{"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":38,"pdf_page":42,"physical_index":42,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"06906213433673100efe937f8b0e0e8e04e4abb2b32e08f41e49aeaacf0de75d"},"chapter":"第一章唯物主义历史观:一种时间解读","content":"那么劳动分工和阶级分工呢?这个问题显然与生产力和生产关系的辩证法有交集，但它本身也必须加以探讨。在《德意志意识形态》中，确实有一些段落记录了这样一种观点，即劳动分工和由此产生的阶级创造是“迄今为止历史的主要力量之一”。80的确，如前所述，如果需要构成了人类个体化的社会性的本体论基础，那么我们可以接着说，劳动分工和阶级分工是(迄今为止)这一点的基本历史表现。在本体论上这是正确的，因为这种个体化首先通过劳动分工表现出来81，在认识论上这是正确的，因为把它作为“历史的”思想一一实际上是与它的“创世的实际行动”82相对立的“历史”思想一一依赖于统治阶级的存在，没有统治阶级，“物质劳动和精神劳动的分工”就不可能出现。83这里需要注意的是，这是物质(materiellen)和精神(或“智力”)(geistigen)劳动之间的分工，而不是体力劳动和脑力劳动之间的分工。在《德意志意识形态》(或其他任何地方)中，马克思没有提到“体力劳动和脑力劳动的划分”。物质劳动一一历史的“实际基础”一—不能简化为体力劳动，精神劳动也不等同于精神/智力劳动，因为精神劳动与物质劳动是分不开的(即使是最艰苦的体力劳动仍然涉及认知活动)。然而，就精神/智力劳动而言，它恰恰相反:它必须与物质劳动分离，才能使历史得到思考。因此，将“materiellen und geistigen劳动”翻译为“体力劳动和脑力劳动”是一种误导:这样做关闭了历史与物质性之间开放关系的持续构成的大门。举一个当代的例子:所谓的“认知资本主义’中的服务业，如果这个翻译抓住了物质劳动和精神劳动之间划分的含义,就不会是物质劳动。服务劳动—一像所有劳动一样必然有一些体力维度——是物质劳动。在资本主义内部，除了精神劳动之外，没有“非物质劳动”84这种东西，只有资产阶级才能被理解\n\n80Marx and Engels, GI, 65.\n\n81 What else but the social division of labour first differentiates one individual' from another? 82 The entire movement of history is, therefore, both its actual act of genesis (the birth act of its empiriçal existence) and also for its thinking consciousness the comprehended and known process of its becoming. Marx, EM, 135. Chapter 4 will problematise the transhistoricality of this argument.\n\n83 The division of labour only becomes truly such from the moment when a division between material and spiritual labour appears.' Marx and Engels, DI, 31 (GI, 51). Emphasis added. The German reads as follows: Die Teilung der Arbeit wird erst wirklich Teilung von dem Augenblicke an, wo eine Teilung der materiellen und geistigen Arbeit eintritt.\n\n84 For Negri, we live today in a society increasingly characterised by the hegemony of immaterial labour.' Quoted in Tomba, Marx's Temporalities, 145, ft. 243. More often than not, assertions such as these (thus the concept of immaterial labour’ ) points to a basic misunderstanding of Marx, whereby matter, not sensuous human activity or labour, is the assumed ground of Marx' s concept of materialism.\n\n38","previous_page":37,"next_page":39}