摘要
“两次转变论”者认为,马克思在摆脱了青年黑格尔派唯心主义之后,转向了费尔巴哈式的一般唯物主义和人本主义历史观,在经过“费尔巴哈阶段”之后,才从根本上修正和超越了其费尔巴哈哲学立场,创立了唯物史观。这种观点不符合马克思思想演进的真实轨迹,夸大了费尔巴哈对马克思哲学的影响而忽视了两者的根本差异,也忽视了马克思对黑格尔辩证法的批判性继承,曲解了《1844年经济学—哲学手稿》的历史观的出发点。对于马克思的早期著作,“两次转变论”者的评价也与马克思本人及恩格斯、列宁的科学评价不相符合。在马克思哲学史上,费尔巴哈的影响的确存在,但不存在所谓的独立的“费尔巴哈阶段”。
A viewpoint that Marx realized his revolution in philosophy through ＂two transformations of his philosophy＂ has been prevalent in the domestic academic circles for a long time. Such a viewpoint considers that when he extricated himself from the idealism of ＂the Young Hegelians ＂, Marx accepted ＂the general materialism＂ and the humanist view of history analogous to Feuerbach＇s philosophy and after such a ＂Feuerbach Stage＂, he thoroughly abandoned his belief in Feuerbach＇s philosophy and founded his historical materialism. We consider this opinion doesn＇t tally with the actual situation of Marx＇s philosophy. In fact, so-called ＂Feuerbach Stage＂ didn＇t exist at all. Our article strongly questions the validity of the above opinion. We expect valuable criticism and advice from the academic circles.
出处
《学术月刊》
CSSCI
北大核心
2007年第4期37-45,共9页
Academic Monthly
