意识形态及其文化转向与马克思主义话语权的文化审视

马克思文化理论的话语逻辑及其实践旨趣在于:一是其现实前提与可能基础是现实的人以及现实生活实践活动的统一性;二是其实践旨趣或主题在于文化自觉与人的自由、解放和幸福等核心价值目标及其现实化路径的探寻;三是其逻辑路径与方法论则是基于"生产逻辑"与"资本逻辑"相结合的社会总体性批判。马克思文化理论的超越性在于科学的真理性与哲学的价值性、内在具体的社会分析与哲学思维的形上价值相统一的二重属性。而当代西方马克思主义的意识形态研究根据社会历史条件的变化,把重点转向了文化价值批判,由此重构历史唯物主义的当代形态,承继与发挥且在一定程度上转换了马克思文化理论的主题及其实践方式,从而为当前中国文化实践提供了启示:需要建构以马克思主义话语权为指导的主流意识形态,并为审视当前我国马克思主义话语权问题提供了文化路径与理论资源。     

马克思主义哲学中国化实践逻辑探析

中国社会的实践进程与马克思主义哲学中国化的逻辑进程是不可分割且相互交织的。所谓马克思主义哲学中国化实践逻辑就是指中国革命和建设实践以及由此决定的实践需要的发展规律。基于这一认识,笔者拟从马克思主义哲学中国化逻辑起点和核心范畴成功转换的角度,探讨以实事求是为理论硬核的马克思主义哲学中国化的逻辑展开,力图建构当代中国马克思主义哲学的逻辑体系。     

“两个结合”的历史贡献及实践要求

“两个结合”创新了马克思主义中国化时代化话语体系,形成了“一体三翼”的叙事框架和“一本两基”的内在逻辑,拓展了马克思主义中国化时代化的历史深度。用马克思主义立场、观点和方法解决社会主要矛盾,是中国化时代化马克思主义的生发逻辑。马克思主义同中国具体实际的契合机制,一旦与中国共产党领导的伟大社会革命相联系,就会释放出改变中国的磅礴力量。马克思主义既激活了中华优秀传统文化历史变迁的内在潜力,也为理性认识中华优秀传统文化提供了科学的方法论。马克思主义同中华优秀传统文化相融通,产生了推动伟大社会革命的合力动能。基于“一对二双向互化”和“三翼互促”的历史原则,强化“两个结合”的整体性、系统性和协调性,其理论意义和实践意义极为重大。一方面,将从理论层面实现“继承与发展马克思主义的辩证统一”“中华优秀传统文化的创造性转化与创新性发展的辩证统一”“推进马克思主义时代化与中华优秀传统文化的现代化的辩证统一”;另一方面,将从实践层面推动马克思主义的“原生版”转化为“中国版”、中华优秀传统文化的“古代版”转化为“当代版”,在不断回答世界之问、中国之问、时代之问和人民之问的过程中,揭示马克思主义和中国互不辜负之...     

马克思主义道德话语的境况及其建构

在信息全球化的文化背景下,科学估价马克思主义道德话语的现实境况,强化马克思主义道德的话语权,以巩固马克思主义道德在中国社会道德形态中的主导地位,已构成当代中国伦理学研究的重大理论和实践问题.马克思主义道德话语研究的学界视角、现实境况及其当代建构构成本文讨论的重要内容.     

马克思主义中国化的出场路径——重读《实践论》

重大历史时刻的高度重合往往映现着某种深刻的辩证结果.今年,<实践论>发表已逾70年,改革开放已历30周年.70年沧桑、30年辉煌,其中贯穿着一条主线:经过革命、建设、改革与发展历史的反复验证,马克思主义中国化的出场路径反复凸现:一切从实际出发是马克思主义中国化的现实出发点;从自主的实践出发科学地理解马克思主义文本的意义,促进两者的思想结合是后发展国家探索真理的基本道路;展开积极的思想对话、营造民主氛围是造就马克思主义理论创新、与时俱进的基本条件.     

《解放日报》视域下的马克思主义中国化路径考察

延安时期,不断推进马克思主义中国化是党的建设、武装斗争和中共理论建设的需要。《解放日报》是中共中央机关报,更是当时推进马克思主义中国化的主流媒介和载体,通过马克思主义实践资讯报道、革命导师生平事业介绍、马克思主义经典文本传播和马克思主义理论现实解读四种形式,推进了马克思主义与中国实际的结合,传播了马克思主义理论内容,诠释和发展了马克思主义理论观点和方法,实现了中国经验的马克思主义化,为中国革命实践提供了正确的理论指南,拓展了以大众媒介为中心的马克思主义中国化的路径选择,具有重要的历史意义和现实意义。     

