{"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":127,"pdf_page":131,"physical_index":131,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"d553547d24ea93f6fd55810358ce3d42e40259e769c3b852401f4562cfd353ed"},"chapter":"第三章劳工向何处去？","content":"因为它与黑格尔的界限和障碍的概念，即在《逻辑学》的“存在论”第二章中所概述的“定在”(dasdasein)相抵触。对黑格尔来说，\"通过这一界限，某物成为它所是，在这一界限中，它有了它的质\"124，因此，这一界限是\"某物和另一物既存在又不存在的中介\"125换句话说，某物的界限决定了这一事实，即它的“超越”同时是它的内部和外部。因此，这个东西是有限的：“非存在构成了它的本性和存在”，因此“这个存在的真理就是它的目的”。126然而，由于同样的原因，这个某物也可能是无限的，因为它的概念表明了它的否定性—一它的有限性一—本身可以被否定的可能性。在这个意义上，它的自我设定的界限同样是一个障碍:一个“应该”「索伦]被超越的界限。127\n\n必要劳动和剩余劳动之间的双重关系从根本上破坏了这种极限哲学，并在这样做的过程中重新制造了这种极限哲学。因此，在黑格尔的《逻辑学》中，不可能把这种双重关系映射为“某物”和“他者”之间的双重关系。从除劳动力以外的一切商品的观点来看，生产劳动力所必需的劳动确实是剩余劳动的界限，因为剩余劳动由于前者而有限，并且力求超越前者。诚然，剩余劳动实现这种超越性，哪怕只是作为一种“坏的无限性”。用黑格尔的话来说，这种无限性与生产劳动力所必需的劳动处于一种“交替的规定性”之中。因此，资本无限扩张的可能性是存在的，但只是作为“在一定限度内的无限扩张”。或者，“资本的运动是…………无限的”130，但只有在形式回路M-C-M包含了物质生产(“………P……”)的情况下才存在。131然而，这些断言代表了黑格尔和马克思的极限概念之间的任何一种“同源性”的范围。从除劳动力以外的每一种商品的角度来看，都是这样\n\n124 Hegel, The Science of Logic, 126.\n\n125 Ibid. 127.\n\n126 Ibid. 129.\n\n127 Something' s own limit thus posited by it as a negative which is at the same time essential, is not merely limit as such, but barrier. But what is posited as negated is not barrier alone; the negation is twoedged, since what is posited by it as negated is the limit, and this is in general what is common to both something and other, and is also a determinateness of the in-itself of the determination as such. This in-itself, therefore, as the negative relation to its limit (which is also distinguished from it), to itself as barrier, is the ought.'Ibid 132. This translation has been altered to render Schranke asbarrier' rather than limitation’.\n\n128 Ibid. 138.\n\n129 Peter Osborne, A sudden topicality: Marx, Nietzsche and the politics of crisis’ , Radical Philosophy 160 (March/April 2010), 21.\n\n130 Marx, Capital 1, 253.\n\n131 Chris Arthur describes .P…’ as the ,“black box\" that lies at the heart of capital, and which it must manage materially, and not just formally.' Christopher J. Arthur, The Problem of Use-Value for a Dialectic o Capital' , in New Dialectics and Political Economy, ed. Robert Albritton and John Simoulidis (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003), 137.\n\n127","previous_page":126,"next_page":128}