摘 要
讓·鮑德里亞是法國著名的哲學家、社會學家，也被認為是法國旗幟最為鮮明、著作最為晦澀、創作力最為豐富的后現代理論家，是“現時代最重要和最具煽動性的作者”.鮑德里亞知識廣博，他的作品涉及哲學、分析學、美學、建筑學、社會學、人類學、符號學等諸多領域。鮑德里亞對當代西方資本主義社會有著十分深刻的思考，在這種思考之下，鮑德里亞取得了豐碩的理論成果。他一生出版著作 50 余部，這些著作幾乎涵蓋了現代社會所有的熱點問題。正因如此，他被學術界譽為現代社會思想大師，知識的“恐怖主義者”.從二十世紀五六十年代開始，西方資本主義國家從工業社會向后工業社會的轉變，這種轉變不僅使勞動和生產性質發生改變，更深深地影響著大眾的日常消費領域。鮑德里亞敏銳的捕捉到了這種變化，從西方馬克思主義的主流觀點中突圍出來。從分析物品和消費入手，他把符號學引入其研究領域，開創出獨樹一幟的符號消費思想，將對資本主義“消費社會”的考察和批判引領到新的境界。
本文以鮑德里亞早期的著作為依據，以揭示符號政治經濟學理論對馬克思政治經濟學的理論貢獻和誤讀作為寫作“主要目的”,通過比較馬克思政治經濟學和鮑德里亞符號經濟學兩大體系之間的關系，研究鮑德里亞符號政治經濟學向馬克思主義政治經濟學的“過渡”和“轉換”.在這一轉換過程中凸顯出許多值得深入思考的問題：鮑德里亞進行這一轉換的目的，進行轉換的條件，完成轉換的方法，以及這一轉換的實質是和理論與現實意義等。論文要緊緊圍繞這些問題設置自己論文的架構和問題結構。
從手頭的研究資料來看，鮑德里亞的符號政治經濟學理論和馬克思主義政治經濟學既有千絲萬縷的聯系，又有著本質性的區別：一方面，鮑德里亞是在馬克思主義政治經濟學的問題域下進行的思考。另一方面，兩者又因為所處時代，研究方法，理論依據等方面的不同，使兩者的理論呈現出一種若即若離的微妙關系。時代的發展使資本主義社會在政治、經濟、文化領域產生了巨大的變化，這些變化主要體現在生產力發展的條件下社會物質生產水平有了極大地提高，社會從物質匱乏的時代進入到豐裕社會時代，這一轉變構成了鮑德里亞理論轉變的現實基礎。社會發展推動了理論界的研究，法蘭克福學派對啟蒙思想的反思，對科學技術、意識形態、大眾文化的研究成果為鮑德里亞的轉化提供了堅實的理論基礎。鮑德里亞沿襲了馬克思的異化思維模式，在列斐伏爾大眾文化理論、拉康精神分析學和羅蘭巴特的神話學的綜合影響之下建立起來一套符號學，精神分析學，異化思維模式交織在一起的獨特研究方法。從馬克思主義政治經濟學向符號政治經濟學轉變的過程中，鮑德里亞對馬克思主義政治經濟學既有理論貢獻，這種貢獻主要體現在將馬克思主義政治經濟學研究提供了一種新的角度，即符號學角度；使馬克思主義政治經濟學在文化領域的研究進一步深化。也有不足，即過度的強調了物的意義性維度，使物的自然維度被遮蔽，這種激進的觀點必然導致其理論現實性的缺失。
關鍵字：消費，政治經濟學，符號，豐裕，匱乏，生產
ABSTRACT
Jean Baudrillard was a famous French philosopher, sociologist.He was also considered a person,Who toke a clear-cut stand, most obscure works, creativity being the most abundant post-modern theorist,“the era of the most important and most provocative writers”. Baudrillard was knowledgeable. his worksrelated to philosophy, aesthetics, analysis, architecture, sociology, anthropology, semiotics and other fields.
