马克思“历史科学”的当代解读

The Contemporary Interpretation and Theoretical Predicament of Marx's “Historical Science”

如何阐释"唯一的""历史科学"这一概念,学界主要表现为两种不同的解读模式。一种是传统哲学教科书的解读方式,将"历史唯物主义"解释成"辩证唯物主义"在社会历史领域的"推广和运用"。但由于"两种唯物主义"对"物"的指认不同,导致了"历史与自然关系"的割裂,依然未能超越旧唯物主义的解读模式。另一种是黑格尔主义的解读方式,通过与黑格尔历史哲学的比较,阐释"历史科学"的科学内涵。但这种解读方式将"历史科学"这一概念当成一个思辨性的东西,混淆了历史科学与思辨历史哲学的界限,从而弱化了历史科学的科学性。因此,我们有必要重新考察这两种解读模式,在澄清两种解释模式的理论困难的过程中,指明只有在《资本论》的语境中,才能实现历史与自然关系的内在统一,划清历史科学与思辨历史哲学的界限,从而深化对马克思关于"历史科学"这一概念的理解。

How to interpret the concept of 'the only' 'historical science' is mainly manifested in two different interpretations. One is the interpretation of traditional philosophy textbooks, which interprets 'historical materialism' as 'the promotion and application of dialectical materialism' in the field of social history. But this kind of interpretation of 'two kinds of materialism' is difficult to realize the inherent unity of history and nature, and it is still an old materialism reading mode. The other is the way of Hegel's interpretation, which explains the scientific connotation of 'historical science' through the comparison with Hegel's historical philosophy. But this interpretation of the concept of 'historical science' as a speculative thing confused the boundary between historical science and speculative historical philosophy. Therefore, it is necessary to re-examine the two reading modes, in clarify two difficulties in the process of interpretation model theory, indicate that only in the context of the 'das kapital', in order to realize the unification of history and the natural relations,draw a historical science and the boundaries of speculative philosophy of history, thereby deepening of Marx about the understanding of the concept of 'historical science'.