对物化的批判为何反而成为物化?——评阿多诺对海德格尔反主体理论的批判  

Why the Critique of Reification Could be Reification:On Adorno’s Critique of Heidegger’s Anti-subject Theory

作　　者：王晓升[1] Wang Xiaosheng

机构地区：[1]华中科技大学哲学系

出　　处：《世界哲学》2020年第2期27-38,160,共13页World Philosophy

摘　　要：海德格尔在否定主客体框架的基础上来批判物化,在进行这样的批判的时候,他弱化了主体,把最基本的生存结构内化到人自身,使人顺从现代社会的物化结构。由于他弱化了主体的作用,所以他只能采用现象学直观的方法来把握存在,于是存在就变成了直观的对象,具有了存在者的特征。这样海德格尔的存在论就有了一种客观主义的倾向,即用资本主义社会所普遍出现的功能关系来代替实体,从表面上看,这避免了物化,但是这个东西类似于无形式的质料,是不能用概念表达的东西,是"X"。在阿多诺看来,海德格尔之所以需要这个最终的"X",是因为他要虚假地满足社会对稳定性的需要。虽然海德格尔批判了物化,但是他只是否定了物化的外在条件。阿多诺对海德格尔的批判的核心是,海德格尔虽然把存在和存在者区分开来,但是他还是让存在在一定程度上获得了存在者的特征。Against subject-object duralism, Heidegger criticizes reification. When he does like that, he weakens the subject, internalizes the basic structure of existence into human beings, makes them succumb to the reified structure of modern society. It is because he weakens the function of subject that he could only comprehend Sein with the method of phenomenology. Sein then becomes the object of intuition, has the characteristic of Seiendes. Then Heidergger s ontology has the tendency of objectivism, namely to replace the functional relationship which appears all over the capitalist society. It seems that reification has been avoid, but in realty, the relationship is almost the same as material without form, is the inexpressible with concept, i.e.“X”. For Adorno,it is because he wants falsely to meet the needs of stability of the society that he then needs the ultimate “X”. Although Heidegger criticizes reification, he only negates the external condition of reification. The core idea of Adorno s critique of Heidegger is that although Heidegger distinguishes between Sein and Seiendes, he still to some extent makes Sein to have the characteristic of Seiendes.

关 键 词：阿多诺 海德格尔 物化 拜物教 

分 类 号：B516[哲学宗教—外国哲学]