Baudrillard had a very profound thinking on Contemporary Western capitalist society. In this kind ofthinking, Baudrillard achieved fruitful theoretical results. He published 50 books. The book covers almostall the hot issues in modern society. Because of this, he was known as the master of academic thought inmodern society, the knowledge of “terrorists”. From the beginning of fifty or sixty's of the twentiethCentury, the western capitalist countries, was being the transition from industrial society to post-industrialsociety, this change not only change the nature of labor and production, more deeply influence people'sdaily consumption. Baudrillard is keen to capture this change. He break out from the mainstream view ofWestern Marx's. Starting from the analysis of goods and consumption, he put the semiotics into his studyfield, and create an independent school thoughts of symbol consumption, which will lead to the capitalist“consumer society” study and criticism to a new realm.
his paper basising on Baudrillard's early works, with the writing purpose of revealing themisreading of symbol political economy theory to Marx political economics theory and through thecomparison of relationship between two systems, study the transition and “conversion”,from Baudrillardsymbol political economy to Marx's political economics this transition and “conversion” Show manyproblems worth further thinking: the conversion of the objective, the conversion conditions, the completingof the conversion method, as well as the theoretical essence and realistic significance of this conversion.
The paper must focus on these issues or ideas to set its own architecture and structure.
From the research on the information, symbol of political economy theory of Baudrillard andMarx's political economics have many faces of connections, but they also has the essential difference: onthe one hand, Baudrillard is under consideration in Marx's political economics problem domain. On theother hand, because of the different of times, research methods, theoretical basis and so on, the two theoriespresents a subtle relationship neither friendly nor aloof. With the development of the era capitalist societyproduced tremendous change which exists in the political, economic, and cultural fields. These changesmainly reflect the social material production level of productivity is greatly improved. Under developmentconditions, society entered into the era of the affluent society from material scarcity society, this changeconstitutes the basis of Baudrillard theory. The development of the society promote The theory. Thethought of Frankfurt School on enlightenment, research on science and technology, ideology, mass cultureprovides a solid theoretical basis for Baudrillard's transformation. Baudrillard followed Marx's mode ofalienation thinking, in Lefebvre's theory of popular culture, under the comprehensive influence