马克思的“物化（Verdinglichung）”和“事物化（Versachlichung）”概念研究
发布时间：2018-08-26 11:54
【摘要】：“物化”概念一直以来在批判理论的传统中扮演着重要的角色。但是马克思的“物化”概念因为在德语中存在着两个不同的概念,即物化(Verdinglichung)和事物化(Versachlichung)而变得复杂起来。为了理解物化和事物化,我们必须回到思想史之中,对物(Ding)和事物(Sache)进行一个梳理。在康德那里,物的概念最集中体现在了“物自身”(Ding an sich)之上。康德对现象界和物自身的划分,使得经验之中的物仅仅归属于经验的范畴,而将物自身放置入了不可知的领域。康德尽管在道德形而上学体系中论述到了事物概念,但它还不是一个作为哲学反思的概念而出现。费希特针对康德的物自身设定,以“自我设定非我”的原则消解了物。黑格尔的哲学体系最为全面地批判了康德“物自身”的预设,并最早对物与事物概念进行了区分,进而以“物性”和“事物自身”来把握世界进程的两重特征。 黑格尔因此成为马克思在物与事物问题上批判与超越的对象。在《德意志意识形态》中,物与事物的话语虽然有所浮现,但总体看来《德意志意识形态》时期以及之前的马克思那里,物与事物这一概念还没有真正进入到马克思的视域之中。物与事物的讨论只有在《1857-1858年经济学手稿》中才真正成为明确区分的概念呈现出来：物作为经验表象的直接性,而事物则指涉了人与人之间的关系性。这同马克思政治经济学的研究有着非常密切的关系。它们在马克思历史现象学的理论之中扮演的重要的角色,正是在《1857-1858年手稿》中,事物化概念第一次出现。在《资本论》中,马克思对物和事物概念的区别进一步深入的同时,物化和事物化概念也随之在《资本论》中登场。尽管出场次数不多,我们仍可以发现物化和事物化作为分析三大拜物教的理论环节所扮演的重要地位。它们对于我们理解把握资本主义的本质结构具有着重要的帮助。 在马克思之后,韦伯、卢卡奇、海德格尔和以广松涉为代表的日本学者都曾从不同角度,在不同的历史情境之中对物化和事物化的讨论作出了贡献,然而他们都未能从根基上达到马克思在这一问题上的水平。物化和事物化必须被联系起来加以看待,人类社会历史在今天所呈现出来的物性特征,必须回到客观的社会历史生产过程之中,通过分析特定的生产关系和社会关系才能够加以破解。
[Abstract]:The concept of materialization has always played an important role in the tradition of critical theory. But Marx's concept of materialization is complicated by the existence of two different concepts in German, that is, materialized (Verdinglichung) and materialized (Versachlichung). In order to understand materialization and materialization, we must go back to the history of thought and sort out (Ding) and (Sache). In Kant's view, the concept of things is most concentrated on the "thing itself" (Ding an sich). Kant's division of the phenomenal boundary and the object itself makes the object in the experience belong to the category of experience and put the object itself into the unknown field. Although Kant discussed the concept of things in the system of moral metaphysics, it was not a concept of philosophical reflection. Fichte dispels things with the principle of "self-setting non-self" in view of Kant's self-setting. Hegel's philosophy system criticizes the presupposition of Kant's "thing itself" in a comprehensive way, and distinguishes the concept of thing from thing at first, and then grasps the dual characteristics of the world process by "materiality" and "thing itself". Hegel therefore became the object of Marx's criticism and transcendence on matter and matter. In "German ideology", the discourse of things and things appears, but generally speaking, the period of "German ideology" and Marx before, The concept of things and things has not really entered Marx's horizon. Only in the economic manuscripts of 1857-1858 did the discussion of things really become the concept of clear distinction: things are the direct representation of experience, while things refer to the relationship between people. This is closely related to the study of Marx's political economy. They played an important role in Marx's theory of historical phenomenology. It was in the manuscript of 1857-1858 that the concept of materialization of events first appeared. In "Capital", Marx's difference between the concept of things and things is further deepened, at the same time, materialization and materialization also appear in Capital. Although the number of appearances is not many, we can still find that materialization and materialization play an important role in the theoretical analysis of the three fetishism. They have important help for us to understand and grasp the essential structure of capitalism. After Marx, Weber, Lukacs, Heidegger and the Japanese scholars represented by Hirosuzawa all contributed to the discussion of materialization and materialization from different perspectives and in different historical contexts. However, they all failed to reach Marx's level on this issue from the foundation. Materialization and materialization must be linked to each other, and the physical characteristics of human social history today must be returned to the objective process of social and historical production. Through the analysis of specific relations of production and social relations can be cracked.
