科学主义马克思主义的两条路径——新实证主义马克思主义与结构主义马克思主义的比较研究  

On Two Paths of Scientific Marxism: Comparative Studies on Neo-positivist Marxism and Structuralist Marxism

作　　者：孙乐强[1] 

机构地区：[1]南京大学马克思主义社会理论研究中心暨哲学系

出　　处：《南京社会科学》2013年第10期41-48,共8页Nanjing Journal of Social Sciences

基　　金：江苏社科青年基金项目"新实证主义马克思主义学派研究"(11ZXC009);南京大学文科青年基金重点项目"新实证主义马克思主义对历史唯物主义的发展与反思"(11NJUZX005)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：虽然新实证主义马克思主义与阿尔都塞结构主义马克思主义同属于科学主义马克思主义思潮,但它们在以下三个问题上存在明显差异:第一,虽然它们都主张马克思与黑格尔之间的彻底决裂,但在决裂时间、决裂方式以及决裂后果上存在明显分歧。第二,在方法论上,前者是经验实证主义,后者是反经验主义,二者是完全对立的。第三,在人道主义问题上,前者承认历史主体的存在,只反对抽象的人道主义,并主张用实证的方法来证明马克思人道主义的科学性;而后者不仅否认历史主体的存在,而且彻底反对一切人道主义。Although belonging to Scientific Marxism, Neo-positivist Marxism and Structuralist Marxism have some special differences. Firstly, they both advocate the thorough ruptures between Marx and Hegel, but there are some distinct divergences when it comes to the rupture time, rupture mode and its result. Secondly, with respect to methodology, the former advocates positivism, and the latter emphasizes anti-empiricism ; accordingly, they are thoroughly adverse. Thirdly, in terms of the problem of humanism, the former admits the existence of historical subject, simply opposes meta- physical humanism, and claims to prove the scientific nature of Marxian humanism by positivist method; on the contrary, Althusser not only denies the existence of historical subject, but also ob- jects to all humanism.

关 键 词：新实证主义马克思主义 阿尔都塞 反黑格尔主义 经验主义 反人道主义 

分 类 号：B0-0[哲学宗教—马克思主义哲学]