ‬ ‫ﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻜﻠﻰ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬ ‫ﺷﺎﻧﺰﺩﻫﻢ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻬﻴﺎﺗﻰـﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﮔﻔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ »ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﺼﻞ‬
‫ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻦ ﭘﻞ ﻳﺎ ﻛﻠﻴﺴﺎﻯ ﺟﺎﻣﻊ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺍﺟﺮﺍﻯ ﻋﺪﺍﻟﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﻧﻮﺍﺧﺘﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ‬ ‫ﺣﻖ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺪﻧﻰ ﺍﻓﺮﺍﺩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻣﺮﺟﻌﻴﺖ ﻗﺪﺭﺕﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ‪ّ ،‬‬
‫ﻣﻮﺳﻴﻘﻰ ﻭ ﻧﻈﺎﻡﻣﻨﺪﺳﺎﺯﻯ ﻳﻚ ﻋﻠﻢ ﻭ ﺗﻜﻨﻮﻟﻮژﻯ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ‪ .‬ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ‬ ‫ﺣﻖ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﻭ ﻗﺪﺭﺕ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻛﻤﻪ‪ «.‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ ّ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﭘﺎﻳﮕﺎﻥﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻃﻮﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻩﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺑﻪﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﺣﻖ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺩﺍﺩﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﻣﻌﺘﻘﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ّ‬
‫ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﺑﺎ ﭘﻴﻜﺮﻩﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﻤﻌﻰ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻣﺸﻜﻼﺗﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﻭﻗﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ ﭼﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ »ﻫﻴﭻ ﮔﻨﺎﻫﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﻴﻜﺮﻩﻫﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻣ ّﺪﻋﻰ ﺍﻣﺘﻴﺎﺯﺍﺗﻰ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﺧﻮﺩﺷﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ«‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎ »ﺩﻭﻟﺖ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﻪﻧﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻣﺠﺒﻮﺭ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﻯ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩﺷﺎﻥ ﮔﺸﻮﺩﻩ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫»ﮔﻨﺎﻩ« ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻤﻮﻧﺔ ﺍﻧﻘﻼﺑﻰ ﻛﻮﺗﺎﻩ ﻭ ﻣﻮﺝ ﺧﺮﻭﺷﺎﻧﻰ ﺁﺯﻣﺎﻳﺸﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ )ﻭ ﻫﺎﺑﺰ(‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ )ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ( ﮔﺮﻳﺰ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ‬
‫ﺳﺮﺩﺭﮔﻢﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﻫﺮ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺳﺮ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻻﺯﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﺁﻳﺎ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻣﻤﺎﻧﻌﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺩﺳﺘﮕﺎﻩ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺳﺮﺷﺖ ﺟﻨﺒﺶﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪.‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍُﭘﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﮔﺮﺍﻳﺶﻫﺎ ﻭ ﻗﻄﺐﻫﺎ ﻭ‬ ‫»ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻴﺖ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﮓ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻪ‪ ،‬ﺟﻨﮕﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ؟«‪ 15‬ﻭ‬
‫‪18‬‬
‫ﻛﻤﻴﻜﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﻴﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺻﺤﻨﺔ ﺑﻌﺪﻯ ﭼﻪ ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﺍﻓﺘﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻗﻮﻡﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﺼﺪﻳﻖ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 16«.‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬
‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺶ ﻣﻘ ّﺪﻣﺔ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺧﻠﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺘﺲ ﺭﻭﺯﻧﺘﺎﻝ‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺱ‬ ‫)ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ( ﺑﻪ ﺍﻗﺘﻔﺎﻯ ﭘﻴﺌﺮ ﻛﻼﺳﺘﺮ )‪1934‬ـ‪ 1977‬ﻡ( ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ِ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺘﻔﺎﺩﻩ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻳﺰﺍﺕ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻣﻰ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺣﻀﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺪﻭﻳﻪ‪ ،‬ﻗﺮﻳﻪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺳﻪﭘﺎﺭﻩ ﻭ ﻣﺨﺘﺼ ِﺮ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ‬ ‫ﺁﻧﺎﺭﺷﻴﺴﺖ ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ﻭ ﻣﺆﻟّﻒ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‪ 19.‬ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ‬
‫ﻣﺪﻳﻨﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻗﺎﻣﻮﺱ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺧﻠﺪﻭﻥ ﻧﻴﺰ ّ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻃﺮﺡ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦﺟﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺑﻦﺧﻠﺪﻭﻥ ﺑﻪﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺑﻌﺎﺩ ﺍﺛﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻧﻴﺎﺯﻣﻨﺪ ﺻﺮﻑ ﻭﻗﺖ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪﭘﺮﺩﺍﺯ ﺯﻭﺍﻝ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﻭ ﺳﺘﺎﻳﺶﮔ ِﺮ »ﻧﻈﻢ ﻋﺸﻴﺮﻩﺍﻯ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪﻥ ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﻫﺰﺍﺭ ﺳﻄﺢ ﺻﺎﻑ ﺁﺳﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﺒﺎﺭﺍﺕ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪﻋﻼﻭﻩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ )ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ( ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺭﺩ ّ‬
‫ﻭ ﺟﻤﻠﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺄ ّﻣﻞﺑﺮﺍﻧﮕﻴﺰ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺍﻧﺪﻙ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻻﺑﻪﻻﻯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﻗﺴﻤﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﺩﺭ »ﻛﻮچﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‪ :‬ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﮓ« ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﮔﺴﺴﺖ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺍﻧﺘﻘﺎﺩﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺳﻮﻳﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﻗﻀﻴﺔ ‪ 3‬ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﭼﻨﺪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺧﻠﺪﻭﻥ ﺑﻬﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺘﻦﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺳﺎﺧﺖﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺪﺭﻧﻴﺘﺔ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﻭ ﻋﻄﻒ ّ‬ ‫ﻛﺎﺭﺑﺴﺖ ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ »ﻋﺼﺒﻴﺖ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻜﺘﺔ ﺍﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦﺟﺎ‬
‫ﺍﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﻰ ﺳ ّﻨﺖ ﻗﺮﻭﻥ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﺔ ﺍﺳﻼﻣﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺍﻧﺴﻮﻯ ‪ esprit de corps‬ﺑﻪ ﻛﺎﺭﺭﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ‬
‫)ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ( ﺩﺭ ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ ﺑﺎ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺎ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﺭﻭﺣﻴﺔ ﮔﺮﻭﻫﻰ ﻭ ﺭﻭﺣﻴﺔ ﻗﻮﻣﻰ ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ )ﻭ‬
‫ﻗﻠﻤﺮﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﻭﺡ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮﺍﻥ ﻛﻼﺳﻴﻚ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺳﺘﻌﺎﺭﺓ‬ ‫ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ( ﻫﻤﭽﻮﻥ ﺍﻏﻠﺐ ّ‬
‫ﻭ ﺟﺴﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﻬﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺩﻳﺪ ﺁﻧﺎﻥ ﺑﺪﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻭ ﻣﺂﺧﺬ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﻓﺮﻭﻛﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ »ﻋﺼﺒﻴﺖ‬
‫ﻣﻘ ّﺪﻣﻪ‪ ،‬ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ ﺑﻦ ﺧﻠﺪﻭﻥ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻣﺤﻤﺪ ﭘﺮﻭﻳﻦ ﮔﻨﺎﺑﺎﺩﻯ‪،‬‬ ‫‪.1‬‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺭﻭﺣﻴﺔ ﻗﻮﻣﻰ« )‪ (esprit de corps‬ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻭﺡ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﺷﺮﻛﺖ ﺍﻧﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻋﻠﻤﻰ ﻭ ﻓﺮﻫﻨﮕﻰ‪.1375 ،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﻓﺮﻭﻛﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺭﻳﺸﺔ ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ ﭘﻴﻜﺮﺓ ﺟﻤﻌﻰ ﻭ »ﻋﺼﺒﻴﺖ«‬
‫ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ :‬ﻧﻮﺁﻣﻮﺯﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻳﻜﻞ ﻫﺎﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺭﺿﺎ‬ ‫‪.2‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻟﻔﻆِ »ﻧﻈﺎﻣﻰ« ﺟﻨﺒﺔ ﻣﻬﻢ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺭﻳﺸﺔ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﻧﺠﻒﺯﺍﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﻧﻰ‪.1392 ،‬‬
‫ﺍﻯ ﺩﻭ ِﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻭ ﮔﺘﺎﺭﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻠﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻋﺸﻴﺮﻩ ِ‬
‫‪3.‬‬ ‫‪“Gilles Deleuze Talks Philosophy”,‬‬
‫ﺑﺪﺭﺳﺘﻰ ﺩﺭﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘ ّﺪﻣﺔ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺧﻠﺪﻭﻥ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﮕﻰ ﺍﻳﻠﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺑﺎ‬
‫‪in Desert Islands and Other Texts‬‬
‫‪(1953-1974),Gilles Deleuze, translated by Mike‬‬ ‫»ﺧﺎﻧﻮﺍﺩﻩ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺴﺐ ﺑﻪﺍﻧﻀﻤﺎ ِﻡ ﻋﺼﺒﻴﺖ« ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ 17.‬ﻃﺒﻖ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ‬
‫‪Taormina, Semiotext(e), 2003, p 143-145.‬‬ ‫ﺁﻧﺎﻥ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﮕﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺧﺎﻧﻮﺍﺩﻩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺴﻴﺎﺭ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ‬
‫‪4.‬‬ ‫‪The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to‬‬ ‫ﺧﻂ ﺳﻴﺮ ﮔﺮﻭﻫﻰ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎ ﺩﻭﻟﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﮕﻰ ﺧﺎﻧﻮﺍﺩﻩ ﻳﻚ ّ‬
‫‪History,Ibn Khaldun, trans. Franz Rosenthal,‬‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺳﻠﻮﻟﻰ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻳﻦ؛ ﺗﺒﺎﺭ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﻟﻴﺎﻗﺖ ﺧﺎﻧﻮﺍﺩﻩﺍﻯ ّ‬
‫‪Princeton, N J.: Princeton University Press, 1967.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺧﺎﻧﻮﺍﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺧﺎﻧﻮﺍﺩﻩﺍﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺣﺪﺍﻛﺜ ِﺮ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ّ‬
‫‪5.‬‬ ‫‪la société contre l’état, Clastres, Pierre,‬‬ ‫»ﻫﻤﺒﺴﺘﮕﻰ ﺍَﺑَ ِﻮﻳﻨﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﻣﺤﻘّﻖ ﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻭ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺔ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﻰ‬
‫ِ‬
‫‪Society against the State, trans. Robert Hurley,‬‬ ‫ﺧﺎﻧﻮﺍﺩﻩ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎﻩ ﺁﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺍﺭﮔﺎﻧﻴﺴﻢ ﺩﻭﻟﺘﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪93 1393‬‬

