Handout 12.04.

2023
Life-Institution-Power: A Spinozan Intervention of Bio-politics

1. Introduction：
1.1 “The dual ontology of the social world”
The first, especially in its rhizomorphous forms, is based on an ontology containing only one tier or
plane (the ‘plane of immanence’). It knows only singularities or flows, the relationship between
which assumes a reticular form and whose movements and relations are governed by a logic of
forces. The second, in contrast, is intelligible only on condition that it posits a two-tier space, the
first of which is occupied by singular entities – in particular, people – while the second is composed
of principles of parity that make it possible to compare singular entities, to constitute them as
categories or classes, and to make normative judgements about the relations between them. It is
precisely this two-tier structure that is condemned by the first paradigm as succumbing to the illusion
of transcendence. (Boltanski, 2017)
1.2 Marx Scheller ,,sich einem neuartigen Spinozismus genärhert habe",,Behauptung der
fundamentalen MachtIosigkeit des Geistes gegenaber dem Orang, dem Lebensdrang schlechthin
oder dem Triebdrang, der allein Macht habe"（Arnolad Gehlen, Rückblick auf die Anthropologie Max
Scheler, 1975/1985: 247-249）
Gehlen: human’s original incompleteness（1）techne overcomes nature (2) use of representations
to reduce environmental complexity (3) “exoneration”(Entlastung)- relieving from flood of impulses
1.3 Spinoza:anti-scarcity. The constant “new-interpretation” of Institution and the collective
improvement of power (instead of rationality of institution)

2. Instituting life (Vitam Instituere)

vitam instituere, to institute life （against bare life）, to establish new meanings (but institution is
always there)
Demosthenes, quoted by the Roman jurist Marcianus in the Digest

2.1 Spinoza in TdIE

From “ordinary life”(communis vita) to “the institution of life” (vitam institutum)
(1) Common life as the given/shared form=the spontaneous form of our existing conditions
当我受到经验的教训之后，才深悟得日常生活（communis vita/ordinary life）中所习见的一切
东西，都是虚幻的、无谓的，并且我又确见到一切令我恐惧的东西，除了我的心灵受它触动外 ，
其本身既无所谓善，亦无所谓恶，因此最后我就决意探究是否有一个人人都可以分享的真正的
善，它可以排除其他的东西，单独地支配心灵。
(2) The dialectics of institution: Instituere= to establish the life/ institutum= established life
“因此我反复思索有没有可能找到一种新的生活建制（vitae institutum） ，或者至少确定有没
有新的生活建制的存在，而不致改变我与他人共享的生活秩序和习惯，这是我所屡次尝试的，
但总是没有成效。”
(3) Life is a force-field (always fluctuates between institution and institution), not a racial process. The
Perishable Goods（wealth, glory, pleasure）
“荣誉还有一种缺点，就是为了追求荣誉，我们必须完全 根据他人的意见生活，追求人们共同
追求的东西，规避人们共同规避的东西。
……特别是当我确切认识到，如果把追求财富、荣誉、肉体享乐当作自身目的，而不把它们当
作达到其他目的的手段，实在有百害而无一利时，则我的心灵便愈觉沉静不为所动。但是，反
之，如果只认对于财富、荣誉及快乐的追求为手段而非目的，则它们就会受到一定的节制，这
不但没有什么妨害，而且对于我们所以要把它们作为手段去追求的那个目的的实现，也有很大
的帮助。”

2.2 Four dimensions of life

（1）life as organic activities (circulation of blood) “对于金钱或任何其他物品的获得，必须以维
持生命与健康为限度。”
（2）life as a power of being alive (conatus). The manifestation of natura naturans.
（3）true life (state as its external condition)
（4）common life “我们必须充分了解自然，以便足够使我们达到上述品格， 并且还有必要组
成这样一种社会，以便利于促进可能多的人尽可能容易而且确定地达到这种品格。 ”“对那些
不违反我们目标的一般习俗，都可以遵从。”

3. From Potentia to Potestas

A Spinozist concept of Power: the space of possibilities where actions happen (immanent living
force/potentia + the realization, extension and cystalization of power/potestas/Gewalt)
A Hobbesian concept of Power: the question of legitimacy/contest for resources and individual
possessions. （constrained to sovereignty）

3.1 The Metamorphosis of Institution

（1）potestas as a practical concept - “self-government”（Selbst-führen）: mind’s direction of body
and reason makes judgement independent of passions (E4praef, TP 2.8) = capacity (in its own
right/power)
（2）potestas as instituent power (an initial connection between institution and movement)
“我为了这个目的而建立的国家是指自由的诸众所建立的国家 (imperium ... quod multitudo libera
instituit)，而不是通过战争权利掠夺人口而建立的国家。”(TP 5/6)
“Thus the love of the Hebrews for their country was not simple love but piety, which along with
hatred of other nations, was so nourished and inflamed by daily worship that it must have become
second nature.” (TTP, 17)
The true legislator is not the person who legislates or commands, but rather the person who
institutes.（reunion of nature-politics）
（ 3 ） potestas as a legal concept-supreme power (summa potestas) - body politics - potentia
multitudinis
（ 4 ） potestas as social differentiation and a target of critical theory (analysis of power) （ TP2.9,
2.10）
For institution, there is a very long path, from the structuralization of life to domination.
Cf. Negri:the multitude is the people prior to institutions, in their originary form, which is human
singularities on a plane of equality. They degenerate into mob only because of the external constraint
and corruption of institution.

3.2 The Best Form of Government

(1) a political constitution is all the more stable the more it is positively anchored in the affective
nature of human beings (Freedom-oriented)
(2) Best form of government(Regierung) ≠ Best form of State
(3) Institutional failure and dynamics: The example of Turkey （ The Turks [i.e., the Muslims] have
organized this very effectively. Believing as they do that it is wicked even to argue about religion, they
fill the minds of every individual with so many prejudices that they leave no room for sound reason,
let alone for doubt. TTP, PRE）
“没有哪个国家像土耳其那样历时长久而无任何显著变化，相反地，没有哪个国家像平民国家
或民主国家那样短命或者易于发生内乱。但是如果奴役、野蛮和绝望被称为和平，那么和平就
成了人类最大的不幸了。”（TP, 6.4）

4. Power and Government：Foucault and Esposito

Foucault: history of governmentality ≠ history of politics (institutions) ≠ history of political
ideas(ideology) which is a history of politics-as-reality
Power-relation-freedom
Vitam instituere as a form of anti-social-constructivism
Esposito: “A life devoid of folds, scansions and differences that mark out its rhythm risks shipping into
a whirlpool with no embankments”