德里达的解构主义的道德观的启示

德里达的解构主义在政治哲学领域发起的一场革命是:它通过解构,构建了一种与传统的互惠和平等的道德原理完全不同的、非互惠的友爱和关心的道德原理,并把这一道德原理视为正义的基础.德里达认为,基于传统的互惠和平等的道德原理之上的传统的道德观并没有真正把人当作相异的个体性存在来看待,这也造成了基于互惠的平等观念之上的现代法律的困境.本文分析和评价了德里达的道德观,并指出了他的这一带有解构意图的道德观所具有的积极的建构性的意义.     

生理的、心理的和邏輯的东西的相互关系

(一) 辯証唯物主义从唯物主义的一元論原則出發,在哲学思想史上破天荒第一次給于了心理的起源及其本質以唯一科学的說明,指出了心理是高度組織起来的物质的属性,是現实的反映。唯心主义由于把心理同大脑割裂开来,因此不仅不能比較正确地解决这个問題,甚至还不能提出这个問题。唯心主义在原則上不能站在自然科学和人类实践的立场上,于是从根本上否認心理同大脑有任何联系,否認心理是大脑的产物。換句話说,对哲学基本問題的唯心主义解决,完全排斥科学地提出关于心理和邏輯思維的起源問題,从而堵塞住了科学地解决这个問題的道路。唯心主义剩下来只有一条道路可走,那就是把意識加以神化,加以歪曲。这样一来,唯心主义就向僧侣主义和反动派伸出手来,为那些关于心理、意識、思維的本質的謬論作辯护,说什么心理、意識、思維能够从自身中創造出世界来等等。     

試論人的心理的矛盾的特殊性

“就最一般的意义来說,运动是物貭的存在形式、物貭的固有属性,它包括宇宙中所发生的一切变化和过程,从簡单的位置变动起直到思維止。 反映是运动着的物貭的一种普遍的属性。正如列宁所指出的:“假定一切物貭具有在本貭上类似感觉的特性、反映的特性,这是合乎邏輯的。 物貭的反映形式与物貭的运动形式是相适应的。反映形式多样性的原因在于物貭运动形式的多样性。 心理活动、意識現象是物貭运动的最高級的形式,也是反映的最高級的形式。因此,     

佛教的善的思想的心理诠释

佛教的宗旨是众善奉行诸恶莫作,认为人的先天本性无分善恶,亲近善知识能形成善的心理,亲近恶知识会形成恶的心理。佛教相信善有善报恶有恶报,鼓励人们行善积德。佛教认为欲望是恶的根源,控制欲望,通过戒定慧、八正道等方式能达到善的心理状态。佛教关于善的先天本性的观点、善恶形成的思想以及善的自我修养方法符合心理学的有关规律。佛教的崇善理念及善的修养思想对于构建社会主义核心价值观的友善价值准则具有积极意义。     

平衡是矛盾的暂时的相对的统一

对平衡范畴应在更广泛的意义上理解,即不仅有量的相等意义上的平衡和量的一定比例的保持上的平衡,而且还有结构平衡,指事物结构内部各种因素、各个部分之间互相适应和协调,互相补充。平衡的这两种表现:量的平衡和结构平衡,相互制约,相互规定。平衡是矛盾的暂时的相对的统一,这个哲学概括揭示了平衡的本质,说明了平衡的存在具有客观普遍性,也指出了平衡的相对性。平衡和不平衡既互相对立,又互为前提、互为中介、互相包含,平衡以不平衡的存在为前提和中介才能得到实现。平衡的历史作用有两重性,在矛盾的衰亡阶段之前,平衡是矛盾存在发展的要求和条件;当矛盾进入衰亡阶段后,平衡维护旧矛盾统一体,起阻碍前进的保守作用。因此,对待平衡的态度也应有两重性,该促进平衡时就做促进平衡的工作,该打破平衡时就致力于打破平衡,不能一概而论。     

伟大的历史性的转变

从今年起,把全党工作的着重点转移到社会主义现代化建设上来,这是党的十一届三中全会作出的具有伟大历史意义的决定。这一决定,表达了我国亿万人民长期怀抱的强烈愿望,实现了老一辈无产阶级革命家的宏图宿愿,适应了社会主义建设客观规律的要求。在全国范围内全党工作重点的这一转变,实际上标志着我国社会主义建设历史进程的深刻转变,迎来了社会主义发展的新时期。     

失去的与得到的

有一首诗歌这样唱道:“你若不压橄榄成渣,它就不能成油;你若不投葡萄入榨,它就不能变成酒;你若不炼哪哒成膏,它就不流芬芳;主,我这人是否也要受你许可的创伤?每次的打击,都是真利益,如果你收去     

