De-Paradoxisation of Paradoxes by Referring to Death as an Ultimate Paradox: The Case of the State-Formation Phase of Japan
De-Paradoxisation of Paradoxes by Referring to Death as an Ultimate Paradox: The Case of the State-Formation Phase of Japan
复制标题
通过将死亡视为终极悖论来消除悖论：以日本国家形成阶段为例
DOI：
10.1017/cbo9781316014509.017
复制
发表时间：
2016
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
I. Morley
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Koji Mizoguchi;C. Renfrew;M. Boyd;I. Morley
损失人的256美元。这一点使我们能够将死亡归类为危及我们生命延续的特定类型的事件之一--例如自然灾害。我们不能用‘自然的观点’来理解自然灾害。我们只能根据它们造成的各种影响和后果来理解它们。这种“讲得通”的可能性使得人们很难接受这些事件。我们可以通过各种方式为尚未发生的改变生活的事件做好准备，但我们无法阻止它们的发生：我们无法影响导致它们的机构。这种不可能促使人类开发各种技术来描绘和感知这些机构，认为这些机构可以通过人类的行动来影响，并使人们感到能够影响它们。换句话说，这些技术的发展是为了使不可预见的事件以某种方式传播，希望它们将为保持生活正常提供尽可能小的障碍。为了达到这一目的，需要三件事：第一，与这些事件不同的东西；第二，与它们有联系的东西；第三，可能有助于关于它们的交流的东西，或被视为能指的东西。最好是每一样东西都能让人们有亲和感或同情心，或者被认为具有社区可以影响的行为模式。因此，选择一些习性可以与人们经常遇到的某些不可预见但不可避免的事件联系在一起的生物，并将其用作交流此类事件的符号，以便理解并有效地驯服它们。我们可以在列维-施特劳斯的不朽神话中找到许多这样的例子(例如，L 1969年)。有许多例子表明，伤害个人和社区的原因被归因于死者。与活生生的生物相比，例如某些被选为不可预见但不可避免的象征的动物和昆虫，死者具有个性。在这里，个性指的是伴随着或可以与单个死者相关的各种传记性记忆。在提到死人时，不可避免地涉及到个性，这将他们与活生生的生物分开，使他们成为不可预见但不可避免的、往往是有害的事件的象征。个人的死亡被认为是一种损失，对社区来说，这相当于一场自然灾害。S/他
256 of the loss of the person. This point allows us to categorise death as one of a certain type of occurrence that jeopardises the continuation of our lives–such as natural disasters. We cannot make sense of natural disasters in terms of ‘nature’s point of view’. We can only make sense of them in terms of the various effects and consequences that they have caused. This impossibility of ‘making sense’makes it difficult to come to terms with these occurrences. We can variously prepare ourselves for life-changing events that are yet to occur, but we cannot prevent them from happening: we cannot influence the agencies that cause them. This impossibility has encouraged human beings to develop various technologies for portraying and perceiving these agencies as something that human beings can influence by their actions, and that make people feel able to influence them. In other words, these technologies are developed to make unforeseeable events somehow communicable, in the hope that they will present as small an obstacle as possible for retaining normality in life. For that purpose, to achieve this, three things are needed: firstly, something different from these events; secondly, something that has a connection to them; and thirdly, something that may aid communication about them, or be seen as a signifier. It is desirable that each of these things be something with which people can have a sense of affinity or sympathy, or something that can be perceived as having behavioural patterns that the community can influence. Accordingly, some living creatures whose habits can be connected to certain unforeseeable-but-inevitable events that people have frequently encountered are chosen, and used as signifiers for communicating about such events, in order to make sense of, and effectively tame, them. We can find many such examples in Levi-Strauss’ monumental Mythologiques (eg, Lévi-Strauss 1969).There are many examples in which the cause of harm coming upon individuals and communities is attributed to the dead. In comparison with living creatures, such as certain animals and insects chosen as the signifiers of the unforeseeable-but-inevitable, the dead have individuality.‘Individuality’, here, refers to various ‘biographical’memories that accompany or can be articulated in relation to individual dead people. The inevitable involvement of individuality in reference to dead people separates them from living creatures as signifiers of unforeseeable but inevitable, and often harmful, events. The death of an individual is experienced as a loss that is comparable to a natural disaster for the community to which s/he