|
| 文章编号：1672-3104(2018)06-0055-07 |
| |
|
马尔库塞与哈贝马斯技术统治论之比较 |
| |
刘光斌 |
| |
|
（湖南大学马克思主义学院，湖南长沙，410082） |
| |
| 摘 要： 马尔库塞和哈贝马斯都对技术统治论进行过研究。在技术统治论的逻辑起点方面，他们围绕工具理性展开分析，马尔库塞认为理性就是技术理性，技术理性构成了技术统治论的逻辑起点，哈贝马斯则指出理性概念包含工具理性和交往理性，理性并不是技术统治论必然产生的逻辑起点。在技术统治论的意识形态方面，马尔库塞指出随着技术理性被广泛地应用于社会生活之中，技术进步强化了统治效应；哈贝马斯则认为技术是中立的，无法为统治提供合法性基础。在技术统治论的民主走向方面，马尔库塞认为技术统治论维护了一个极权社会，对民主的追求促使他走向了马克思主义的审美之维，哈贝马斯则主张为技术的应用划界，走向了一种商谈民主政治。分析比较马尔库塞和哈贝马斯的上述观点，就他们的技术统治论立场而言，马尔库塞赞成技术统治论，哈贝马斯则反对技术统治论。 |
| |
| 关键词： 马尔库塞；哈贝马斯；技术统治论 |
| |
|
| |
Comparison between Marcuse’ and Habermas’ technocracy |
| |
LIU Guangbin |
| |
（School of Marxism, Hunan University, Changsha 410082, China） |
| |
| Abstract: Both Marcuse and Habermas have studied technocracy, and in terms of the logical starting point of technocracy, their analysis revolves around the connotation of instrumental rationality. Marcuse believes that rationality is technical rationality, which constitutes the logical starting point of the technocracy, while Habermas points out that the concept of reason contains instrumental rationality and communicative rationality, and that rationality is not the logical starting point of the technocracy. In the ideological aspect of technocracy, with the social application of technological rationality, Marcuse points out that technological rationality has become political rationality, while Habermas believes that technology is neutral, unable to provide legitimacy for politics. In the democratic trend of technocracy, Marcuse believes that technocracy is designed to preserve totalitarian society, which means that his pursuit for democracy drives him to Marxist dimension of aesthetics. Habermas advocates the application of technology demarcation, which indicates his turning to a communicative democratic politics. A comparative analysis of Marcuse and Habermas in the above three aspects reveals that, as far as their technocracy is concerned, Marcuse is in favor of technocracy, while Habermas is against it. |
| |
Key words: Marcuse; Habermas; technocracy |
| |
|
|
