论历史唯物主义“目的论问题”的“近康德”阐释——以洛维特和波普尔的分歧为视角  

On the“Near-Kantian”Interpretation of“Teleological Problem”in Historical Materialism—From the Perspective of Criticism of L?with and Popper

作　　者：李国屏 Li Guoping(College of Philosophy,Nankai University,Tianjin 300350,China)

机构地区：[1]南开大学哲学院

出　　处：《科学.经济.社会》2024年第6期54-65,共12页Science Economy Society

基　　金：天津市研究生科研创新项目“马克思分配正义理论研究”(2021YJSB076)。

摘　　要：卡尔·洛维特和卡尔·波普尔两人从不同视角对历史唯物主义中“共产主义”的相关论述进行了批判式分析。通过分别比较他们的批判逻辑,即历史哲学的神学性与历史决定论的封闭性,可以从中发现两种历史唯物主义批判路径之间的相似性与差异性。究其根源,关键之处是对历史唯物主义中“目的论”问题的误读。如果以康德的“合目的性”概念及其先验逻辑的框架作为历史唯物主义的理论参照,则可以构建一种不同于传统历史目的论的新“历史目的论”。新“历史目的论”不仅可以有效克服传统历史目的论的决定论倾向,也可以充分激活历史唯物主义中蕴含的张力,进而为当前马克思主义历史哲学的研究提供一种可能的理论进路。Karl Lowith and Karl Popper conducted a critical analysis of the discourse on“communism”in historical materialism from two perspectives.By comparing the logic of their respective arguments,namely the theological nature of historical philosophy and the closed nature of historical determinism,it can be found that there are differences between the two critical paths of historical materialism.At its root,the key lies in the misreading of the issue of“teleology”in historical materialism.If we take Kant's structure as a reference and regard Kant's concept of“purposiveness”and the framework of his transcendental logic as the reference for historical materialism,then it is possible to attempt to construct a new“historical teleology”that is different from the traditional historical teleology.It can not only effectively overcome the determinist tendencies of traditional historical teleology,but also fully activate the tension contained in historical materialism.The new“historical teleology”can provide a possible theoretical approach for the current research of Marxist philosophy of history.

关 键 词：历史神学 历史决定论 历史目的论 历史唯物主义 “近康德”阐释 

分 类 号：B0[哲学宗教—哲学理论]