Return to Marx
The Change of Philosophical Discourse in the Context of Economics

Zhang Yibing

Mr.Zhang Yibing was born in Nanjing in 1956. He graduated from the Philosophy Department of Nanjing University in 1981 with MA degree. Now he is the assistant president of Nanjing University, Professor and tutor of doctoral students, the dean of Philosophy department, the head of library of Nanjing University, and the Chief Editor of the Journal of Nanjing University (social science), also the director of China Dialectical Materialism Research Society, China Human-Science Institute and Research Institute on Overseas Marxism as well as the Standing Director and Secretary-general of the Jiangsu Philosophy Research Society. Since 1982, he has published more than 180 articles, and 3 monographs. Main publications include Subjective Dimension of Historic Dialectics of Marx (Henan people press, 1995), History and Today of Marxist Philosophy (Vol.3 Nanjing University, 1992), the Fifth Generation of Western Human-Science (Xueling Press, 1991), and Breakdown of the Rational Wing (Nanjing Press, 1990.)

Return to Marx

  It is special in Return to Marx that from the deep context of Marx’s of economic research, the author re-explores his change of the philosophic discourse. This maybe the first time after the death of Marx and Engels to study the whole progress of Marx thought development combining the research of economics and philosophy. The two writings are aiming at exploring the inner meaning of Marx's texts, which is the potential logic of discourse. However, because of special mode of writing and thinking, it might make some readers who are used to the mode of directive cognition not understand it. Nevertheless, the author tries to make the research of text more scientific, especially destructure the textual research about Marx, which has been budgeted by dogmatists.
    In Chapter I, the book mainly clarifies the understanding of philosophic discourse in economic theory hidden in Marx's background of philosophical reform. The author has independently advanced the viewpoint that inner philosophic premise of early economics of bourgeoisie, especially classic economics is social materialism, which admits the basic place of material production, abstracts objective relations of society and relations of economy. Meanwhile, he has made the progress of theory on the monographic study such as the deep relations between Hegel and classic economics, and the critique to capitalism from the economic viewpoint of Sismondi, Proudhon, Hesso and young Engels. It brings forth-new ideas of researching Marx philosophy on the basis of economic background of supporting consciousness.
    Paris Notes is the beginning of the research. From Chapter II, the author centers on exploring the problem that why "after young Marx firstly changed his thought in 1842, he had become a materialist, communist, but not Marxist." The problem is difficult to understand in Marxist philosophy. Because of changing the narrative logic, the deep and potential philosophic discourse in economic context begins to emerge. In Chapter III, Zhang Yibing advances young Marx's social phenomenology of Humanism contrasting to the same theory stage of my former manuscript. He regards it as the first highpoint of theory in the development of Marx's philosophy. Based on the viewpoint of double logic’s proposed by Mr. Sun Bokui, he has pointed out the source of the economic social materialism of potential logic starting from objective reality under the control of humanism logic Society. The thinking is more natural and scientific than those of Althusser's and Structuralists’. This is the most important support of Mr. Sun Bokui's viewpoint, "Theory of double transformation".
    The second highpoint of the theory of Marx's philosophy is stated from Chapter IV to VII. This is the founding course of Marx's general materialism and historic dialectics. The viewpoint of the author is the theory re-evaluating Marx's exploring of economics. First, based on Brusseral Notes, he advance that Marx's concept of practice in Theses on Feuerbach is not the speculative result (materialism and Dialectics) but a summary of industrial productive force in economics, which is found only in researching Lister. Second, based on the analysis of two Notes, Brusserl Notes and Menchester Notes, he firstly advances the viewpoint of historic "Essence" of the general materialism of history, which is the most important but concealed things in Chapter I in the German Ideology. Third, Zhang proves the two ways of Marx's thinking in the German Ideology, philosophic logic and economic criticism. Fourth, he also firstly confirms the certain special time-space context as essence of historic dialectics in A Letter to Anninlorf.
In Chapter VIII and IX, readers will find the most importance viewpoint that Marx built his critical phenomenology of history based on positive science in Economic Manuscript (1857-1858). During the philosophic revolution from 1845 to 1847, Marx refused the legality of phenomenology cognitive in the meaning of positive science, but with the extension of economic research, he realized again the complex of inverse and verdinlichurg of the actual capitalist economic relations in scientific horizon. So while being beyond the ideological boundary of classic economics, Marx rebuilt the phenomenology of history on the basis of the special historical materialism and social cognitivism. In Economic Manuscript (1857-1858), Marx was not concerned with the general but the special principles of historical materialism, by which, he could perspect all kinds of false appearance and brings to light the objective laws and the essence of actual existence. Because the premise of Marx’s phenomenology of history is the objective inverse of social relations, it is not Hegel’s phenomenology of spirit and Humanist phenomenology of society that Feuerbach and young Marx had.  Scientific phenomenology of social history explains how the inverse of economy becomes the reality of capitalist society, exposes the objective inverse of social relations in capitalist model of production, and discloses the secrets of capitalist economic exploit. This is not reflection of direct seeing but rebuilding. The obstacles that reversing relations of society produces must be cleared away so as to get the simple relations of the society of prehistoric age, and all concrete appearances of complex economy must be returned to. In the author’s opinion, the phenomenology of history is the most important philosophic achievement in the Manuscripts (1857 - 1858), which are the third and the greatest high point of Marx’s theory.
    In a word, based on textual analysis, Mr.Zhang tries to put forward the slogan--- "Return to Marx" which must be advanced in the Marxist research of the 1990s with the description of the potential change of philosophical discourse in the context of Marx’s economic research. Without any doubt, we return to Marx today not for the solidifying theory, but for the new expected-horizon of open text.

