ABSTRACT Concepts are traditionally pictured as discrete containers that bring together objects or qualities based on the possession of shared, uniform properties. This paper focuses on a contrasting notion of the concept which holds that concepts are defined by their capacity to reach out and connect with other concepts. Two theories in recent continental philosophy maintain this view: one from Ricoeur, the other from Deleuze and Guattari. Both are offered as attempts to bring art and philosophy into relation, but they differ over how the process of connection is theorized. With Ricoeur, a concept is only a concept if it is inherently predisposed to connect with others, and open to being misapplied through metaphor, whereas, with Deleuze and Guattari, connection is left as the general notion of each and every concept being mutually consistent with other concepts, with the consistency attributed to the external action of “bridging.” The author demonstrates the impact of this difference on how the philosophers perceive the art–philosophy relation, and argues that Ricoeur is better placed to provide a theory of philosophical discourse that is open to the aesthetic. Ricoeur can show it through metaphor, while Deleuze and Guattari can only assert or state an art–philosophy relation through a series of technical claims. The significance of the showing–saying distinction is that it can demonstrate the depth with which conceptual connectivity is located within the philosophers’ respective ontologies, and can help to reveal the value of conceptual connectivity for that ontology.

中文翻译：

---

艺术，哲学和概念的连通性：Ricoeur和Deleuze和Guattari

摘要传统上将概念描绘为离散的容器，这些容器基于共享的统一属性将对象或质量组合在一起。本文着重于概念的一个对比概念，该概念认为概念是由它们伸出并与其他概念联系起来的能力定义的。近期大陆哲学中的两种理论保持了这种观点：一种来自Ricoeur，另一种来自Deleuze和Guattari。两者都是为了将​​艺术和哲学联系起来而提供的，但是它们在联系过程的理论化方式上有所不同。在Ricoeur中，只有固有地倾向于与他人建立联系并易于通过隐喻被误用的概念才是概念，而对于Deleuze和Guattari，连接是每个概念与其他概念相互一致的一般概念，其一致性归因于“桥接”的外部作用。作者证明了这种差异对哲学家如何看待艺术与哲学之间的关系的影响，并认为理高更适合提供对美学开放的哲学话语理论。Ricoeur可以通过隐喻来展示它，而Deleuze和Guattari只能通过一系列技术主张来主张或陈述一种艺术与哲学的关系。展示与表述的区别的意义在于，它可以证明概念连通性位于哲学家各自本体之内的深度，并且可以帮助揭示概念连通性对于该本体的价值。归因于“桥接”外部作用的一致性。作者论证了这种差异对哲学家如何看待艺术与哲学的关系的影响，并认为理高更适合提供对美学开放的哲学话语理论。Ricoeur可以通过隐喻来展示它，而Deleuze和Guattari只能通过一系列技术主张来主张或陈述一种艺术与哲学的关系。展示与表述的区别的意义在于，它可以证明概念连通性位于哲学家各自本体之内的深度，并且可以帮助揭示概念连通性对于该本体的价值。归因于“桥接”外部作用的一致性。作者论证了这种差异对哲学家如何看待艺术与哲学的关系的影响，并认为理高更适合提供对美学开放的哲学话语理论。Ricoeur可以通过隐喻来展示它，而Deleuze和Guattari只能通过一系列技术主张来主张或陈述一种艺术与哲学的关系。展示与表述的区别的意义在于，它可以证明概念连通性位于哲学家各自本体之内的深度，并且可以帮助揭示概念连通性对于该本体的价值。作者证明了这种差异对哲学家如何看待艺术与哲学之间的关系产生了影响，并认为里科尔更适合提供对美学开放的哲学话语理论。Ricoeur可以通过隐喻来展示它，而Deleuze和Guattari只能通过一系列技术主张来主张或陈述一种艺术与哲学的关系。展示与表述的区别的意义在于，它可以证明概念连通性位于哲学家各自本体之内的深度，并且可以帮助揭示概念连通性对于该本体的价值。作者证明了这种差异对哲学家如何看待艺术与哲学之间的关系产生了影响，并认为理高更适合提供对美学开放的哲学话语理论。Ricoeur可以通过隐喻来展示它，而Deleuze和Guattari只能通过一系列技术主张来主张或陈述一种艺术与哲学的关系。展示与表述的区别的意义在于，它可以证明概念连通性位于哲学家各自本体之内的深度，并且可以帮助揭示概念连通性对于该本体的价值。而德勒兹和瓜塔里只能通过一系列技术主张来主张或陈述一种艺术与哲学的关系。展示与表述的区别的意义在于，它可以证明概念连通性位于哲学家各自本体之内的深度，并且可以帮助揭示概念连通性对于该本体的价值。而德勒兹和瓜塔里只能通过一系列技术主张来主张或陈述一种艺术与哲学的关系。展示与表述的区别的意义在于，它可以证明概念连通性位于哲学家各自本体之内的深度，并且可以帮助揭示概念连通性对于该本体的价值。