《1844年经济学哲学手稿》伦理思想研究

《手稿》较之马克思的其它著作有较为丰富的伦理思想,但其仍不是一本伦理学专著。综观《手稿》,其伦理思想,似可包括如下几方面:一是劳动异化和共产主义理论的人本价值导向;二是人论思想,奠定了马克思主义伦理学的理论基础;三是关于经济伦理或对资产阶级经济伦理的批判;四是其它伦理学观点。     

湖北省马哲史研究会举行《1844年经济学哲学手稿》学术讨论会

湖北省马哲史研究会,为纪念马克思逝世一百周年,于四月下旬举行了《1844年经济学哲学手稿》(以下简称《手稿》)学术讨论会。对《手稿》在马克思主义哲学形成中的地位、意义以及马克思主义与人道主义的关系等问题,进行了热烈的讨论。现将不同看法综述如下: 第一种看法认为,《手稿》是新世界观的天才萌芽,是新哲学形成的标志。理由是:(1)《手稿》是包括科学社会主义、政治经济学和唯物史观在内的全部马克思主义学说的发祥地,它的基本思想、基本理论同《关于费尔巴哈的提纲》等著作的基本思想是一致的。(2)《手稿》是从经济学上剖析市民社会的第一部著作,特别是在异化劳动的理论中,包含着历史唯物主义理论一系列基本的规定性,如关于人“具有自然力,生命力,是能动的自     

马克思“新唯物主义”的真正诞生地和秘密——纪念《1844年经济学哲学手稿》写作170周年

<正>马克思《1844年经济学哲学手稿》(以下简称《手稿》)写于170年前。由于该文本的独特性及其特殊的历史境遇,所以它成为争议最大同时也是误读最严重的文本,从而构成哲学史特别是哲学文献诠释史中的一道风景线,乃至这一现象本身也成为一项有意义的研究课题。笔者在多年前曾经从青年黑格尔派特别是费尔巴哈、赫斯与马克思思想关系的角度对《手稿》进行过较为详细的解读,澄清和阐释费尔巴哈、赫斯对《手稿》的实际影响。~([1])本文拟从另外的视角,结合哈贝马斯、阿尔都塞、阿伦特、海德格尔等人的相关评论,对《手稿》的性质、地位特别是有争议的主要问题进行某种再释和讨论。这在一定意义上是对《手稿》的一种辩护和正名,这是基于对《手稿》中表述的劳动观的基本肯定以及相关争议问题的实际情况而进行的。     

试谈《1844年经济学哲学手稿》中的伦理思想

马克思的《1844年经济学哲学手稿》是一部在马克思主义形成阶段中占有重要地位的、内容十分丰富的著作,其中许多地方涉及到了伦理问题。本文拟对手稿的伦想思想做一粗浅的探讨。一、伦理学研究的崭新方向马克思主义以前的伦理学尽管有着种种的合理因素,但由于在研究方法上都不能自觉地把道德放在社会经济关系的基础上进行唯物辩证的考察,因而始终不能摆脱历史唯     

对异化劳动的“四规定说”辨析

在目前所见到的对青年马克思《1 844年经济学哲学手稿》 (以下简称《手稿》)中异化劳动的研究成果中 ,一致认为马克思的异化劳动有四个规定 (参见杨适《马克思〈经济学 -哲学手稿〉述评》,1 982年版 ,第 34— 37页 ) ,对此笔者不予苟同。从文本看 ,马克思对异化劳动的规定的指认只有三个 ,而对异化劳动的结果的分析则有四个。“四规定说”实际上混淆了马克思对异化劳动的“三个规定”“四个结果”的内容。1 　　“三个规定”是马克思从这一“当前的经济事实出发”而得出的考察结果。这一事实就是 :“工人生产的财富越多 ,他的产品的力量和数…     

