{"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":5,"pdf_page":9,"physical_index":9,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"710f732d218bd98ddec4e08af0e4281ffca36cc1cf494c55e42f73cc86ab59b1"},"chapter":"马克思与历史时间概念","content":"在历史之外。因此，像财富这样的超历史范畴并不是“自然的”(通常意义上的)范畴。这是至关重要的，因为马克思作品的超历史维度经常被忽视，如果不是完全被忽视，通过调用这个作品的“历史特殊性”。这里的问题是，当马克思著作的“历史特殊性”被引用时，没有提及它与他的著作的超历史的关系，历史主义成为历史和历史时间的隐性框架。资本主义是一种历史上特定的生产方式，但这只能通过与使这种特殊性变得可理解的历史概念的关系来把握。通常情况下，那些批判地使用马克思作品的“历史特殊性”的读者从未建立过这种关系。11\n\n劳动和需要的超历史范畴是重要的，因为它们引入了从马克思的著作中构建历史时间概念的可能性。事实上，如果有一个单一的问题来指导这篇论文，那就是:我们如何将马克思的唯物主义历史观重建为历史时间的概念?要回答这个问题，首先要对唯物主义历史观进行时间上的解读。具体来说，它始于对“第一个历史行为”的时间解读一一生活资料的社会生产，正如我们将考虑的那样，它在内部区分了满足现有需要的资料的创造和新需要的创造。通过这种解读，我们将发现，唯物主义历史观使历史时间的初步概念偏离了——实际上是与——理解历史时间的主要框架对立的:历史主义，也就是本雅明之后令人窒息的“同质的、空洞的时间”的限制。因此，本论文的一个前提是，对唯物主义历史概念的时间解读一—马克思发展历史时间概念的第一步，但绝不是唯一的一步一一将被称为“历史唯物主义”的编纂传统去法典化。所谓的“历史唯物主义”（同样，一个马克思本人从未使用过的术语)长期以来在马克思主义者和非马克思主义者的手中遭受了哈里·哈鲁图尼安(Harry harootuunian)恰当地描述为“叙事和持续的故事线，就像一列驶向预定目的地的快速行驶的快车”。14对《历史唯物主义》(the唯物主义的历史观一一第一章—一因此，在本雅明、阿尔都塞、萨特和布洛赫的精神中，揭示了历史核心的一种明显的非线性暂时性。\n\n11 Moishe Postone' s Time, Labor, and Social Domination: a Reinterpretation of Marx's Critical Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993) is at the forefront of this problem. Postone repeatedly calls upon the authority of the historically specific' character of Marx' s work -ad nauseam -but he never considers what concept of history renders this character intelligible. Indeed, for Postone, Marx' historically specific social theory' is completely at odds with the philosophy of history, such that the historical specificity of the critique of political economy delineates Marx’ s final break with his earlier transhistorical understaning of historical materialism and, hence, with notions of the philosophy of history [Geschichtsphilosophie].' Ibid. 140, 258.\n\n12 Benjamin, On the Concept of History', 395.\n\n13 This thesis avoids the use of the term historical materialism’ without the indefinite article ‘a’\n\n14 Harry Harootunian, Historical Materialism’s Task in an “Age of Globalization\"’, Radical History Review 79 (Winter 2001), 95.\n\n5","previous_page":4,"next_page":6}