                    Contents
Introduction
I Young Marx and Economic Traditions
 1.The hidden clues I: The potential philosophy component of political economics in early stage
 2.The hidden clue II: Hegel and classical economics
 3.The hidden clue III: The economic-philosophic logic pounding at bourgeois society directly
II Philosophy in Economics: From Potentiality to Actuality
 1.From Kreuznacher notes to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Law
 2.The text structure and context of Paris Notes
 3. An inquiry into Excerpt-Notes of Paris Notes
 4.Notes on James Mill: the humanism in economic critique
III Dual Discourse: Humanist Alienation Conception of History and Objective Economic Reality
 1.The general situation of Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts (1844)
 2.The first Note-book of Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts (1844)
 3.Paradox of Power discourse and complex logic
 4.Young Marx and Critique of Hegel
IV the Unconscious Unity of Socialism and Economics
 1.The Holly Family in economics context
 2.Nontactics: The subintentional destructure of humanist logic
3. The unusual experience of thought to philosophic revolution
4. Change of Gestalt in Theses on Feuerbach
V the Theoretical Background of New Horizon of Marx's Philosophy
 1.New improvement in economic study
 2.Proletarian Opposition in Economics: The unity of classical economics and socialism
 3.Marx Stirnis Der Einzige uncl Sein Eigenthum
VI Construction of Marx’s Scientific World Conception
 1.The text and discourse structure of the German Ideology
 2.The historical existence and essence in new horizon of Marx's philosophy
 3. Division of labor and world history: an actual critique discourse of economics
 VII The last vision of the Revolution of Marx’s Philosophy
 1.Newly starting point of the scientific critic theory 
 2.The first combination between historical materialism and political economics
VIII Economic Manuscripts (1857 - 1858) and Historical Materialism
 1.London Notes and the Economic Manuscript (1857-1858)
 2.Location of the philosophic logic of the Economic Manuscripts
 3."Evaluation the abstract to the concrete" and historical materialism
IX the Historical Phenomenology in Economic Context
1. Logic and historical analyses on the reversion of the phenomena and the essence of the Capital economics
2. Capital: actual productive relation behind exchange
 3. The Capital: Mature description of phenomenology of history

Bibliography
Appendix I To the Depth of Times Spirit----Calling on Professor Zhang Yibing
Appendix II the Chronological Table of the Important Research and Texts
Appendix III the Brief Introduction of MEGA 2

