论文部分内容阅读
王金福教授对《回到列宁》一书的批评,其实质是试图将已经超越了解释学语境中的后文本学讨论重新拉回到现代性文本学中。王金福不能理解的地方,是在后现代文本语境中,恰恰是承认认知结果的有限性和主观性,才会反证一种历史性的客观性和真理性,这种新的客观性与真理性正是当代哲学和科学认识论的积极反思的结果。然而,《回到列宁》一书在“构境论”基本观点的表述上存在着一个重要的逻辑缺环,即它与历史唯物主义的逻辑衔接。实际上,“构境”理论并没有放弃马克思历史唯物主义的基本立场,或者倒过来说,历史唯物主义恰恰是“构境论”的重要逻辑前提。当然,对历史唯物主义的当代诠释,有可能为“构境论”提供一个重要的现实性基础。
Professor Wang Jinfu’s criticism of “Back to Lenin,” in essence, seeks to reintroduce the post-textual discussion that has gone beyond the context of hermeneutics back into modern textology. Where Wang Jinfu can not understand, in the context of postmodern texts, it is precisely the recognition of the limited and subjective nature of the cognitive result that will counter-evidence a new kind of objectivity and truth of history. This new objectivity and truth Sex is the result of a positive reflection of contemporary philosophy and scientific epistemology. However, there is an important logical gap in the book “Back to Lenin” in the basic conception of “situationalism ”, that is, it is logically linked with historical materialism. In fact, “construction ” theory does not give up the basic position of Marxist historical materialism, or conversely, historical materialism is exactly the important logical premise of “situationalism ”. Of course, the contemporary interpretation of historical materialism may provide an important realistic basis for “situationalism ”.