摘要
马克思在《哲学的贫困》中运用已经形成的历史唯物主义的基本观点批判了蒲鲁东"政治经济学的形而上学"。但是对经验事实的描述只能驳倒历史唯心主义的观点,不足以动摇其内在逻辑。历史唯物主义要真正超越历史唯心主义,必须说明现实历史的意义。此时的马克思由于经济学研究的滞后,未能揭示资本主义生产关系的本质内容,无法从现实的物质生产中揭示出人类解放的意义,不足以彻底驳倒蒲鲁东的内在逻辑,历史唯物主义的内容仍有待深化。
In the Poverty of Philosophy, Marx uses the basic principles of historical materialism that have already formed to criticize ＇the metaphysics of political economy＇ of Proudhon. However, the description of experiential fact can only refute the viewpoints of historical materialism instead of its logic. The significance of historical ideal- ism is a new clue of human emancipation beyond the reality. Historical materialism has to illustrate the signifi- cance of the real history to truly transcend historical idealism. At that time, owing to the lag of Marx＇ s economic study, he could not reveal the essential content of capitalist relations of production. The significance of human emancipation cannot be developed from practical material production. Marx is not able to refute the internal logic of Proudhon. Historical materialism remains to be promoted.
出处
《常熟理工学院学报》
2012年第11期33-36,共4页
Journal of Changshu Institute of Technology