青年马克思的现实的人道主义是马克思主义学说的不可缺少的部分

文章说,资产阶级和社会民主党的理论家们总是喜欢把青年时期的马克思与成年时期的马克思加以割裂,并且以青年马克思在人道主义方面的言论来歪曲马克思,来解释资本主义社会中人类本质的异化现象。但青年马克思在谈人道主义时,总是以资本主义社会中无产阶级的非人的生活状况为对象,以马克思列宁主义的改造世界和人的学说为基础的。文章说,早期马克思关于人道主义的言论是全部马克思主义学说的一个组成部分,马克思在当时提出人道主义思想是一种创举,表现了马克思的崭新的大胆精神。并说,列宁在后来发展了马克思的人道主义学说,俄国工人阶级首先把这种思想变成了现实。马克思谈过“异化”问题,但这个“异化”概念是他从黑格尔和费尔巴哈那里借用的概念。马克思使用这个概念是为了说明在有剥削的社会中,特别是在资本主义的生产关系下劳动者丧失人的特性,人的劳动不是人的本质力量的自愿活动,而是强迫劳动。劳动者所创造下的东西成了劳动者的对象化,劳动者的产品剥夺了劳动者的族类生活。文章说,人的异化现象的消除只能通过消灭资本主义的生产关系,通过推翻资本主义制度建立社会主义制度来实现。这是工人阶级的历史使命,也是我们时代人类的基本任务。这就意味着必须改变抽象的、资产阶级人道主义的理想:“人人皆兄弟”。文章接着说,“全世界无产者,联合起来!”的口号是为创造一个新的人的制度而斗争的无产阶级的具体的人道主义口号。     

算命的不敌骗人的

近日,自诩为"神算"的嵊州市某镇算命兼看相先生林某,在剡湖堤摆摊看相时,被一男一女两骗子以介绍婚姻为名骗走2800多元的钱财,成为人们茶余饭后的笑料.     

A contemporary interpretation of Marx’s thoughts on modernity

Unlike some western scholars who limit their interpretation of modernity and its source to conceptual, cultural, value, and psychological dimensions, Marx pointed out that modernity came mainly from modern production system. Starting from the historical context of his time, Marx explored various aspects of modernity and pointed out that modernity was inherent in the logic of capital, resided in the process of historical evolution, arose in social conflicts and segmentation, and presented itself in a global horizon. The logic of capital, the historical viewpoint, the theory of contradiction and a global perspective are fundamental in Marx’s analysis of the problems of modernity. Marx’s ideas of modernity are methodologically significant to the construction of modernity in contemporary Chinese society. __________ Translated from Zhongguo Shehui Kexue 中国社会科学 (China Social Sciences), 2005 (4) by Xing Lijun     

Critique of metaphysics, capital logic and totality, and social critique theory: the three critical dimensions of Marx’s philosophy

Karl Marx’s philosophy includes three dimensions of critique. The first is the critique of metaphysics, which is also the major premise on the basis of which Marx turns his philosophical viewpoint to the analysis of social life and its cultural logic. The second is the capital logic and totality, the core of Marx’s philosophy, according to which Marx exposes the totality and contradictions inherent in the capital logic. The third is the theory of social critique that is the realistic end of his philosophy. __________ Translated from Xueshu Yanjiu 学术研究 (Academic Studies), 2005 (5) by Yang Haifeng & Xing Lijun     

Stanisław Brzozowski on the ideal of the modern man

Stanisław Brzozowski formulated the ideal of modern man in the polemic with the contemporary man, who has ceased to believe in truth and moral values and is devoid of the will to act. For Brzozowski modernity involves the discovery of truth about the human condition: about man as an autonomous subject, a creator of values, who struggles with non-human reality. This truth was formulated in Kant’s idea of autonomy and in Marx’ idea of a collective conquest of the world of nature. For Brzozowski, ideal modern man is “the conscious labourer,” who labours because he wants to proudly impose a human law on the non-human world. At the same time Brzozowski used the term “modernity” to describe life of constant change in the modern world, understood as a set of results of man’s reign over nature. For the sake of human maturity, Brzozowski expected the truly modern man to perceive modern life as an unquestionable value. Undoubtedly, there is an evident tension in Brzozowski’s ideal of modern man between the affirmation of creativity in the world of change and the necessity of disciplined production, including unchangeable moral foundations of labour. There is also a major shift in this ideal, stemming from Brzozowski’s change of attitude towards religion.     

