黑格尔哲学对于斯宾诺莎哲学的进与退

The Progress and Regress of Hegel's Philosophy Relative to Spinoza's Philosophy

黑格尔在其《哲学史讲演录》中批评斯宾诺莎哲学只有实体没有主体,因而没有个体性自由,而他自己的绝对精神既是实体又是主体,由此开出了个体性自由的现代性原则。从论证上看,黑格尔的理论方案无疑更加合理。可是,黑格尔的这套理论落实到实践领域后却大打折扣,表现为在他所构想的理性国家中有资格充当实体兼主体的个人只有君主一人,广大民众只限于充当经济等社会活动的主体,而不能充当政治主体。与之相反,在理论上被他诟病的斯宾诺莎反而竭力主张言论自由,把民主制作为最佳政体,直接诉求公民在国家机构中的投票权和任职权。造成这种反差的主要原因是:斯宾诺莎所处的17世纪中期的荷兰已经是一个初步现代化的商业国家,而黑格尔所处的19世纪的德意志邦国才刚刚开始现代化进程。可见,在哲学史上,后人总能在哲学论证的专业技艺上超越前人,但在实践主张上是否也能后来居上,却要看其所处环境在发展程度上是否超越了前人的处境。

In his Lectures on the History of Philosophy,Hegel criticizes that Spinoza's philosophy discusses substance without subject,indicating the absence of individual freedom.Hegel's own Absolute Spirit,however,is both substance and subject,thus prescribing the modern principle of individual freedom.In terms of argumentation,Hegel's theoretical scheme is undoubtedly more reasonable.However,Hegel's theory,when put into practice,does not achieve the expected effect.In practice,the only individual qualified to act as both substance and subject is the monarch,while the general public can only act as subjects in economic and other social activities instead of as political subjects.In contrast,Spinoza,whom Hegel denounces theoretically,argues strenuously for freedom of speech and regards democracy as the best regime,directly appealing for citizens'right to vote and hold office in state institutions.The main reason for this contrast is that the mid-seventeenth-century Netherlands where Spinoza lived was already a rudimentary modernized commercial nation,whereas the nineteenth-century German state that Hegel inhabited had just embarked on modernization.Therefore,it can be concluded that in the history of philosophy,scholars could always surpass their predecessors in the philosophical argumentative skills,but whether their practical claims are more progressive than those of their predecessors depends on whether their environment exceeds those of their predecessors in terms of conditions.