“巴黎手稿”解读中的“青年马克思”问题

本文聚焦于"巴黎手稿"("巴黎手稿"包括通常被称为《1844年经济学哲学手稿》的三个手稿和"穆勒评注",本文主要聚焦于《1844年经济学哲学手稿》)的传播与接受史,以期对学界围绕马克思"早期"和"晚期"著作而展开的相关论争作一批判性考察。几乎所有公开出版的有关马克思早期著述的重要研究文献(特别是在德语区、法语区、前苏联和英语国家),都吁求要对马克思的"巴黎手稿"进行全新的和严格的解读;同时,也几乎是所有的解释者都理所当然地假定,"巴黎手稿"是一部业已完成的著作。然而,通过对《1844年经济学哲学手稿》及所谓的"巴黎笔记"的文本分析,使我们有可能一方面反对将前者视为一部完全成熟的文献并借此宣称马克思思想是一个以其为基础的整体,另一方面也反对将其视为一个定义明确的理论文献并借此将之与马克思成熟时期的"科学"阶段相对立。     

马克思与现象学——论需要、财富和价值形式

I、马克思1884年经济学-哲学手稿中的人类学与需要《1844年手稿》把一些阅读注释重新集中起来,这些阅读注释的重要目的是对需要和劳动这些经济学概念进行哲学解释。对于这一点,所有注释者的意见是一致的。但是,一方面在涉及这篇著作在整个马克思著作的地位时,另一方面在涉及青年马克思同哲学传统的关系时,这些注释者的意见就大相径庭了。事实上一些人同意L.阿尔杜塞的意见,     

马克思早期《手稿》劳动观新探

近年来,在关于马克思(1844年经济学哲学手稿》(以下简称《手稿》)的研究中,有一种观点认为,马克思在《手稿》中的劳动观还是不成熟的、理想化的劳动观,其基本出发点仍然是费尔巴哈人本主义的。最近笔者重读《手稿》,发现《手稿》尽管还带有费尔巴哈人本主义的痕迹,但其基本的出发点已经是以生产劳动为基础的劳动观,劳动观是贯通《手稿》的一条红线。     

现实生活的道德思考——评李奇新著《道德与社会生活》

李奇同志的《道德与社会生活》是一本赋有时代感的著作,是理论联系实际的好书,值得一读。此书由上海人民出版社出版。全书共有十篇和一个绪论。从内容上,大致可归为三大方面:即道德与经济(利益、产品分配)的关系;道德与其它社会意识(包括科学)的关系;以及道德与婚姻家庭和人生观的关系。通过对道德与社会生活各方面关系的论     

另类胡塞尔——胡塞尔现象学的"标准化"和"非标准化"的解读

欧美学界一般认为,胡塞尔本人出版的著作代表了他的现象学思想。这种看法几乎成了解读胡塞尔现象学的标准。但是胡塞尔本人却一直把他的研究手稿看作其思想的主要代表。随着胡塞尔手稿在《胡塞尔全集》（Husserliana）中的陆续发表,欧美一批学者开始努力通过他们对手稿的批判性研究扭转这一局面。本文就是对“胡塞尔标准解读”的分析批评和对这一正在进行中的“非标准的”胡塞尔解读的阶段性总结。     

《穆勒评注》中的交往异化:马克思的转折点——马克思《詹姆斯·穆勒〈政治经济学原理〉一书摘要》研究

迄今为止,人们往往把《巴黎手稿》的异化理论归结为异化劳动。而实际上它决不仅仅指《第一手稿》中的异化劳动,还指《穆勒评注》中的交往异化。交往异化是马克思走出孤立人的自我异化逻辑,走向复杂的社会关系逻辑的关键环节,也是马克思建构社会概念以及唯物史观的前提。因此,交往异化在思想水平上高于异化劳动,《穆勒评注》在理论上也比《第一手稿》成熟,我们应该遵循《第一手稿》在前《穆勒评注》在后的文献学顺序解读《巴黎手稿》。如果说马克思在其早期思想发展过程中有一次根本性转变的话,《穆勒评注》就是这次转变的转折点。     

On deriving essence from existence

A definition of ‘alienation’ is proposed which is a rational reconstruction of the term as it is used in primarily moral contexts. Special attention is given to the Marxist tradition. It is argued that the earliest, moral form of Marx's economic determinism can be expressed in terms of the principle of the sufficiency of unalienated labor. In this connection four main kinds of alienation are distinguished. In the final section, it is argued that while ‘alienation’ has and should have an important theoretical role in the context of moral discourse, social scientists, and in particular sociologists, would be better off if they eliminated ‘alienation’ from their scientific vocabulary.     

