Thing, Value, Time, and Freedom: A Consideration of Some Key Concepts in Marx's Philosophical System Author(s): Wujin Yu and

Jie Tang Reviewed work(s): Source: Frontiers of Philosophy in China, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Jan., 2006), pp. 114-123 Published by: Springer Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30209956 . Accessed: 01/01/2012 17:04
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Frontiers of Philosophy in China.

http://www.jstor.org

Front.Philos. China (2006) 1: 114-123 DOI 10.1007/s11466-005-0011-2

Yu Wujin

A of Thing, Value,Time,and Freedom: Consideration Some Key Conceptsin Marx's Philosophical System
2006 0 Higher EducationPress and Springer-Verlag

Abstract Criticizing misunderstanding wrongexplanation Marx'sphilosophical the and of the system made by recentChinesetextbookson Marxistphilosophy, authorarguesthat Marx'sphilosophy practical, has and and economical-philosophical, ontologicaldimensions stresseson reconstructing Marx'sphilosophical the systemthrough synthesizing abovethree dimensions.This paperintendsto set up a new outlineof Marx'sphilosophical system,in termsof the followingfourconcepts-thing, value,time, andfreedom. Keywords Marx,thing,value, time,freedom

Introduction Based on the priorgraspof the threebasic dimensions Marx'sphilosophy, practice, of i.e., and the has founda new pathto reconstruct economy-philosophy, ontology, author primarily Marx'sphilosophical will system.Limited themeandlength,thispaper mainlydiscussthe by in of important pointsfollowingfourkey conceptsandtheirinterrelations the reconstruction Marx'sphilosophy--thing,value, time, and freedom.

Fromabstractmatterto concretething The view of mattertold by recentChinesetextbookson Marxistphilosophyis a view of "abstract matter" was criticized Marxlong ago. that by
In Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, Marx wrote:

is of and of "Industry therealhistorical relationship nature, therefore natural science,to man.If thenit is conceivedof as the openrevelation human of thenthehuman faculties,

Translated TangJie fromZhexue 2004:11 by Yanjiu, YuWujin (.) Fudan China Philosophy Department, University, Shanghai, E-mail: yuwujin@hotmail.com

Front. Philos. China (2006)1: 114-123

115

essenceof nature thenatural or essenceof manwill alsobe understood. Natural science will then lose its one-sidedly materialist[abstrakt or ratheridealistic, materille], orientation become the basis of humanscience as it has already,though in an and alienated becomethe basis of actualhumanlife" ([1], p. 102). formn, and concept of "industry," It is notable here that Marx createdthe very important it leave the "abstract comprehended as the necessarymediumto enablescientificresearch material" In orientation. fact, real natureis the naturemediatedby industry, whereasreal matteris the mattermediatedby humanproductivelabor.Ratherthan somethingelse, is the and industry an openbookconcerning essentialforceof humanity, it is just the concrete exhibitionof humanpractice,especiallyof humanproductive labor. In Capital,Marxfurther materialism natural of pointedout:"theweaknessof the abstract which excludesthe historical evidentfrom science,a materialism process,are immediately the abstract ideologicalconceptions and wheneverthey venture expressed its spokesmen by beyond the boundsof their own specialty"([2], p. 494, footnote).This indicatesthat the essentialdifferenceof Marx's view of matterfrom all the formerphilosophers, whether materialists idealists,consists in this: Marxneverabstractly or talkedaboutmatterbeyond humanactivities,i.e., never talked about the materiality the world as recent Chinese of textbookson Marxistphilosophydid. Marxalways took the most basic practice,i.e., the the labor,as his starting productive point,andhe historically explored concrete configuration of matter, concrete andthereby carried a critical out examination the prevailing on i.e., thing, and "fetishism"that arose from the capitalisteconomical phenomenaof "reification" relations. We shouldsee that some contemporary scholarshave observantly noticedand Western disclosedthe practical revolutionary and Fromthe point tendencyof Marx'sview of matter. of view of Lukacs,the keystoneof Marx'sview of matter not to talkloudlyin classroom is about"w'orld a but being unifiedin matter," dogmaalso held by the old materialists, rather consciousnessto arousethe and throughdisclosingthe reification phenomenon reification classconsciousness proletariat, thereby impelthemto recastthe capitalist and of to societyin the way of practice.WhentalkingaboutMarx,Gramsci pointedout: neitherin the "clearly,for the philosophyof praxis, 'matter'shouldbe understood in that that sciencenorin anyof the meanings one finds meaning it hasacquired natural in the variousmaterialistic The variousphysical(chemical,mechanical metaphysics. of which togetherconstitute itself shouldbe considered, matter etc.) properties matter but only to the extentthatthey become a productive as 'economicalelement'.Matter such therefore not our subjectbut how it is socially and historically is organizedfor and science shouldbe seen correspondingly essentiallya hisas production, natural toricalcategory, humanrelation" a ([3], pp. 465-466). made a very Heidegger,when talking about how to deal with Marx's materialism, to engage Marx'ssystem, one needs to get rid of such naive ideas about point: important materialism suchsimpledenialsof it. The nature suchmaterialism and of consistsnot in the assertion everything material that is to (Stoff) but in a metaphysical prescription according which all beings appearas materials(Material) labor(see [4], p. 27). Schmidt,in his of notion: work,Marx's Conceptof Nature,continually representative expressedthe samne "It is not just becausethe working Subjectsmediatethe materialof naturethrough themselves it is impossibleto speakof matter a supreme that as of principle being.Men

