从“具体”到“总体”——重评《资本论》的理论进路

发布时间：2018-05-03 08:13

本文选题：具体 + 总体　；参考：《南开学报(哲学社会科学版)》2016年03期

【摘要】：马克思在"思维"与"现实"的非对称性关系中所区分的"思维的具体"与"现实的具体",是《资本论》得以展开的坐标;以"劳动一般"为表征的"思维"与"现实"之间的直接同一性,则是《资本论》得以展开的理论前提;在此前提下如何构造"资本"这个"具体的总体",则构成了马克思《资本论》的主题。由于马克思《资本论》以一个十分发达的社会总体作为现实前提,以"抽象的范畴"与"真实的现实"之间的同一性作为理论前提,其构造出来的"具体的总体"虽然具有典范的意义,但决不能混淆于"现实的具体"并将其非法扩张;同时,由于马克思所构造的"具体的总体"是在物质生产领域中展开的,而经济生活与政治生活之间存在着根本的差异,因此,《资本论》也不能直接被转译为"正义论"。
[Abstract]:Marx's distinction between "concrete thinking" and "reality" in the asymmetric relationship between "thinking" and "reality" is the coordinate of "Capital". The direct identity between "thinking" and "reality", characterized by "labor in general", is the theoretical premise of Capital. Under this premise, how to construct the "capital", the "concrete collectivity", constitutes the theme of Marx's "Capital". Because Marx's "Capital" takes a very developed society as its realistic premise and the identity between "abstract category" and "real reality" as its theoretical premise, The "concrete collectivity" constructed by Marx is of exemplary significance, but it must not be confused with the "concrete reality" and unlawfully expand it; at the same time, since the "concrete collectivity" constructed by Marx is carried out in the field of material production, However, there is a fundamental difference between economic life and political life. Therefore, Capital cannot be translated directly into Justice.
【作者单位】：南开大学哲学院;
【分类号】：F091.91

【参考文献】