本文選題：新階級概念　切入點(diǎn)：評析　出處：《湖南師范大學(xué)》2010年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】： 階級問題是一個(gè)屬于全人類又屬于每個(gè)民族的普遍又特殊的問題。階級不是從來就有的,階級是生產(chǎn)力發(fā)展到一定階段的產(chǎn)物;不同階級在社會生產(chǎn)中的地位決定階級之間的差別;經(jīng)濟(jì)上的不平等是階級斗爭的根源;生產(chǎn)力的高度發(fā)展是階級消亡的條件。 隨著資本主義的發(fā)展,在人類社會進(jìn)入后工業(yè)社會這一新的歷史條件下后,從事不同職業(yè)的知識分子數(shù)量迅猛增加,使得階級結(jié)構(gòu)發(fā)生了變化,知識分子集團(tuán)在社會生活中表現(xiàn)出越來越重要的作用。在此情況下,當(dāng)代西方以美國社會學(xué)家艾爾文·古德納為代表的學(xué)者提出了“新階級”概念,認(rèn)為知識分子以擁有文化知識為資本,又具有獨(dú)特的批判的話語文化(CCD文化),正在展開與原本控制著社會經(jīng)濟(jì)領(lǐng)域的資產(chǎn)階級的斗爭,在古德納看來,在后工業(yè)社會里,舊的勞資關(guān)系已經(jīng)不再起主宰作用,文化資本已經(jīng)取代了舊有的物質(zhì)資本。此時(shí),由人文知識分子和技術(shù)知識分子組成的新階級便能成為歷史的代言人,他們是人類社會未來的救世主,是人類解放的中心,他們將實(shí)行以知識、理性和專業(yè)技術(shù)為基礎(chǔ)的統(tǒng)治。 “新階級”概念的拋出是對馬克思主義階級理論的嚴(yán)正挑戰(zhàn),筆者立足于馬克思主義的基本立場,從馬克思主義的資本概念入手,深入分析了古德納的文化資本概念,指出了其理論的脆弱之處——文化資本是對馬克思資本概念的嚴(yán)重偏離；并運(yùn)用馬克思主義階級劃分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的理論分析了古德納以文化作為階級劃分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的錯誤所在,給新階級理論的挑戰(zhàn)以有力的回應(yīng)。筆者認(rèn)為,首先,古德納所謂的文化資本并非馬克思意義上的資本,這是他在對資本的概念泛化理解的基礎(chǔ)上,才導(dǎo)致了將文化當(dāng)作資本來看待的。第二,馬克思恩格斯劃分階級的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是建立在唯物史觀的基礎(chǔ)之上的,他們緊緊抓住各種垂直分化中最本質(zhì)的、具有決定性的因素,即人們對生產(chǎn)資料的占有關(guān)系來劃分階級的,而古德納則以文化資本和批判的話語文化作為階級的劃分標(biāo)準(zhǔn),將知識分子集團(tuán)劃分為一個(gè)新的獨(dú)立的階級,這顯然已在更深層次上與馬克思主義“社會存在決定社會意識”的基本立場分道揚(yáng)鑣,從而陷入了唯心史觀的泥潭。同時(shí),本文也肯定了根源于科技革命(技術(shù)發(fā)展)且至今愈演愈烈的新階級論是一種積極、大膽的理論探索,從而引發(fā)我們重新審視既有的階級概念,對知識分子的階級歸屬問題進(jìn)行深入思考。但總的來說,筆者并不認(rèn)同其與經(jīng)典馬克思主義相異的基本觀點(diǎn)。
[Abstract]:Class problem is a universal and special problem that belongs to all mankind and every nation. Class is not always existed, and class is the product of the development of productive forces to a certain stage. The position of different classes in social production determines the difference between classes; economic inequality is the root of class struggle; and the high development of productive forces is the condition of class extinction. With the development of capitalism, under the new historical conditions of human society entering the post-industrial society, the number of intellectuals engaged in different professions has increased rapidly, and the class structure has changed. The intellectual group plays a more and more important role in social life. In this case, the modern western scholars, represented by American sociologist Alvin Goodner, put forward the concept of "new class". It is believed that intellectuals with cultural knowledge as their capital and with unique critical discourse culture and CCD culture are waging a struggle against the bourgeoisie, which originally controlled the social and economic fields. In the view of Goodner, in the post-industrial society, The old labor relations no longer dominate, and cultural capital has replaced the old material capital. At this point, a new class of humanistic and technological intellectuals can become the spokesman of history. They are the future savior of human society and the center of human liberation. They will rule on the basis of knowledge, reason and professional technology. The concept of "new class" is a challenge to Yan Zheng of Marxist class theory. Based on the basic standpoint of Marxism, the author analyzes Gudena's concept of cultural capital from the perspective of Marxist concept of capital. This paper points out the weakness of his theory that cultural capital deviates seriously from the concept of Marx's capital, and analyzes the error of Gudena's taking culture as the criterion of class division by using the theory of Marxist class division standard. The author thinks that, first of all, the so-called cultural capital of Goodner is not the capital in the sense of Marx, which is based on his general understanding of the concept of capital. Second, Marx and Engels' criteria for class division are based on historical materialism, and they hold fast to the most essential and decisive factors in the vertical division. That is to say, people divide the class according to the possession of the means of production, while Goodner takes cultural capital and critical discourse culture as the criterion of class division and divides the intellectual group into a new independent class. Obviously, this has broken away from the Marxist basic position of "social existence determines social consciousness" at a deeper level, thus falling into the quagmire of historical idealism. At the same time, This paper also affirms that the new class theory, which is rooted in the scientific and technological revolution (technological development) and has become increasingly fierce, is an active and bold theoretical exploration, thus causing us to re-examine the existing class concepts. The author thinks deeply about the class ownership of intellectuals, but in general, the author does not agree with the basic point of view which is different from classical Marxism.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：D01