of Lacanianpsychoanalysis and Roland Barthes mythologies semiotics, psychoanalysis, mode of alienation thinking areintertwined in the unique research methods. The transition from Marx's political economics to the politicaleconomy of symbols, there is theoretical contribution, the contribution is embodied in will provide a newperspective of Marx economics politics, namely the semiotics angle; the research in the field of culturefurther deepening of Marx's political economics. There is also insufficient, excessive emphasis on thesignificance of dimensions of object, so that the natural dimension of material to be covered, the radicalnotion will inevitably lead to the loss of its theoretical realityKEY WORDS:Consumption, political economics, symbol, rich society, poor society, production
目 錄
摘 要
ABSTRACT
一 緒論
1.1 選題背景及意義
1.1.1 選題背景
1.1.2 選題意義
1.2 鮑德里亞研究現狀
1.3 論文的研究思路
1.4 研究方法
1.4.1 查閱文獻法
1.4.2 對比研究法
1.4.3 總結歸納法
1.4.4 舉例論證法
1.5 鮑德里亞生平
二 理論演變的社會背景，理論背景和邏輯轉換
2.1 鮑德里亞思想階段劃分
2.2 鮑德里亞符號政治經濟學的現實根基和理論背景
2.2.1 符號政治經濟學的現實根基
2.2.2 法蘭克福學派的意識形態批判
2.2.3 大眾文化意識形態的批判
2.2.4 消費社會符號政治經濟學理論的三重邏輯
三 符號政治經濟學構建的方法論基礎
3.1 異化
3.2 消費社會的文化視域
3.3 物的符號價值體系
四 消費社會符號政治經濟學與馬克思主義政治經濟學的“異”與“同”
4.1 鮑德里亞對物的意義價值維度的凸顯
4.2 鮑德里亞的阿基米德之點--從經濟型交換到象征性交換
4.3 從商品拜物教到物的拜物教--異化思維方式的延續
后記
參考文獻
讓·鮑德里亞是法國著名的哲學家、社會學家，也被認為是法國旗幟最為鮮明、著作最為晦澀、創作力最為豐富的后現代理論家，是“現時代最重要和最具煽動性的作者”.鮑德里亞知識廣博，他的作品涉及哲學、分析學、美學、建筑學、社會學、人類學、符號學等諸多領域。鮑德里亞對當代西方資本主義社會有著十分深刻的思考，在這種思考之下，鮑德里亞取得了豐碩的理論成果。他一生出版著作 50 余部，這些著作幾乎涵蓋了現代社會所有的熱點問題。正因如此，他被學術界譽為現代社會思想大師，知識的“恐怖主義者”.從二十世紀五六十年代開始，西方資本主義國家從工業社會向后工業社會的轉變，這種轉變不僅使勞動和生產性質發生改變，更深深地影響著大眾的日常消費領域。鮑德里亞敏銳的捕捉到了這種變化，從西方馬克思主義的主流觀點中突圍出來。從分析物品和消費入手，他把符號學引入其研究領域，開創出獨樹一幟的符號消費思想，將對資本主義“消費社會”的考察和批判引領到新的境界。
本文以鮑德里亞早期的著作為依據，以揭示符號政治經濟學理論對馬克思政治經濟學的理論貢獻和誤讀作為寫作“主要目的”,通過比較馬克思政治經濟學和鮑德里亞符號經濟學兩大體系之間的關系，研究鮑德里亞符號政治經濟學向馬克思主義政治經濟學的“過渡”和“轉換”.在這一轉換過程中凸顯出許多值得深入思考的問題：鮑德里亞進行這一轉換的目的，進行轉換的條件，完成轉換的方法，以及這一轉換的實質是和理論與現實意義等。論文要緊緊圍繞這些問題設置自己論文的架構和問題結構。
從手頭的研究資料來看，鮑德里亞的符號政治經濟學理論和馬克思主義政治經濟學既有千絲萬縷的聯系，又有著本質性的區別：一方面，鮑德里亞是在馬克思主義政治經濟學的問題域下進行的思考。另一方面，兩者又因為所處時代，研究方法，理論依據等方面的不同，使兩者的理論呈現出一種若即若離的微妙關系。時代的發展使資本主義社會在政治、經濟、文化領域產生了巨大的變化，這些變化主要體現在生產力發展的條件下社會物質生產水平有了極大地提高，社會從物質匱乏的時代進入到豐裕社會時代，這一轉變構成了鮑德里亞理論轉變的現實基礎。社會發展推動了理論界的研究，法蘭克福學派對啟蒙思想的反思，對科學技術、意識形態、大眾文化的研究成果為鮑德里亞的轉化提供了堅實的理論基礎。鮑德里亞沿襲了馬克思的異化思維模式，在列斐伏爾大眾文化理論、拉康精神分析學和羅蘭巴特的神話學的綜合影響之下建立起來一套符號學，精神分析學，異化思維模式交織在一起的獨特研究方法。從馬克思主義政治經濟學向符號政治經濟學轉變的過程中，鮑德里亞對馬克思主義政治經濟學既有理論貢獻，這種貢獻主要體現在將馬克思主義政治經濟學研究提供了一種新的角度，即符號學角度；使馬克思主義政治經濟學在文化領域的研究進一步深化。也有不足，即過度的強調了物的意義性維度，使物的自然維度被遮蔽，這種激進的觀點必然導致其理論現實性的缺失。
關鍵字：消費，政治經濟學，符號，豐裕，匱乏，生產
ABSTRACT
Jean Baudrillard was a famous French philosopher, sociologist.He was also considered a person,Who toke a clear-cut stand, most obscure works, creativity being the most abundant post-modern theorist,“the era of the most important and most provocative writers”. Baudrillard was knowledgeable. his worksrelated to philosophy, aesthetics, analysis, architecture, sociology, anthropology, semiotics and other fields.
