如何理解《资本论》“重建个人所有制”问题

本文考察、对比《资本论》第一卷的几个不同版本,并针对其中关于"重建个人所有制"这句话的译文所展开的争论,认为目前的中译文基本未偏离原意,不宜在文本上过分纠缠马克思要"重建"的具体形式,也无需借助于文本进行过度诠释。马克思的这段话是建立在辩证法和历史唯物主义基础上所作的"否定之否定"的哲学表述。"重建个人所有制"指的是自由人联合体下,个人与社会联合起来的所有制,它既保证社会劳动者的个人所有,又超越资本主义私有制对社会生产力的束缚。因此,对于这段话的理解,我们不应仅局限于经济学的繁琐而纠缠不清的讨论方式,而应还原理论本身的意涵。至于实践中的难题,则应该交给实践去解决。     

"所有制"与"财产":关系概念与实体概念的不同——马克思和恩格斯原文本阅读带来的初步释疑

消灭私有制,尽管取而代之的形式是不清晰的,但已经被人们公认为是马克思主义的基本精神。马克思在《1844年经济学哲学手稿》中,就将私有制与异化劳动关联起来进行分析和认识,在《共产党宣言》中,马克思和恩格斯明确地将消灭私有制与铲除剥削现象的根源联系起来。随着我们自身的改革实践和进程,历史上曾经被争论过的话题再次受到人们的关注:一方面,消灭私有制的观点受到质疑,因为马克思和恩格斯表达过“通过联合起来的个人实现对全部生产力的占有,私有制(财产)也就不再存在了”[1]和“重新建立个人所有制(财产)”[2]的观点;另一方面,究竟是消…     

怀疑时代的道德信仰

风险时代也可以称其为怀疑时代,市场经济进入一种资本迅猛发展的时期。资本主义文化矛盾日益突出,道德与价值的拯救成了无可奈何的愿景。资本主义的文化矛盾的消灭如果不在资本主义社会关系的消灭当中,富强、平等、自由、民主的新价值秩序就不能如雨后春笋破土而立。价值重建的任务,应该深深根植于我们时代变化的伦理关系当中,最终必须消灭私有制,才能建立真正的新价值。     

时间川流中的"否定的辩证法"--阿多诺《否定的辩证法》的历史性注释

本文是阿多诺“否定的辩证法”思想的一个历史性注释,它证明：没有同一性的辩证法原本只是阿多诺本人一种不占主导地位的哲学话语,只是在具体的历史发展情境中,没有同一性的辩证法方才获得充分发展,成为否定的辩证法,并作为法兰克福学派的晚期哲学纲领而为人所知,没有同一性的辩证法与否定的辩证法是存在基本差别的。     

《管子》"道"、"德"的生命特性及对当代生态伦理建设的启示

在存在论的意义上,《管子》中的“道”、“德”是被作为重要的哲学范畴运用的,指生命产生的根源和生命存在的内在根据,二者是一体共在的关系。《管子》的“道”、“德”论揭示了人与万物在自然本性层面上的内在一体性和生态伦理的存在论维度,启示我们生态伦理应超越人与自然的外在关系,建立于人与自然内在关系的基础上。     

“塔克-伍德”命题的恩格斯视角解读

“塔克-伍德”命题的关键在于，它试图在历史唯物主义框架内部建立一种阶段性的“正义评价模式”并认可其“历史合理性”。对于“正义评价模式”与历史唯物主义关系问题的解答，强调“意识形态的规范性作用”或建构“生产正义”理论等诸种尝试均以失败告终，即无法真正解答“塔克-伍德”命题。在《反杜林论》等著作中，恩格斯阐释了价值观评价“元模式”的历史生成及其局限性，在资产阶级“正义观”问题上集中表达了历史唯物主义的态度，揭示了马克思及他本人没有从“正义”视角进行资本主义批判的原因。恩格斯的这一视角，有助于我们在区分事实判断和价值判断的基础上，澄清“塔克-伍德”命题的“泛主体性”逻辑缺陷，摆脱价值形而上学的思维方式。     

