作　者：温权
关键词：“主体—总体”辩证图式；克尔凯郭尔；卢卡奇；《历史与阶级意识》
摘　要：

 克尔凯郭尔并非卢卡奇偶然提及的学术注脚，而是其理解马克思的背景支援。卢卡奇在不同时期都对克尔凯郭尔作了选择性评述，并将其接受或重构马克思主义哲学的曲折心路历程逐一呈现：通过质疑克尔凯郭尔在人与世界相统一问题上遭遇的“审美—伦理”悖论，青年卢卡奇从心灵掘进到阶级意识，将“主体—总体”辩证图式看作马克思的认识论地平，由此创作出《历史与阶级意识》；之后，为回应该书引起的争议，盛年的卢卡奇以批判克尔凯郭尔的非理性主义为契机，尝试清除“主体—总体”辩证图式中残余的主体形而上学痕迹，开始在方法论维度正视生产实践与经济规律间的有机联系；及至晚年，当卢卡奇立足社会存在，抨击克尔凯郭尔有关主体优先性的宗教幻象时，他又把社会性的“自在—自为”运动内嵌于人性的“主体—总体”辩证图式，并根据超然的悟性，默认马克思主义哲学是将经济规律置于从属地位的劳动本体论，再度退回《历史与阶级意识》的主体形而上学谋划。不难看出，在卢卡奇臧否克尔凯郭尔与马克思的“主体—总体”辩证桥段中，当事人对“人之实然性和应然性的现实统一”问题所秉持的龃龉心态暴露无遗。这也恰好说明，卢卡奇一生都徘徊于正统的马克思主义与人道的马克思主义之间。

 

Kierkegaard and the Flux of Lukács' Marxist Philosophical Perspective

Wen Quan（Wuhan University）

Abstract Soren Kierkegaard is more a background support for György Lukács' understanding of Marx than an occasional academic footnote. At different stages, Lukács made selective comments on Kierkegaard, revealing his winding mental process of receiving or reconstructing Marxist philosophy. By questioning the aesthetic-ethical paradox that Kierkegaard encountered in terms of the unity of man and the world, the young Lukács went deep into class consciousness and regarded the dialectical schema of subject totality as Marx's epistemological horizon, thereby creating History and Class Consciousness. Afterwards, in response to the controversy aroused by the book, Lukács in his prime took criticizing Kierkegaard's irrationalism as an opportunity to remove the residual traces of the metaphysics of the subject in the dialectical schema of subject-totality, and began to face up to the connection between the practice of production and the laws of economics in the dimension of methodology. In later years, when Lukács based himself on social existence and attacked Kierkegaard's religious illusion of the priority of the subject, he embedded the social movement of self-in-itself in the dialectical schema of subject-totality of human nature, then acquiesced with transcendent gnosis in Marxist philosophy having an ontology of labor subordinate the laws of economics, and thus retreated once again into the metaphysical schema of the subject of History and Class Consciousness. It is not difficult to see that in Lukács' denial of the subject-totality dialectic between Kierkegaard and Marx, the disagreement between the parties concerned over the question of "the unity of the actuality and the contingency of the human being" is clearly revealed. This also shows that Lukács vacillated between orthodox Marxism and humanistic Marxism throughout his life.

Key words the dialectical schema of "subject-totality"; Soren Kierkegaard; Lukács; History and Class Consciousness

 

作者简介  温权，武汉大学马克思主义学院教授，湖北 武汉 430072。

[PDF]（下载数：）