The Importance of the ‘Exterior’ and ‘Errant Matter’: Louis Althusser’s Theoreticism and Self-Criticism Revisited

Abstract

How cogent is Louis Althusser`s self-criticism started in mid-60s to rectify his earlier theoreticism is much debated in contemporary critical scene. My position in this debate is to prove that Althusser in his self-criticism indeed lays bare a lot of blind spots which his earlier theoreticism is riddled with and then opens up the alliance of theoretical practice with other practices which his earlier theoreticism renders impossible. This paper is broken down into three part. In the first part, I start with Althusser`s inconsistent treatment of "guilt feelings" in Reading Capital and his oft-discussed ISA essay. While Althusser comes up with the theory of "guilty reading" in Reading Capital to grant the subject of theoretical practice every latitude in producing scientific knowledge and thus detaching himself from ideology, he disavows rightly after bringing up the existence of "guilty feelings" on the part of the subject of other practices in ISA essay and consequently traps the subject in ideological control without providing any exit. Besides enlarging on why "guilt feelings" of the subject guarantees his detachment from ideology, I will argue that his inconsistent treatment is indicative of a constant error that Althusser`s theoreticism is subject to—that is, the primacy of theoretical practice over other practices. In the second part, I will argue that insofar as this primacy does not pay due attention to the relative autonomy of all social practices that Althusser himself elaborates in his historical materialism, it forces Althusser`s epistemology into a blind alley and makes it theoretically tenuous and politically lame. The entirely autonomous character of scientific-theoretical practice leads to an epistemology which not only renders impossible the ongoing development of knowledge but, while applied in the domain of politics, also elevate the knowledge it produces to the transcendental truth to govern the progress of other practices in the manner of pedagogue. The major contributing factor to these problems is Althusser`s ignorance of the radical otherness or exteriority inherent in the object of knowledge and in the non-theoretical practices under investigation. This radical exteriority makes the object of knowledge resistant to the formulation of theory which works on it and thus activates the ongoing transformation of theory. In the final part, I will argue that the discovery of this exteriority is the chief contribution that Althusser`s self-criticism makes. By redefining philosophy and creating a bland-new epistemology, Althusser brings back the relatively autonomous character that theoretical practice and other practices hold in common. Once the primacy of theoretical practices over other practices is denied, the exteriority of the other practices under theoretical investigation is underlined and the interaction between theoretical practice and other practices precipitated so that the incessant transformation of theory is warranted and the political dogmatism that Althusser`s earlier theoreticism is indicative of also trashed.

在60年代中期，阿圖賽對他早期將理論無限上綱的傾向展開自我批判。在當今的學界裡，一般對他的自我批判的精準、公允與否仍是爭論不休。本文的立場認為阿圖賽的自我批判的確將他早期的一些盲點一一呈現出來，因而得以重新為理論踐作與其他踐作之間的結盟開啟了新的可能性。 本文共分三個部分。在第一部份中，我將先探討阿圖塞在《閱讀資本論》以及他那篇討論意識形態國家機器的文章中，對「罪惡感」所做的不同處理。當阿圖賽《閱讀資本論》中提出「罪惡閱讀」的觀念，讓理論踐作的主體得以創造科學知識，與意識形態作某種程度的脫離，但相反地，在討論意識形態國家機器的文章中，他雖然提及卻又即刻否認罪惡感也在其他踐作的主體心中出現的事實，進而把主體掐入無可掙脫的意識形態牢籠之中。這種對不同的主體做出不同處理的作法暗示出一個在阿圖賽早期的著作中經常出現的一個主題－那就是理論踐作優於其他的踐作。本文第二部分要處理的是，因為理論踐作的絕對優越性明顯違反了阿圖賽自己在他的歷史唯物論中所說的所有社會踐作都有其相對自主性的觀念，他所強調的理論優越性與絕對自主性格不但把他早期的知識論逼進了死胡同，同時在理論上與政治上也都站不住腳。阿圖賽早期的知識論不僅阻斷了不斷發展知識的可能性，一旦用這樣的知識論來思考政治，也會造成將理論踐作所產生出來的知識無陷上綱，變成超越的真理，進而企圖用教條化的方式來強力主導政治踐作的進程。造成這些問題的主要原因在於阿圖賽不管在思考純粹的知識對象物或其他踐作時，因為太過強調理論踐作的優越性，以致於忽略了隱含在這些對象物之中的異質性。就是因為這種異質性使得理論踐作所要處理的對象物無法完全被理論掌握，因此也觸動了理論的不斷進展，免於淪入過分教條化的危險。本文的最後一部分就是要說明阿圖賽的自我批判的主要成就便是發現了這樣的異質性。透過對哲學的重新定義以及提出一套全新的知識論，阿圖賽找回了當初他所忽略的理論踐作以及其他踐作的相對自主性。一旦揚棄了理論踐作優於其他踐作的想法，理論踐作在思考其他踐作時，不僅其他踐作的異質性（也就是阿圖賽所說的外在他所忽略的理論踐作以及其他踐作的相對自主性。一旦揚棄理論踐作優於其他的踐作的想法，理論踐作在思考其他踐作時，不僅其他踐作的異質性（也就是阿圖賽所說的「外在性」或脫序物質）會一併被突顯出來，同時理論踐作與其他踐作之間互通有無的交流狀況也可以因此順利展開。在這種互通有無的狀況不但可以打開理論不斷進展的空間，阿圖賽早期將理論教條化的危險也同時煙消雲散。