20. Spinoza`s Critique of Religion, Strauss, New York:
Leo, New York:Schocken Books 1965, reprinted Uri-zen, 1977.
by University of Chicago Press, 1996. 6. Spinoza et le problème de
21. Subversive Spinoza: (Un) l’expression,Deleuze, Gilles, Editions de Minuit,
Contemporary Variations, Antonio 1968.
Negri, Translated by Timothy S. 7. Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza,
Murphy, Michael Hardt, Ted Stolze, Deleuze, Gilles,translated by Martin Joughin,
and CharlesT. Wolfe. Manchester University Zone Books, 1990.
Press, 2004. 8. Spinoza - Philosophie pratique,Deleuze,
22. OPERA QUAE SUPERSUNT OMNIA, Gilles, Editions de Minuit, 1981.
EX EDITIONIBUS PRINCIPIBUS DENUO 9. Spinoza: Practical Philosophy,Deleuze,
EDIDIT ET PRAEEATUS EST, CAROLUS Gilles, translated by Robert Hurley, San
HERMANNUS BRUDER, VOL. III., TRACTATUS Francisco: City Lights Books, 2001.
THEOLOGICO – POLITICUS COMPEXDIUM 10. Pure Immanence: Essays on A Life,
GRAMMATICES LINGUAE HEBRAEAE, Deleuze, Gilles,translated by Anne Boyman, New
SPINOZA, DE BENEDICTI, EDITIO York: Zone Books, 2001.
STEREOTYPA, LIPSIAE, EX OFFICINA 11. Qu’est-ce que la philosophie?,Deleuze,
BERNHARDI TAUCHNITZ, 1846. Gilles and Félix Guattari, les editions de Minuit,
1991.
‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺖﻫﺎ‬ 12. Capitalisme et Schizophrénie, tome 2:
.‫* ﺩﺍﻧﺶ ﺁﻣﻮﺧﺘﺔ ﺩﻛﺘﺮﻯ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ‬ Mille Plateaux, Deleuze, Gilles and Félix Guattari,
1. Subversive Spinoza, pp 114-115. Editions de Minuit, 1980.
2. Wha t is Philosophy?, p 60;Qu’est-ce que la 13. A Thousand Plateaus, Deleuze, Gilles
philosophie?, p 59 . and Félix Guattari, translated byBrian Massumi
3. Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza, p 322. University of Minnesota Press, 1987.
4. Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza, p 17. 14. What is Philosophy? Deleuze, Gilles and
5. see Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza ,pp Félix Guattari, translated by Janis Tomlinson and
18-17. Graham Burchell, Columbia University Press,
6. see Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza,p 11; 1996.
Qu’est-ce que la philosophie?;What is Philoso- 15. Nomadology: The War Machine,
phy?; and Pure Immanence: Essays on A Life,). Deleuze, Gilles and Félix Guattari, Seattle, WA,
7. Pure Immanence: Essays on A Life ,pp 122- Wormwood Distribution, 2010.
123. 16. Spinoza: Complete Works, Spinoza,
8. Qu’est-ce que la philosophie?, p 49. Benedictus de, with Translations by Samuel
9. Pure Immanence: Essays on A Life, p 125. Shirley, Edited, with Introduction and Notes, by
10. Pure Immanence: Essays on A Life, p 129. Michael L. Morgan, Indianapolis and Cambridge:
11. “Gilles Deleuze Talks Philosophy”,, 2003, p Hackett Publishing Company, 2002.
144. 17. Political Treatise, in Spinoza: Complete
12. Subversive Spinoza, p 113. Works, Spinoza, Benedictusde, translated by
13. Subversive Spinoza, p 117. Samuel Shirley, edited with introduction and notes
14. Spinoza: Complete Works, p 518;Theological- by Michael L. Morgan, Indianapolis I Cambridge,
Political Treatise, pp. 178-185. Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.2002.
.1 ‫ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ‬،«‫ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﮓ‬:‫ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ »ﻛﻮچﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬.15 18. A Theologico-Political Treatise, Spinoza,
.2 ‫ ﻗﻀﻴﺔ‬،«‫ ﻣﺎﺷﻴﻦ ﺟﻨﮓ‬:‫ ﺭﺳﺎﻟﺔ »ﻛﻮچﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ‬.16 in The Chief Works of Benedict de Spinoza,
.‫ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻘ ّﺪﻣﻪ ﺍﺑﻦ ﺧﻠﺪﻭﻥ‬:‫ﻙ‬.‫ ﺭ‬.17 trans by Elwes, vol 1,The Pennsylvania State
18. Capitalisme et Schizophrénie, University, 2000.
tome 2: Mille Plateaux ;A Thousand 19. Theological-Political Treatise, Spinoza,
Plateaus;Nomadology: The War Machine. Edited by Jonathan Israel, translated by Michael
19. See The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to Silverthorne and Jonathan Israel, Princeton, New
History. Jersey, 2007.

1393 ‫ ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ‬،81‫ ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‬، 94

 ‫ﻳﻜﻢ‬
‫ﭘﺎﺭﻣﻨﻴﺪﺱ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ »ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻫﺴﺖ« ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺗﺒﻌﺎﺗﻰ ﭘﺮﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ ﺗﺒﻌﺎﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ِ« ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗﻰ ﺩﺭ »ﻫﺴﺘﻦ«ﺍﺵ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺏ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺍﺵ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ‪ .‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ »ﭼﻴﺰﻯ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺏ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ »ﻧﻴﺴﺖ« ﺩﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺷﺮﻭﻉ ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ :‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺣﺘﻤ ًﺎ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪:‬‬
‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﻋﺪﻡ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ‪ 1.‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺗﺎ ّﻣﻪ ﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺏ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻫﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﺜﻠﻴﺚ ﻣﻘﺪﺱ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭘﺲ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺗ ًﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺨﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺵ ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺗﻀﻤﻴﻦ ﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﮕﺎﻫﻰ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻫﻢﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪ :‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺳﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﻨﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ .‬ﺍﻭﻟﻰ »ﺟﻮﻫﺮ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺩﻭﻣﻰ‬
‫»ﺣﺎﻟﺖ«‪ 2.‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺵ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺫﺍﺗﺶ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ‬
‫ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺫﺍﺗﺶ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺵ ﻻﺯﻡ ﻧﻤﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺵ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ ﻭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺵ ﺩﺭ ﺫﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻭﺳﺖ‪ 3.‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺵ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺖ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻋﺮﺽ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺟﻬﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺶ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪،‬‬
‫ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ ﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺧﺪﺍﺩﺍﺩﻯ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ‬
‫‪ali.khodadadi.s@gmail.com‬‬
‫ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻊ ﺁﻥ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﺘﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﺟﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ‪،‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،4‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ‬
‫ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﺪﻓﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺮﻭژﺓ‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﭘﻰ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﻭ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﻗﺮﻭﻥ ﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺴﻴﺤﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ :‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻓﻴﻀﺎﻧﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺻﺪﻭﺭﻯ‬
‫ﻭ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺍﺧﻠﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ‪ 5.‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻼ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻟﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﻛﺎﻣ ً‬
‫ﺟﺪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺟﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﻣﺤﺾ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺟﺪﺍ‬
‫ﻭ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ‪ .‬ﭼﻪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻣﺎﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﻋﺮﺿﻰ ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﻏﺎﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻠﻰ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺁﻥ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ‬
‫‪6‬‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﮔﺰﻳﻨﻪﻫﺎﻯ ﺧﻮﺑﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﻋﻠّﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪.‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪95 1393‬‬

 ‫ﺩﻭﻡ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻞ ﻓﻴﻀﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺘﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻢﭼﻨﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻦ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ »ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ‪ .‬ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻴﭻﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﺴﺖ« ﻭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﻳﺶ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻧﻤﻰﺭﻭﻧﺪ‪ 7.‬ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭﻯ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﺮﺧﻼﻑ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﺓ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻜﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‪ِ ،‬‬
‫ﻋﻈﻴﻢ ﻭ ﺑﻰﻭﻗﻔﻪ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ »ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻠّﺖ‬
‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﻭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﺶ‬ ‫ﻓﻴﻀﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﺍﺵ‬
‫ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﮔﺬﺭ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺍﺭﻯ ﺑﻰﻭﻗﻔﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ...‬ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻑ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁﻫﺎ ﺗﺪﺍﻭ ِﻡ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝﺍﺵ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﺑﻤﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﺮﺍﻛﻠﻴﺘﻮﺱ ﻣﻰﮔﻔﺖ‪» :‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻳﻚ ﺳﻴﻼﻥ ﺑﻰﻭﻗﻔﻪ‬ ‫ﻴﺖ ﻓﻴﻀﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦﻛﻪ ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ 8«.‬ﺩﺭ ﻋﻠّ ِ‬
‫ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ« ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﺩﻋﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻪ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ ﻭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺵ ﻗﺎﺋﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺮ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺟﺪﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺁﻥ‬
‫‪10‬‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺟﺰ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ«‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻋﻠّﺖ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻝ ﺁﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻭ ﺳﻴﻼﻥ ﺑﻰﻭﻗﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺵ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻳﻚ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺗﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺷﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻼ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻟﺤﻈﺔ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﻫﺪﻑ ﻳﺎ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﻗﺒ ً‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﻨﺎﺑﺮﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﻋﻠّﺖ‪ ،‬ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻯ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺖ‬
‫ﻛﻨﻮﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﺖ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻟﺶ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪ِ 11«.‬‬ ‫ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻓﻴﻀﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﺪﻓﻰ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻰ ﺗﻌﺎﺩﻟﻰ ﺑﻮﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺑﺎﻳﺴﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺑﺒﺨﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﻰﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺻﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻪ ﺑﻴﺸﺘﺮ‪ ،‬ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﺘﺶ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻛﻢﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺗﻮﻗﻒ ﻭ ﺗﻌﺎﺩﻝ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻰﺍﻧﺘﻬﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ‪:‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻣﻰﺍﻳﺴﺘﺪ ﻧﺮﺳﻴﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺗﻔﺎﻕ ﻫﻴﭻﮔﺎﻩ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺍﻓﺘﺎﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺘﺼﻮﺭ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫»ﺧﺪﺍ ﻋ ّﻠﺖ‬
‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻧﻤﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭﻫﻤﺔ‬
‫ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ 12.‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺵ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻮﻁ ﻭ ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭﺭ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻋ ّﻠﺖ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻰﭘﺬﻳﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ »ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻧﻜﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻓﺎﺻﻠﻪﺍﺵ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺳﻨﺠﻴﺪﻩ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰﺁﻧﻬﺎ‪«.‬‬
‫ﺣﺘﻰ ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻧﻜﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 13«.‬ﺑﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻭﺻﺎﻑ‬ ‫ﭼﻪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﺎﺭﺟﻰ ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻓﻴﻀﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﺷﺘﺮﺍﻛﻰ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻳﺎ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﻮﻟﺪ ﻭ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﻨﺪﺓ ﻳﻚ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺑﻰﻭﻗﻔﻪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ‬ ‫ﺷﻜﺎﻑ ﺧﻮﺭﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺩﻭﭘﺎﺭﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭘﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﭘﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ‬
‫ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻋﻈﻴﻢ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻳﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻳﻚ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻳﻚ ﭘﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﻤﻜﻦ‪ .‬ﺩﻭﮔﺎﻧﻪ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ِ‬
‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﻭ ﺗﻐﻴﻴ ِﺮ ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﻭﺍﺩﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺴﺘﺠﻮﻯ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺷﺪﻥ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻋﻠﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ِ‬ ‫ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻓﻴﻀﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﺓ ﻳﻚ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺟﺪﺍ‬
‫»ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺫﺍﺕ«‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻠّﺖ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻯ ﺻﺪﻭﺭﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺵ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺧﺼﻴﺼﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻟﺶ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺑﻤﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﺑﻰﻭﻗﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺷﺪﻥ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻝ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ِّ‬‫ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻳﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻳﺎ‬
‫»ﭼﻴﺰ« ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﻡ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺳﺨﻦ ﮔﻔﺖ؟ ﺁﻳﺎ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ‪ ،‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻻﺗﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻣﻰﮔﻮﻳﺪ‪» :‬ﺧﺪﺍ‬
‫ﻭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‪ ،‬ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺫﺍﺗﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻳﻚ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫‪9‬‬
‫ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻫﻤﺔ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻣﺘﻌﺎﻟﻰ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‪«.‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؟ ﻳﻚ ﻫﻮﻳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻣﻔﻬﻮﻡ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‬
‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﺤﺮﻙ‬
‫ّ‬ ‫)ﻣﺤﺮﻙ‬
‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻭ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ ّ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﻩ ﭘﺎﻳﺒﻨﺪ ﺑﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫ﺍﺭﺳﻄﻮ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻏﺎﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻓﺎﻋﻠﻰ(‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﻫﻢﺳﻨﺦ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﻩ ﭘﺎﻳﺒﻨﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺁﻥﮔﺎﻩ ﺁﻳﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﻫﻮﻳﺖ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻣﻘﺮﺭ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ »ﺍﺳﻢ« ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﻳﻰ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﺎ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ِ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ »ﻓﻌﻞ« ﻳﺎ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ »ﻣﺼﺪﺭ« ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻓﻌﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﻛﺮﺩ؟ ﺭﺍﻫﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺭﻓﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺗﺼﻮﺭﻯ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪﻯ ﻳﻚ »ﻣﺼﺪﺭ«‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻰﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺟﺴﺖ‪ :‬ﻋﻠّﺖ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺳﭙﺲ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻋﻠّﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ »ﻫﻮﻳﺖ«‪.‬‬ ‫***‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪96‬‬

 ‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺟﺴﺖ‪» :‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ«‪» .‬ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﺔ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﻭ ﻣﻮﻟ ِﺪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﮔﺮ ﻋﻠّﺖ‬
‫ﻫﺮﮔﺰ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺴﺖ ﺑﮕﺬﺭﺩ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺍﻳﻦﻛﻪ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ‬ ‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺷﺎﻳﺪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺼﺪﺭﻯ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻧﺒﻮﺩ‪ 15«.‬ﺣﺎﻝ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﮔﺬﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ«‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺖ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻬﻢ ﻣﻌﻤﻮﻟﻰ ﺍﺯ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ »ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ« ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﻪﻯ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻭ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ »ﻫﺴﺖ«‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺑﺎ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬
‫ﻧﺤﻮﻯ ﻏﻴﺮﻓﻌﺎﻝ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻮﺩﻧﺶ ﻧﻪ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻝ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫»ﻧﻴﺴﺖ« ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﻰ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ »ﻫﺴﺖ« ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻋﻤﻞ‬ ‫ﺑﻨﻴﺎﺩﻯ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻭ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪﺵ‪ ،‬ﻣﺪﺍﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﮔﺬﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻝ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻝ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨ ِﺪ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﮕﺬﺭﺩ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ »ﺷﻮﺩ«‪ .‬ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺮﻁِ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﻭ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺰﻟﻪﻯ ﺷﺮﻁِ‬
‫ﮔﺬﺭﻛﺮﺩﻥ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺟﻤﻊﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ :‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻳﻚ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪:‬‬ ‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻌﻜﻮﺱ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪» :‬ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﺣﺎﻝ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻭ‬
‫»ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ‬ ‫ﮔﻔﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺣﺎﻝ »ﺑﻮﺩ« ﻭ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺭﺓ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﮔﻔﺖ ﻛﻪ »ﻫﺴﺖ«‪ ،‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫‪16‬‬
‫ﺣﺘﻤ ًﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻋ ّﻠﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺗﺎ ﺍﺑﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴ ِﺪ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺧﺎﺭﺝ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ‬
‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ »ﻫﺴﺖ«‪ .‬ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻛﻞ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﮔﺬ ِﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ِ .‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻭ ﺷﺮﻁِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻭ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﺣﺮﻛﺖ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﺸﻴﺪﻩﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠّﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰﺍﺵ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻋﺪﻡ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﺸﺪ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﻭ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻭ ﺗﻐﻴﻴ ِﺮ ﻣﺪﺍﻭﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﺵ‪،‬‬
‫ﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺧﻼﻝ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﻟﺤﻈﺔ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺑﻪ ِ‬ ‫ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﻮﻟ ِﺪ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﻭ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺫﺍﺗﺶ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠّﺖ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻭ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴ ِﺪ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺑﺰﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺫﺍﺗﺶ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻳﻚ ﻫﻮﻳﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ »ﻫﺴﺖ«؟ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‬ ‫ﻓﻌﻞ ﺑﻰﺁﻏﺎﺯ ﻭ ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﺑﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻓﻌﻞ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﭘﻰ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﻭ ِ‬
‫»ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ« ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻰ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻳﻚ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻊ ﺁﻥ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺼﺪﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ ِ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻥﻫﻢ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺳﻮﺑﮋﻛﺘﻴﻮﺵ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫»ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨ ِﺪ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻇﺮﻓﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺗﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ ﺫﺧﻴﺮﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻳﻚ ﻛﻞ‪ ،‬ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻋﻠﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺮ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﺷﻜﺎﻝ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻫﻮﻯ‪» .‬ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺟﺎﺯﺓ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻭ ﺻﻴﺮﻭﺭﺕ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﻋﺚ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ »ﺣﺎﻻﺕ« ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺷﻜﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺑﮕﻴﺮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺭ ﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻓﻈﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻣﺎﻫﻮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺟﻮﻫ ِﺮ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻊ ﺁﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪» ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ«‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺸﻤﻮﻝ ﺫﺧﻴﺮﻩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒﻊ ﺁﻥ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺧﻄﻰ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻛﻞ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺗﻰ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﭼﻄﻮﺭ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ »ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ« ﻧﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﻧﻬﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻓﻬﻤﻰ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻤﻨﺪ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠّﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺮﺭ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍﻳﺠﺎ ِﺩ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻬﻤﻰ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻤﻨﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪» .‬ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺭﺍﺟﻊ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؟ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺭ‬
‫ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻭ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺷﺪﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭﺍﻡ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﺍﻳﻦﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 17«.‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻭ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭘﺲ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺫﺍﺗﺶ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻟﺤﻈﺔ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻳﻚ ﭼﻴﺰ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬ ‫***‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ؟ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‬ ‫ﺳﻮﻡ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ »ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ« ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺧﺼﻴﺼﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺣﺪﺕ ﻧﺪﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﮔﺬﺭ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪﺍﻯ ﺩﺭﺑﺎﺏ ﺗﻜﺜﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﻭ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺏ ﻛﺜﺮﺕ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺩﺍﺩ؟ ﺟﻮﺍﺏ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ »ﺯﻣﺎﻥ« ﺟﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﻣﺘﻜﺜﺮ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ »ﺣﺎﻝ« ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻧﻘﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ِ‬
‫‪14‬‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥﮔﺎﻩ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻄﻰ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻤﻮﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮﻯ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ‪» .‬ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺷﺪﻥ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ «.‬ﻟﺤﻈﺔ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻜﺜﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺨﺶﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺗﻐﻴﻴ ِﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻓﺮﺍﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ‪،‬‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﺧﻮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺎﻝﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻩﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺭﻭﺯﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺳﺎﻋﺖﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺣﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥﻣﻨﺪ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﻢﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﭘﺮﺳﻴﺪ ﻛﻪ ِ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻗﺎﺑﻠﻴﺖ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﻪﻯ ﻳﻚ ﺧﻂ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﭘﺎﻳﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻛﺠﺎ ﮔﺬﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺣﺎﻝ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ ﻭ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻟﺤﻈﺔ ِ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻯ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻗﻄﻌﻪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺑﻌﺪﻯ ﻓﺮﺍ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ؟ ﭼﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﻪ »ﺣﺎﻝ« ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﮕﺬﺭﺩ؟ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪97 1393‬‬

‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻫﻤﺮﺍﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻜﺜﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺧﻄﻰ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﻳﻦﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ِ .‬‬
‫ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺘﺶ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺛﺎﻧﻴﻪﻫﺎ ﻫﻤﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻢ ﺷﺒﻴﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﻃﻮﺭ ﻛﻪ ﺭﻭﺯﻫﺎ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﺎﻫﻮﻯ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻜﺜ ِﺮ ﻏﻴﺮﻋﺪﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺧﻄﻰ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ِ‬
‫ﻣﺎﻩﻫﺎ؛ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺟﺰ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ِ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺫﺍﺗﺶ »ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ«‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﮔﻮﻳﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻗﻄﻌﺎﺕ ﮔﺴﺴﺘﺔ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻫﻢﺳﺎﻥ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻛﻴﻔﻰ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﺯﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻜﺜ ِﺮ ﻏﻴﺮﻋﺪﺩﻯ ﻭ ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺟﻮﻫ ِﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻭﻟﻴﻦ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﻪ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻣﺤﻘﻖ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺷﻜﻞ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﺏ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺗﻜﺜﺮﻯ ﻏﻴﺮﻋﺪﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺘﺶ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺫﺭﺍﺕ ﻛﻮﭼﻚﺗﺮ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺁﺏ ﺑﻤﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻳﺎ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‬ ‫ﻫﻮﺍ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻜﺜﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻜﺜﺮ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﻧﺎﻣﺪ‪» .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻜﺜﺮ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ‪،‬‬
‫ﺟﺰ ﺟﻤﻊ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺍﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ‬ ‫ﻫﻢﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻫﻢﻧﺸﻴﻨﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﻛ ّﻤﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭﺟﻪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻮﻋﻰ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻜﺜﺮ ﻋﺪﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 18«.‬ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻜﺜﺮ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫***‬ ‫ﻛ ّﻤﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﺟﻪ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻜﺜﺮ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢﺷﺪﻩ‪ ،‬ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﭘﺮﺳﺶ‪ :‬ﺟﺎﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻛﺠﺎﺳﺖ؟ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﻤﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺩﺭﺟﻪ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ؟ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻜﺜﺮ ﺭﺍ »ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ« ﻭ »ﻋﺪﺩﻯ« ﻣﻰﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﺟﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻛ ّﻤﻴﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ )ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ‬
‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺵ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪ ﻭ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﻛﺮﺩ؟ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؟‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﻇﺮﻑ ﺁﺏ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﻇﺮﻑ ﺁﺏ ﺑﺎ ﻛ ّﻤﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﭼﻪ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺁﺏﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﺍﺟﻬﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻟﺤﻈﺔ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺁﺏ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﻯ‬
‫ﻣﺤﻘﻖ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻥﻫﺎ »ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ« ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﻰﺩﻫﺪ(‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻜﺜﺮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺸﺘﺮﻙ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺪ ِﺭﻙ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺤﻮﺓ ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺟﻮﻫ ِﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ‬‫ﺍﺯﺧﻮﺩﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ‪:‬‬
‫ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺟﻬﺖ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙﭘﺬﻳﺮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ »ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ« ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﺟﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ‬ ‫»ﺍﮔﺮ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺁﻥ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺗﻜﺜﺮﻯ ﺭﺍ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪﺍﺵ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ‬ ‫ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖﺗﻌﺎﺩﻝ‬
‫ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻣﺤﻘﻖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺷﺪﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻤﻜﻦ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﻙ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺲ ﺩﺭﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻜﺜ ِﺮ ﻋﺪﺩﻯ‪ ،‬ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻜﺜﺮﻯ ﻏﻴﺮﻋﺪﺩﻯ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺳﺨﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ »ﺣﺎﻝ« ﻭ »ﺣﺎﻟﺖ« ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ‬ ‫ﮔﻔﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻜﺜﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻣﮕﺮ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺘﺶ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ ﻫﺪﻑ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻟﺤﻈﺔ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﺭﻧﮓ ﺳﻔﻴﺪ‪ :‬ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﺭﻧﮓ ﺳﻔﻴﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺩﻭ ﻃﻮﻝ ﻣﻮﺝ ﻣﺠﺰﺍ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻤﻰ‬ ‫ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖﻧﻬﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪﻩ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﺤﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺖ ﺳﻔﻴﺪﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺭﻧﮕﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺭﻧﮓ ﺳﻔﻴﺪ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﻗﺒ ً‬
‫ﻼ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺗﻌﻠﻖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻭ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﺼﻒ ﺭﻧﮓ ﺳﻔﻴﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺳﻔﻴﺪ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﺭ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻃﻮﻝ ﻣﻮﺟﺶ ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ِ‬ ‫ﺁﻥ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻩ ﺑﻮﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ ﻳﺎ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﺻﺪﺍﻫﺎ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻧﺖﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻤﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻟﺤﻈﺔ ﻛﻨﻮﻧﻰ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ »ﺑﺎﺷﺪ« ﻛﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻫﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭ ﺍﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻭﺟﻬﻰ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺑﺘﺪﺍ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﻭﺟﻬﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ِ‬ ‫ﺭﻧﮓ ﺳﻔﻴﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺻﻮﺕ ﻣﻮﺳﻴﻘﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻟﺤﻈﻪﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻧﻪ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻧﻪ »ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ«‪ .‬ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻣﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺭﻧﮓ ﺳﻔﻴﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻧﺖ ﻣﻮﺳﻴﻘﻰ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩﮔﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﻮﻉ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩﮔﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﭘﺎﻯ ﺗﻜﺜﺮﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﺑﻪ ﻛ ّﻤﻴﺎﺕ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻤﻰ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻋﺪﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﻣ ِﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﺟﻪ ﻧﻤﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻜﺜﺮ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺭﺳﺪ‪«.‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺳﺘﺪﻻﻝ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫»ﺗﻜﺜﺮﻯ ]ﺍﺳﺖ[ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺘﺰﺍﺝ‪ ،‬ﺳﺎﺯﻣﺎﻧﺪﻫﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﻳﮕﺮﮔﻮﻧﮕﻰ‪،‬‬
‫ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺭﺑﻄﻰ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ‬ ‫ﺍﻓﺘﺮﺍﻕ ﻛﻴﻔﻰ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﺎﻫﻮﻯ‪ ،‬ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺗﻜﺜﺮ ﭘﻴﻮﺳﺘﻪ ﻭ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻋﺪﺩ ﺗﻘﻠﻴﻞﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 19«.‬ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻜﺜﺮ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻛﻴﻔﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻣﻮﺭ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﺟﺎ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻣﺎﻫﻮﻯ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﺭﻧﮓ ﺳﻔﻴﺪ ﭘﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻣﺮ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺍﺭﺍﻯ ﻫﻴﭻ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ )ﻳﻚ ﻛﻨﺪﺓ ﺩﺭﺧﺖ‬ ‫ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪﺍﺵ ﺭﻧﮓﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﺒﺰ ﻭ ﺯﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺁﺑﻰ ﻭ ‪ ...‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻜﺜﺮﻯ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻛﻴﻔﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻘﻮﻩ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻳﻚ »ﻣﻴﺰ« ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻣﻴﺰ‪ ،‬ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻏﻴﺮﻋﺪﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ »ﺳﻔﻴﺪ« ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪﺍﺵ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬
‫ﻭ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖ ﺑﺎ ﻣﻴﺰ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ(‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻳﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻘ ّﻮﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﻚﭘﺎﺭﭼﻪ ﻭ ﺑﺴﻴﻂ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ‬
‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻴﺎﻧﮕﺮ ﻧﺤﻮﺓ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻛ ّﻤﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﻋﺪﺩ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻓﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﺟﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ ﺁﻳﻨﺔ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‪ .‬ﺁﻳﻨﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﺣﺪ ﻫﻢ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻮﻟ ِﺪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ِ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ 20.‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻫﻢ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﻣﺘﻜﺜﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻏﻴﺮﻋﺪﺩﻯ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﻛ ّﻤﻰ ﻭ‬
‫ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺷﺮﺍﻳﻂ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﻋﻠّﻴﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻋﺪﺩﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺗﻰ ﻛﻴﻔﻰ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻤﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﺑﺎ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪98‬‬

‫ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻧﺶ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ ﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺑﻪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺒﺪﻝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻣﺮ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮﺍﻍ ﻧﺤﻮﻩﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺭﻓﺖ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﺎ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ‪» :‬ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ‬
‫ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﮔﻮﻧﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﺪﻩﺁﻝ ﺑﺪﻭﻥ ﺍﻧﺘﺰﺍﻋﻰ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ«‪ .21‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺔ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻦ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ‪» ،‬ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺫﺍﺗﻰ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﺍﻡ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻯ ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﺎﻫﻮﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﺟﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻛﻨﻮﻧﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ »ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻤﺎ‬
‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺷﺮﻁِ‬ ‫ﻫﻮ ﻭﺍﺟﺪ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ 22«.‬ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻟﺤﻈﺔ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺣﺎﻝ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﺮﻭﻑ‪ :‬ژﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﺭﻭﻧﺪ ﺭﺷﺪ ﻭ ﺷﻜﻞﮔﻴﺮﻯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺯﺑﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺟﺪﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻧﻰ »ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖﻳﺎﺑﻰ« ﺁﻥ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﺑﺮ ﺍﺳﺎﺱ ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ﻋﻤﻠﻜﺮﺩ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ژﻥ ﺍﻭ ﺫﺧﻴﺮﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺭﺙ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺍﻭ ﺑﻪ »ﺑﻮﺩﻥ«‬
‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ« ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪ِ .‬‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ »ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ِ« ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﺩﺍﺩﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺕ ژﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ‬
‫ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻳﺎ ﺧﻮﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ »ﺣﺎﻟﺖ«ﻯ‬
‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺫﺍﺗﺶ ﻣﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺕ ﺫﺧﻴﺮﻩ ﺷﺪﻩ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺕ ژﻥ ﺍﻭ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﻳﻚ ﻣﺜﺎﻝ‪ :‬ﺫﺍﺕ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺯﻳﮕ ِﺮ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺍﺯ »ﺧﻮﺩ«‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺳﺘﺮﺳﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺯﻳﮕﺮ ﺣﺪﺍﻗﻞ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﻋﺎﻣﻴﺎﻧﻪ ﺗﺎ ﺁﻥﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﺎﺯﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﻣﺎﻫﻮﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻋﻼﻭﻩ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺕ ﺑﺎ ﺣﺎﻟﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻳﻚ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﺑﺎﺯﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ِ .‬‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺕ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﺗﺼﺎﻭﻳ ِﺮ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ ﺍﺟﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺯﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻣﺒﺪﻝ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺫﺍﺕ»ﺑﺎﺯﻳﮕﺮ«ﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺫﺍﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻔﺶ »ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ِ‬‫ﺩﺭ ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻡ ﺑﺎﺯﻯ‪ِ ،‬‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻭ ﺣﺎﻟﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺁﻥ ﻫﻢ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺑﺪﻧﻰ ﻭ ﮔﻔﺘﺎﺭﻯ ﻳﻚ ﺑﺎﺯﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﺟﺪﺍﻳﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ‬
‫ﮔﺴﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻭ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻭ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻳﻚ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺷﺨﺺ ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻰ ﺭﺍ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺑﺎﺯﻳﮕﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺟﻤﻊ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻦ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﻪ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺑﺨﺶ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺧﻮﺩﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﺑﺎﺯﻳﮕﺮ‪ .‬ﺗﻤﺎﻡ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬
‫ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺑﺎﺯﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻧﺤﻮﺓ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻳﺖ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ :‬ﺍﻭﻝ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻴﺰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻤﺎﻳﺶ ﺑﮕﺬﺍﺭﺩ‪ِ .‬‬ ‫ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻦ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﺸﺪ ﻭ ﺩﻭﺍﻡ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻭﻡ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺗﻮﺳﻂ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‬ ‫ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺳﻮﻡ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﻜﺜﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻋﺪﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭﺟﻪ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﭼﻬﺎﺭﻡ ﺍﻳﻦﻛﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﺍﮔﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﻋﻠﺖ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻣﺪﺍﻭﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭﺍﻡ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻭ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩﺵ ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥ ﻧﻤﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺁﻥ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﭘﺲ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ِﻩ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻦ‬ ‫ﺧﺼﻴﺼﺔ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺁﻭﺭﺩ‬‫ﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﺩﻭﺍﻡ‬ ‫ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴ ِﺪ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ‪» ،‬ﺑﻴﺎﻥ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻴﺘﺶ ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎ ِﺭ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻳﺎ ﺻﺪﻭﺭ‪ِ ،‬‬ ‫***‬
‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﺷﻮﻧﺪﻩ ﺑﺎ ﻫﻢ ﻭ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﻫﻢ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺁﻥﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﭘﻨﺠﻢ‬
‫ﺍﻣﺮ ﺻﺎﺩﺭﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺻﺎﺩﺭﻛﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﻭ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﺟﺪﺍ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ‬ ‫ﭘﺲ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﻋﻠّﺖ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻝ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺭﺍﻩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺕ ﻳﻚ ژﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺭﺍ ﻧﻪ ﺧﻠﻖ‬ ‫ﺁﻳﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭ ﺑﺨﺶ ﺟﺪﺍﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺍﻧﺪ؟ ﺁﻳﺎ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻀﺎﺩ ﻳﺎ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺑﺎ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻒ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻧﻪ ﺻﺎﺩﺭ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ؟ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻫﻢﺳﻨﺦ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻛﻨﺪ؟ ﺍﻣﻮﺭ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖﺑﺨﺸﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ »ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺕ« ﻧﻴﺴﺖ »ﺑﻴﺎﻥ«‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ؟‬
‫ﺍﻃﻼﻋﺎﺕ ژﻥﻫﺎﻯ ﺍﻭﺳﺖ‪ .‬ژﻥﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻫﺮ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ‪ِ ،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻮﺭ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺎﻣﺸﺎﻥ ﭘﻴﺪﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ‬
‫ﻛﻪ »ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ« ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ »ﺣﺎﻝ« ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺏ ﺳﺎﺩﻩ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﮔﺰﺍﺭﻩ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻳﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻣﺼﺎﺩﺭﻩﺑﻪ‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ »ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ« ﭘﻴﺎﻣﺪ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ‬ ‫ﻧﺒﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺩﻗﻴﻘ ًﺎ ﺗﻌﻴﻴﻦ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻛﻪ »ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖﻳﺎﺑﻰ« ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺘﺄﺧﺮ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﻨﺘﻰ ﻣﺘﺎﻓﻴﺰﻳﻚ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ ﺷﻮﺩ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﺎ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﻭ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﭼﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﻭ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻩ ﻳﺎ ﺻﺎﺩﺭ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍﺑﻄﻪﺍﻯ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ؟‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺷﺒﺎﻫﺖﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﺑﻄﺔ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺩﻭﺍﻡ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪99 1393‬‬

