《亞里斯多德場所觀》一文是柏格森在1889年寫作的論文，筆者會以此文為題，一方面是由於對柏格森哲學的興趣，一方面乃是對強調綿延和時間的柏格森，會在早期著作中對亞里斯多德的場所觀進行討論的原因產生好奇。因此，本文由探討柏格森如何討論亞里斯多德的場所開始，企圖了解柏格森為何如此討論亞里斯多德的場所、有何看法及其批評背後的理由。 為了解柏格森討論亞里斯多德背後的理由，本論文分為五個部分討論：第一個部分為導論，先介紹柏拉圖的空間 ( chôra ) 觀，而後陳述亞里斯多德的場所 ( topos ) ，對空間與場所議題作一個概略式的理解。從第一章開始，會隨著柏格森對亞里斯多德場所的分析，一步步分析出亞里斯多德的場所觀。首先，討論柏格森對亞里斯多德場所設定的討論，排除一些不屬於場所的東西。而在排除不屬於場所的東西後，第二章討論柏格森所推導出的亞里斯多德的場所的定義，以及柏格森所提出的問題和批評，而後，柏格森認為亞里斯多德的場所就是空間的結論。接著，筆者參考柏格森在1990年寫的《意識的直接與料》、《物質與記憶》、《形上學導論》，以及康德與萊布尼茲的說法，在第三章進一步對柏格森所理解的空間進行探討與再思考。最後，在結論的部分，說明筆者認為柏格森討論亞里斯多德的場所的理由，並引入德勒茲的詮釋，初探在德勒茲的詮釋下，柏格森哲學的另一種面向。 / “Aristotle’s concept of place” is an essay that Bergson wrote in 1889. I take this article as the theme of my essay, partly to my interest in the philosophy of Bergson; on the other hand, to my curious about Bergson’s reason to wrote this article. Why Bergson discussed Aristotle’s concept of place in the early work？So, I start from the way how Bergson discussed Aristotle’s concept of place, attempt to realize Bergson’s view of it, and the reason why Bergson discussed it. For realizing the reason, I will discuss it in five parts. The first part is the introduction, in which I introduce Plato’s concept of “space” ( chôra ), and discuss Aristotle’s concept of “place” ( topos ). Then, start from the Chapter Ι, I will follow to Bergson’s analyze to the concept of Aristotle’ place, and I will inference the place of Aristotle step by step. First, I will discuss the hypothesis of Aristotle’s place, and exclude some characters which not belong to Aristotle’s place. Then, in the Chapter Ⅱ, I will discuss the definition of Aristotle’s place which inference by Bergson, and the problem and critic of Bergson. And, Bergson thought Aristotle’s concept of place is space. Again, I refer to Bergson’ work like Time and Free Will, Matter and Memory, and the Introduction of Metaphysics. And otherwise, I will refer to the openion of Kant and Leibniz, too, in order to discuss and reflect the further means of Bergson’s space in the Chapter Ⅲ. Finally, in the conclusion, I will return to my curious about why Bergson discussed Aristotle’s concept of place. Then, I will sketch in the interpretation of Deleuze, in order to see another feature of Bergson’s philosophy.