Baudrillard had a very profound thinking on Contemporary Western capitalist society. In this kind ofthinking, Baudrillard achieved fruitful theoretical results. He published 50 books. The book covers almostall the hot issues in modern society. Because of this, he was known as the master of academic thought inmodern society, the knowledge of “terrorists”. From the beginning of fifty or sixty's of the twentiethCentury, the western capitalist countries, was being the transition from industrial society to post-industrialsociety, this change not only change the nature of labor and production, more deeply influence people'sdaily consumption. Baudrillard is keen to capture this change. He break out from the mainstream view ofWestern Marx's. Starting from the analysis of goods and consumption, he put the semiotics into his studyfield, and create an independent school thoughts of symbol consumption, which will lead to the capitalist“consumer society” study and criticism to a new realm.
his paper basising on Baudrillard's early works, with the writing purpose of revealing themisreading of symbol political economy theory to Marx political economics theory and through thecomparison of relationship between two systems, study the transition and “conversion”,from Baudrillardsymbol political economy to Marx's political economics this transition and “conversion” Show manyproblems worth further thinking: the conversion of the objective, the conversion conditions, the completingof the conversion method, as well as the theoretical essence and realistic significance of this conversion.
The paper must focus on these issues or ideas to set its own architecture and structure.
From the research on the information, symbol of political economy theory of Baudrillard andMarx's political economics have many faces of connections, but they also has the essential difference: onthe one hand, Baudrillard is under consideration in Marx's political economics problem domain. On theother hand, because of the different of times, research methods, theoretical basis and so on, the two theoriespresents a subtle relationship neither friendly nor aloof. With the development of the era capitalist societyproduced tremendous change which exists in the political, economic, and cultural fields. These changesmainly reflect the social material production level of productivity is greatly improved. Under developmentconditions, society entered into the era of the affluent society from material scarcity society, this changeconstitutes the basis of Baudrillard theory. The development of the society promote The theory. Thethought of Frankfurt School on enlightenment, research on science and technology, ideology, mass cultureprovides a solid theoretical basis for Baudrillard's transformation. Baudrillard followed Marx's mode ofalienation thinking, in Lefebvre's theory of popular culture, under the comprehensive influence of Lacanianpsychoanalysis and Roland Barthes mythologies semiotics, psychoanalysis, mode of alienation thinking areintertwined in the unique research methods. The transition from Marx's political economics to the politicaleconomy of symbols, there is theoretical contribution, the contribution is embodied in will provide a newperspective of Marx economics politics, namely the semiotics angle; the research in the field of culturefurther deepening of Marx's political economics. There is also insufficient, excessive emphasis on thesignificance of dimensions of object, so that the natural dimension of material to be covered, the radicalnotion will inevitably lead to the loss of its theoretical realityKEY WORDS:Consumption, political economics, symbol, rich society, poor society, production
目 錄
摘 要
ABSTRACT
一 緒論
1.1 選題背景及意義
1.1.1 選題背景
1.1.2 選題意義
1.2 鮑德里亞研究現狀
1.3 論文的研究思路
1.4 研究方法
1.4.1 查閱文獻法
1.4.2 對比研究法
1.4.3 總結歸納法
1.4.4 舉例論證法
1.5 鮑德里亞生平
二 理論演變的社會背景，理論背景和邏輯轉換
2.1 鮑德里亞思想階段劃分
2.2 鮑德里亞符號政治經濟學的現實根基和理論背景
2.2.1 符號政治經濟學的現實根基
2.2.2 法蘭克福學派的意識形態批判
2.2.3 大眾文化意識形態的批判
2.2.4 消費社會符號政治經濟學理論的三重邏輯
三 符號政治經濟學構建的方法論基礎
3.1 異化
3.2 消費社會的文化視域
3.3 物的符號價值體系
四 消費社會符號政治經濟學與馬克思主義政治經濟學的“異”與“同”
4.1 鮑德里亞對物的意義價值維度的凸顯
4.2 鮑德里亞的阿基米德之點--從經濟型交換到象征性交換
4.3 從商品拜物教到物的拜物教--異化思維方式的延續
后記
參考文獻
