查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 從黑格爾到青年馬克思--市民社會思想史一段流行敘事的批判
- 黑格爾「市民社會」中的公民社會之光
- 試論馬克思主義者對黑格爾矛盾學說的揚棄
- 後馬克思主義者的市民社會理論: 比較與批評
- 論黑格爾哲學中影響馬克思的幾個課題﹣﹣兼論費爾巴哈對黑格爾哲學的批判
- 「存有的前提」與「認識的前提」論三種邏輯上可能的關係--以哲學史上實際出現過的三種主張為例的探討
- 青年馬克思對康德、費希特法哲學的揚棄--從馬克思「給父親的信」說起
- 馬克思主義者對「馬克思-黑格爾」關係的討論--一個思想史的考察
- 「後馬克思主義」視野中的市民社會
- The Theory of The Modern State: A Dialogue Between Hegel and Marx
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 從黑格爾到青年馬克思--市民社會思想史一段流行敘事的批判=From Hegel to the Young Marx: Critique of a Prevailing Narrative in the Intellectual History of Civil Society |
---|---|
作者 | 姚遠; | 書刊名 | 政治與社會哲學評論 |
卷期 | 56 2016.03[民105.03] |
頁次 | 頁69-162 |
分類號 | 570.94 |
關鍵詞 | 黑格爾; 馬克思; 市民社會; 政治國家; Hegel; Marx; Civil society; Political state; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 在黑格爾法哲學中,「國家」和「政治國家」有著根本差別,而混用二者的做法始於馬克思。馬克思化約了黑格爾市民社會的具體形象,並對(現代)市民社會做出批判性分析,在討論馬克思的脈絡裡不宜混淆「市民社會」和「社會」。在市民社會與政治國家的關係問題上,黑格爾和馬克思都看到二者在現實中的二元分立狀況,但黑格爾希望從學理上消解它。而馬克思讓黑格爾希望破滅,摧毀了黑格爾的理性國家構造。黑格爾和馬克思都深知在經驗世界中市民社會決定政治國家,但黑格爾輕視經驗,希望從邏輯上證明政治國家淩駕於市民社會,而馬克思再次破壞了黑格爾的理論方向,把人們的視野重新拉回歷史現實。 |
英文摘要 | Within the legal philosophy of Hegel, "state" and "political state" are two concepts with fundamental difference, and the first one to confuse them is Marx. Although Hegel and Marx have some connections in the definition of "civil society" as such (not its relationship with the political state), we cannot ignore their separate characteristics, for it is Marx who reduces the concrete image of Hegelian civil society to an abstract image, something like the economic infrastructure. Marx has made significant criticism upon the (modern) civil society, and therefore puts forward his own socialist principles focusing on the concept of "society", so it is false to confuse "civil society" with "society" in the Marxian context. Last, as to the relationship between civil society and political state, both Hegel and Marx find the dualism therein; however, Hegel doesn’t establish such dualism- -he just hopes to get rid of it in his theory. But Marx disappoints Hegel, destroys the Hegelian constitution of the rational state, and presents instead the concept of "democracy" which is said to transcend the dualism in question more effectively. Both Hegel and Marx know very well that in the world of experience, civil society determines political state, but Hegel looks down on experience and wishes to prove logically that the political state is prior to civil society, while Marx again destroys the intellectual direction of Hegel and draws us back to the historical actuality. It is inappropriate to describe the turning of the civil-society theory from Hegel to the young Marx with the phrase "it is the (civil) society that determines the (political) state, not the (political) state that determines the (civil) society". |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。