马克思与尼采宗教批判思想比较探析北大核心CSSCI

马克思和尼采对宗教批判存在巨大的差异性,马克思更注重在政治、经济层面对宗教进行批判,而尼采主张从自然、生命、本能这些现实层面对基督教进行批判。同时,两者对宗教的起源、宗教的世界二重性批判以及宗教批判的目的方面存在着高度的一致性。关于如何赋予尘世以意义这个问题,马克思主张以共产主义作为人的信仰,尼采则呼吁把超人和永恒轮回当作尘世信仰的保证。     

马克思的宗教批判:理解模式与实质

马克思对于宗教的态度是一个重要的理论与现实问题。国内外学术界对马克思的宗教批判的理解可以归纳为6种主要模式:"鸦片论"、"意识形态论"、"简单模糊论"、"经济替代论"、"新宗教论"和"调和论"。对于宗教产生的根源、消亡的条件马克思有着独特而深刻的论述,不能把马克思的宗教批判简单地理解为旧唯物主义的回归。马克思的宗教批判是西方哲学中宗教批判传统的继续和深化,其中一个重要问题是共产主义作为一种价值、理想在形上层面的重建。马克思的宗教批判对基督教思想家有着巨大的影响。     

马克思的宗教批判与当代基督宗教人文主义--兼论宗教异化和异化的消除

马克思的宗教批判对当代基督宗教人文主义有相当的影响,虽然两者对宗教异化有不同的理解,但都认为消除异化是人类走向自由的前提。     

马克思对资本主义的宗教批判——《资本论》的三重拜物教批判

马克思宣告宗教批判已经终结,继而转向政治经济学批判,即转向对现实的批判。本文旨在探究马克思在《资本论》中如何一以贯之地推进其宗教批判,思路,分别从三个层面考察宗教批判"道成肉身"转化成了对商品拜物教、货币拜物教和资本拜物教的批判,由此揭开资本主义及其精神实质的神秘面纱。以宗教批判为线索来解读马克思的《资本论》,一方面可以更深入地理解其资本主义批判的内在结构,另一方面也可以调和其与韦伯对资本主义精神与宗教之关系所作出的批判性反驳,此外,对于研究改革开放视域下中国社会意识变迁之哲学基础亦有一定借鉴意义。     

近年来国内关于马克思与费尔巴哈宗教批判思想关系研究述评

近年来,国内学者对马克思与费尔巴哈宗教批判思想的关系进行了不少研究,大体可概括为三种主张。一是“开端说”,把费尔巴哈看作是马克思宗教批判思想转变的开端;二是“中间环节说”,把费尔巴哈视作是马克思宗教批判思想转变的中间环节;三是“批判超越说”,认为马克思对费尔巴哈宗教思想进行了批判和超越。三种主张达成了某些共识,但还存在一些争议和有待进一步探讨的问题。     

从马克思的宗教批判看其与基督教的联系及意义——以马克思的几句著名格言为例

通过对马克思几句著名格言的分析,我们看到,马克思的宗教批判(主要以基督教为原型),既是一个否定、颠覆的革命过程;又是一个无法决绝断裂的文化承继发展过程.马克思思想与基督教是两种具有许多本质差异的世界观、人生观,但这些差异性的存在,并不一定是两者相互诋毁、相互对抗的根本,也可以成为双方相互尊重、相互补充的前提;马克思的宗教批判不能简单地看成是对上帝存在不存在问题的辩驳,因为这其中包含着对于世界、历史、人的价值、生存意义、人格尊严的革命性宣告;马克思的宗教批判,对近现代基督教思想家产生过巨大影响.     