"命题推理"的心理学研究综述

本文在对“如果…,那么…”规则、“四卡问题”和“THOG”等三种有关“命题推理”领域的研究作了简要综述。     

读《抱朴子》的“生”“命”

《抱朴子》的“生”“命”其实是平实的,在许多地方并没有我们现代人赋予的神秘,如在《抱朴子》中,“我命在我不在天”的命题,“命”就不是指的命运之义,也不是后世“性”与“命”对举的“命”。仙,也不是指存在于另一个世界的“仙界”,是指人通过以包括服食金丹为主要手段的各     

马克思对洛克财产权理论的透视与批判

洛克财产权理论为后世自由主义的资本主义所有制辩护奠定了劳动原则与个人所有原则。从表面上看,洛克财产权理论的两大原则与马克思劳动理论具有一定的同质性。事实上,马克思通过以劳动为基础的私有制和以占有他人劳动为基础的私有制的区分,证明了洛克的劳动原则无法成为资本主义私有制的正当性依据;并根据商品所有权规律向资本主义占有规律的转化,揭示自由主义在为资本主义所有制辩护时陷入劳动幻象的根源与机制。同时,马克思在劳动力商品化的分析中通过描述劳动者与劳动力分离的历史过程,对洛克自我所有原则进行前提性批判,即人与人格的区分是自我所有原则的前提,而人与人格的区分是历史的产物,而非自然法的前提。     

从孔子的评论看齐《韶》的"善"与"美"

齐景公三十一年，孔子在齐闻《韶》后，如痴如醉，感慨万千，进而给予了高度评价和热情推介。这充分说明了齐《韶》在当时确实具有无穷魅力。孔子赞美齐《韶》的核心是内容极“善”与形式极“美”。那么，齐《韶》的内容到底“善”在何处?其形式又美在何方?本文进行了详细地探讨。     

"Psychotherapy" versus "treatment"

Presents a comment on "Psychological treatments" by D. H. Barlow. Barlow proposed that we distinguish between the terms "treatment" and "psychotherapy." The author believes that not only is the distinction unnecessary, but that its implications could have negative consequences for the field of clinical psychology. It is the proposed distinguishing feature that treatments are "specifically tailored to the pathological process that is causing the impairment and distress" that is most problematic. Clinical psychology does not need a distinction that further exacerbates the split between researchers and practitioners.     

"Enmeshment" and "Fusion"

The paper examines two related concepts utilized by two different schools of family therapy. Any family seen to be "enmeshed" is also seen as "fused," and vice versa. The difference in the level of focus, on the "system containing the individuals" (structural) or the "individual in the system" (fusion), determines the difference in therapeutic approach of these two schools.     

“对的”与“好的”

什么是“对的”,和对它的证立,是道德哲学中具有争议性的核心问题,也是效用主义和道义论间的主要差异之所在。统合效用主义对于“好的就是对的”这个陈述有一套完整周延的说法。而道义论对这个问题的证立不够周延或没有足够的说服力。     

"本体论"与"伦理学"--形而上学的两个向度

形而上学有两个密切相关的内在向度,就是本体论向度与伦理学向度.在哲学史上,哲学家们之所以在"追求形而上学"的同时,又总是"反形而上学",并非是人们的形上本性出了问题,而是因为人们总是将形而上学视为单纯的"一维性",总是用一个向度来取代或遮蔽另一个向度.而所谓的"后形而上学思想",也并不是消解了形而上学,而是指形而上学从"本体论向度"转向了"伦理学向度".     

