利科的“失去”主体与自身解释学建构——兼与马克思主体观比较  

Ricoeur's“Losing”Subject and Selfhold-Hermeneutics Construction--Also on a Comparison with Marx's View of the Subject

作　　者：姚亚峰[1] Yafeng YAO(Zhjiang University)

机构地区：[1]浙江大学文学院

出　　处：《马克思主义美学研究》2022年第2期231-242,473,共13页Research on Marxist Aesthetics

摘　　要：保罗·利科在论述和建构其“自身解释学”思想时常常提到“失去”主体的问题。在他的理论体系中,这个问题源于对虚幻的、绝对优先的“自我”主体的批判。利科认为主体应该是具体的、反思的,主体的建构需要通过文本、行动和他者的中介迂回的实践过程来完成。马克思关于主体的问题也有丰富且深刻的论述,与马克思的主体理论相比,利科的“自身解释学”在主体建构路径与实践观的思考上略有不同。利科侧重于通过具体的中介环节和实践智慧的思考建构伦理的主体,马克思则充分强调主体的实践性和社会性。从解释学的生存论意义上看,这种不同的视角能够为主体的自我认识和自我建构提供丰富的理论源泉。Ricoeur often refers to the problem of“losing”the reflective subject when discussing and constructing his reflective hermeneutics.In Ricieur's theoretical system,this problem begins with a critique of the illusory,absolutely-priortized“self”subject,and then needs to detour back to its own cognition and interpretation through the mediation of text,action,and the other.Marx also has classic expositions on the subject.Analyzing Ricoeur's“self-hermeneutics”from the perspective of Marx's subject theory can bring about dialectical and complementary reflections.They show a certain difference in the way of thinking about the subject construction and the practic view.This difference has been integrated and promoted in the thinking of practice,self-understanding and self-construction,and then the subject's epistemology and existentialism are perfectly combined.

关 键 词：利科 马克思 失去 主体 自身解释学 自身建构 

分 类 号：B565.59[哲学宗教—外国哲学] B0-0