马克思的宗教批判与唯物史观的形成——以马克思青年时期论著为中心的分析

马克思的唯物史观是在批判宗教、批判各种“宗教批判”理论及方法的过程中形成的。马克思青年时期对宗教的本质及其“尘世”根源问题的认识,经历了从人的理性或自我意识的认识根源→政治根源→经济根源的演变过程,得出物质生产与交往关系在人类社会生活中基础性地位的重要结论。宗教批判是马克思社会批判的切入点,对唯物史观的形成具有关键性意义。深入研究马克思宗教批判与唯物史观形成之间的关系,有助于准确把握马克思思想的发展脉络及其理论体系的内在逻辑,有助于完整、准确地理解马克思宗教批判的思想涵义与方法,提升对马克思主义宗教理论的辨析力,避免因片面理解马克思的宗教理论所导致的或“左”或右的宗教政策。     

青年马克思宗教批判的社会哲学意蕴

青年马克思宗教观的形成包含三个环节：(1)从博士论文写作到《莱茵报》时期,马克思分别以希腊自然神论和19世纪普鲁士政治唯灵论为批判对象,揭示出人在“社会现实”中的不自由是宗教得以产生的社会前提;(2)以《黑格尔法哲学批判》和《论犹太人问题》为节点,马克思通过考察国家神论与私有财产拜物教之间的内在关联,明确了作为“市民社会”前提的现代私有财产关系,是人在当下陷入不自由的根本原因;(3)经《1844年经济学哲学手稿》及至与恩格斯共同完成《德意志意识形态》,马克思既发掘出市民社会的宗教精神是理性神论与历史唯灵论,又在表征人类实践的“社会历史”中,指认了以共产主义为目标的无产阶级革命对私有财产关系的扬弃,是人类实现自由的历史前提。据此可知,青年马克思的宗教批判不是对某一特定宗教观念的理论剖析,而是对宗教本身何以可能的社会前提进行的哲学反思。它内含对导致人类不自由的社会前提进行检视,并对人类自由得以实现的历史前提进行展望的社会哲学意蕴。     

超验道德与生命虚无——尼采对基督教道德的批判及其意义

尼采立足于感性生命的基础性、多元性及创新性这一生存现象学立场,把基督教超验道德解释为颓废生命的虚幻的价值表达,揭示了其否定现实生命的存在意义及其美好达成的虚无主义实质。他认为,基督教道德的禁欲主义否定了人的本真感性及其升华的意义,本质上是颓废者对生命中障碍痛苦、厌倦无聊等必然感受的一种消极逃避;其同情主义尊崇病态而虚弱的生命,遏制了独立自强、竞取超越等创新品质的积极生成;其灵魂平等说强调人与人之间的绝对平等,否定了类的发展所需要的争高竞长及由此形成的等级分层的存在价值。尼采的批判坚持从"生命本身"出发理解和建构道德,废除了绝对化的超验视角和尺度,高扬了本真的个性化创新生存的美好意义;其局限在于没有看到人的工具性生产和互主体性交往对道德的深刻影响,忽略了休戚与共、平等互助等协调性道德的重要作用。     

马克思主义宗教批判思想之辨析

马克思主义的宗教批判思想,实质上是19世纪以来越来越鲜明的世俗化过程中反叛宗教神学的一种极端形式。不能从唯物主义世界观直接推出信仰层面的无神论,马克思新唯物主义以及唯物史观形成,同时也是对无神论的明确的扬弃。马克思对宗教持激进的批判与否定态度,至于把这样的态度解读为宗教精神的再度复活,其实是引伸开来的思想,同马克思本人的宗教批判思想无关。马克思的宗教批判从宗教产生的经济与政治关系入手展开对宗教及其社会现象的意识形态批判,也是一种宗教社会学。马克思的社会概念以及社会主义,意在通过从哲学到共产主义实践的转变成为无神论时代社会共同体的新的信仰,但涂尔干与韦伯则以不同的的方式证明了现代性社会的信仰及其认同依然是诉诸于宗教理解方式。如何面对现代世界宗教现象的多样性与复杂性,是马克思主义宗教批判思想面临的难题。     

