在当今这个技术时代技术时代，技术与人的自由问题正在成为哲学反思的中心。本书旨在从技术与自由的冲突技术与自由的冲突和融合的视角对马尔库塞的技术哲学思想进行全面、系统的研究。技术时代技术时代人的自由解放是马尔库塞整个哲学思想的主题。而人的自由解放问题实质上就是一个如何融合技术与自由之间的对立与冲突的问题。技术与自由的冲突技术与自由的冲突是近代以来主体主体与客体客体、思维与存在存在、感性感性与理性理性、精神与肉体肉体等一系列二元分裂在现代技术社会技术社会中的具体体现。因此，解决技术与人的自由之间的冲突从根本上讲就是要克服以上的一系列二元分裂，也就是要克服对象性的思维方式思维方式。因为，由技术所造成的人性危机的根源就在于人的思维方式思维方式的危机。重建一种有别于对象性思维对象性思维方式的新思维方式思维方式和生存方式生存方式是马尔库塞全部哲学思考所试图实现的目标。就马尔库塞哲学思想的整体而言，批判精神批判精神和超越精神是贯穿于其中的两个基本特质。由此，批判不自由的现实社会和构想未来美好的自由世界就成为他整个哲学思想发展的两条主线。就其批判性这条主线而言，马尔库塞继承了马克思马克思的“批判”传统并从黑格尔黑格尔辩证法辩证法思想中挖掘出否定精神否定精神，将其作为自己对发达工业社会发达工业社会中技术理性技术理性对人的全面控制和奴役所造成的人的P自由全面丧失的现实进行彻底批判的思想武器。与以往的批判理论将对社会的批判建立在经济和政治制度的基础之上不同，马尔库塞将批判的矛头直指人类自身的思维方式思维方式与生存方式生存方式，并指出人的解放人的解放首先不在于变革外在于人的社会环境和制度，而在于恢复人的自由的批判精神批判精神和革命意识。因此，否定性思维否定性思成为马尔库塞克服由技术理性技术理性所彰显出来的主—客二元化的对象性思维对象性思维方式的基本思想方法之一。就其超越性超越性这条主线而言，马尔库塞把早期马克思马克思关于感性感性的人的思想、海德格尔海德格尔的存在存在论人学以及弗洛伊德弗洛伊德生命本能本能理论有机地融合起来，创造性地把“爱欲”作为人的本质人的本质性规定，并主张通过审美革命审美革命建立一个不同于现代压抑性的技术文明的非压抑性自由社会自由社会，从而解决因技术与自由的冲突技术与自由的冲突所造成的现代人的生存困境，实现人的本源性的自由存在存在。马尔库塞思想中的这两个基本内核相互之间并不是外在的关系。实际上，这两条思路是统一于对“人”本质的思考之上的。也就是说，不论是对现存社会的批判，还是对新的理想社会的建构，都是建立在对人的自由生存的追问的基础之上的。因此，从某种意义上讲，马尔库塞的哲学就是“人学”。而任何真正对“人”的追问在某种程度上都必须将之置于现象学现象学的视野之中。“人学”作为现象学现象学才是可能的。现象学现象学的方法与否定性思维否定性思一起构成了马尔库塞思想两个基本的哲学方法。而马尔库塞哲学思想中的现象学现象学维度往往遭到人们的忽视。马尔库塞试图通过美学将感性感性的人从技术理性技术理性的控制与奴役中解放出来，却最终把现实中人的自由解放置于“审美幻想幻想”和“审美形式审美形式”中，也就把现实中的人的自由“内在化”，从而走向了“乌托邦乌托邦”。这是他唯心主义哲学思想中难以克服的矛盾。马尔库塞之所以没有能解决他自己提出的问题，原因在于他虽然在某种程度上遵循了“现象学现象学”还原的方法，但他始终没有像马克思马克思那样在实践唯物论实践唯物论的基础上找到人的最本质的东西——感性感性实践实践活动。他从“感性感性的人”到“本能本能的人”再到“审美的人审美的人”，始终是在对象化思维中打转。他始终都把人的本质人的本质作为一个知识性对象加以追问，而没有把人置于一种历史的实践实践活动中加以考察。因此，在他那里，虽然有对发达工业社会发达工业社会的极为深刻的批判，却始终找不到解决人的自由解放的正确途径。在面对工业文明的异化现实时，他不是逃避逃避到抽象的前技术时代技术时代（本能本能的人），就是逃避逃避到个人孤独的内心中（审美的人审美的人），最终也只能是把人的自由交还给压抑性的现实社会，充其量就是对压抑性社会作出某种伦理学的情绪发泄。而对现实社会，却只能通过审美的“想象”、“回忆回忆”在内心精神中达到某种超越，从而走向了审美乌托邦审美乌托邦。本书最后认为，只有把人的本质人的本质建立在马克思马克思具有彻底现象学现象学意蕴的“实践唯物论实践唯物论”的基础之上，人类才能从根本上解决由主体主体与客体客体、思维与存在存在、肉体肉体和精神、理性理性与感性感性等一系列分裂所造的人性分裂，也才能从根本上克服由技术理性技术理性在当代技术社会技术社会中所造成的“技术与人的自由”之间的冲突。也就是说，只有在感性感性的实践实践活动中，才能为人的自由解放找到一条正确的道路。关键词：技术理性技术理性 否定性思维否定性思 现象学现象学方法 人的自由 审美乌托邦审美乌托邦 实践实践