象征之镜的生产和生产之镜的象征,或马克思和鲍德里亚

鲍德里亚批评马克思的逻辑有一个递进过程,从最初借助于马克思的拜物教理论发展出一种以符号(或形式)分析为核心的消费社会观,到对马克思主义“生产力”理论批评,最后以“象征交换”理论替代马克思的“生产”理论。在这一过程中,他把西方马克思主义哲学逻辑的失败原因追溯到马克思主义起点上,并借助于结构主义、精神分析和相关人类学成果构建了一种从象征关系入手对当代资本主义文化和意识形态的批判话语,但是在根本上“象征之镜”却是资本主义“生产之镜”话语之外的另一种非历史话语,批判本身成为与历史生成具体情境无关的一种话语反对另一种话语的斗争。在直接的意义上,鲍德里亚式的批评是当代左派激进文化批判的困境表现。     

哲学发展:“经典文本”与“现实逻辑”——回归马克思主义哲学的本质

"经典文本"和"现实逻辑"是彼此理解、交互作用的。哲学"经典文本"既是对"现实逻辑"之哲学理解的历史沉淀,也能为把握"现实逻辑"提供思想资源。马克思、恩格斯的经典文本往往是在占有一定思想资源和借鉴一定思维方法的基础上,提炼时代精神的精华,历经艰辛孕育而成的书写"现实逻辑"的典范。马克思主义哲学的本质,是基于劳动人民立场,对"现实逻辑"作出既"科学"又"价值"的理解。把握"现实逻辑"首先要把握其逻辑起点。从哲学上把握当代中国发展的"现实逻辑",其起点是"结构转型"。回归马克思主义哲学的本质,高度关注并研究当代中国的实践发展及作为其"呼声"与"格言"的中国问题,并在面向当代中国发展的"现实逻辑"的基础上积极展开各种对话,是马克思主义哲学创新发展的根基和源泉。     

高校马克思主义宗教观教育的网络话语权建构

宗教思想和宗教文化在网络中的传播会对大学生政治追求和信仰选择产生影响。在介绍马克思主义宗教观定义和内涵的基础上,指出新时期高校网络话语权建构的必要性和现实性。认为高校在马克思主义宗教观网络话语权建构中应遵循导向性、主体性、交融性和实践性等原则,进而在话语理念、话语管理、话语服务和话语心理等方面提出新时代高校马克思主义宗教观教育网络话语权构建的新路径,在教育实践中帮助学生坚定理想信念,转变思想观念,实现人生价值。     

意识形态与学科逻辑的辩证统一 ——再论新时代伦理学话语体系的构建

伦理学作为一门人文学科,既与政治领域和意识形态密切相关,又有学科自身的发展逻辑。坚持以习近平新时代中国特色社会主义思想为指导,融通马克思主义、中华优秀传统文化和国外哲学社会科学三种资源,使伦理学在指导思想、学科体系、学术体系、话语体系等方面进一步体现中国特色、中国风格和中国气派,是构建新时代中国特色伦理学话语体系的正确方向。宏大叙事与专业研究相反相济、指导思想与文化立场互补融通、政治引领与道德共识相辅相成,实现意识形态与学科逻辑的辩证统一,是构建新时代伦理学话语体系的合理路径。     

Logic,Logic, and Logic

In his recent paper in History and Philosophy of Logic, John Kearns argues for a solution of the Liar paradox using an illocutionary logic (Kearns 2007 Kearns, J. 2007. ‘An illocutionary logical explanation of the Liar Paradox’. History and Philosophy of Logic, 28: 31–66. [Taylor &; Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). Paraconsistent approaches, especially dialetheism, which accepts the Liar as being both true and false, are rejected by Kearns as making no ‘clear sense’ (p. 51). In this critical note, I want to highlight some shortcomings of Kearns' approach that concern a general difficulty for supposed solutions to (semantic) antinomies like the Liar. It is not controversial that there are languages which avoid the Liar. For example, the language which consists of the single sentence ‘Benedict XVI was born in Germany’ lacks the resources to talk about semantics at all and thus avoids the Liar. Similarly, more interesting languages such as the propositional calculus avoid the Liar by lacking the power to express semantic concepts or to quantify over propositions. Kearns also agrees with the dialetheist claim that natural languages are semantically closed (i.e. are able to talk about their sentences and the semantic concepts and distinctions they employ). Without semantic closure, the Liar would be no real problem for us (speakers of natural languages). But given the claim, the expressive power of natural languages may lead to the semantic antinomies. The dialetheist argues for his position by proposing a general hypothesis (cf. Bremer 2005 Bremer, M. 2005. An Introduction to Paraconsistent Logics, Bern: Lang.  [Google Scholar], pp. 27–28): ‘(Dilemma) A linguistic framework that solves some antinomies and is able to express its linguistic resources is confronted with strengthened versions of the antinomies’. Thus, the dialetheist claims that either some semantic concepts used in a supposed solution to a semantic antinomy are inexpressible in the framework used (and so, in view of the claim, violate the aim of being a model of natural language), or else old antinomies are exchanged for new ones. One horn of the dilemma is having inexpressible semantic properties. The other is having strengthened versions of the antinomies, once all semantic properties used are expressible. This dilemma applies, I claim, to Kearns' approach as well.     