116

Front. China Philos. (2006)1: 114-123

arenotconcerned theirproduction matter such',butalwayswith its concrete, in with 'as and determined formsof existence"([5], p. 34). quantitatively qualitatively All theseopinionsindicate the essentialdifference that betweenMarxandold materialists froma staticepistemological consistsin the factthatMarxdidnot talkaboutabstract matter he matter factorsof production, as i.e., pointof view; instead, talkedaboutmodesof concrete In concretethings,froma dynamical view of practice. fact,Marxneverindulgedhimselfin worldthatexistedbeforethe emergence humanbeings,just as whatthe of tracinga material old materialists latereditorsof textbookson Marxist and philosophydid. ForMarx,thereis for worldindependent them.Thus,Marxpointed of no significance men to tracea material out: "I can in practiceonly relatemyself humanlyto an object if the objectrelatesitself humanlyto man" ([1], p. 100). On all accounts,things are not objects of man's static observation are factorsof humanpractice, but labor. especiallyof productive Then,whatdoes Marxmeanby concrete thing?Owingto the factthathis starting pointis Marxthinksthat,in not humansocietyin generalbutthe specialsocialsystemof capitalism, of capitalisteconomicrelations,the concretethings appearas a huge accumulation commodities.He wrote:"thecommodity Ware) firstof all, an external is, (die object,a thing(ein its kind"([2], p. 125). As Ding) whichthrough qualitiessatisfieshumanneeds of whatever soon as commodities thingsareproduced greatmass,the phenomenon as in of"reification" Marxprofoundly or "fetishism" revealsthe essence of spreadsout. Throughhis research, these phenomena: "theformof wood, for instance,is altered a tableis madeout of it. Nevertheless if the tablecontinues be wood, an ordinary, to sensuousthing.But as soon as it emergesas a it It sensuousness. not only stands commodity, changesinto a thing whichtranscends withits feet on theground, in relation all otherconmmodities,stands its head, to it on but, andevolves out of its woodenbraingrotesque thanif it were ideas,farmorewonderful to begin dancingof its own free will" ([2], pp. 163-164). orientation Marx'sview of of Thus, it can be seen thatthe practicaland revolutionary matter of or just consists in the critiqueof the widely spreading phenomena "reification" "fetishism" capitalistsociety and in the disclosureof the real relationsbetweenpeople in from the relationsbetween things. The editorsof recent Chinese textbookson Marxist philosophysatisfythemselveswith abstractly talkingabout"world beingunifiedin matter," a view alreadyheld by old materialists; this will hinder our grasp of that essential of orientation Marx's view of matter.What is more important that Marx elicited the is matterbut throughconcretething. conceptof value not throughabstract

Fromuse valueto exchangevalue As statedabove, in capitalisteconomicrelations,concretethings appearas a huge accumulationof commodities. look Then,how did Marxeconomically-philosophically into the the has society?He thinksthatthethingas commodity two basic commodity, cell of capitalist properties: firstly,"the usefulnessof a thing makes it a use-value(Gebrauchswert)" ([2], human p. 126).Thatis to say,thethingas commodity needs,whereasits alwaysmeetscertain "use value" is just realized in the process of men's consumingor using it. "Riches" in (Reichtums) the normalsense indeedmeanspile of thingsas commodities. this sense, In