"石狮"、"风水"与"吉祥"

谁都知道,在古老的中国,不管是衙门、宫殿、庙宇的门前,还是豪宅、大户人家的门口,人们都能看到摆着一对石狮。据说,这对石狮子在许多中国人的心目中,它不但是一种气派的象征,而且还是一种被人认为是好的“吉祥物”。如今,旧时的衙门没有了,但遗留下来的宫殿、庙宇的门前,其中有些石狮仍有保存。然而,想像不到的是,这号称“吉祥物”的石狮今天却开始“走”进某些党政机关的大门口,它们(石狮)在那里时时都在保护着这些政府要员“平平安安”、“吉祥如意”。这不仅使我联想起一些极端的报道,有些政府官员为升迁,请算命先生定位,用风水术为政府…     

PREFERRING "HOUSEWIVES" TO "FEMINISTS"

Four studies are described outlining the favorability of attitudes toward women. In Study 1, participants indicated their attitudes toward women and men and their construal of the term "women". The results revealed that women were evaluated more favorably than men, but that male right-wing authoritarians (RWAs) who construed women as referring primarily to feminists were least favorable in their attitudes. In Study 2, participants indicated their attitudes toward both "housewives" and "feminists". The results revealed that feminists were evaluated less favorably than housewives, and that the most negative attitudes toward feminists were expressed by authoritarian men. Study 3 revealed that high-RWA males held more negative symbolic beliefs concerning feminists (i.e., beliefs that feminists failed to promote participants'values) and that these beliefs accounted for variation in attitudes among high RWAs and much of the RWA-attitude relation. Finally, Study 4 revealed that high RWAs perceived greater value dissimilarity between them-selves and feminists. The implications of the findings for future research are discussed.     

"Us" and "Them":

Abstract: In the Aristotelian tradition, politics is a matter of public deliberation over questions of justice and injustice. The Bush administration's response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, has been uniformly hostile to this notion, and it has instead promoted a jingoistic politics of self‐assertion by an America largely identified with the executive branch of its government. This is doubly disturbing, as the executive branch has sought to free itself from international law, multinational commitments, and domestic judicial regulation, even as it has sought to validate itself by demonizing its enemies. This essay draws out the disturbing echoes here of Carl Schmitt's work of the 1920s, in particular of Schmitt's conception of the sovereign as the ungrounded ground of the law and the political as the site of mortal conflict between friend and enemy. The essay argues that Schmitt's position in the twenties, for all of its evident problems, is superior to that of Bush, Wolfowitz, and Ashcroft in at least two senses: Schmitt condemns the idea of waging war for profit and recognizes that such wars will often be disguised as moral crusades waged against the “inhuman”; and he acknowledges that claiming to fight a war for humanity denies one's enemies their humanity, leaving them open to torture and even extermination.     

从"管制"到"平衡"--政府与公众理想关系模式的构建及其制度化

论文从行政民主的角度探讨政府与公众之间的理想关系模式及其制度化构建过程 ,将我国在改革之前的政府与公众模式概括为管制模式。论文指出 ,在制度变迁的过程中 ,这一模式日益受到挑战。而在新的制度环境下 ,我国政府与公众的关系模式应该是平衡模式。这一模式的制度化措施包括培育自主的市民社会 ,赋予公众以独立的活动空间 ;促进行政公开 ,建立一个开放负责的政府 ;推进行政法建设 ,抑制行政恣意     

The "Natural" and the "Formal"

The paper presents an argument against a metaphysical conception of logic according to which logic spells out a specific kind of mathematical structure that is somehow inherently related to our factual reasoning. In contrast, it is argued that it is always an empirical question as to whether a given mathematical structure really does captures a principle of reasoning. (More generally, it is argued that it is not meaningful to replace an empirical investigation of a thing by an investigation of its a priori analyzable structure without paying due attention to the question of whether it really is the structure of the thing in question.) It is proposed to elucidate the situation by distinguishing two essentially different realms with which our reason must deal: the realm of the natural, constituted by the things of our empirical world, and the realm of the formal, constituted by the structures that we use as prisms to view, to make sense of, and to reconstruct the world. It is suggested that this vantage point may throw light on many foundational problems of logic.