费尔巴哈“主谓颠倒法”对于马克思批判黑格尔的意义

On Significance of Feuerbach's “Subject-Predicate Inversion Method” Towards the Marx's Critique of Hegel

学界对于马克思在《黑格尔法哲学批判》中运用费尔巴哈方法基本达成共识,但有学者据此认为这一时期马克思运用了费尔巴哈的"主谓颠倒法"意味着他是站在费尔巴哈人本主义立场展开对黑格尔的批判。事实上,马克思是利用了"主谓颠倒法"揭示出市民生活与国家分离统一的根源在于构成经济生活的市民社会内部,而非黑格尔所强调的理性国家,而这一颠倒不是简单地恢复人的地位就能完成。马克思意识到黑格尔泛逻辑主义错误恰恰是现实世界在德国古典哲学的反映,要想完成对黑格尔的批判,就必须深入到市民社会内部。正是根基于现代社会的特征分析,才决定了马克思并没有停留在费尔巴哈意义上的"主谓颠倒法",仅仅完成对黑格尔的国家和市民社会的第一重颠倒,而是以对现实人具体生活的辩证方法论为基础,使得马克思走向揭露现实本身就是颠倒的第二重批判。

It is because of the well - accepted consensus that Marx used Feuerbach＇s method in Critique＇ s Philosophy of Right that some scholars proposed that Marx’ s application of Feuerbach ’s “subject - predicate inversion method” means that he criticized Hegel from Feuerbach’s humanism. Actuallyby using the “subject - predicate inversion method”,Marx revealed that the root of civil life and nation,s separation and unity lies in the inside of civil life that consists of economic life , rather than a rationacountry Hegel emphasized. This inversion cannot be completed by simply regaining humans, status. Marx realized that Hegel,s generalized logic error was German classical philosophy reflected the real world.Only by going deeply into the inside of civil society, can Marx complete his critique of Hegel. It is the analysis of the features of modem society that determined Marx , s non - stop at Feuerbach , susubject -predicate inversion”,which is the first inversion of Hegel’s country and civil society, but continued hiscritique based on dialectical methodology towards real life , which is the second inversion thus making Marx , s revelation to reality.