                 Preface

    When I was about to finish this book, I got the Archaeology of Knowledge of Foucalt, who was a postmodern master. He said he put forward "the Archaeology of Knowledge" because he wanted to concern himself with "the mark of decayed time", i.e. noncontinuity, which had been deleted by historians intentionally. According to Foucault, the past ideological history often tried to make a "description of concentric circles”, i.e. narrating a continued homogeneous varying totality in a linear logic, when facing a kind of viewpoint and a thinker. The description is a false appearance. The most important things in development are the breakdown of discourse, the boundary of discourse extension and heterology of different logic.
    Undoubtedly, my reading is obviously different from that of the poststructuralism of Foucault and Althusser. Like them, I also pay more attention to the noncontinuity in Marx's thought, which is different from the past work. But this is the noncontinual reading affirming the potential continuity of Marx's thought. In fact, the later real development of Marxism is just based on the breakdown of noncontinuity of concentric circles, otherwise there wouldn't be Lenin's " October Revolution", Mao's "Encircle the cities from the Rural Areas" and Den's Market Economy of Chinese socialism. This is the dialectics of "Origin" and "Development".
    As a Marxist scholar of new generation, I often think about why classic works of Marxism are still far away although many scholars of Marxism at home have read them thousand of times for 150 years and abroad. I have found a new answer from my recent research. In addition to the newly published texts in MEGA2, the reading method is also very important (about the Brief of Introduction of MEG2, referring to Appendix III). That is to say, you may get different pictures of theory when you read Marx's text in different discourses and different ways. That’s why I advance the different reading models first in the introduction. To prevent readers from misunderstanding, I have to state that my reading method isn't a simple quotation of modern science and philosophy. In fact, I am unable to calculate how many cognitive models and theoretical methods of modern science and our cultural characteristic are merged into my theory.
    It is special in my writing that from the deep context of Marx’s of economic research, I re-explore his change of the philosophic discourse. To my knowledge from documentation of home and abroad, this maybe the first time after the death of Marx and Engels to study the whole progress of Marx thought development combining the research of economics and philosophy. Without doubt, I am very glad to read these works: Althusser's Reading the Capital, and Kosik’s Dialectics of the concrete, etc. However it is more important that I am concerned with Marx's notes of economics, which has been published and been arranging. It is these Notes that they introduce the research of Hermeneutics between Marx's Notes and texts. This is the base of my writing in the way of texts. Of course, because of this specialty, my study must produce the limit of specialized subject. But Eothaiillung ist verhallung as Heidergger said. Furthermore, I have evaded those themes having stated in my former writing, Subjective Dimension of Historic Dialectics of Marx (Henan People Press 1995).
    It may be found that the method of my writing is the same as Subjective Dimension of Historic Dialectics of Marx. The two writings are aiming at exploring the inner meaning of Marx's texts, which is the potential logic of discourse. Gaston Bachelard said " Only knowledge of potential things is science." I am very fond of this word. However, because of special mode of writing and thinking, it makes some readers who are used to the mode of directive cognition not understand my writings. That is sorry in my expectation. However through the writing experiment, I try to make the research of text more scientific, especially destructure the research about Marx's Textology, which has been budgeted by dogmatists.
    In Chapter I, I mainly clarify the understanding of philosophic discourse in economic theory hidden in Marx's background of philosophical reform. Unlike the past background of reading, I have independently advanced the viewpoint that inner philosophic premise of early economics of bourgeoisie, especially classic economics is social materialism, which admits the basic place of material production, abstracts objective relations of society and relations of economy. Meanwhile, I have made the progress of theory on the monographic study such as the deep relations between Hegel and classic economics, and the critique to capitalism from the economic viewpoint of Sismondi, Proudhon, Hesso and young Engels. I think this brings forth-new ideas of researching Marx philosophy on the basis of economic background of supporting consciousness.