In the era of technology，technology and man’s freedom are becoming the focus of philosophical reflection. This dissertation aims to give a comprehensive and systematic study of Marcuse’s thoughts on philosophy of technology from the perspective of the conflict and integration between technology and freedom.The freedom and liberation of human beings in the technological era is the theme of Marcuse’s philosophical thought. And the essence of the freedom and liberation of human beings is how to control and integrate the conflict between technology and freedom. It is the embodiment of the series of dual split between subject and object，thought and existence，perception and rationality，spirit and human body in modern technological society. As a result，to control the conflict between technology and man’s freedom，the dual split mentioned above have to be avoided，in other words，thinking mode of objectivity should be disserted，as the root of human nature crisis resulted from the technology lies in the crisis of human’s thinking model. So what Marcuse’s philosophy wants to achieve is to reconstruct a new thinking model different from thinking mode of objectivity and way of living.Marcuse’s philosophical thought is characteristic of the spirit of criticism and transcendence. As a result，criticizing the society lacking of freedom and picturing the wonderful free world in the future are the two threads throughout the development of his philosophical thoughts. As far as criticism is concerned，Marcuse inherited Marx’s critical theory and developed“spirit of negation”from Hegel’s thought of dialectics. He regarded it as the weapon to give thorough critics to the reality in which man’s freedom is deprived by technological reason’s control and enslavement towards man in developed industrial society. Unlike former critical theory to criticize the society based on the economic and political system，Marcuse put the spearhead of criticism to man’s thinking mode and way of living. He pointed out the liberation of man is to wake up man’s spirit of free criticism and awareness of revolution rather than change the outside social environment and institution. So the critical thinking becomes one of the basic forms of thinking for Marcuse to overcome the subject-object dual thinking mode of objectivity manifested by technological reason.As far as transcendence is concerned，Marcuse integrated early Marx’s theories upon perceptual man，Heidegger’s existential theory about human and Freud’s libido theory. He proposes that libido is the human nature and that a non-repressive society should be constructed in place of the repressive modern technological civilization through aesthetic revolution so as to deliver modern man from his dilemma caused by the conflict between technology and freedom，realizing man’s primordial free existence. These two basic principles in Marcuse’s theory are not contradictory. As a matter of fact，both of them are based on the reflection on human nature. In other words，both the criticism of the existing society and the construction of a new ideal society have as their cornerstone the reflection on man’s free existence. In consequence，Marcuse’s philosophy is，in a sense，theory about human and any serious reflection on human，to some extent，should be placed under the realm of phenomenology. It is possible for the study on human beings being the branch of phenomenology. Marcuse’s philosophy consists of phenomenological method and critical thinking. However，the former tends to be ignored by people.Marcuse attempted to liberate perceptual man from the bondage of technological reason with aesthetics. However，in the end，he resorted to aesthetic imagination and aesthetic form to realize man’s freedom. In other words，he internalizes man’s freedom and ends up in Utopia. This is an unavoidable contradiction in his philosophy of idealism. His failure to solve the question he raised lies in the fact that despite his adherence to the reversion method in phenomenology to some degree，he failed to discover the most basic thing about man，namely，perceptual practical activity. From perceptual man to instinctive man to aesthetic man，he never got out of the thinking mode of objectivity. He always pursues man’s nature as something of knowledge，never placing man in historical background of practical activity. As a result，despite his in-depth criticism of the developed industrialized society，he never found the right approach to man’s freedom. Confronted with the alienating society，he either escaped into the abstract pre-technological era（primordial man）or retreated into individual’s lonely innermost（aesthetic man），resulting his handing freedom to the repressive existing society. His solution is at most some ethical catharsis of the repressive society. In conflict with modern society，he resorted to aesthetic imagination or memory to realize some means of transcendence，ending up in aesthetic Utopia.In the end，this dissertation maintains that only by basing man’s nature on Marx’s practical materialism which is thoroughly phenomenological can we ultimately solve man’s alienation caused by the divorce between subject and object，thought and existence，body and soul，rational and perceptual，can we ultimately defuse the clash between technology and man’s freedom wrought by technological reason. In other words，it is only in perceptual practical activity that the right approach to man’s freedom can be found.Key words：Technological reason，critical thinking，phenomenological method，man’s freedom，aesthetic Utopia，practice

暂无简介

用户未登录无权限查看参考文献