 ‫ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺟﺰ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ِ‬
‫ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ؟ ﺍﺯ ﻛﺠﺎ ﺁﻣﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ؟ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ؟‬ ‫ﻣﺜﺎﺑﻪﻯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ‬
‫ﺟﻮﺍﺏ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪» :‬ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺔ ﻋﻠّﺖﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺲ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﻭ ﺗﻼﺷﻰ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺗﻘﺪﻡ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ 23.‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫‪24‬‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻃﻮﺭ ﻧﺎﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﺳﺮﺗﺎﺳﺮ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺘﺄﺛﺮ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﺟﺰ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ .‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺩﺭ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺷﺪﻥ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﻋﻠّﺖﺍﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺲ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺍﻳﻦﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺫﺍﺗﺶ ﻛﻪ »ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻨﺠﺎ ﺟﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺁﺧﺮﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﻆ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻭ ﻣﻘﺪﻡ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪،‬‬
‫ﮔﺎﻡ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻟﻮﺍﻯ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‬
‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻋﻠّﺖ‪ ،‬ﺟﻤﻊ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻫﻮﻳﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﻨﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‬
‫ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺎﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞﺷﺪﻥ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖﻳﺎﻓﺘﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻩ ﻭ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺍﺟﺎﺯﻩ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﮕﺬﺭﺩ‬
‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻳﺎ‬
‫ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺩﺭ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺩﺍﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﺷﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺟﻤﻊ ﻭ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻉ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ِ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺸﺔ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻮﻗﻒ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ‬
‫ﻭ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪﻯ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺯﻣﺎﻥﻣﻨﺪﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﻭ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺩﺭﻭﻥ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺧﻄﻰ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﺗﻤﺎ ِﻡ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻄﻠﻖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ »ﺯﻣﺎﻥ« ﺑﺎ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﺪ‪» .‬ﻣﻜﺎﻥ« ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ‪ .‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﺣﺎﺿﺮ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻳﺎ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ‪» .‬ﺷﺪﻥ« ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺫﺍﺗﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﻭ ﻫﻢﺯﻳﺴﺘﻰ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺛﺎﺑﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻝ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻡ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺑﺮ ﭘﺎﻳﺔ‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺩﻗﻴﻖﺗﺮ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻨﻮﺯ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ »ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖﻳﺎﺑﻰ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ‬
‫ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔﺑﺮﮔﺴﻮﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﺗﻼﺷﻰ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﻧﻮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺠﺎﻡ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ؟« ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺳﺎﺩﻩﺗﺮ‪» :‬ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟« ﭘﺎﺳﺨﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻣﺜﺎﻝ ﻗﺒﻞ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﻭﭼﺮﺧﻪ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺷﺪﻥ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺍﻳﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺶ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﮔﺮﻭ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺩﻗﻴﻖﺗﺮ ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻭ‬
‫»ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ« ﺭﺍ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺸﺴﺘﻦ ﻭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻭ ﺟﺎﺑﺠﺎﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺳﺮﻋﺖ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺍﻭﺿﺎﻉ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﻔﻞ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‬
‫‪ ...‬ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ ﮔﺮﻩﮔﺎﻩ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺣﺎﺻﻞﺷﺎﻥ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻳﻰ‬ ‫***‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﭘﻴﺸﻨﻬﺎﺩ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺩﻭﭼﺮﺧﻪ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﺷﺸﻢ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ‬
‫ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺟﺰﺍ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻯ ﺩﻭﭼﺮﺧﻪ ﻭ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺳﺎﺧﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻠّﺖ‬ ‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‪ ،‬ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ؟ ﺍﮔﺮ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻧﻴﺰ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻛﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﮔﺬﺭﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻛﻨﺎﺭ ﻫﻢ ﻣﻰﻧﺸﻴﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‬
‫ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺷﺮﻁ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ؟ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺍﻛﺜﺮﺍً‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪،‬‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﺳﻨﺪ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ؟ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺑﻰﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ ﻳﺎ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‬ ‫ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺴﻴﻄﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺸﺎﻫﺪﻩ‪ :‬ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎ ﻫﻤﻪ ﻣﺮﻛﺐ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻭ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻣﺮﻛﺐ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﺸﺎﻥ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻫﻮﻯ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ‬
‫ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻓﻈﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‬ ‫ﻼ ﺩﻭﭼﺮﺧﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ ﻭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‪ ،‬ﻣﺜ ً‬
‫ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻭ ﺧﺎﺹ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‪ِ ،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﺻﻨﺪﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﺳﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﭼﺮﺥ‪ ،‬ﺯﻧﺠﻴﺮ ﻭ ‪ . ...‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺟﺰﺍ ﻫﻢ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺟﺰﺍ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺣﻀﻮﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﺎﺗﻰ ﺷﻜﻞ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺥ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻼﺳﺘﻴﻚ ﻭ ﺳﻴﻢﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫ﻋ ّﻠﺖﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺗﺎﻡ ﻭ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﭘﻴﺸﺎﭘﻴﺶ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻓﻠﺰﻯ ﻭ ﺩﺍﻳﺮﻩ ﻭ ‪ . ...‬ﻭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﻳﺮﻩ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻧﻘﺎﻁ ﻭ ﺷﻌﺎﻉﻫﺎ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻣﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‬
‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﺍﻟﻰ ﻭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥﻣﻨﺪﻯ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺩﺍﻳﺮﻩ ﻭ ‪ . ...‬ﺭﻭﻧﺪﻯ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ‪ :‬ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻯ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻛﻨﻮﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﻋﻠﺖ ﺯﻣﺎﻥﻣﻨﺪﻯ ﻭ ِ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻳﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻳﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺤﻘﻖ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺍﻟﻰ ﺁﺧﺮ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻫﺮ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ﺁﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻳﺶ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻣﮕﺮ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﻭ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻛﻞ ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭﻧﻮﺭﺩﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺤﻠﻴﻞ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺲ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭ ﻣﺤﻘﻖﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺯ ﺗﻌﺪﺍﺩﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭﺟﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻓﻰ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ ﺷﺪﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺍﺩﺍﻣﺔ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺭﻭﻧﺪ ﻧﺸﺎﻥﺩﻫﻨﺪﺓ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ ﻭ ﻳﻜﺘﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭﺟﻪﺍﻯ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻭ‬ ‫ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﺑﺮ ﺫﺍﺕﻫﺎ ﻣﻘﺪﻡﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺐ ﻭ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ‬
‫ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﺳﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻓﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ ،‬ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎ ﻓﺮﺍﺗﺮ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺫﺍﺕﻫﺎ ﺣﺎﺻﻞ‬
‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﻳﺎ ﺩﻭﺭ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﻳﺎ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﺟﺎ ﻛﻪ ﺫﺍﺗﻰ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺟﻬﺎﻥ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻗﺴﻤﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﻧﻘﺸﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪﻩﺍﺵ ﺭﺍ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‪ :‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪100‬‬

‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﺣﺎﻝ ﻧﻴﺰ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﻣﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺫﺍﺕﻫﺎ‬
‫ﻭ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻰﻳﺎﺑﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺫﺍﺕﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬
‫ﻫﻢ ﺑﺮ ﻣﺒﻨﺎﻯ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻛﺮﺩ؟ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﭼﻴﺴﺖ؟ ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﻣﻰﺁﻳﺪ؟ ﭼﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺸﺨﺼﺎﺗﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ؟ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﻭﺍﻡ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺩﻭﺍﻡ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻧﮕﺎﻩ ﺩﺍﺷﺖ ﻭ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﺳﻨﺘﻰ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﺸﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﻭ ﻋﺪﻡ ّ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ ﭘﺮﺩﺍﺧﺖ‪ :‬ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪ ّ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻝ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﻧﺪ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻫﻴﭻﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪ ،‬ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ِ ِ‬
‫ﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻧﻈﺮ ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﭼﺎﺭﻩﺍﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ ﺍﻳﻦﻛﻪ‬ ‫ّ‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﻨﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺍﺑﺪ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺑﻤﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺩﻭﺍﻡ ﺑﻴﺎﻭﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﺯﺩﻥ‬
‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺑﺎ ﺣﺪ ِ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﺮ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻣ‬ ‫ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‬
‫ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭﺍﻡ ﺑﻴﺎﻭﺭﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﻨﺪ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﻛﺮﺍﻥ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ ،‬ﺩﻭﺍﻡ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﺎ ﺑﻰ ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺣﺎﺻﻠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺍﺯ ﻫﻢ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ‪،‬‬
‫ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎﺯﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻰﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ﺑﻰﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮ‬
‫ﭘﺲ ﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﭘﺲ ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫»ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ«‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺗﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ‪/‬ﻋﺪ ِﻡ ّ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺩﻳﺪﮔﺎﻩ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ّ‬
‫ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭﺑﺎﺭﻩ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻛﺮﺩ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻨﻰ ﻧﻔﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ؟ ﻣﺴﻠﻤ ًﺎ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﻴﺖ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪» .‬ﺁﻳﺎ ﻫﺮ ّ‬
‫ﺫﺍﺕ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪﮔﺸﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺘﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﺑﻤﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍﻛﻪ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍﻯ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺟﺎﻯ ﻃﺮﺡ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﭘﺮﺳﺸﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ؛ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ‬
‫ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ »ﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻳﻨﺪﺓ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻭ ﺑﻰﺩﺭﻧﮓ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻃﺮﺍﻭﺕ ﻭ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻒ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻫﻴﭻﮔﺎﻩ‬
‫‪25‬‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪» .‬ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ ‪ ...‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺗﺮﻛﻴﺒﻰ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﺔ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺩ ّﻳﺖ ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺭﻗﻢ ﻣﻰﺯﻧﺪ‪ «.‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎﺭ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖﻣﻨﺪ‬
‫ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﻄﻠﻘ ًﺎ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻧﻮ ‪ ...‬ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺻﻞ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻣﺘﻜﺜﺮ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺜﺮﺗﺶ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻋﺪﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻛﺜﺮﺗﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫‪27‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺍﺻﻞ ﺑﺎﺯﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﭼﻨﺎﻥ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍﺻﻞ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪«.‬‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺍﻣﺮ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻋﻴﻦ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ﻭ ﻣﻄﻠﻖ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺟﻮﻫ ِﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻳﺎ ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ‪،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ‪،‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖﻣﻨﺪ ﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ .‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻛﺸﻴﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﻫﻢ‬ ‫ﺗﺎ ﺍﺑﺪ ﺍﺯ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺜﺮﺗﺶ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ ِ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻧﺎﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻧﺪ ﭘﺲ ﻭﺿ ِﻊ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴ ِﺮ ِ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻏﻴﺮﻋﺪﺩﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖﻣﻨﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻛﺜﺮﺗﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻨﺎﻫﻰ‬
‫ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺩﻭﺍﻡ ﻧﻤﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭﺍﻡ ﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺩﻭﺍﻡ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ‪ .‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﻣﺪﺍﻭ ِﻡ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ‬
‫ﺗﻮﻗﻒ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻭ ﺧﻠ ِﻊﻳﺪ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻣﺮﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻭﺿﻊ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺘﻠﺰﻡ ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ‪/‬‬
‫ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺑﻰﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﺑﻤﺎﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺩﻟﻴﻞ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ّ‬
‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻨﺎﻗﺾ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻤﻞ »ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ«‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﻴﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻫﻤﻴﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺩﺳﺖ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻋﺪ ِﻡ ّ‬
‫ﺩﺳﺖ ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺭﻓﺖ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﮔﺬﺭﺍ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺫﺍﺕﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﭼﻴﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞﺍﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ‪ .‬ﻣﻔﻬﻮ ِﻡ ّ‬
‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴ ِﺮ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻥ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ‬ ‫ﻫﺎﻯ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ِ‬ ‫ﭼﮕﻮﻧﮕﻰ ﺁﻧﻬﺎ ﻧﺎﺑﺴﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻯ ﻛﻴﻔﻴﺖﻣﻨﺪ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻴﺸﮕﻰ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻭ ﺫﺍﺕﻫﺎﻯ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺘﻜﻴﻒ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬ ‫ّ‬ ‫ﻳﮕﺎﻧﻪ‪،‬‬ ‫»ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ‬ ‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴ ِﺮ ِ‬‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻭﺿ ِﻊ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ؛ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ‪ ،‬ﻣﻌﻴﻦ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﻰ ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ 26«.‬ﺣﺎﻟﺖﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ِ‬
‫ﻧﻔﻰ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎﺯﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﮔﺸﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺁﻥﻫﺎ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻫﻮﻳﺖ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ ﻛﺴﺐ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ ﻭ ّ‬
‫ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺟﺎﺯﻩ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﺩﺭﺟﻪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ‪ ،‬ﻫﻮﻳﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞ‬
‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺷﺪﻥﺍﺵ ﺩﻭﺍﻡ ﺑﻴﺎﻭﺭﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﺴﺐ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺑﻴﺎﻥﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺟﻮﻫﺮﻧﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺖ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﻰﮔﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﻧﻪ ﻧﻔﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ‪ .‬ﻭﺟﻮ ِﺩ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﭼﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪،‬‬
‫ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻧﻤﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺧﺎﺹ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﻣﺨﺘﺼﺎﺗﻰ ﺧﺎﺹ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎ ﺍﺑﺪ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﻧﻤﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ‬‫ﻭ ﭼﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﺗﺤﻘﻖﻳﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ ِ‬
‫ﺑﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻫﻴﭻ »ﺑﻮﺩﻥ«ﻯ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﭼﻪ ﻫﺴﺖ‪» ،‬ﺷﺪﻥ« ﺍﺳﺖ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺘﻔﻰ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻧﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻧﻔﻰ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫ﻭ ﺑﺲ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭﺿ ِﻊ ﺛﺎﺑﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻧﻤﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﮕﻴﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻣﺤﻘﻖ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻤﻞ »ﺑﻴﺎﻥ«‪ ،‬ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﭼﻪ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ‬ ‫»ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ« ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ‪ .‬ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻻﺯﻣﺔ ﺁﻥ ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚﺑﺎﺭ ﻭ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻴﻦ ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺪ ﺯﺩﻥ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﺎﻣﺘﻌﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻧﻔﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ّ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ »ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﺎﻫﻴﺎﺕ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻭ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫»ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ« ﺭﺍﻫﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﺎ ﺭﺳﻴﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮﺩﺍﺷﺘﻰ ﺩﻗﻴﻖ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﺔ‬
‫ﺧﻮﺩ« ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪» :‬ﺍﺻﻄﻼﺡ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺪ ﺗﻌﺒﻴﺮ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﻠﻴﻒ »ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ« ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﻜﺮ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺭﻭﺷﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻤﺎﻧﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭘﻴﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ‬
‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻴﻢ‪ ،‬ﻫﻨﮕﺎﻣﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺁﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻓﻬﻤﻴﻢ‪ .‬ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻛﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﺴﺌﻠﻪﺍﻯ ﻣﺮﺑﻮﻁ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﻣﻰﺳﺎﺯﺩ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎ ﺁﻧﺠﺎ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫***‬
‫ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺷﺪﻥ ﻭ ﺑﻮﺩﻥ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻣﻰﮔﺬﺭﺩ ﺁﺭﻯ ﮔﻔﺘﻪ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬ ‫ﻫﻔﺘﻢ‬
‫‪ ...‬ﺑﻪ ﻋﺒﺎﺭﺕ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ‪ :‬ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺖ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ‬ ‫ﺣﺴﺐ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺷﺪﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺑﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﺮ ﻋﻜﺲ‪ ،‬ﻭﺍﻗﻌﻴﺖ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‬ ‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻣﺪﺍﻭ ِﻡ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪ .‬ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬
‫ﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ 28«.‬ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ‬ ‫ﻳﺎﻓﺘﻦ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻫﺮ ﻟﺤﻈﻪ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ‬
‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﻭﺍﻡ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎ ﻭ ﺫﺍﺕﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻝ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﺳﻄﺔ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺩﺭ ﺩﺭﺟﻪ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛ ّﻤﻰ ِ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪101 1393‬‬