God and Governance: Development,State Capacity,and the Regulation of Religion

In this article, we propose a new approach to an old question: How does development affect religion‐state relations? We argue that because development increases states’ ability to effectively formulate and implement policy, it will be associated with greater state regulation of religion. This stands in contrast to predominant theories that examine development's negative impact on individual religiosity while largely overlooking the impact that development may have on state institutions. We test our theory using data drawn from over 160 countries, and demonstrate that the effect of economic development on state regulation of religion is consistently positive, substantively significant, and robust to alternative measurements and the inclusion of a broad range of controls. Statistical analysis also demonstrates that the correlation between development and state regulation of religion is primarily a result of economic development's impact on state capacity, rather than social dislocation or improved coordination by religious communities. Incorporating state capacity recasts the study of religious regulation—and suggests that economic growth is unlikely to take religion off the political agenda.     

Solution-Focused Brief Therapy and the Kingdom of God: A Cosmological Integration

The core cosmological dimension of Solution-Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) and Christianity emphasizes a similar truth—the future is now. As humans live in their preferred realities, they experience the future, problem free solution for their lives from a SFBT perspective. The Christian tradition emphasizes the in-breaking Kingdom of God beginning with the Christ event. The end has entered the now. However, the final consummation of the end-times is still as yet in the future which means that sin and death are part of the world. This Christian understanding of sin and fallenness provides humility to SFBT’s inherently positive view of the world (Bidwell, D. R. Am J of Pastor Couns, 3:3–21, 1999), while SFBT encourages Christians to see the kingdom of God in the now instead of the future.     

God, Freedom, and Evil: Perspectives from Religion and Science

This paper develops analogies concerning the evolution of dissipative structures in nonequilibrium thermodynamics to interpret irrational human behavior in which one finds a lack of correspondence between the invested means and the consequences observed. In an attempt to positively explain the process of cooperation between the free human person and interacting God, I use philosophical categories of Whitehead's process philosophy in an aesthetic model that opposes composition and performance in a musical symphony. Certainly, the essence of human freedom can be expressed in neither thermodynamical nor aesthetic terms. The models proposed can, however, facilitate our understanding of the mutual relations between God's action in the world and the drama of human free choice of moral evil.     

Mysticism,Reality, Illusion,and the Freudian Critique of Religion

Freud's critique of religion cannot be fully understood if his ontogenetic perspective is explored outside of his phylogenetic perspective. The former allows for illusionistic thought processes that are orthogonal to reality claims. The latter requires consideration of empirical claims to truth within a social psychological perspective. It is only the phylogenetic perspective that allows Freud to maintain that religion is delusional, whether or not it is also illusional. Freud's rejection of "as if" philosophies as exemplified by Vaihinger is based upon his refusal to allow religious truth claims to escape their empirical, social foundations. Recent efforts to revive psychological theories of religion rooted only in illusionistic thought, as exemplified in the use of Winnicott's conceptualization, must confront social psychological issues similar to those articulated within Freud's phylogenetic view. A mystical reading of Freud is suggested in which claims to truth within psychoanalysis, science, and religion can be confronted in an empirical and inherently social manner.     

God and Country: The Partisan Psychology of the Presidency,Religion, and Nation

Overt love of God and country have seemingly been prerequisites to be president in the United States in recent decades, if not always. Indeed, the 2008 presidential race was replete with campaign messages showcasing such perspectives—that Barack Obama and John McCain were religiously faithful and deeply patriotic. Scholarship demonstrates the potential political power of explicit appeals to America and Christianity; however, little research has examined (a) citizens' perceptions of candidates' ties to faith and nation and (b) how these impressions may be related to electoral attitudes and intended vote. We address this gap, measuring both explicit and implicit indicators of the Christian‐ness and American‐ness of Obama and McCain. We expected and found that both explicit and—in a final‐entry regression position—implicit perceptions of these traits related to voters' overall candidate attitudes and intended vote choice and that they were connected significantly more strongly for our sample of self‐described Republicans than Democrats. Results illuminate these partisan differences and raise questions about their implications for U.S. presidential politics in years to come.