{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd","title":"现代性的哲学话语","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787544715829","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd","id":"296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd","uuid":"296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd","title":"现代性的哲学话语","normalized_title":"现代性的哲学话语","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787544715829","isbns":["9787544715829"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":463,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%E7%8E%B0%E4%BB%A3%E6%80%A7%E7%9A%84%E5%93%B2%E5%AD%A6%E8%AF%9D%E8%AF%AD","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/296fac69-2927-4952-8b17-011f7141a0cd/search"},"page":{"printed_page":48,"pdf_page":56,"physical_index":56,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"87c0a65ce706fbcc411abc3b150d011d081c2c0863618f49bd7fd37b3a30919f"},"chapter":"现代性的哲学话语","content":"但当《法哲学原理》中的“国家”上升为“实质意志的现实性和自为自在的合理性时”，在黑格尔看来，超越了哲学界限的政治运动将与理性自身发生冲突。这一结论在黑格尔的同代人看来是有挑战性的。宗教哲学最终抛弃了民众未被满足的宗教需求①，同样，国家哲学也退出了未能得到满足的政治现实。民主自决的要求—在巴黎七月革命中被大声疾呼，在英国议会关于选举改革的草案中却变得小心谨慎—在黑格尔耳边激起了更加刺耳的“杂音”。这一次，黑格尔在面对理性与历史现实之间的不协调时，是如此的心烦意乱，以致在《论英国改革议程》中，他干脆站到了复辟派一边。\n\n5\n\n黑格尔尚未来得及把现代性的分裂加以概念化，现代性的动荡和运动就打算冲破这个概念。这样的认识可以从以下事实当中找到根据：黑格尔只能在主体哲学范围内批判主体性。一旦分裂的力量只是为了绝对者便于证明自己是一种一体化的力量，就再也没有“错误的”实证性了，有的只是分裂，它也可以要求一种相对的权力。“顽固”的制度论促使黑格尔在《法哲学原理》前言中宣称：凡是存在的，就是合理的。当然，早在1819一1820年冬季学期的讲座中，黑格尔就已经有了如下语气稍缓的表述：“凡是合理的，将会成为存在的现实；凡是存在的，将会是合理的。”①但即便这一陈述也只是为预先决定和预先判断了的现在打开了一方天地。\n\n①“如果不再给穷人传播福音，如果连盐都变得愚不可及，如果所有的基础都悄悄地被剥夺了，那么，民众也就明白了，对于渗透到他们当中的理性来说，真理只能停留在想像当中，而再也不能为他们的内在冲动提供任何帮助。”(黑格尔：《全集》,第17卷，第343页)\n\n48","previous_page":47,"next_page":49}