论马克思的实践——社会生产关系本体论

For a long time, under the influence of traditional Western philosophy, Orthodox interpreters have distorted Marx’s philosophy as the ontology of matter, thereby concealing the essence of Marx’s philosophy, and eliminating the fundamental difference between Marx’s philosophy and traditional philosophy. This paper proposes that Marx’s philosophy is not the ontology of matter, but on the contrary, by examining the ontology of matter, Marx put forward his own ontological theory, i.e., the ontology of the praxis-relations of social production, by which Marx linked the realms of phenomenon and essence, revealing the content and essence of his philosophy. __________ Translated by Kong Hui from Zhexue yanjiu 哲学研究 (Philosophical Researches), 2008, (3): 3–11     

Knowing thyself ... in private: Masturbation and philosophy

Karl Marx once compared philosophy to masturbation, essentially seeing both as privative, idealistic, and impractical activities. Indeed, many lay folk see philosophers as “wankers.” While the present state of universities does throw doubt on the liberatory character of contemporary philosophy, Marx’s jibe nonetheless mischaracterizes masturbation. This paper is a brief attempt to correct Marx’s characterization of masturbation by drawing on the work of a thinker ofter associated with “intellectual onanism”: Martin Heidegger. Speaking ontologically, Heidergger’s theories can be developed to show that masturbation it is not privative, but “stretched” in time and place. Moreover, masturbation plays a practical role in the creative development of the self, including the self’s essential bodiliness. While not necessarily defending philosophy against Marx’s charges, this paper does show how even so-called “onanistic” philosophy might be redeemed. “Only a being which, like man, ‘had’ the word... can and must ‘have’ ‘the hand’” —Martin Heidegger “I have a dangerously supple wrist.” —Friedrich Nietzsche     

The concept of nature and historicism in Marx

Scholars of Marx often spend much effort to emphasize the socio-historical characteristics of Marx’s concept of nature. At the same time, from this concept of nature, one seems to be able to deduce a strong sense of historical anthropocentricism and relativism. But through an exploration of the results of Rorty’s discarding the distinction between “natural” and “man-made” and Strauss’ clearing up value relativism in terms of the concept of nature, people will find that historicism is a world outlook that brought its historical circumstances on itself. It neglects the fundamental role of nature in the structure of the relationships between nature and history. A modern result of it is that it fails to offer any universal norms. __________ Translated from Renwen Zazhi 人文杂志 (Journal of Humanities), 2005 (1)     

What to Do in an Unjust State?: On Confucius’s and Socrates’s Views on Political Duty

Confucius argued for the centrality of the superior man’s political duty to his fellow human beings and to the state, while Socrates suggested that the superior man (the philosopher) may have no such political duty. However, Confucius also suggested that one not enter or stay—let alone save—a troubled state, while Socrates stayed in an unjust state, apparently fulfilling his political duty to the state by accepting an unjust verdict. In this essay, I will try to show how Confucius could solve these apparent contradictions. I will then examine the reasons Socrates directly and indirectly offers to resolve his seemingly conflicting positions in light of the discussion of the Confucian case. This article is a first step toward a deeper understanding of both Confucius and Socrates (Plato) by way of comparative studies, and of the general issue of a superior man’s political duty to a bad state.     

马克思的"感性世界"理论与现象学运动

The epistemological problems that are implicit in Marx’s theory on the “sensible world” indicate that Marx’s philosophy in fact contains within itself the topics of pure philosophy, but Marx did not involve himself in these topics. Through comparing with Husserl’s epistemological critique and Heidegger’s existentialism, we can clearly see that there are theoretical spaces in which we can develop Marx’s philosophy to the realm of pure philosophy, however, we must devote our creative efforts to the exploration of the spaces. Translated by Yang Xiaohua from Zhexue Yanjiu 哲学研究(Philosophical Research), 2006, (6): 20–26     

The Thought of Building a Human Community with a Shared Future: Inheritance and Innovation to Marx’ s Thought of Community

Marx’s thought of community has experienced three stages in logic and is rooted in the social fundamental contradictions between productive forces and universal communication in content. It reflects the evolution of history into world history and human’s free and all-round development tending towards the unity of individuals and communities. Faced with the profound changes never seen in a century, the thought of building a human community with a shared future inherits and carries forward Marx’s idea of community in three aspects, i.e., the practice of building a social community, the ultimate focus on human destiny, and the grand vision of promoting historical development in human society. In addition, under the historical context of socialism and capitalism coexisting, the thought of building a human community with a shared future creates and shows a new state of Marx’s idea of community in three aspects, namely, dimension remodeling, path reshaping, and value reinterpretation. It presents a new model for historical significance and human civilization of a world of openness, probability and promise to promote the transformation from the modern society to a human society.     

Hermeneutical Portrait of Today’s 18–22 Year Old Young Adult Male

This article’s objective is to help uncover today’s 18–22 year old young adult male in his modern day milieu in order to paint a hermeneutical portrait of his maleness and masculinity. It will attempt to do so utilizing two main categories: (1) psycho-social development and (2) socio-cultural types and archetypes. Psycho-social development refers to the meaning and telos of the young man’s “maleness” and “masculinity.” It is the self-perceived direction of his sexuality explored within the frameworks of physiology and post-modern implications of his development. Socio-cultural types and archetypes refer to the established male roles and masculine identity markers as well as the human energy that operates in the daily life of college men today. The article concludes with a portrait of the young man’s overall perception of the public sphere, how he is placed within a social and political mindset and imagination regarding maleness and masculinity today.