摘要
中国学术界在马克思主义社会形态理论的认识上,长期存在“三种社会形态论”和“五种社会形态论”(或作“五种生产方式论”)两种主要观点及其争论,其中后者则为中国史学界的主导性理论。改革开放以来,包括历史学界在内的中国学术界对马克思社会形态理论进行了较为深刻的省思,也提出了一些新的认识或阐释。但争论依然激烈,分歧继续存在,甚至对于马克思是否提出过社会形态理论这样的问题也未能形成一致性看法。造成这种状况的重要原因是一些学者狃于寻章摘句以论证预设观点的研究方法,其结果既相悖于真正的学术探讨,也背离了马列著作的原义。立足于文本学考察,可知马克思在人类社会发展形态的问题上,从未明确提出过“三种社会形态”或“五种社会形态”的理论,而只是对人类社会发展过程中的某些“社会形态”及其特征作过一些描述或设想,认为马克思在《德意志意识形态》一书明确阐述“三种社会形态”或“五种社会形态”的说法,并不符合事实。长期支配中国学术界的“五种社会形态(生产方式)论”,实为列宁和斯大林总结出来的“理论”,特别是后者将其教条化和神圣化,因而并非马克思主义的基本原理。
On the understanding of Marxist social form theory,Chinese academia has long had two main views and arguments of“three social forms theory”and“five social forms theory”.Since the reform and opening up in 1978,the debate has remained fierce,and even there has been no consensus on whether Marx proposed the theory of social forms.The important reason for this situation is the research methods used by some scholars to extract sentences to demonstrate the preset viewpoint.Marx described or imagined certain“social forms”and their characteristics in the process of human social development,but the statement that Marx explicitly stated“three social forms”or“five social forms”in his book German Ideology does not conform to the fact.The theory of“five social forms”,which has long dominated Chinese academia,is actually a“theory”summarized by Lenin and Stalin,and therefore it is not a basic principle of Marxism.
作者
李文才
潘静
LI Wen-cai;PAN Jing
出处
《河北学刊》
北大核心
2024年第2期58-67,共10页
Hebei Academic Journal