Labor as the Basis for Intellectual Property Rights

In debates about the moral foundations of intellectual property, one very popular strand concerns the role of labor as a moral basis for intellectual property rights. This idea has a great deal of intuitive plausibility; but is there a way to make it philosophically precise? That is, does labor provide strong reasons to grant intellectual property rights to intellectual laborers? In this paper, I argue that the answer to that question is “yes”. I offer a new view, different from existing labor theories of intellectual property, which I call the productive capacities view. This view gives us a way to make sense of the idea of labor as the basis for intellectual property rights, as well as a tool for critically evaluating existing intellectual property institutions.     

Open Minds on Open Borders

This article is a plea, both moral and empirical, for open borders to be put on the agenda of mainstream academic theory. It begins by conceptualizing the liberalization of international labor markets as compensation for those who have not benefitted from the liberalization of capital and commodity markets. To demonstrate that the opportunity costs of maintaining closed borders are unacceptably high, it reports on economic studies suggesting huge gains from relaxing national border controls. The focus then turns to the historical record to argue against the realist notion that closed international borders are inevitable. Flaws are exposed in the logic underlying realist “infeasibility” arguments, as well as in much of the misinformation driving mass opinion against increased immigration into the USA. To explain how such myths are perpetuated by some prominent academic theorists, the focus turns to the “liberal paradox” reinforcing the moral perfectionism by which domestic inequality is condemned, but far greater international inequality is not. The conclusion, inspired by Julien Benda's The Betrayal of the Intellectuals, is that this perfectionism can be avoided by emphasizing intellectual integrity and the courage to follow one's ideas to their full logical consequences.     

马克思主义理论整体性的创生大纲——论《巴黎手稿》和异化劳动理论的性质与地位

我国学术界新近出现的试图从不同角度说明《巴黎手稿》和异化劳动理论本身是不成熟的或混乱的,从而否定它们的重要历史地位的倾向,是对"手稿"和异化劳动理论的曲解。"手稿"和异化劳动理论是马克思主义的真正诞生地和秘密,是系统构建马克思主义理论体系的逻辑大纲,是马克思主义全部丰富内容的理论起点和立论基础。这可以从"手稿"本身所完成的理论任务或在欧洲思想史上实现的创造性变革、"手稿"的内容及其逻辑结构与马克思主义理论体系的对应关系以及异化劳动理论的解密中得到充分的证明。     

The Evolution of Social Ethics: Using Economic History to Understand Economic Ethics

In the development of Roman Catholic social thought from the teachings of the scholastics to the modern social encyclicals, changes in normative economics reflect the transformation of an economic terrain from its feudal roots to the modern industrial economy. The preeminence accorded by the modern market to the allocative over the distributive function of price broke the convenient convergence of commutative and distributive justice in scholastic just price theory. Furthermore, the loss of custom, law, and usage in defining the boundaries of economic behavior led to a depersonalization of economic relationships that had previously provided effective informal means of protecting individual well-being. Hence, recent economic ethics has had to look for nonprice, nonmarket mechanisms for distributive justice. This is reflected, for example, in the shift in attitude from the medieval antipathy toward unions to the contemporary defense of organized labor on moral grounds.     