《出航》(The Voyage Out 1915) 是維吉尼亞．吳爾芙 (Virginia Woolf) 的第一本小說。就像女主角從倫敦出發航向南美一個虛構的異地一樣，吳爾芙似乎也從此開始了她做為作家的旅行。女主角瑞秋．凡瑞斯 (Rachel Vinrace) 從一個懵懂的中產階級女兒，一腳踏入了未知的大海航程。在乘載著她橫跨大西洋的商船上，瑞秋體驗了與原本平靜生活截然不同的衝擊。當她走向聖塔瑪莉納 (Santa Marina)，她眼中儘是對這個熱帶異鄉的熱情與渴望。在那裡，瑞秋依著自己的步伐／速度與其他的角色相遇、相識、相知，開啟了自己對這個世界的視野。她與泰倫斯．希威特 (Terrence Hewet) 相戀、決定互許終生。然而，一場熱病讓瑞秋在返鄉之前過世。她的靈魂，似乎就此沒入深不見底的大海之中(Woolf 398)。 　　本論文以德勒茲 (Gilles Deleuze) 與葛塔力 (Felix Guattari) 的著作《千高臺：資本主義與精神分裂》(A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia) 中所探討的旅行路線：固著路線 (rigid line)、可彎路線 (supple line)、逃逸路線 (line of flight) 來討論《出航》中角色之間的人際互動。從不同角色交疊橫越的旅行路線中，自我與他者的關係也不斷地在不同的情境之中形塑與消融。《出航》不再只是瑞秋個人的生命成長旅行經驗，更是眾多角色相互影響、體驗、與改變的廣大場域。小說裡表現了柏格森 (Henri Bergson) 所主張的種類差異 (differences in kind)，以及從中所發展出的個體性 (singularity) 價值與溝通的可能性。瑞秋的遊牧旅行軌跡，使她與泰倫斯之間擁有了超越性別差異的結合。在這種動態、開放的情境之下，瑞秋死亡之前的幻想與精神錯亂似乎象徵著逃逸路線所帶出的蛻變：在精神高度凝縮之下，全然的開放、專注於當下、無限接近真我。 不同的路線象徵不同旅行者的選擇以及路線背後的意義。本論文分成五章來探討《出航》裡交織複雜的旅行路線：第一章介紹《出航》的相關評論與背景，並且說明本論文所使用的理論架構；第二章以固著路線和可彎路線的討論為主，帶出絕對差異 (absolute difference) 的意義與價值；第三章探討真正溝通的可能性以及瑞秋從可彎路線出發的旅行軌跡；第四章從瑞秋的旅行起點到旅行終點，以逃逸路線的角度，找出詮釋她的死亡的另一種面向；第五章以瑞秋與泰倫斯之間的「愛」作結，帶出小說最終以死亡來表現生命的苦難與持續性。 / The Voyage Out (1915) is Virginia Woolf’s first novel. Like the heroine’s voyage from London to a fictional town in South America, Woolf has begun her travel as a writer since then. Rachel Vinrace, a daughter of a middle class merchant, plunges into the sea voyage out to the unknown world. In the cargo boat that takes her across the Atlantic, contrary to her original quiet life in Richmond, the interactions with the other crew make a profound impact on Rachel. Stepping onto the soil of Santa Marina, she is full of passion and has a thirst for this tropical foreign land. Here, Rachel encounters, and becomes acquainted and intimate with the other characters. She and Terrence Hewet fall for each other and decide to spend the rest of their lives together. However, a serious fever carries her off on the verge of her return trip. Rachel’s soul seems to “curl up at the bottom of the sea” (Woolf 398). The thesis intends to explore the interactions among the characters in The Voyage Out with the travel lines (rigid line, supple line, and lines of flight) discussed in Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari’s A Thousand Plateaus. From the intertwining travel lines of the characters, the relation between the self and the other is constantly constructing and blurring. The Voyage Out is not only the bildungsroman of Rachel but also a vast field for the characters to interact, experience, and become. The novel reveals the concept of differences in kind explored by Henri Bergson and the value of singularity and possibility of communication developed by Bergsonian ontology. Rachel’s nomadic travelling trajectory allows her to form a kind of union with Terrence that is beyond the limitation of gender difference. Under this dynamic and open circumstance, the deliriums and dreams before her death seem to suggest her becoming generated from the lines of flight: in the intensity of her spirit, she is open to the other, focuses on the present, and approaches to the primordial pure state. The thesis is divided into five chapters to investigate the complicated travel lines in The Voyage Out: Chapter I introduces the background of The Voyage Out and its literature reviews, and the theoretical approaches used in the thesis will also be illustrated; Chapter II concentrates on the discussion of the effect of the rigid line and the supple line in The Voyage Out and develops the meaning of absolute difference; Chapter III looks for the possibility of true communication and the orbit of Rachel’s voyage launched from the supple line; Chapter IV begins with Rachel’s point of departure and her point of arrival in order to form another dimension of her death, contrasted with traditional interpretation with the discussion of the lines of flight; Chapter V concludes with the love between Rachel and Terrence and reveals the suffering and continuity of life that the novel tries to display through death.