哲学研究

马克思的“从后思索”法体现了政治经济学批判的历史性维度，实现了历史发展过程研究与现实生产方式结构研究的科学统一，对于理解历史唯物主义在政治经济学批判中的深化发展具有关键意义，同时也面临一系列亟待澄清的理论疑难。“从后思索”法蕴含着一种立足现在以回溯过往并预见未来的“双向开放”的历史时间观。这一双向开放的历史时间观从根本上决定了马克思的“从后思索”法不可能是黑格尔主义的“历史目的论”。与黑格尔式“后思”不同，马克思“从后思索”法强调的是一种自觉的“有限性视角”:历史科学家知道自身基于当代现实而回溯过往时所受的各种条件和结构的制约，因而不会自以为可以达到对过去历史进程及其真相、目的等的透明认知和完全理解。“从后思索”法就是要基于资产阶级社会的自身批判过程，在理解不同社会形态之间的差异性、阶段性的基础上去把握具体的连续性和历史的统一性。

Marx's “Nachdenken” approach embodies the historical dimension of his critique on political economy, achieving a scientific unity between the study of processes of historical development and the study of structures of real production modes. It is of crucial significance for understanding the ever deepening progression of historical materialism in Marx's critique on political economy, but at the same time faces a series of theoretical difficulties that urgently call for clarification. The “Nachdenken” method contains a historical perspective of bidirectional openness that is based on the present to look back on the past and foresee the future. This historical perspective of bidirectional openness fundamentally determines that Marx's “Nachdenken” method cannot be a historical teleology in the Hegelian sense. Unlike Hegelian “Nachdenken,” Marx emphasizes a consciously-limited perspective: historical scientists know the various objective conditions by which they are constrained when looking back on the past based on contemporary reality, and do not believe that they can achieve transparent cognition or complete understanding of the process, truth and purpose of history. The “Nachdenken” method is based on the self-criticizing process of bourgeois society, grasping the specific continuity and historical unity of different social forms on the basis of an understanding of both their differences and developmental stages.