一般智力、价值形式与激进辩证法

General Intellect,Value Form and Radical Dialectic

面对认知资本主义下"一般智力"及非物质劳动的兴起,奈格里、维尔诺等意大利激进理论家以康德主义的方式将劳动与资本的对立视为绝对的外在性对抗并试图从以"语言游戏"为基础的"生命政治劳动"中寻求超溢资本的潜能。与之相对,普殊同等学者则从价值"形式规定性"的角度出发证伪了非物质劳动和资本的对立,并认为非物质劳动不过是资本本身的"现实抽象"而隶属于作为社会实体-主体的资本逻辑。尽管二者对后福特制及后福特制下的劳动问题给予了深刻的论述,但他们最终都错失了对于历史维度下革命性阶级斗争的把握,从而误解了马克思辩证法以及被阿多诺所强调的马克思"自然历史"概念的真实逻辑,对此我们有必要在马克思所揭示的资本之"崩溃逻辑"的"自然历史规律"下重新阐发知识、非物质劳动、一般智力和知识产权等社会范畴。

Encountering the rising -up of ＂general intellect＂ and immaterial labor in nexus of cognitive capitalism, Antonio Negri, Paolo Virno and other Italian radical theorists took advantage of Kantian horizon of dialectic to regard the dichotomy between labor and capital as some absolute external antagonism, therefore, they intended to search for some potentiality of exceeding capital from the basis of ＂language -game＂ and ＂biopolitical labor＂. In the opposite side, Moishe Postone falsi- fied the absolute contradiction between immaterial labor and capital from the angle of the ＂formal determinacy＂ of value, hence, they argued that immaterial labor, affiliated to the social substance- subject of capital logic, is no more than the ＂ real abstraction＂ of capital per se. Although both sides provided profound argumentation on issues about labor in condition of post - Fordist system, they missed the historical dimension of revolutionary class struggle, whereby they misunderstood Marx＇s dialectic and his real logic of ＂natural history＂ , which was emphasized by Adorno. In such circumstance, it is necessary to re - interpret knowledge, immaterial labor, general intellect and intellectual property in Marx＇s paradigm of ＂natural hlstory＂ and ＂logic of collapse＂ of capital.