{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","title":"Marx and the Concept of Historical Time","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":null,"requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","id":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","uuid":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","title":"Marx and the Concept of Historical Time","normalized_title":"marxandtheconceptofhistoricaltime","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":null,"isbns":[],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":200,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/Marx%20and%20the%20Concept%20of%20Historical%20Time","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/search"},"page":{"printed_page":114,"pdf_page":118,"physical_index":118,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"3e2025c6d361b8bed6b9f66e93db125539b31eda30f05879b157186800e8c23a"},"chapter":"第三章劳工向何处去？","content":"不是具体劳动的概念。因此，它最大化了抽象劳动的概念，但仍停留在抽象劳动的范围内，以至于这个概念构成了“正常时间”的历史本体论，当然，海德格尔和萨特没有提供，但是，这也必须说明这样一种观念，即具体劳动的时间——抽象劳动生产并依赖于它的时间——不能立即还原为抽象劳动。\n\n值得赞扬的是，波斯顿在试图以避免这种直接减少的方式来暂时化具体劳动方面走得最远。他将抽象劳动重新解释为一般社会中介的核心是“具体时间”(时间是“事件、事件或行动的函数”，因此时间是“因变量”)和“抽象时间”（“统一、连续、同质、“空”的时间”，因此时间是“自变量”)之间的辩证法，一个“运动、事件和行动发生的独立框架”。”76)抽象的时间，他接着说，“可以被分割成相等的、恒定的、非定性的单位。77这种特殊的资本主义迭代是劳动生产率(具体时间)和随之而来的对恒定社会劳动时间(抽象时间)的再确定之间不断变化的动态。78这种“时间的持续定向运动”79，波斯顿将其比作“跑步机模式”，具有内在的历史维度:它“可以被理解为内在价值形式的抽象和历史时间的辩证法”80。简而言之，资本主义社会中的“历史时间”就是“具体时间”。81对马克思的这种解读存在多种问题，但它们都源于这样一个事实，即将“劳动”从抽象和具体的劳动时间中分离出来，会使波斯顿坚持(令人作呕)的资本主义劳动的历史特殊性去历史化,绝对化。抽象劳动作为“抽象时间”并没有将历史时间化，甚至也没有将其时间化:时间化—作为“具体的时间”—一是在现成的背景下被测量的(这解释了为什么对波斯顿来说，抽象的时间已经是“抽象的统治”。)82正如博恩菲尔德从不同的角度总结的那样，“波斯顿预设了需要解释的东西。”83至于“具体时间”，它的排他性同一性是资本主义的历史时间\n\n76 Postone, Time, Labor, and Social Domination, 202.\n\n77 Ibid. Once again, Postone' s concept of abstract time conflates abstract labour-time with clock-time. The progress made by his dialectic of concrete and abstract time is immediately undone by his de-dialectisation of abstract labour-time, such that this time is not understood as a dialectical relation between two different manifestations of clock-time, but as clock-time itself.\n\n78 Ibid. 292-93.\n\n79 Ibid. 293.\n\n80 Ibid. 295.\n\n81 Historical time in capitalismcan be considered as a form of concrete time that is socially constituted and expresses an ongoing qualitative transformation of work an production, of social life more generally, and of forms of consciousness, values, and needs. Unlike the “flow\" of abstract time, this movement of time is not equable, but changes and can even accelerate.’ Ibid. 294.\n\n82 See, for instance, ibid. 191. Hence abstract labour qua abstract time’ de-temporalises history.\n\n83 See Werner Bonefeld, On Postone’ s Courageous but Unsuccessful Attempt to Banish the Class Antagonism from the Critique of Political Economy’ , Historical Materialism 12:3 (2004), 104.\n\n114","previous_page":113,"next_page":115}