法兰西科学院院士米歇尔?塞尔是世界知名的哲学家。他在《五感》一书中提出的感知结合的身体概念在国际学界引起了极大的反响，但我国学界对塞尔其人其思还未有初步的了解。在此，本文将对贯穿塞尔哲学始终的“五感融合”观念及其在不同思想文化中激起的回应展开研究。塞尔的独特之处就在于他将人文精神与自然科学置于同一高度进行思考，这既受益于自文艺复兴以来的法国思想文化遗产，也与他在科学领域接受的学术训练息息相关。针对自己所经历的“三次科学革命”，塞尔没有从传统理性认知的角度而是从官能上的审美立场出发，将数学、信息论和遗传学上的理论发现进行了身体重构，并提出了将“视听味嗅触”这五感融合的“混合身体”概念。在完成审美认知主体的身体重组之后，就可以进一步去考察塞尔在21世纪初提出的以科学为骨架、以文化为血肉的“新人文主义工程”。为了强调当下人文精神建设的重要性，塞尔选择到笛卡尔的几何学推理过程中去复原所思之“我”充分在场的感性直观，并对理念决定论对身体偶然性的排斥予以反驳。此外，他还通过对语词起源的身体现实及其物质环境的分析，论证了语言作为连接身体内外世界的“操作者”所承载的转译和创造功能，由此提出了由丰富多样的身体风景谱写而成的“大叙事”理论。为了更好地把握他所坚持的身体立场，本文还对其思想在法国内外的遭遇进行了比较研究。一方面，塞尔极力反对巴什拉开创的认识论传统对日常经验与科学理论的截然区分，另一方面，他还激烈地批评英美学派的逻辑经验主义对感性经验的忽视甚至排除。最后，本文将从三种对比语境中去看塞尔的身体观念。其一，使用美国实用主义哲学中的经验理论去支持塞尔“五感不分”的观点，在法国与美国思想的比较中去深入分析塞尔的“感”与英语世界的“经验”的异同所在。其二，根据世界知名哲学家斯唐热和拉图尔对其身体概念的继承与发展，到现代国际学界中去证实塞尔这一理性与感性相结合的身体立场的合理性。其三，本文将回到中国的思想文化传统中去验证塞尔的观点，从时间性、世俗性与身体性三个角度出发去看中法两国在处理身体问题上的相似之处，在支援塞尔的“五感融合”思想的同时也能够重新认识到中国自身传统的博大精深与源远流长。

Michel Serres, the prestigious French philosopher and Académicien, is celebrated for his interdisciplinary researches on various domains. His concept of the combination between the sense and the rationality, formally proposed in Les Cinq Sens, has aroused a huge effect in the world. However, it is a pity that Serres and his thoughts are hardly known in China. Therefore, the disseration will work on Serres’s theory of the five-sense “mixture” (mélange) and its influences in different cultures.The specialty of his thoughts is the equal treatment on both sciences and humanities. It not only benefits from the humanist spirits since French Renaissance, such as that of Rabelais, Montaigne, Diderot, La Mettrie, Sartre and so forth, but also deeply connected with two generations of French philosophers of science in the twentieth century like Duhem, Poincaré, Cavaillès, Bachelard and Canguilhem. Moreover, for “the three scientific revolutions” he experienced respectively in the maths, physics and biology, Serres chosed a mixed perspective of five senses rather than the traditional recognition of rational determinism, so that he could complete the physical reconstruction of sciences and propose the notion of the “mingled body” with the fusion of sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell.After the reorganisation of both the knowing and aesthetic subject, it is available to enter Serres’s project of new humanism in the twenty-first century, which is built by sciences as structure, culture as flesh and blood. To emphasize the significance of humanist construction under such a fast development of the science and the technology, Serres restored the graphic intuition of the thinking “I” (je) by re-playing Descartes’s geometrical reasoning so to prove both the presence and the priority of the senses, which was against the purification of body contigency by the rational determinism. Furthermore, Serres also analysed the material circumstances of the birth of the “word” (mot), which was closely related to the physical world. He then proposed the notion of the “operator” (opérateur) to demonstrate the translating and creative roles of the word, and finally put forward his “Great Narrative” (Grand Récit) that was and is being painted by diverse “bodily landscapes” (paysages physiques). To have a better understanding of Serres’s position of the body, it is necessary to investigate the differences between Serres and Bachelard as well as the debates between Serres and the Anglo-American schools. On the one hand, Serres straightly opposed Bachelard’s “rupture” epistemology that distinguished strictly scientific thoughts from the common sense; on the other hand, he also fiercely rejected the exclusion of the physical experiences by the English logicism. In the end, there are supports for Serres’s concept of the mixed body from three different contexts, i.e. pragmaticism, the anthropology of science and the Chinese culture. Firstly, Serres’s union of the five senses could find a response in the empiricism of William James and John Dewey, because they would unite against dualism that divides the body into two parts, like the cooperation between Bergson and James did in the early twentieth century. However, there are still certain differences between the meanings of “experience” in English and French, between Serres’s espistemology of senses and Bergson’s philosophy of consciousness. Secondly, Serres’s viewpoint of the entire body has played a great effect on the anthropology of science through the excellent inheritance and development of two well-known philosophers, namely, Isabelle Stengers and Bruno Latour, which could provide Serres’s sensory philosophy with strong evidences. Finally, Serres’s “mingled” subject, though in disaccordance with the western aesthetics, draws an echo in the Chinese traditon in the respects of time, secularity and body. It thus could not only prove Serres’s ideas true and valuable but also motivate us to return to China and rediscover our own long and broad cultures and thoughts.