Modal Logic As Dialogical Logic

The title reflects my conviction that, viewed semantically,modal logic is fundamentally dialogical; this conviction is based on the key role played by the notion of bisimulation in modal model theory. But this dialogical conception of modal logic does not seem to apply to modal proof theory, which is notoriously messy. Nonetheless, by making use of ideas which trace back to Arthur Prior (notably the use of nominals, special proposition symbols which name worlds) I will show how to lift the dialogical conception to modal proof theory. I argue that this shift to hybrid logic has consequences for both modal and dialogical logic, and I discuss these in detail.     

Default Logic as Dynamic Doxastic Logic

Dynamic doxastic logic (DDL) is used in connexion with theories of belief revision. Here we try to show that languages of DDL are suitable also for discussing aspects of default logic. One ingredient of our analysis is a concept of coherence-as-ratifiability.     

Adaptive Logic as a Modal Logic

Modal logics have in the past been used as a unifying framework for the minimality semantics used in defeasible inference, conditional logic, and belief revision. The main aim of the present paper is to add adaptive logics, a general framework for a wide range of defeasible reasoning forms developed by Diderik Batens and his co-workers, to the growing list of formalisms that can be studied with the tools and methods of contemporary modal logic. By characterising the class of abnormality models, this aim is achieved at the level of the model-theory. By proposing formulae that express the consequence relation of adaptive logic in the object-language, the same aim is also partially achieved at the syntactical level.     

On Argumentation Logic and Propositional Logic

This paper studies the relationship between Argumentation Logic (AL), a recently defined logic based on the study of argumentation in AI, and classical Propositional Logic (PL). In particular, it shows that AL and PL are logically equivalent in that they have the same entailment relation from any given classically consistent theory. This equivalence follows from a correspondence between the non-acceptability of (arguments for) sentences in AL and Natural Deduction (ND) proofs of the complement of these sentences. The proof of this equivalence uses a restricted form of ND proofs, where hypotheses in the application of the Reductio of Absurdum inference rule are required to be “relevant” to the absurdity derived in the rule. The paper also discusses how the argumentative re-interpretation of PL could help control the application of ex-falso quodlibet in the presence of inconsistencies.     

Toposes in Logic and Logic in Toposes

The purpose of this paper is to justify the claim that Topos theory and Logic (the latter interpreted in a wide enough sense to include Model theory and Set theory) may interact to the advantage of both fields. Once the necessity of utilizing toposes (other than the topos of Sets) becomes apparent, workers in Topos theory try to make this task as easy as possible by employing a variety of methods which, in the last instance, find their justification in metatheorems from Logic. Some concrete instances of this assertion will be given in the form of simple proofs that certain theorems of Algebra hold in any (Grothendieck) topos, in order to illustrate the various techniques that are used. In the other direction, Topos theory can also be a useful tool in Logic. Examples of this are independence proofs in (classical as well as intuitionistic) Set theory, as well as transfer methods in the presence of a sheaf representation theorem, the latter applied, in particular, to model theoretic properties of certain theories.     

Logic and Philosophy of Logic in Wittgenstein

This essay discusses Wittgenstein's conception of logic, early and late, and some of the types of logical system that he constructed. The essay shows that the common view according to which Wittgenstein had stopped engaging in logic as a philosophical discipline by the time of writing Philosophical Investigations is mistaken. It is argued that, on the contrary, logic continued to figure at the very heart of later Wittgenstein's philosophy; and that Wittgenstein's mature philosophy of logic contains many interesting thoughts that have gone widely unnoticed.     

Quantum Logic as a Fragment of Independence-Friendly Logic

The working assumption of this paper is that noncommuting variables are irreducibly interdependent. The logic of such dependence relations is the author's independence-friendly (IF) logic, extended by adding to it sentence-initial contradictory negation ¬ over and above the dual (strong) negation . Then in a Hilbert space turns out to express orthocomplementation. This can be extended to any logical space, which makes it possible to define the dimension of a logical space. The received Birkhoff and von Neumann quantum logic can be interpreted by taking their disjunction to be ¬(A & B). Their logic can thus be mapped into a Boolean structure to which an additional operator has been added.