将马克思的物质性解读为时间性?这还有待观察。9正如阿尔都塞所言，我们还远未厘清“围绕历史概念的困惑”。10为了引用马克思，物质性和时间性之间未被探索的交换(Austausch)强调了解决以下问题的必要性:对马克思的实践、社会和历史唯物主义进行时间解读的哲学结果是什么?引入了哪些解释的可能性?如果马克思的唯物主义实际上是一种“新”唯物主义，那么它是否因此引入了一种新的时间性?也就是说，这种唯物主义是否影响了过去、现在和未来之间的一种新的配置?如果《德意志意识形态》将《费尔巴哈提纲》的唯物主义置于一种历史逻辑之下，那么一种新的历史暂时性是否由此产生了呢?如果一个的概念确实给另一个的哲学提出了问题，那么这些问题对时间与历史的关系有什么启示呢?这些问题标志着本文中心问题的开始：我们如何批判性地将马克思的唯物主义历史观重构为历史时间的概念?
9 Haver goes so far as to claim that for Marx, materiality and temporality are the same thing.’ Haver, For a Communist Ontology' , 114. However, the problem of history is noticeably absent from his analysis. This reading hinges on developing a concept of materiality [Materialität] that simply put does not exist in Marx' s corpus. This concept would emerge from -and yet would need to ontologically ground -Marx' s critical reconstruction of materialism [Materialismus] in the Theses on Feuerbach as a dynamisation of the subject-object relation in modern (post-Kantian) epistemology.
10 Althusser, The Errors of Classical Economics: an Outline for a Concept of Historical Time’, 93.
1 Peter Osborne, Marx and the philosophy of time’, Radical Philosophy 147 (January/February 2008), 15.
14