歷史的普遍性與特殊性：馬克思歷史辯證法新視角

王露瑤　代利剛

摘 要： 歷史的普遍性與特殊性關(guān)系問題是馬克思歷史辯證法的熱點問題，學(xué)界以實踐本體論為基礎(chǔ)所持有一個基本共識是，具體情境中的特殊性孕育著普遍性。莫伊舍·普殊同（以下簡稱“普殊同”）獨創(chuàng)性地從關(guān)系本體論出發(fā)，批判了傳統(tǒng)馬克思主義基于實踐情境的準自然主義社會本體論，提出要以抽象勞動為中介來論證資本主義社會關(guān)系的歷史特殊性，進而闡明了資本主義是一種黑格爾意義上的獨特統(tǒng)治體系。然而，普殊同用關(guān)系本體論來解決普遍性與特殊性的關(guān)系問題還有深究的余地，馬克思歷史的普遍性與特殊性思想之本質(zhì)在于將人類社會形態(tài)的演進看作一個系統(tǒng)整體，從作為人類基本實踐活動的生產(chǎn)性勞動出發(fā)，抽象概括出以生產(chǎn)關(guān)系為核心的各種關(guān)系性規(guī)定，并以唯物史觀為方法論基礎(chǔ)、以政治經(jīng)濟學(xué)批判為具體研究路徑，真正揭示歷史辯證法的本體論基礎(chǔ)是實踐性與關(guān)系性的有機統(tǒng)一。

關(guān)鍵詞： 馬克思；歷史辯證法；政治經(jīng)濟學(xué)批判；普殊同；歷史的特殊性

中圖分類號： B03 文獻標志碼： A 文章編號： 1673-3851（2023） 02-0087-09

Historical universality and particularity： A new interpretation of Marx′s historical dialectics based on Postone′s social critical theory

WANG? Luyao， DAI? Ligang

（School of Marxism， Jiangnan University， Wuxi 214122， China）

Abstract： ?The relationship between historical universality and particularity is a hot issue in Marx′s historical dialectics. The academic community holds a basic consensus based on practical ontology that particularity in specific situations breeds universality. Starting from the relational ontology， Moishe Postone creatively criticized the quasi-naturalistic social ontology of traditional Marxism based on practical situations， proposed to use abstract labor as an intermediary to demonstrate the historical particularity of capitalist social relations， and then clarified that capital doctrine is a unique system of governance in the Hegelian sense. However， there is still room for further study about Postone′s using relational ontology to solve the problem of the relationship between universality and particularity. The essence of Marx′s historical universality and particularity thought is to regard the evolution of human social form as a system as a whole. Starting from the productive labor of basic human practical activities， the paper abstractly summarizes various relational regulations with production relations as the core， and takes historical materialism as the methodological basis and political economy criticism as the specific research path， truly