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 沈堅(jiān),戴天華;試論當(dāng)代法國社會階級關(guān)系變化的若干趨向[J];浙江學(xué)刊;2004年03期

2 王印煥;張寧;;民國鄉(xiāng)村階層流動狀況[J];燕山大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2008年03期

3 李子;;階級范疇及其與體系的關(guān)系研究[J];齊齊哈爾師范高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2010年05期

4 孟艷;;19世紀(jì)英國工人運(yùn)動改良主義成因分析[J];科學(xué)社會主義;2011年03期

5 姜輝;;論當(dāng)代資本主義的階級問題[J];中國社會科學(xué);2011年04期

6 ;“四人幫”鼓吹“階級關(guān)系新變動”的反動實(shí)質(zhì)[J];首都師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);1977年Z2期

7 李世濤;;后馬克思主義:一種似是而非的馬克思主義[J];馬克思主義研究;2009年10期

8 錢大東 ,毛禹權(quán);發(fā)達(dá)資本主義國家的階級關(guān)系和工人階級狀況[J];工會博覽;2001年08期

9 劉保國;我國社會主義階級關(guān)系變化縱覽[J];渭南師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年03期

10 吳家國;認(rèn)真學(xué)習(xí)毛主席對我國社會各階級的科學(xué)分析——兼駁“四人幫”的“階級關(guān)系新變動”論[J];北京師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);1977年05期

相關(guān)會議論文 前10條

1 李春玉;張寶均;;當(dāng)代資本主義社會階級關(guān)系的回顧與展望[A];《資本論》與社會主義市場經(jīng)濟(jì)理論與實(shí)踐[C];2003年

2 雷忠勤;;弘揚(yáng)毛澤東同志正確認(rèn)識和處理同資產(chǎn)階級關(guān)系的政治思想[A];毛澤東社會主義政治建設(shè)思想座談會文集[C];2003年

3 劉文智;;長蘆鹽業(yè)及其階級關(guān)系略述[A];鹽文化研究論叢(第二輯)[C];2007年

4 崔向東;;漢代豪族研究[A];遼寧省哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)獲獎成果匯編（2003—2004年度）[C];2003年

5 ，

本文編號：1630291