{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"9387edf6-76a0-49b0-871f-f45c222f04d1","title":"时间、劳动与社会统治：马克思的批判理论再阐释","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787301301517","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"9387edf6-76a0-49b0-871f-f45c222f04d1","id":"9387edf6-76a0-49b0-871f-f45c222f04d1","uuid":"9387edf6-76a0-49b0-871f-f45c222f04d1","title":"时间、劳动与社会统治：马克思的批判理论再阐释","normalized_title":"时间劳动与社会统治马克思的批判理论再阐释","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787301301517","isbns":["9787301301517","9780521565400"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":487,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/9387edf6-76a0-49b0-871f-f45c222f04d1","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%E6%97%B6%E9%97%B4%E3%80%81%E5%8A%B3%E5%8A%A8%E4%B8%8E%E7%A4%BE%E4%BC%9A%E7%BB%9F%E6%B2%BB%EF%BC%9A%E9%A9%AC%E5%85%8B%E6%80%9D%E7%9A%84%E6%89%B9%E5%88%A4%E7%90%86%E8%AE%BA%E5%86%8D%E9%98%90%E9%87%8A","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/9387edf6-76a0-49b0-871f-f45c222f04d1/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/9387edf6-76a0-49b0-871f-f45c222f04d1/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/9387edf6-76a0-49b0-871f-f45c222f04d1","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/9387edf6-76a0-49b0-871f-f45c222f04d1/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/9387edf6-76a0-49b0-871f-f45c222f04d1/search"},"page":{"printed_page":280,"pdf_page":293,"physical_index":293,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"00369c4de309062d69cc4983d95aa23a8f1c1fe92a523b349d3415134b5d02e9"},"chapter":"第六章哈贝马斯对马克思的批评","content":"因为哈贝马斯用工具行为来阐释马克思的劳动的社会综合体的概念，所以，他早期对马克思的批判便强烈地令人联想到霍克海姆在《理性的销蚀》中的论辩，其对象是在他看来支配着美国的（显然是非辩证的、非批判的)科学主义形式以及对自动进步的信仰。霍克海姆批评实用主义将实验物理变成所有科学知识的模板。②他同时批评实证主义将自然科学视为社会进步的自动保证，也批评技术统治论的这一假设：理论的社会批评是多余的，因为技术发展将自动解决所有人类问题。这些指控基本上和哈贝马斯早期对马克思的批判一样。④考虑到更为正统的马克思主义版本，这一批判或许有其道理，但是，只有当我们忽视价值这一政治经济学批判的核心范畴所具有的意义和内涵，或将其简化地解释为一个市场范畴时，这一批判才可能被加到马克思头上。此外，尽管被哈贝马斯强加给马克思的那些关于自然科学、生产和劳动的观念，正是霍克海姆所批评的实用主义和实证主义中的观念，但是，哈贝马斯自己在处理劳动领域，以及试图借由提出一个补充性的互动领域，来限制劳动的社会效力的范围时，却恰恰接受了这些观念。其结果，是一种对劳动领域的不具有历史规定性的阐释—它被作为一个工具行为的领域，一种关于社会关系形式和意识形式的缺乏特殊性的理论，以及一次向超历史的社会与历史发展理论的倒退。\n\n280\n\n时间、劳动与社会统治：马克思的批判理论再阐释\n\n① Habermas, Knowledge and Human Interests, p. 42.\n\n② Horkheimer, Eclipse of Reason (New York, 1974), p. 50.\n\n③同上书，pp. 59,74ff.,151。\n\n④ 一个类似的批评可见 Albrecht Wellmer, “The Latent Positivism of Marx's Philosophy of History, ”inCritical Theory of Society, trans. John Cumming (New York, 1971)。","previous_page":279,"next_page":281}