摘要
在《启蒙辩证法》中,霍克海默和阿多诺在探寻法西斯主义根源时把尼采解释成与法西斯主义一致的理论家,这是一种误读。实际上,尼采反对现代均等、一致的主体概念,主张不同等级的多元"主体"观念,但并不反对低等级的弱者,只是反对试图凌驾于强者之上、并用意识形态美化这种凌驾的弱者。尼采是个文化批评家,他钦佩以前的"野蛮贵族",钦佩的是他们身上没有绝对主义、形而上学的教条;他从哲学文化角度批评基督教道德,只是意味着否定传统基督教道德信条作为唯一真和善的那种理由,并不是说那些具体道德信条没有意义。尼采反对从道德上评价历史,而主张从力量增长角度评价,这与历史唯物主义有一定类似性。
It is wrong for Horkheimer and Adorno to portrait Nietzsche as a theorist consistent with fascism when they explore the roots of fascism in their book Dialectic of Enlightenment.In fact,what Nietzsche opposed to is the modern subject concept of equality and consistence,and advocating the pluralistic 'subject' ideas of different levels though,he was not yet against the weak of the lower level.What he was against,instead,is just the weak that attempted to override above the strong and to beautify this overriding with ideology.As a cultural critic,he admired the 'barbarous aristocracy' of the past,appreciating that there was no doctrine of absolutism and metaphysics in them.His criticism of Christian morality from a philosophical and cultural point of view is but a rejection of the traditional Christian moral creeds as the only reason for being true and good,in no way to demean any of those specific moral creeds.Nietzsche was against evaluating the history in moral perspective,but for a perspective of strength growth,as is similar,to some extent,to the historical materialism.
出处
《南京大学学报（哲学．人文科学．社会科学）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2017年第3期5-15,共11页
Journal of Nanjing University(Philosophy,Humanities and Social Sciences)
基金
国家社会科学基金项目(15AZX002)
