重审体系辩证法的“历史性”向度——对奥尔曼与阿瑟争论的再讨论

Review the“Historical”Dimension of the Dialectics of the System——A Rediscussion of Ollman's Argument with Authur

“新辩证法”学派的代表人物约翰·阿瑟曾将历史与逻辑相统一的方法论视为对《资本论》辩证法的误读。他依据黑格尔的辩证法,把辩证法看作是概念范畴不断推演完善的体系,以至于遮蔽了历史的维度。奥尔曼从目标的遗失、逻辑的断裂和简化的叙述逻辑三个方面对体系辩证法进行批评,强调了历史与逻辑相统一的重要性,虽然其分析依旧存在局限,但为我们正确理解《资本论》的辩证法提供了有益启发。立足马克思的历史唯物主义,将研究方法与叙述方法有机结合,并把分析视角聚焦于隐藏在抽象统治背后的资本主义生产方式,才能够重绘人类解放的版图,为推翻资本主义寻求解放之路。

John Arthur,the representative of the“new Dialectics”school,once regarded the methodology of the unification of history and logic as a misinterpretation of the dialectics of Capital.Based on Hegel's dialectics,he regarded dialectics as a system of continuous improvement of conceptual categories,so as to obscure the dimension of history.Ollman criticizes the dialectics of system from three aspects:the loss of goal,the rupture of logic and the simplified narrative logic,and emphasizes the importance of the unity of history and logic.Although there are still limitations in his analysis,it provides beneficial inspiration for us to correctly understand the dialectics of Capital.Based on Marx's historical materialism,the organic combination of research methods and narrative methods,and the focus of analysis on the field of the capitalist mode of production hidden behind the abstract rule,can redraw the map of human liberation and seek the path of liberation for the Overthrow of capitalism.