‫)ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩﻯ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻭ ﻧﻔﻰ ﻧﻮﻉ ﻳﺎ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻉ‬ ‫ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻌﺮﺽ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ ﺷﺪﻧﻰ‬
‫ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﺍﺯ ﺍﻧﺴﺎﻥ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎﻡ »ﻣﺠﻨﻮﻥ« ﻳﺎ »ﻧﺎﻗﺺﺍﻟﺨﻠﻘﻪ« ﻭ ‪ ،(...‬ﭘﺎﻳﺒﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ِ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻰﻭﻗﻔﻪ‪ :‬ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ‪ .‬ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ‬
‫ﻏﺎﻳﺖ ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺨﻰ )ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﺼﻮﺭ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻭ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺣﺎﻝ ﺑﺎ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﺻﻞ ِ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻝ‬
‫ﺍﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﺗﻜﺮﺍ ِﺭ ﻳﻚ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﺸﺨﺺ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺭﻓﺖ(‪ ،‬ﭘﺎﻳﺒﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻝ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻛ ّﻤﻰ ﻭ ﺩﺭﺟﻪ ﭘﻴﺪﺍ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺍﺩﺭﺍﻙ ﺷﺪﻩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺩﺭ ﻣﻮﻗﻌﻴﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻭ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ )ﺍﻋﺘﻘﺎﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺩﺳﺘﻮﺭﺍﻟﻌﻤﻞ‬ ‫ﺣﻴﺚ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻝ ﺩﺭ ﻣﻜﺎﻥ »ﺑﺎﺯ ﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ«‪ .‬ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ِ‬
‫ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻓﺮﻣﻮﻝﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻋﻠﻤﻰ( ﻭ ‪ ...‬ﻫﻤﻪ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﮔﺬﺷﺘﻪ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻛﺮﺩ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻛﺮﺩﻩ ﻭ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﺎﻧﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺭﺍ ﻃﻠﺐ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﻣﻜﺎﻥ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﺁﻣﺪ ﻫﻤﺎﻥﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻛﻪ ﺗﺎ ﻛﻨﻮﻥ ﺁﻣﺪﻩ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ ِ‬
‫ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻭ‬ ‫ﺑﻰﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﻣﺸﻤﻮﻝ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻪ‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮﻯ ﺍﺯﭘﻴﺶﺩﺍﺩﻩﺷﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻋﻤﻞ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺴﺐ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﺯﻣﺎﻥ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻭ ﻧﺎﺑﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺯﻣﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻈﻴﻢﺗﺮ ﻭ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩﺗﺮ ﺍﺯ‬
‫ﺟﺰ »ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ«‪» .‬ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ« ﻧﻮﻋﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻋﻤﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻳﺎ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺗﺄﻣﻴﻦ ﻭ ﺗﺒﻴﻴﻦ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ‪ِ ،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺷﺪﻥ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﺼﻮﻳﺮ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﭘﻴﺶﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺭﺥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﻟﻮﺯ ﺍﺩﻋﺎ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‬
‫»ﭼﻴﺰ«ﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﺜﺮﺕﮔﺮﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻣﺘﻜﺜﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺍﮔﺮ ﺑﺘﻮﺍﻥ‬
‫ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻚ ﻳﻚ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻲ ﻳﻚ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺭﺥ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ‬ ‫ﺍﻧﺪﻳﺸﻪﺍﻯ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺭﺍ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﺤﺎﻝ ﻣﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬ ‫ﻋ ّﻠﺘﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬
‫ﻳﺎ ﺗﺄﺛﺮ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻳﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁ ﺑﺎ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﺑﺎ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞﺍﺵ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺭﺍ ﺍﺯ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﺑﺎﺯ‬ ‫ﺗﻜﺮﺍ ِﺭ ﻳﻚ ِ‬
‫ﻣﺘﺼﻮﺭ ﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ ﻫﻢﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﺩﻭﺍﻡ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﺁﻥ ﻧﻴﺎﺯ ﺩﺍﺭﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺩﺭ ﺭﺍﻩﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺟﻮﻫﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﺸﻜﻞ ﺍﺯ ﺑﻰﻧﻬﺎﻳﺖ‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻜﺪﻳﮕﺮ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﻧﺸﺎﻥ ﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﻣﺘﻜﺜﺮ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ ﺗﺎ ﺫﺍﺕﻫﺎ ﺭﺍ ﺷﻜﻞ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻋ ّﻠﺖ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺩﻳﮕﺮﻯ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‪ .‬ﺑﺎ ﺩﻭﺍﻡ ﺁﻭﺭﺩﻥ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﺩﻫﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﺩﻭ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﻫﻢﺳﺎﻥ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﺮﺍ ﻛﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‪ ،‬ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‬ ‫ﻋ ّﻠﺖﺩﺭﻭﻥﻣﺎﻧﺪﮔﺎﺭ‬
‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﻭ ﺍﺭﺗﺒﺎﻁِ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ‬ ‫ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﺩﻳﮕﺮ ﻓﻬﻤﻴﺪﻩ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺭﺍ ﻳﺎﻓﺖ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻋ ّﻠﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻪ ﺗﻤﺎﻡ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﻋﻴﻨ ًﺎ ﻣﺎﻧﻨﺪ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﭼﻪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺑﺎ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻧﻪ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩﺵ‬
‫ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﻣﻌﻤﻮ ًﻻ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻨﺎﻗﺾ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺲ ﺣﺘﻰ ﺍﮔﺮ ﻧﺴﺒﺘﻰ ﻫﻢ‬
‫ﺑﻴﺮﻭﻥﻧﻤﻰﺁﻳﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺩﻧﻴﺎﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‪ ،‬ﺩﻧﻴﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﻧﻴﺎﻯ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻭ ﭘﺎﻯﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺮﺩﺩ ﻭ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻫﻴﭻ ﻭﺟﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎ ﻭ ﻣﺨﺘﺼﺎﺕ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺭﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺣﻴﻄﻪ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻋﻠﻮﻡ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﺎﺭﻳﺦ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻧﺎﻣﻤﻜﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺑﻠﻜﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻼﻭﻩ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‬
‫ﺍﺧﻼﻕ ﻭ ‪ ...‬ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﺩﻧﻴﺎﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‪ ،‬ﻫﻴﭻ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﻣﮕﺮ ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻤﻰﺍﻳﺴﺘﺪ ﻭ ﺗﻮﻗﻒ ﻧﻤﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻤﻞ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﻫﻢ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻥ‬
‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ‪ .‬ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺩﻧﻴﺎﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﻰﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺪ ﻭ ﭘﻴﺶ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﺯ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ ﻭ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻋﻤﻞ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‪ِ ،‬‬
‫ﺍﺯ ﺟﻨﺲ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ِ .‬‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‪ .‬ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﺷﺒﺎﻉ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺭﺍ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩﺵ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻮﻁ ﻭ‬
‫ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻭ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﺑﻰﻭﻗﻔﻪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﻯ »ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﺯ ﻋﺪﻡ« ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺑﺴﺘﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺟﻮﺩ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺮﻙ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﭘﺬﻳﺮﺩ‪ .‬ﻋﻤﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ‬
‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ِ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ‬ ‫ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺧﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ِ .‬‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺗﺎﺯﻩﺍﻯ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻋ ّﻠﺖ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎﻳﺪ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ِ ،‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ‬
‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﺟﻮﺩ ﻣﻰﺁﻭﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻛﻨﻨﺪﺓ ﻫﻤﺎﻥ ﻧﺴﺒﺖ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﺁﻥ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪» :‬ﻛﻨﺶ«‪ .‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻨﺸﻰﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻴﻄﺔ ﺍﻣﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﻪ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺿ ِﺪ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻭ ﺿ ِﺪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻳﺎ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻭﺍﻗﻊ ﺑﺮ ﺿ ِﺪ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﺿ ِﺪ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻋﻤﻞ‬
‫ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻳﺎ ﺩﺭ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺘﻰ ﺍﺯﭘﻴﺶﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﺗﺨﺮﻳﺐ ﻳﺎ‬‫ﻭﻳﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ِ ،‬‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ‬
‫ﻛﺎﺭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻥ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ‬ ‫ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﻭ ﻣﺘﻼﺷﻰ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﻮﺟﻮﺩ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻔﻊ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺧﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭ‬ ‫ﺛﺒﺎﺕ ﻳﻚ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﺨﺮﺏ‪ ،‬ﺗﻼﺵ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻭ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﺫﺍﺕ‬
‫ِ‬
‫ﺁﻣﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﻨﺶ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮ ﺧﻼﻑ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ‪ ،‬ﻧﻪ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ‬ ‫ﻳﺎ ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺧﺎﺻﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻼﺵ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‪ .‬ﺗﻼﺷﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻛﻨﺶ ﻳﻚ ﭘﺎﺳﺦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ ،‬ﻳﻚ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻧﺎﺏ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺣﺮﻛﺘﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺠﺮ ﺑﻪ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻝ ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎ ِﺭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ ،‬ﺣﺪﺍﻗﻞ ﺑﻪ ﻇﺎﻫﺮ‪ .‬ﺗﻼﺷﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻛﻪ ﻫﺪﻓﻰ ﺟﺰ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻧﺪﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﻛﻨﺶ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺳﺮﻛﻮﺏ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺟﺪﻳﺪﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻼﺵ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬
‫ﻫﻤﻴﻦ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ‪ .‬ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺸﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻧﻪ ﺳﻮژﻩﺍﻯ ﭘﻴﺸﻴﻨﻰ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﻫﺪﻓﻰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﮔﺬﺷﺘﺔ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺑﻪ ﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﺑﮋﻩﺍﻯ ﺧﺎﺹ‪ .‬ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺶ ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ ﺳﻮژﻩﺍﺵ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﺩﻫﺪ‪ ،‬ﻫﻢ ﺑﻪ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺪ ﻫﻤﻪ ﭼﻴﺰ ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ »ﺑﻴﺎﻥ« ﻣﻬﻴﺎﺳﺖ‪.‬‬
‫ﺍﺑﮋﻩ‪ .‬ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺸﻰ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺑﺮﻗﺮﺍﺭﻯ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺗﺎﺯﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻭ ﻧﻪ ﺧﻠﻖ ﺍﺯ‬ ‫***‬
‫ﻋﺪﻡ‪ .‬ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻣﺪﺍﻡ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻩ‬ ‫ﻫﺸﺘﻢ‬
‫ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝﻫﺎ ﻳﺎ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﻛﻨﺶ ﻋﻤﻞ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ‪ ،‬ﭘﺎﻯﺑﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺴﺒﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞﺷﺪﺓ ﻣﺸﺨﺼﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ‬
‫ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﻨﺪﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻳﺎ ﺁﻓﺮﻳﺪﻩﻯ ﺍﻳﻦ ﻋﻤﻞﺍﻧﺪ‪.‬‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﺣﺎﻟﺘﻰ ﺧﺎﺹ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﺑﻮﺩﻩﺍﻧﺪ ﻳﺎ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺎﻳﺒﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺍﻧﻮﺍﻋﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ‬
‫ﺩﻳﺮﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﺣﺎﻓﻈﻪ ﻳﺎ »ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕﺷﺪﻥ ﺍﺯ ﺧﻮﺩ« ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮﺍﻥ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪،‬‬ ‫ﺍﺟﺰﺍﻯ ﺧﻮﺩ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﻧﺪ )ﻧﻮﻉ »ﺑﺮگ« ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﻫﺮ ﺑﺮگ ﺟﺰﺋﻰ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻛﻪ ﻳﻚ ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﻳﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﻔﻰ ﻧﻮﺍﻗﺺﺍﺵ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ(‪ ،‬ﭘﺎﻳﺒﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻳﻚ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻭ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮﻧﺎﭘﺬﻳﺮ ﻭ ِ‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪1393‬‬ ‫‪102‬‬