    Paris Notes is the beginning of my research. From Chapter II, I center on exploring the problem that why "after young Marx firstly changed his thought in 1842, he had become a materialist, communist, but not Marxist." The problem is difficult to understand in Marxist philosophy. In addition to Western "Marxologie", I shall refute western Marxism of humanism and the past Soviet Union---eastern European scholars. Because of changing the narrative logic, the deep and potential philosophic discourse in economic context begins to emerge. From Marx's attitude toward classic economic in his Paris Notes, we are able to understand that how Marx's political critique of humanism is not to meet the social materialism of economics and Notes on James Mill in the last part of Paris Notes is to become an alienation viewpoint of humanism in Economic-philosophic Manuscripts  (1844). In Chapter III, I advance young Marx's social phenomenology of Humanism contrasting to the same theory stage of my former manuscript. I regard it as the first highpoint of theory in the development of Marx's philosophy. Based on the viewpoint of double logic’s proposed by Mr. Sun Bokui, I have pointed out the source of the economic social materialism of potential logic starting from objective reality under the control of humanism logic Society. My thinking is more natural and scientific than those of Althusser's and Structuralists are. This is the most important support of Mr. Sun Bokui's viewpoint, "Theory of double transformation" (about the theory of double transformation and double logics in the Manuscripts, referring to Mr. Sun Bokui's The Exploring of Explorer's Way, Anhui People Press, 1985 and my writing, Subjective Dimension of Historic Dialectics of Marx, Henan People Press, 1995.)
    The second highpoint of the theory of Marx's philosophy is stated from Chapter IV to VII. This is the founding course of Marx's general materialism and historic dialectics. My viewpoint is the theory re-evaluating Marx's exploring of economics. First, based on Brusseral Notes, I advance that Marx's concept of practice in Theses on Feuerbach is not the speculative result (materialism and Dialectics) but a summary of industrial productive force in economics, which is found only in researching Lister. Second, based on the analysis of two Notes, Brusserl Notes and Menchester Notes, I firstly advance the viewpoint of historic "Essence" of the general materialism of history, which is the most important but concealed things in Chapter I in the German Ideology. Third, I prove the two ways of Marx's thinking in the German Ideology, philosophic logic and economic criticism. Fourth, I firstly confirm the certain special time-space context as essence of historic dialectics in A Letter to Anninlorf.
In Chapter VIII and IX, I will give my most importance viewpoint that Marx built his critical phenomenology of history based on positive science in Economic Manuscript (1857-1858). During the philosophic revolution from 1845 to 1847, Marx refused the legality of phenomenology cognitive in the meaning of positive science, but with the extension of economic research, he realized again the complex of inverse and verdinlichurg of the actual capitalist economic relations in scientific horizon. So while being beyond the ideological boundary of classic economics, Marx rebuilt the phenomenology of history on the basis of the special historical materialism and social cognitivism. In Economic Manuscript (1857-1858), Marx was not concerned with the general but the special principles of historical materialism, by which, he could perspect all kinds of false appearance and brings to light the objective laws and the essence of actual existence. Because the premise of Marx’s phenomenology of history is the objective inverse of social relations, it is not Hegel’s phenomenology of spirit and Humanist phenomenology of society that Feuerbach and young Marx had.  Scientific phenomenology of social history explains how the inverse of economy becomes the reality of capitalist society, exposes the objective inverse of social relations in capitalist model of production, and discloses the secrets of capitalist economic exploit. This is not reflection of direct seeing but rebuilding. The obstacles that reversing relations of society produces must be cleared away so as to get the simple relations of the society of prehistoric age, and all concrete appearances of complex economy must be returned to. In my opinion, the phenomenology of history is the most important philosophic achievement in the Manuscripts (1857 - 1858), which are the third and the greatest high point of Marx’s theory.
    In a word, based on textology, I try to put forward the slogan--- "Return to Marx" which must be advanced in the Marxist research of the 1990s with the description of the potential change of philosophical discourse in the context of Marx’s economic research. I am aware of this, which is Hegel's word; result is lifeless without getting to its road. I hope this is the actual beginning of casting off the yoke of reading mode of the past Soviet Union-Eastern Europe. I am not going to point out Marx's metaphor of "dragon's child" and "flea", because this makes somebody very embarrassed. Without any doubt, we return to Marx today not for the solidifying theory, but for the new expected-horizon of open text.

                                   Zhang Yibing

                                           1998.12.30