【学位授予单位】：南京大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：A811;B023
本文编号：2204787
[Abstract]:The concept of materialization has always played an important role in the tradition of critical theory. But Marx's concept of materialization is complicated by the existence of two different concepts in German, that is, materialized (Verdinglichung) and materialized (Versachlichung). In order to understand materialization and materialization, we must go back to the history of thought and sort out (Ding) and (Sache). In Kant's view, the concept of things is most concentrated on the "thing itself" (Ding an sich). Kant's division of the phenomenal boundary and the object itself makes the object in the experience belong to the category of experience and put the object itself into the unknown field. Although Kant discussed the concept of things in the system of moral metaphysics, it was not a concept of philosophical reflection. Fichte dispels things with the principle of "self-setting non-self" in view of Kant's self-setting. Hegel's philosophy system criticizes the presupposition of Kant's "thing itself" in a comprehensive way, and distinguishes the concept of thing from thing at first, and then grasps the dual characteristics of the world process by "materiality" and "thing itself". Hegel therefore became the object of Marx's criticism and transcendence on matter and matter. In "German ideology", the discourse of things and things appears, but generally speaking, the period of "German ideology" and Marx before, The concept of things and things has not really entered Marx's horizon. Only in the economic manuscripts of 1857-1858 did the discussion of things really become the concept of clear distinction: things are the direct representation of experience, while things refer to the relationship between people. This is closely related to the study of Marx's political economy. They played an important role in Marx's theory of historical phenomenology. It was in the manuscript of 1857-1858 that the concept of materialization of events first appeared. In "Capital", Marx's difference between the concept of things and things is further deepened, at the same time, materialization and materialization also appear in Capital. Although the number of appearances is not many, we can still find that materialization and materialization play an important role in the theoretical analysis of the three fetishism. They have important help for us to understand and grasp the essential structure of capitalism. After Marx, Weber, Lukacs, Heidegger and the Japanese scholars represented by Hirosuzawa all contributed to the discussion of materialization and materialization from different perspectives and in different historical contexts. However, they all failed to reach Marx's level on this issue from the foundation. Materialization and materialization must be linked to each other, and the physical characteristics of human social history today must be returned to the objective process of social and historical production. Through the analysis of specific relations of production and social relations can be cracked.
【学位授予单位】：南京大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：A811;B023
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 平子友长;李乾坤;;“物象化”与“物化”同黑格尔辩证法的联系[J];马克思主义与现实;2012年04期
2 诺曼·莱文;赵辛;;黑格尔与《资本论》1861—1863年手稿[J];马克思主义与现实;2012年02期
3 王南n\;;广松涉对马克思理论的物象化论阐释及其扩展[J];学术研究;2007年06期
4 洪汉鼎;;何谓现象学的“事情本身”(Sache selbst)(上)——胡塞尔、海德格尔、伽达默尔理解之差异[J];学术月刊;2009年06期
5 洪汉鼎;;何谓现象学的“事情本身”(Sache selbst)(下)——胡塞尔、海德格尔、伽达默尔理解之差异[J];学术月刊;2009年07期
6 刘森林;;物与意义:虚无主义意蕴中隐含着的两个世界[J];中山大学学报(社会科学版);2012年04期
7 刘森林;;重思“物化”——从Verdinglichung与Versachlichung的区分入手[J];哲学动态;2012年10期
8 韩立新;;从个人到社会的演进逻辑——以《精神现象学》中的“物象本身”概念为核心[J];哲学动态;2012年10期
9 罗纲;;社会关系的无意识与不作为——卢卡奇对Verdinglichung与Versachlichung的区分[J];哲学动态;2012年10期
10 刘森林;;物象化与物化:马克思物化理论的再思考[J];哲学研究;2013年01期
，本文编号：2204787
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/makesizhuyiyanjiu/2204787.html
