柄谷行人事前性思维探究
发布时间：2018-11-22 17:26
【摘要】：《资本论》作为一本哲学著作,它以哲学的思维方式深刻剖析了资本主义社会及其运行发展,以哲学的思维方式深刻批判了以亚当斯密为代表的资本主义政治经济学理论,以哲学的思维方式深刻反思了人类解放的现实道路,同时完成哲学理论的自我超越。《资本论》并不像科学著作那样进行一般的规律概括和总结,进行“构成性”思想的建构,而是进行前提性的哲学反思,揭示科学成果所蕴含的“认识论与价值论前提”,进而能够以哲学的视角去揭示出隐藏在“物与物关系”下的“人与人的关系”。对于哲学理论自身来说,其思维方式的变革无疑最为闪耀,而对于《资本论》的逻辑、《资本论》的思维方式的解读也为国内外学者所热衷。在这之中,我们发现了日本学者柄谷行人,他提出了跨越性批判、超越论追溯等新颖的对于《资本论》的解读。他认为在马克思的《资本论》中存在一种不同于黑格尔,而近于康德式的“事前性”的思维方式。本文将事前性思维方式做两种解释,一是作为康德式的反思,引入某种客观性即他者性以克服反思的“共谋性”,并且善于在反思中发现“强烈的视差”,在不同的体系、不同的场域间进行移动,不断地进行“追溯”、“跨越”的批判。二是将事前性思维放在历史思维方式中来理解,只有在思维的历史性维度中才具有意义。即重视思维对于人们的现实生活及其历史发展的参与性或意义。深入事物的历史性维度,重新审视事物发展的各个环节,充分尊重事物的独立性,重视事物与人之间的相互关系。存在于《资本论》中的事前性思维是历史思维方式多样性的一种体现,柄谷行人的事前性思维为我们对于马克思主义哲学与其他哲学体系的思维方式的相互联系与理解提供新的思路。
[Abstract]:As a philosophical book, Capital deeply analyzes the capitalist society and its development in the way of philosophical thinking, and criticizes the capitalist political economy theory represented by Adam Smith in the way of philosophical thinking. This paper deeply reflects on the realistic road of human liberation and completes the self-transcendence of philosophical theory in the way of philosophical thinking. The Capital does not generalize and summarize the general laws as in the scientific works, and constructs the thought of "constitution". It is a philosophical reflection on the prelude to reveal the "epistemology and the premise of axiology" contained in the scientific achievements, and then to reveal the "relationship between man and man" hidden under the "relationship between things and things" from the perspective of philosophy. For the philosophical theory itself, the transformation of its mode of thinking is undoubtedly the most brilliant, and the interpretation of the logic of "Capital" and the way of thinking of "Capital" is also keen by scholars at home and abroad. In this, we find the Japanese scholar Han Gu pedestrian, he proposed the leapfrogging criticism, transcendental theory traceability and other novel interpretation of Capital. He thinks that there is a way of thinking which is different from Hegel and close to Kant's "prior nature" in Marx's Capital. In this paper, there are two interpretations of the mode of thinking in advance. One is to introduce some objectivity, that is, otherness, in order to overcome the "complicity" of reflection, and to be good at finding "strong parallax" in reflection, in different systems. Moving between different fields and constantly criticizing "tracing" and "leapfrogging". The other is to put the prior thinking in the way of historical thinking, which is meaningful only in the historical dimension of thinking. That is, to attach importance to the participation or significance of thinking for people's real life and their historical development. Go deep into the historical dimension of things, re-examine each link of the development of things, fully respect the independence of things, attach importance to the mutual relationship between things and people. Ex ante thinking, which exists in Capital, is a manifestation of the diversity of historical thinking modes. The prior thinking of Qianggu provides us with a new way of thinking about the interrelation and understanding of the way of thinking between Marxist philosophy and other philosophical systems.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：B0-0
本文编号：2350049
[Abstract]:As a philosophical book, Capital deeply analyzes the capitalist society and its development in the way of philosophical thinking, and criticizes the capitalist political economy theory represented by Adam Smith in the way of philosophical thinking. This paper deeply reflects on the realistic road of human liberation and completes the self-transcendence of philosophical theory in the way of philosophical thinking. The Capital does not generalize and summarize the general laws as in the scientific works, and constructs the thought of "constitution". It is a philosophical reflection on the prelude to reveal the "epistemology and the premise of axiology" contained in the scientific achievements, and then to reveal the "relationship between man and man" hidden under the "relationship between things and things" from the perspective of philosophy. For the philosophical theory itself, the transformation of its mode of thinking is undoubtedly the most brilliant, and the interpretation of the logic of "Capital" and the way of thinking of "Capital" is also keen by scholars at home and abroad. In this, we find the Japanese scholar Han Gu pedestrian, he proposed the leapfrogging criticism, transcendental theory traceability and other novel interpretation of Capital. He thinks that there is a way of thinking which is different from Hegel and close to Kant's "prior nature" in Marx's Capital. In this paper, there are two interpretations of the mode of thinking in advance. One is to introduce some objectivity, that is, otherness, in order to overcome the "complicity" of reflection, and to be good at finding "strong parallax" in reflection, in different systems. Moving between different fields and constantly criticizing "tracing" and "leapfrogging". The other is to put the prior thinking in the way of historical thinking, which is meaningful only in the historical dimension of thinking. That is, to attach importance to the participation or significance of thinking for people's real life and their historical development. Go deep into the historical dimension of things, re-examine each link of the development of things, fully respect the independence of things, attach importance to the mutual relationship between things and people. Ex ante thinking, which exists in Capital, is a manifestation of the diversity of historical thinking modes. The prior thinking of Qianggu provides us with a new way of thinking about the interrelation and understanding of the way of thinking between Marxist philosophy and other philosophical systems.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：B0-0
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 孙正聿;;思想的前提批判与哲学的活动方式[J];哲学分析;2016年01期
2 王南n\;;《资本论》的辩证法:历史化的先验逻辑[J];社会科学辑刊;2016年01期
3 张盾;;《哲学通论》与黑格尔哲学[J];哲学分析;2015年06期
4 王南n\;;马克思哲学的近康德阐释(下)——其可能性与限度[J];社会科学辑刊;2014年05期
5 王南n\;;马克思哲学的近康德阐释(上)——其意谓与必要性[J];社会科学辑刊;2014年04期
6 柄谷行人;夏莹;;康德、黑格尔与马克思[J];哲学动态;2013年10期
7 柄谷行人;;双重的颠倒——马克思关于“未来”的认识[J];清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版);2013年02期
8 张盾;;“道德政治”谱系中的卢梭、康德、马克思[J];中国社会科学;2011年03期
9 孙正聿;;历史唯物主义与哲学基本问题——论马克思主义的世界观[J];哲学研究;2010年05期
10 孙正聿;;“现实的历史”:《资本论》的存在论[J];中国社会科学;2010年02期
，本文编号：2350049
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/zhexuezongjiaolunwen/2350049.html
