论文部分内容阅读
长期以来,关于历史唯物主义,主要是从经济维度阐述的,几乎一切人类历史问题都试图从经济基础上加以说明,甚至包括共产主义这样的根本性原则问题。但就是在《1844年经济学哲学手稿》中,马克思明确批判了单纯从财产关系(也即生产关系的法律用语)来解释共产主义。海德格尔已经认识到,历史唯物主义是一种深度理论,有时间箭头,比萨特存在主义等更深入本质。相比之下,葛兰西真正推动了这一问题的深化,他明确指出,尽管历史唯物主义与历史主义、历史经济主义有本质的不同,但只要其仍然植根于经济的基础,它就不可能是真正深刻的,为此葛兰西将历史唯物主义深入到无比复杂的文化维度,实现了对马克思主义哲学的“哥白尼偏转”。如果说有什么是我们这个当代在现代性批判中最有价值的转变,这个转变正是从经济维度向文化维度的转变。
For a long time, with regard to historical materialism, mainly from the economic dimension, almost all human history problems have attempted to explain from the economic foundation and even include such fundamental principles as communism. However, in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844, Marx clearly criticized communism solely on the basis of property relations (that is, legal terms of production relations). Heidegger has realized that historical materialism is a kind of depth theory, which has a more in-depth essence, such as the time arrow and Pisant existentialism. In contrast, Gramsci really pushed forward the deepening of this issue. He clearly pointed out that although historical materialism and historicism are fundamentally different from historical economicism, as long as they are still rooted in the economic foundation, Can not be truly profound, for which Gramsci deepened the historical materialism into the incomparable cultural dimension and realized the “Copernican deflection” of Marxist philosophy. If there is any what is the most valuable transformation of our contemporary critique of modernity, this shift is just a shift from an economic dimension to a cultural one.