【作者】 张鹏；

【导师】 刘森林；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 马克思主义哲学， 2019， 硕士

【摘要】 一直以来,学界关于尼采对辩证法的态度是比较一致的,即将其作为批判的对象。尼采对后世西方哲学界的影响不言而喻,霍克海默和阿多诺当然也是其中的深受影响者。在《启蒙辩证法》中,可以清楚地看到他们思想中的尼采因素。尼采对于辩证法的批判根源于其对形而上学的批判,是将辩证法作为一种形而上学的语言来看待的结果。尼采推崇狄奥尼索斯精神,认为其中蕴含着能够直面生命现实中的悲剧与痛苦的力量。而自苏格拉底以来的理性主义所构造的形而上学,是对外在性的悲剧与痛苦的逃避,其情感基础在于恐惧。形而上学以严格论证的必然性和无所不包的整体性来为无力承担起生命苦难的弱者勾勒出了一个如愿的、保险的幻象世界,以此来消除他们的恐惧。而辩证法则充当了这种论证过程的思维工具,借助逻辑与辩证法,形而上学得以不断完善自身并统摄现实。于是,现实也被异化了,不仅是悲剧与痛苦,就连生命以及现实本身都被当做虚假的而舍弃了。而《启蒙辩证法》中对启蒙所作的批判,可以看做是尼采上述批判的变种。两位作者也将恐惧作为启蒙的情感基础,指出了启蒙所建立的现代性体系对作为主体的人的控制和异化,认为启蒙成了新的神话。但与尼采不同的是,霍克海默和阿多诺并不仅仅将辩证法作为思维和概念间的运动方式,而是作为现实的展开。在《启蒙辩证法》中,尽管两位作者认为启蒙在一定程度上重新堕落到形而上学的窠臼中,但是辩证法则为启蒙突破自身界限提供了可能,因为作为现实运动的辩证法具有一种和现实运动一样的开放性和丰富性。霍克海默和阿多诺对尼采和马克思的思想是一种折中式的双向继承,作为马克思主义者,两位作者相信启蒙自身就蕴藏着突破限制的力量,这种力量源自于辩证法的自否定的性质。但是,两位作者思想中的尼采因素又告诫他们要时刻警惕必然性的魔咒。在这样的一种张力之下,霍克海默和阿多诺将辩证法的自否定表达为一种向好发展的可能,即一种积极的自否定辩证法。这是两位作者在启蒙陷入极端黑暗之时所找寻到的一丝光明,也是在一定程度上对尼采关于辩证法的批判做出的回应。更多还原

【Abstract】 All along,the academic world has been relatively consistent on Nietzsche’s attitude towards dialectics,that is,taking it as an object of criticism.Nietzsche’s influence on later western philosophy is self-evident.Hockheimer and Adorno are the influenced.In Dialectics of Enlightenment,we can clearly see the Nietzsche factor in their thoughts.Nietzsche’s critique of dialectics is rooted in his critique of metaphysics.It is the result of taking dialectics as a metaphysical language.Nietzsche praised the spirit of Dionysus and believed that it contained the power to face the tragedy and pain in the reality.The metaphysics constructed by rationalism since Socrates is to escape the tragedy and pain of externality,and its emotional basis lies in fear.By means of the necessity of strict.argumentation and the all-encompassing wholeness,metaphysics draws the desired and secure imaginary world for the weak who cannot afford the suffering of life,so as to eliminate their fears.Dialectics has become a thinking tool in the process of argumentation.With the help of logic and dialectics,metaphysics can constantly improve itself and master the reality.Therefore,the reality is also alienated,not only the tragedy and pain,but also life and reality itself are discarded as false.The critique of enlightenment in Dialectics of Enlightenment can be seen as a variant of Nietzsche’s above criticism.The two authors also take fear as the emotional basis of enlightenment,point out that the modern system established by enlightenment controls and dissimilates the human being as the subject,and believe that enlightenment has become a new myth.However,different from Nietzsche,Hockheimer and Adorno did not only take dialectics as the mode of thinking and concept movement,but also took dialectics as the development of reality.In Dialectics of Enlightenment,although the two authors believe that enlightenment has to some extent fallen back into the dilemma of metaphysics,the dialectis provides the possibility for enlightenment to break through its own boundaries,because as a realistic movement,dialectics has the same openness and richness as the realistic movement.Hockheimer and Adorno are two-way inheritance of Nietzsche and Marx.As marxists,the authors believe that the enlightenment itself contains the power to break through limits.This power comes from the nature of dialectic’s self-denial.But the nietzschean element in the authors’ thinking warns them against the curse of necessity.Under such a tension,Hockheimer and Adorno express the self-negation of dialectics as a progressive possibility,that is,a positive self-negation dialectics.These are the glimmers of light that the two authors find as the enlightenment plunges into extreme darkness.It is also a response to Nietzsche’s criticism of dialectics to a certain extent.更多还原