You are on page 1of 3

In this tradition,Marx is always a humanist but in his 1844 writings ,this was more open and

explicit.For example,you have alienation in 1844;but then in Capital you have fetishism of
the commodity.Thus these themes continue;it is just that the late Marx doesnot express his
Humanism as openly. An other issue linked to humanism is Hegelianism .Again,in 1844 the
link to Hegelis more explicit.But if you know Hegel and you know the 1844 Manuscripts,then
you can see these themes through out Marx work . Some people call themselves Structuralist
Marxists,or Analytical Marxists,and fo r a similar reason I call myself a Marxist Humanist.
在这一传统中,马克思始终是一位人文主义者,但在他 1844 年的著作中,这一点更加开放
和明确但在《资本论》中,你们对商品有拜物教,所以这些主题还在继续只是已故的马克
思没有公开表达他的人文主义。与人文主义相关的另一个问题是黑格尔主义。同样,在
1844 年,与黑格尔的联系更加明确。但如果你了解黑格尔和 1844 年的手稿,那幺你可以
在马克思的作品中看到这些主题。有些人称自己为结构主义马克思主义者,或分析马克思
主义者。出于类似的原因,我称之为我自己是马克思主义人文主义者。
There are at least three kinds of Humanism .There is the Humanism of Shakespeare,and that
of Machiavelli.This is Renaissance Humanism .The Italian humanists Niccolo Machiavelli and
Leonardo da Vinci exemplify Renaissance Humanism . This humanism is interested in concrete
human reality.It is materialist, some what materialist.But it really doesnot have a concept
of wanting to radically changing human nature,of how human nature could become better.It’s
a bit cynical almost . Then you have the Enlightenment Humanists , and they talk about the
ideal society,how we are born free ,we are good,but then society corrupts us .Therefore
we should try to return the state of nature . But Enlightenment Humanism is also forward-
looking , it wants to create a better human being , a better world , and it is therefore
revolutionary.But you could say it’s too idealistic.So the first one is too materialistic,and the
second too idealistic.
至少有三种人文主义。莎士比亚的人文主义和马基雅维利的人文主义。这是文艺复兴时期
的人文主义,意大利人文主义者尼科洛·马基雅维利和莱昂纳多·达·芬奇就是文艺复兴时期
人文主义的代表。这种人文主义对具体的人类现实感兴趣。它是唯物主义者,某种程度上
是唯物主义。但它确实没有想要的概念从根本上改变人性,人性如何变得更好。这几乎有
点愤世嫉俗。然后是启蒙主义人文主义者,他们谈论理想社会,我们如何生而自由,我们
是好的,但社会会腐蚀我们。因此,我们应该试着回归自然状态。但启蒙主义人文也是前
瞻性的,它想要创造一个更好的社会人类,一个更美好的世界,因此它是革命性的。但你
可以说它太理想化了。所以第一个太唯物主义了,第二个太理想主义了。
Then starting with Hegel,and later,Marx,you have a social type of Human ism .Instead of
asking whether something is ideally possible ; they ask what is really possible . Ofcourse for
Marx this is about the proletarian under capitalism , and in the Manifesto he does support
capitalism a little bit , against the old feudal society . In other words , it’s a more practical
philosophy but there is still a certain element of idealism in it too.I know Marx always said he is
materialist,but in 1844 he admits that he is also an idealist.So I see Marx’s dialectic as a unity
of idealism and materialism . Th ere is an idealist element in it ; otherwise , it’s just a very
practical Humanism .Human beings are human,true.But what is truly humanist? What are
the possibilities , not as a dream , but as a real possibility? This really all starts with Hegel
because Hegel is a historicist philosopher.
然后从黑格尔开始,然后是马克思,你有一种社会类型的人类主义,而不是问某件事在理
想中是否可能他们问什么是真正可能的。当然,对于马克思来说,这是关于资本主义下的
无产阶级,在宣言中,他确实有点支持资本主义,反对旧的封建社会。换句话说,这是一
种更实用的哲学,但其中也有一定的唯心主义成分。我知道马克思总是说他是唯物主义者
但在 1844 年,他承认自己也是一个唯物主义者因此,我认为马克思的辩证法是唯心主义和
唯物主义的统一,其中有唯心主义的成分否则,这只是一种非常实用的人文主义。人是人
是真的。但什么是真正的人文主义?什么是可能性,不是梦想,而是现实的可能性?这一
切都始于黑格尔,因为黑格尔是一位历史决定论哲学家。
One of the main theoretical points for Marx in 1844 , which has generated many debates
amongst Chinese scholars , is that when Marx discusses human production , he emphasized
that human production is based on aesthetics. He compared hum an beings with animals.
马克思在 1844 年提出的一个主要理论观点,在中国学者中引起了许多争论,即马克思在讨
论人类生产时,强调人类生产是基于美学的。他将人类与动物进行了比较。
I think we have two parts of Marx we need to look at . One is this(1844) and another is
Capital. Here in 1844 he says free conscious activity is the species being [Gattungswesen in
German 】 of the human being . If I were making the translation I would call it the “species
essence”.Because this is how we normally translate this German word,Wesen.This is what
differentiates human beings from other animals , because they don’t have free conscious
activity.They produce based mainly on instinctual patterns.There is a certain beauty to their
production,ofcourse.I think what is built by animals can be beautiful to look at.But it is the
beauty of nature , which is diferent from human creation . I think Marx clarifies this in
Capital,in chapter 7 of the English version Capital,on the valorisation process,the realisation
of value . At the beginning on th at chapter , in a very famous paragraph , he compares the
labour of human beings with the labour of spiders and bees.He says the spider might create a
beautiful web,but he repeats the same pattern each time ,whereas human being scan view
their creations in the imagination before constructing them in reality . We are also capable of
changing our physical environment and changing ourselves at the same time . Sometim es we
create ugliness,but sometimes we create a beauty greater then natural beauty .Sometimes
we consider something we have created to be ugly , but if we wait another hundred
years , sometimes we find its beauty . Because sometimes these are done by avant—garde
artists , which is why they are called avant—garde .This is the same word as vanguard , the
sense of the vanguard party as espoused by Lenin.I am not an aesthetician an d that is all I can
say.Sorry.
我认为我们需要研究马克思的两个部分。一个是 this(1844 年),另一个是 Capital(资
本)。在 1844 年,他说自由意识活动是人类的物种存在(德语中的 Gattungswesen)。如
果我进行翻译,我会称之为“物种本质”。因为这是我们通常翻译这个德语词 Wesen 的方
式。这就是人类的区别来自其他动物的生物,因为它们没有自由的意识活动。它们的生产
主要基于本能模式。当然,它们的生产有一定的美。我认为动物创造的东西可以看得很美
但这是自然之美,不同于人类的创造。我认为马克思在《资本论》第 7 章中阐明了这一点
版本资本,关于价值的过程,价值的实现。在本章的开头,在一个非常著名的段落中,他
将人类的劳动与蜘蛛和蜜蜂的劳动进行了比较。他说,蜘蛛可能会创造一个美丽的网,但
他每次都重复相同的模式,而人类在构建之前会在想象中审视自己的创造我们也有能力改
变我们的物质环境,同时改变我们自己。有时我们创造丑陋,但有时我们创造出比自然美
更美的美。有时我们认为我们创造的东西是丑陋的,但如果我们再等一百年,有时我们会
发现它的美。因为有时这些都是由前卫人士完成的艺术家,这就是为什么他们被称为前卫
的原因。这与“先锋”是同一个词,是列宁所倡导的“先锋党”的意思。我不是美学家,
我只能说这一点。对不起。

You might also like