Hegelians Axel Honneth and Robert Williams on the Development of Human Morality

An individual is in the lowest phase of moral development if he thinks only of his own personal interest and has only his own selfish agenda in his mind as he encounters other humans. This lowest phase corresponds well with sixteenth century British moral egoism which reflects the rise of the new economic order. Adam Smith (1723?C1790) wanted to defend this new economic order which is based on economic exchange between egoistic individuals. Nevertheless, he surely did not want to support the moral theory of British egoism. His book The Wealth of Nations suits well into the world view of British moral egoism, but in the book The Theory of Moral Sentiments, he presents a moral theory which is the total opposite of moral egoism. Contemporary German intellectuals saw contradiction in Adam Smith??s moral (social) philosophy which they called as Das Adam-Smith-Problem. Smith himself didn??t think that there is any contradiction in a situation where in economic sphere (civil society) individual act egoistically and in ethical sphere (encounter with the imagined Other) he feels humanity and compassion toward his fellow men. Hegel was a passionate reader of Adam Smith and he acknowledged Das Adam-Smith-Problem. He set the task of his social philosophy to overcome this paradox. He wanted to create a theory of a social totality where economic egoism and feelings of humanity are not in contradiction. In the same time Hegel wanted to create a theory on Bildung process where human spirit develops from moral un-freedom (heteronomy) to moral freedom and maturity (autonomy) taking care both aspect of love and reason. In certain Hegel??s texts notion of recognition plays crucial role. That is why modern Hegelians Ludwig Siep, Axel Honneth and Robert Williams consider the notion of recognition to be elementary in Hegel??s threefold theory of developing human spirit from family via civil society to sittliche state. For Hegel family is a sphere where people love their ??concrete other?? and where feeling surpasses reason. Civil Society is a sphere of private contracts and economic exchanges where cold egoistic and calculative reason surpasses feelings. In the sphere of State the contradiction between family and Civil Society (Das Adam-Smith-Problem) is solved by ??rational feeling??. According to Hegel State should protect citizens from alienating effect of egoistic reason of Civil Society and cultivate ??family-feelings?? to rational feelings which integrate citizen into ??sittliche community?? through reciprocal process of recognition. In this article I want to consider Hegelians Honneth??s and Williams??s relevance to the theory of moral development.     

Towards a Confucian Virtue Bioethics: Reframing Chinese Medical Ethics in a Market Economy

This essay addresses a moral and cultural challenge facing health care in the People’s Republic of China: the need to create an understanding of medical professionalism that recognizes the new economic realities of China and that can maintain the integrity of the medical profession. It examines the rich Confucian resources for bioethics and health care policy by focusing on the Confucian tradition’s account of how virtue and human flourishing are compatible with the pursuit of profit. It offers the Confucian account of the division of labor and the financial inequalities this produces with special attention to China’s socialist project of creating the profession of barefoot doctors as egalitarian peasant physicians and why this project failed. It then further develops the Confucian acknowledgement of the unequal value of different services and products and how this conflicts with the current system of payment to physicians which has led to the corruption of medical professionalism through illegal supplementary payments. It further gives an account the oblique intentionality of Confucian moral psychology that shows how virtuous persons can pursue benevolent actions while both foreseeing profit and avoiding defining their character by greed. This account of Confucian virtue offers the basis for a medical professionalism that can function morally within a robustly profit-oriented market economy. The paper concludes with a summary of the characteristics of Confucian medical professionalism and of how it places the profit motive within its account of virtue ethics.     

Moral Judgment in Extreme Social Contexts: Soldiers Who Refuse to Fight and Physicians Who Strike?1

This paper compares two examples of moral action within extreme social contexts: the refusal of Israeli reserve soldiers to perform their military service during the war in Lebanon (1982–1983), and the refusal of Israeli physicians to provide medical care during a “labor war”, that is a strike. This paper examines the cognitive developmental premise that with an increase in the actors' stage of moral development there will be a greater consistency between hypothetical and actual moral reasoning (Kohlberg, 1984). Blasi's (1983) concept of personal integrity, that is, the consistency between the actors' judgment concerning the morality of an action and the action that was actually performed, is examined as well. The findings show that the “refusing” soldiers manifested stage consistency in their action, whereas the physicians failed to justify their action in line with their moral competence. Whereas the soldiers viewed their action as highly moral, the physicians viewed their strike action as unfortunate but necessary. The motivation of the two groups of actors to act in line with their behavioral choices is discussed.