论马克思唯物史观与存在论之根本区别——从广松涉论海德格尔的“存在论”说起  

Fundamental Difference between Marx' Historical Materialism and Existentialism——From Hiromatsu's Comment on Heidegger's Existentialism

作　　者：杨思基[1] 

机构地区：[1]苏州大学哲学系,江苏苏州215021

出　　处：《南京大学学报（哲学．人文科学．社会科学）》2006年第5期21-26,共6页Journal of Nanjing University(Philosophy,Humanities and Social Sciences)

基　　金：国家社科基金项目(05BZX002)

摘　　要：一个时期以来,我国哲学界有不少人以存在论或生存论为坐标来理解和诠释马克思主义哲学,并由此说明马克思哲学在本质上属于现代哲学。日本马克思主义理论家广松涉认为,海德格尔的存在论隐含着先验永恒的人性论,海德格尔的“整体性的因缘关联”实际上就是人因“所用”、“所向”、“所为”并通过“用具”所构建的“实践关联关系的场”,在此基础上,广松涉批判地改造了海德格尔的存在论思想并代之以实践关联关系的“场”的概念。这种批判性的改造使他的思想比较接近于马克思的唯物史观。然而,马克思的唯物史观不仅与海德格尔等人的存在论,而且还与广松涉的社会历史生成论存在明显的不同,不能把他们不加区分地混淆为同一种哲学世界观理论。In order to prove that it is basically a modem philosophy, Marxist philosophy has been for a period of time interpreted on the basis of existentialism or ontology in Chinag philosophical society. In Hiromatsu＇s viewpoint, Heideggar＇s existentialism implies that human nature is transcendent and eternal. His ＂marital association＂ of dasein is virtually the existence of ＂practical associative field＂. Hiromatsu develops Heideggar＇s existentialism and puts forth the concept of the ＂field of practical association＂, which makes his own view closer to Marx＇historical materialism. The latter, however, distinguishes itself from Heideggar＇s and Hiromatsu＇s theory, and must never be mixed up.

关 键 词：唯物史观 存在论 因缘关联 实践关联关系的场 

分 类 号：B03[哲学宗教—哲学理论]