‫‪ .3‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ژﻳﻞ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﭘﻴﻤﺎﻥ ﻏﻼﻣﻰ‪ ،‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﺩﻫﮕﺎﻥ‪.1392 ،‬‬ ‫ﺷﺪﻥ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻓﺮﺍﻳﻨﺪ ﻛﻨﺶ‪ .‬ﻛﻨﺶ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﺟﺪﺍﻯ ﺍﺯ ﻣﺘﻔﺎﻭﺕ ِ‬
‫‪ .4‬ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ :‬ﻧﻮﺁﻣﻮﺯﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﻫﺎﺭﺕ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎﻳﻜﻞ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﺭﺿﺎ ﻧﺠﻒﺯﺍﺩﻩ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪:‬‬ ‫ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﺟﻮﻫ ِﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ‬
‫ﻧﺸﺮ ﻧﻰ‪.1392 ،‬‬ ‫ﺑﻴﺎﻥ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ‪ :‬ﻋﻠّﺖ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺧﻮ ِﺩ ﻛﻨﺶﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺶ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ ﻳﺎ ﺑﻪ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬
‫‪Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza, Deleuze, .5‬‬ ‫ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻭ ﺷﺪﻥ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﭘﻴﻮﻧﺪﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻴﻢ ﺑﺎ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ‬
‫‪.1990 ,Gilles, Tr. Martin Joughin, Zone Books‬‬
‫ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺩﺭ ﺣﻴﻄﺔ ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ‬
‫‪Bergsonis, Deleuze, Gilles, Tr. Hugh Tomlinson .6‬‬
‫ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﻧﻬﻔﺘﮕﻰ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﭼﻴﺰﻯ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ ﺟﺰ ﻛﻨﺶ‪ ،‬ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺖ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻨﺰﻟﺔ‬
‫‪.1991 ,&Barbara Habberjam, Zone Books‬‬
‫ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﻨﺶ ﻫﻤﻮﺍﺭﻩ ﻧﺎﺁﮔﺎﻩ‪ ،‬ﺑﻰﻫﺪﻑ ﻭ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺍﺳﺖ‬
‫‪Difference and Repetition, Deleuze, Gilles, Tr. .7‬‬
‫‪.1994 ,Paul Patton, Columbia University Press‬‬
‫ﻭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﻫﻤﻴﺸﻪ ﺁﮔﺎﻩ‪ ،‬ﻫﺪﻑﻣﻨﺪ ﻭ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰ‪» :‬ﻛﻨﺶﮔﺮﻯ‬
‫‪The Will To Power, Nietzsche, Friedrich. Tr. .8‬‬
‫‪29‬‬
‫ﺑﺰﺭگ ﺍﺻﻠﻰ ﻧﺎﺧﻮﺩﺁﮔﺎﻩ ﺍﺳﺖ ‪ ...‬ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﺫﺍﺗ ًﺎ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪«.‬‬ ‫ِ‬
‫‪Walter Kaufmann, R.J. Holingdale, Newyork:‬‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ ،‬ﺩﺭ ﻳﻚ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺍﺯ ﺁﻥﺟﺎ ﻛﻪ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ‬
‫‪.1968,Vintage‬‬ ‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩﺓ ﺗﻨﮓ ﻭ ﻛﻮﭼﻚ ﺑﺎﻗﻰ ﻣﻰﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪Essays on Deleuze, Smith, Daniel W., Edinburgh .9‬‬ ‫ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻣﺒﺘﻨﻰ ﺑﺮ ﺗﻜﺮﺍﺭ ﻭ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ‪ ،‬ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰﺍﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ‪،‬‬
‫‪.2012 ,University Press‬‬ ‫ﺧﻄﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﺤﺪﻭﺩ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺭﻳﻚ ﻭ ﻧﺰﺩﻳﻚ ﺑﻪ »ﻫﻴﭻ« ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ‬
‫ﺑﺮﺍﻯ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞﺍﻧﺪ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻥ ﺩﺭ ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫ﭘﻲﻧﻮﺷﺖﻫﺎ‬ ‫ﺑﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﻐﺎﻳﺮ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻭ ﺟﻮﻫﺮ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﭘﻴﺶ ﻣﻰﺭﻭﺩ‬
‫‪ .1‬ﺍﺧﻼﻕ‪ ،‬ﺑﺨﺶ ‪ 1‬ﻗﻀﻴﻪ ‪.11‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﻣﻰﺁﻓﺮﻳﻨﺪ ﻭ ﮔﺴﺘﺮﺩﻩ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻛﻨﺶ ﺍﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺟﺮﻳﺎﻥ ﻣﻰﺍﻧﺪﺍﺯﺩ‬
‫‪ .2‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﺎﺭﻳﻒ ‪ 3‬ﻭ ‪.5‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰ ﻣﻰﺑﺨﺸﺪ‪ .‬ﻛﻨﺶ ﺻﻮﺭﺕ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ‬
‫‪ .3‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﻗﻀﻴﻪ ‪.7‬‬ ‫ﻭ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺿ ِﺪ ﺣﺮﻛﺖ ﻭ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ‬
‫‪ .4‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺍﺻﻞ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﻪ ‪.4‬‬
‫ﻭ ﺩﺭ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﻪ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺿ ِﺪ ﺯﻧﺪﮔﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪ :‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺛﺒﺎﺕ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻳﻰ ﻛﻪ‬
‫‪5 Essays on Deleuze, p 32.‬‬
‫ﻭﺿﻌﻴﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻭ ﺣﺎﻟﺖﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻘ ِﺮ ﺁﻥ ﻳﺎﺭﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﻪ ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭ ﻣﺎﻧﺪﻥ ﻳﻚ‬
‫‪ 6‬ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ :‬ﻧﻮﺁﻣﻮﺯﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.34‬‬
‫ﻣﻰﺭﺳﺎﻧﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺩﺭ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ‬
‫‪7 Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza, p 171.‬‬
‫‪8 Ibid. p 172.‬‬
‫ﻭﻳﺮﺍﻧﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻮﻟﺪ‪ .‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ »ﺣﻔﻆ« ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ‬
‫‪ 9‬ﺍﺧﻼﻕ‪ ،‬ﺑﺨﺶ ‪ ،1‬ﻗﻀﻴﻪ ‪.18‬‬ ‫ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺩﻳﻮﻧﻴﺰﻭﺳﻰ ﻧﺨﺴﺘﻴﻦ‬ ‫»ﺗﻮﺍﻥ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻳﺎ ِ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫»ﭘﻴﺶ« ﻣﻰﺭﺍﻧﻨﺪ‪.‬‬
‫‪30‬‬
‫‪ 10‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.59‬‬ ‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﺑﻴﺎﻥ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﻛﻨﺶﮔﺮﻯ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ «.‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺯ‬
‫‪ 11‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺻﺺ‪94‬ـ‪.95‬‬ ‫ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﺣﺪﻭﺩ ﻭ ﻣﺮﺯﻫﺎ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻣﻰﺷﻮﺩ ﻭ ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻰﮔﻴﺮﺩ ﻭ ﺍﺯ‬
‫‪12 The Will To Power, p 1064.‬‬ ‫ﺭﺍ ﺣﻔﻆ ﻣﻰﻛﻨﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﻫﺮ ﺩﻭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻫﺴﺘﻰﺍﻧﺪ ﻭ ﻫﺮﻛﺪﺍﻡ ﺩﺭ ﺟﺎﻳﮕﺎ ِﻩ‬
‫‪13 Ibid. p 1066.‬‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺩ ﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯﺍﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭘﺎﻳﺒﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﭘﺎﻳﺒﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﻭ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻝ‬
‫‪14 Bergsonis, p 55.‬‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ‪ .‬ﺍ ّﻣﺎ ﭼﻨﻴﻦ ﭼﻴﺰﻯ‬ ‫ﺩﺭ ﻛﺎ ِﺭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻝ ﺩﺭ ِ‬
‫ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪. 96‬‬ ‫‪15‬‬ ‫ﻋﻤﻞ‬‫ﺣﺴﺐ ﻗﺎﻋﺪﺓ ﻋﻠﻴﺖ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻧﻴﺴﺖ‪ .‬ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻝ ﻧﻤﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺍﺧﺘﻼﻟﻰ ﺩﺭ ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺮ ِ‬
‫‪16 Bergsonis, p 55.‬‬ ‫ﻋﻠّﺖ ﺍﻳﺠﺎﺩ ﻛﻨﺪ‪ .‬ﭘﺎﻳﺪﺍﺭﻯ ﻭ ﺩﻭﺍ ِﻡ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺻﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻳﻚ ﻭﻫﻢ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻳﻚ‬
‫‪17 Ibid. p 37.‬‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻻﺕ‬‫ِ‬ ‫ﺩﺭﻭﻧﻰ ﺁﻥ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﺘﻈﺮ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺸﻰ ﻭ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺧﻴﺎﻝ‪ .‬ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ‬
‫‪18 Ibid. p 38.‬‬ ‫‪31‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﺪ ﻣﺎﻧﺪ‪» :‬ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶﮔﺮ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪﮔﺸﺖ‪ «.‬ﺍﻳﻦ‬
‫‪19 Ibid.‬‬
‫ﺿﺮﻭﺭﺕ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺍﮔﺮ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺧﻮﺍﺳﺖ ﺍﺧﻼﻗﻰ ﻳﺎ ﻳﻚ ﺁﺭﺯﻭ ﻛﻪ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﻧﻪ ﻳﻚ‬
‫‪20 Ibid. pp 97-96.‬‬
‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺗﻔﺎﻭﺕ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ‪ ،‬ﺍﻳﻦ ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﻛﻨﺶ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺮﻭﻫﺎﻯ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻥ‬
‫ِ‬
‫‪21 Ibid. p 96.‬‬
‫ﻛﻨﺸﻰﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺁﻳﻨﺪﻩ ﺑﺎﺯﻣﻰﮔﺮﺩﻧﺪ‪ .‬ﻫﺮ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ ﺑﻪ ﺗﺒ ِﻊ ﻫﺮ ﺣﺎﻟﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ‬
‫‪22 Ibid.‬‬
‫‪23 Difference and Repetition, p 60.‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﻜﻮﻡ ﺑﻪ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﺩﮔﺮﮔﻮﻧﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﭘﺎﻳﺒﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ ﺑﺎﺯﻧﻤﺎﻳﻰ ﻭ ﻭﺍﻛﻨﺶ‪،‬‬
‫‪ 24‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﺔ ﻋﻤﻠﻰ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.30‬‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻳﺒﻨﺪﻯ ﺑﻪ ﻓﻨﺎ ﻭ ﻧﻴﺴﺘﻰ ﺍﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺣﺎﻻﺕ ﻭ ﺍﻳﻦﻫﻤﺎﻧﻰﻫﺎﻯ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺮ ﻧﺨﻮﺍﻫﻨﺪ‬
‫‪ 25‬ژﻳﻞ ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ :‬ﻧﻮﺁﻣﻮﺯﻯ ﺩﺭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.132‬‬ ‫ﻛﻨﺶ ﻣﺤﺾ‬ ‫ﭘﺎﻳﻴﺪ‪ .‬ﺗﻨﻬﺎ ﺭﺍ ِﺯ ﺟﺎﻭﺩﺍﻧﮕﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﺸﺒﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻫﺴﺘﻰ ﻭ ﻣﺒﺪﻝﺷﺪﻥ ﺑﻪ ِ‬
‫‪ 26‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.131‬‬ ‫ﺣﺴﺐ ﺑﺪﻥ‪ .‬ﺁﻧﭽﻪ ﺩﺭ ﺳﻴﻄﺮﺓ‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ﺍﺳﺖ‪ :‬ﺧﻼﺻﻰ ﺍﺯ ﺳﻴﻄﺮﺓ ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﻞ ﺑﺮ‬
‫‪32‬‬
‫‪ 27‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.94‬‬ ‫ﺁﮔﺎﻫﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺭ ﺩﺍﺭﺩ‪ ،‬ﻫﻨﻮﺯ ﻧﻤﻰﺩﺍﻧﺪ ﻛﻪ »ﻳﻚ ﺑﺪﻥ ﭼﻪ ﻛﺎﺭ ﻣﻰﺗﻮﺍﻧﺪ ﺑﻜﻨﺪ‪«.‬‬
‫‪ 28‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.97‬‬
‫‪ 29‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.86‬‬ ‫ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻭ ﻣﺂﺧﺬ‬
‫‪ 30‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.88‬‬ ‫‪ .1‬ﺍﺧﻼﻕ‪ ،‬ﺍﺳﭙﻴﻨﻮﺯﺍ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﺭﻭﺥ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻣﺤﺴﻦ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﮕﻴﺮﻯ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﺩﺍﻧﺸﮕﺎﻫﻰ‪،‬‬
‫‪ 31‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.131‬‬ ‫‪.1376‬‬
‫‪ 32‬ﻫﻤﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺹ ‪.83‬‬ ‫‪ .2‬ﻧﻴﭽﻪ ﻭ ﻓﻠﺴﻔﻪ‪ ،‬ﺩﻟﻮﺯ‪ ،‬ژﻳﻞ‪ ،‬ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻋﺎﺩﻝ ﻣﺸﺎﻳﺨﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮﺍﻥ‪ :‬ﻧﺸﺮ ﻧﻰ‪.1390 ،‬‬

‫‪ ،‬ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‪ ،81‬ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ ‪103 1393‬‬

 • Editorial

• Life and Works

Why Deleuze?/ Claire Colebrook/ Trans. MostafaAmiri

• Review and Critique

Why What is Philosophy? Why philosophy?/ Ali Khodadadi
Deleuze on Foucault/ Mohammad HosseinDallalRahmani
A mechanistic perspective: on the concept of “machine” in Deleuze’s and Guattari’sAnti-
Oedipus and A Thousand Plateaus/ ImanGanji
Deleuze and the Sign System in Movement-Image/ MiladRowshaniPayan
Francis Bacon: the inspector of talisman-painting/ MortezaKarbalailou
Three different definition of author, literature and minor/ ShapourBehiyan
The logic of time in Difference and Repitition/ Adel Mashayekhi
Deleuze, Marx and Politics/ Nicholas Thoburn/ Mohammad ZamanZamaniJamshidi
Deleuze and Kant’s Critical Philosophy/ Melissa McMahon/ Seyyed Mohammad
JavadSeyyedi

• Essay
The Doctrine of Univocity: Deleuze’s Ontology of Immanence/ Daniel W. Smith/ Seyyed
Mohammad JavadSeyyedi
Gilles Deleuze’sOntology/ Mahdi Parsa

Gilles Deleuze’s Spinoza and the rediscovery of IbnKhaldun in the war machine: in the
absence of theology and radical modernity/ Reza Najafzadeh
Difference and philosophy: the Holy Trinity/ Ali Khodadadi

1393 ‫ ﺧﺮﺩﺍﺩ‬،81‫ ﺷﻤﺎﺭﻩ‬، 104

 In the name of God

Vol.7, No.81 /June 2014

PUBLISHER:
Book House

Managing Editor & Editor – In – Chief:

Ali Owjabi

Editorial Board & Scientific Consulants:

Ghulam-husayn-i Ibrahīmī-yi Dīnanī, Riza Davarī-yi Ardakanī, Zīya’ Mu-
vahhid, Muhammad-i Sa’ īdī-yi Mihr, Muhammad-riza Asadī, Ahad Fara-
marz Gharamalikī

Assistant Editor:
Fatimi Fana

Guest Editor:
Behnaz Dehkordi

Internal Manager:
Elham Ahooie

Editor:
Alī-Riza Rizaī

Art Designer:
Yourik Karimmasihi

Address:
Tehran, Enghelâb ave. bet. Sabâ and Felestin, no. 1080
POSTAL CODE NO:
13145-313
Tel:
+98 21 66415244
www.Ketab.ir
k.m.falsafeh@gmail.com