德勒兹与伽塔利《反俄狄浦斯》以俄狄浦斯为一特定文化符号,不但超越经典精神分析学中的俄狄浦斯情结,同样超越希腊神话中的俄狄浦斯故事,认为其要害在于削足适履,硬将自由不羁的欲望框定在一成不变的弑父娶母先入成见中,用家庭关系取代欲望更为丰富复杂的社会、经济和政治内涵。由此两人展开的替欲望“解域”过程,号召跳出俄狄浦斯陷阱,推翻表征的舞台,来建构欲望的生产秩序,自谓此乃“精神分裂症分析”的全部使命。但是立足欲望来展开资本主义欲望现代性的批判,一如立足俄狄浦斯情结来反俄狄浦斯,是否同样会陷入一叶障目、言不由衷的困境? Deleuze and Gautali “Opposition Oedipus” to Oedipus as a specific cultural symbol, not only beyond the Oedipus complex in classical psychoanalysis, also goes beyond the Greek Oedipus story , Holding that the crux of the matter lies in cutting back on the fittest and putting the desire for free and unruly to be prejudiced in the immutable patriarchal mother-in-law and replace the desire with family relations to enrich the complicated social, economic and political connotations. Thus the two carried out the process of “Desalination” and Desire of Destruction, calling for jumping out of the trap of Oedipus and overturning the stage of representation so as to construct the order of production of desire, which means that it is all “schizophrenia analysis” mission. However, based on the desire to embark on the critique of the modernistic nature of capitalist desires, just as Oedipus’s complex against Oedipus would similarly fall into a fallacious and insidious predicament?