【摘要】：從海德格爾存在論出發(fā)闡釋馬克思的哲學(xué)革命,是當(dāng)今馬克思主義哲學(xué)界較為常見的一種做法。但這一做法存在顯而易見的困難是:任何一種獨(dú)立的規(guī)范維度均難以在"存在論"中獲得有效承認(rèn)。有鑒于此,我們主張回到盧梭的"自由"遺產(chǎn)深入梳理馬克思對(duì)經(jīng)由黑格爾而上溯至盧梭的"內(nèi)在性自由"遺產(chǎn)的繼承及轉(zhuǎn)化,從而呈現(xiàn)出下述不同理解——相較于海德格爾以生存的歷史境域全部折斷形而上學(xué)的翅膀不同,馬克思在告別近代內(nèi)在性哲學(xué)的同時(shí),堅(jiān)決且明確地保留了盧梭的內(nèi)在性自由這一價(jià)值維度。故此,馬克思哲學(xué)革命的闡釋,必須與一種純?nèi)饬x上的海德格爾存在論詮釋路徑堅(jiān)決區(qū)別開來。
[Abstract]:Starting from the theory of Heidegger's ontology, it is a common practice in the Marxist philosophy world to explain the philosophical revolution of Marx. The obvious difficulty in this approach is that any independent normative dimension is difficult to achieve in the "Existentialism". In view of this, we advocate to return to the "free" heritage of Rousseau, and in-depth combing Marx's inheritance and transformation of the "inner free" heritage that goes back to Rousseau through Hegel, As a result, in comparison with Heidegger's all-breaking of Metaphysics's wings in the historical context of the existence of Heidegger, Marx, at the same time, firmly and clearly reserves the value dimension of the inner freedom of the Rousseau at the same time of saying goodbye to the modern inner-nature philosophy. Therefore, the interpretation of the Marx's philosophical revolution must be distinguished from a pure sense of Heidegger's theory of ontology.
【作者單位】： 中山大學(xué)馬克思主義哲學(xué)與中國現(xiàn)代化研究所;中山大學(xué)哲學(xué)系;
【基金】：國家社會(huì)科學(xué)基金重點(diǎn)項(xiàng)目“歷史唯物主義的現(xiàn)實(shí)觀研究”(15AZX002) 廣東省哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)規(guī)劃項(xiàng)目“哈貝馬斯政治哲學(xué)與康德政治哲學(xué)關(guān)系研究”(GD14XZX07)
【分類號(hào)】：A811
，

本文編號(hào)：2453966