{"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":46,"pdf_page":50,"physical_index":50,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"875a9acdc370e64f048dc40d2001cd2edf9884cf138b9c8da75a69807563a4b0"},"chapter":"第二章总体性、时间化与历史:海德格尔与萨特","content":"简单地废除《2¹世纪哲学》，但这种愿望不仅“不意味着在《德意志意识形态》中没有哲学在起作用，而且，我们可以补充说，也不意味着在《德意志意识形态》中不需要有更多的哲学在起作用。马克思的解放计划不需要与拉比卡对马克思唯物主义的激进(但不一定是激进的)把握汇合，即“将所有哲学，无论是唯心主义的还是唯物主义的，置于其真正的位置，即意识形态中”，将马克思主义哲学的概念渲染为“荒谬的”。马克思主义哲学中的哲学不一定是与阿尔都塞、拉比卡和马克思所阐明的“历史科学”相对立的哲学(例如，古典德国唯心主义)。赫伯特·马尔库塞的“具体哲学”概念就是一个有用的例子。对马尔库塞来说，哲学是“人类生存的具体苦难”25，它使我们的当代历史处境变得可见，并要求我们克服它。这种哲学，被马尔库塞称为“哲学化”——哲学作为人类存在的一种具体模式——与抽象思维相去甚远，而抽象思维是阿尔都塞、拉比卡和马克思试图与之分离的，他们可以说是全神贯注于抽象思维，以至于他们忽视了最突出的人物，黑格尔思想的实践的和具体的维度。引用恩格斯的话，也许这并不是“退出哲学”是正当的，而是退出哲学的退出。正如巴里巴尔所指出的这种退出并不是简单地回到哲学的内部，而不受历史的拖累。26这是一个以哲学与马克思自己的异域(历史)之间的辩证法为标志的出口，这个异域本身就是哲学与非哲学之间的辩证法。\n\n然而，个人行动不能成为理解总体性及其与时间化关系的唯一立足点。历史总化迫使我们审视的是一一一个被海德格尔压制、被萨特不确定、被马克思完全不问的问题一—个体、社会和历史时间性之间复杂关系的持续构成。以马克思的“社会个体”概念为例。对马克思来说，个人已经完全由社会决定27，这样社会\n\n21 Louis Althusser, The Historical Task of Marxist Philosophy' , in Louis Althusser, The Humanist Controversy and Other Writings [1966-7], ed. François Matheron, trans. G.M. Goshgarian (New York and London: Verso, 2003), 174.\n\n22 Ibid.\n\n23 Labica, Marxism and the Status of Philosophy, 280, 365.\n\n24 Each in his own way, Althusser, Labica and Marx fail to critically appropriate the place of nonphilosophy' within Feuerbach' s Preliminary Theses on the Reform of Philosophy [1842], a place which qualifies the decisiveness and originality of their respective formulations of a science of history.\n\n25 Herbert Marcuse, On Concrete Philosophy' [1929], trans. Matthew Erlin, in Herbert Marcuse, Heideggerian Marxism, ed. John Abromeit and Richard Wolin (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2005), 36. Marcuse' s concrete distress' derives from Kierkegaard' s stance that qualitative pressure' must be placed on philosophy in order to exist in the public realm, as only the public realm realises, the immense concrete difficulties of social and historical existence, of existing-with-oneanother'\n\n26 Balibar, The Philosophy of Marx, 40, 119.\n\n27 Marx, Grundrisse, 248.\n\n46","previous_page":45,"next_page":47}