摘要
马克思的“历史科学”在方法论上之所以区别于思辨哲学与实证自然科学,关键在于他以“对象性活动”为核心,重新厘清了自然史与人类史之间的辩证统一关系。具体来说,马克思为了确立历史的现实根基,一方面批判了黑格尔将自然消融于精神逻辑的做法,另一方面又借鉴了以达尔文为代表的自然科学,以此确立了历史的“自然史”基础。立足于“对象性活动”这一实践范畴,马克思的“历史科学”明确指出,自然史是构成人类实践历史的物质前提,而人类史是人类改造自然的历史,二者在生产劳动和物质变换的过程中,成为相互制约、不可分割的辩证整体。
The methodological distinction of Marx’s“historical science”from speculative philosophy and positivist natural science lies in that he,centering on“objective activity”,re-clarified and established the dialectical unity between natural history and human history.Specifically,to lay a realistic foundation for history,Marx,on the one hand,critiqued Hegel for dissolving nature into the logic of spirit,and on the other hand,drew upon the natural sciences represented by Darwin,thereby establishing history’s basis in“natural history”.Grounded in the practical category of“objective activity”,Marx’s“historical science”reveals that natural history constitutes the material premise of human practical history,while human history is the reshaping of nature through material productive activity.The two form an inseparable dialectical whole,mutually conditioning each other within the process of productive labor and material transformation.
作者
樊悦阳
FAN Yueyang(School of Philosophy,Nankai University)
出处
《南京林业大学学报(人文社会科学版)》
2025年第5期68-76,86,共10页
Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Humanities and Social Sciences Edition)
关键词
自然史
人类史
历史科学
马克思
natural history
human history
science of history
Marx