Front. China Philos. (2006)1: 114-123

117

whatsocial for Marx,use valuealwaysconstitutes material the contentof riches,no matter form riches take. Secondly, "'exchange-value' (Tauschwert) appearsfirst of all as the in of the relation, proportion, whichuse-values one kindexchangeforuse-values quantitative of another kind.Thisrelation withtimeandplace"([2],p. 126).Thething changesconstantly as commodityhas exchange value just because the commodityitself is producedfor betweenuse value and exchange exchange.For Marx,thereare two essentialdifferences value: first,use value is commodity's natural or property natural being, whereasexchange value is commodity's social property social being;second,as use value, differentcomor modities are differentfrom each other in quality,whereasas exchange value, different commodities different are fromeachotheronly in quantity. is very important recognize It to these two points. We mustpoint out thattherehave been always misunderstandings Marx'stheoryof of value in philosophical circles. This could be seen from Marx'sMarginalnotes on Adolf 's whichhe wrotein his lateryears.An essentialerror Wagner Textbook ofpolitical economy, of Wagner thathe mistakesMarx's"usevalue"for "value." is Whenrecounting wrong this of Marxrecapitulated: generalconcept'value' arisesfromthe "the understanding Wagner, behavior men towards thingsfoundin the external of the worldwhichsatisfytheirneeds..." this of ([6], p. 236). Obviously, sentenceis Marx'sgeneralization Wagner's wrongview,but it of peoplemistake forMarx'sown view of value([7], p. 63). As a matter fact,so long as we have readthis paperin earnest,we would find thatMarxvery sharplycriticizedWagner's was theoryof value,accusingthatWagner keenon talkingaboutgeneraltheoryof valueand In this to alwaysintended showhis brightness usingtheword"value." addition, "enables by himto stickwiththetraditional German academic confusionof 'use-value' 'value',since and both have the word 'value' in common" ([6], p. 231). Fromthepointof view of Marx,use value"doesnotplay therole of its oppositenumber, in of 'value',whichhasnothingin commonwithit, otherthanthat[theword]'value'appears the term'use-value'" Marxheretells us explicitlythatwe shouldnot assertthat ([6], p. 242). "usevalue"is just "value" simplyon thebasisthatthenameof "usevalue"containstheword "value." Thereis an essentialdifference between"usevalue"and"exchange value,"which Marxusuallycalled"value" short. for triedto understand talkaboutMarx'stheoryof value fromthe and Indeed,when Wagner relation betweenpeople'sneeds and externalthings,he confusedthese two concepts.Marx revealedruthlessly languagegame playedby Wagner: the "heachievesthisby re-christening whatin politicaleconomyis commonlycalled 'usevalue'as 'value'pureandsimple,'according German to usage'.And as soon as 'value' pureand simplehas been found,it serves in turnfor deriving 'use value' again from 'valuepureandsimple'.Forthat,one has only to replacethe fragment 'use', whichhas been dropped, frontof 'value'pureand simple"([6], p. 237). in To thoroughlydisclose the possible confusionsthat arose from Wagner'sTextbook of Marxpoints out: political economy, the "Theone thingthatis clearlyat the basis of this German idiocyis thatlinguistically words 'value' or 'worth'were employedat first for useful thingsthemselves,which But existedfora longtimejust as 'labor-products', beforetheycameto be commodities. thathasnothingto do withthe scientificdefinition ([6], ofcommodity-'value'" p. 245).

118

Front. China Philos. (2006)1: 114-123

People may ask, why did Marxelucidateagain and againthe differencebetween"use value"and"value" Here,his pointis thatthe"usevalue"onlyrefers (i.e., "exchange value")? or natural to the natural of thingas commodity, whereasvalueor exchange properties being or It value refersto the social properties social being of thingas commodity. indicatestwo in different orientations the discussionsof the theoryof value in Marx'sphilosophy. the Fortraditional Chinesetextbookson Marxist of philosophy, problem valueis ignored. in Sincethe 1980s,peoplehavebegunto explorevaluetheorycontained Marx'sphilosophy. whichidentifies "usevalue" with "value," always has However, Wagner's misunderstanding, dominated is people'smind.In fact,so long as thiskindof misunderstandingnot eliminated, what people are concerned with will alwaysbe the "use value"as the natural of property to as of things,andthiswill resultin people'sindifference "value" the socialproperty things. Nevertheless,in a certainsense, all the secrets of Marx's philosophy of economy are concealedin its theoryof "value." Why would we say this? If "usevalue"is only concerned with the relation betweenmenandthe natural properties of things,in short,therelation betweenmenandthings,then"value" (i.e., exchangevalue)is concernedwith the relationbetweenmen and the social properties things, in short,the of relationbetweenpeople. In the economic domain,just as Marxpointedout: "exchangevalues (exchange-value does not exist unless [thereare] at least two of them) represent common them[commodities] to whichis whollyindependent theiruse-values' 'of something (i.e. here,of theirnatural form),namelyvalue"([6], p. 230). Thatis to say,in the economic domain,the concreteexpressionof value is the exchangevalue,which is concernedwith economicrelations.Beyondthe economicdomain,value is concerned with a interpersonal series of important notionsrepresenting relations,such as humanrights,life, interpersonal freedom, goodness,equality, justice,andso on. In fact,for feelings,convictions, democracy, Marx,the essence of the value problemnever consistsin the relationbetweenpeople and betweenpeople. thingsbut in the relation For a long time, Chinesephilosophers understood Marx'stheoryof value only by apto the"usevalue,"i.e., the relation betweenpeople'sneedsandavailable pealing things.This has in limitation resulted the factthatourresearch the "exchange on value"in the economic domainwas neglected, the factthatourresearch the seriesof valueformsconcerning and on the relationsbetweenpeople outsidethe economicdomainwas neglected.Indifference to these two aspectsnot only made it hardfor people to gain a real understanding Marx's of of theoryof value but also madethe reconstruction Marx'sphilosophical system along his own line of thoughtimpossible.Actually,without encountering problemof value, the the value"in the economicdomain, especiallywithoutencountering problemof "exchange we will not be able to understand Marx'sview of time, which is my next topic.

Fromnatural time to social time the of on focused Concerning problem time,all recentChinesetextbooks Marxist philosophy on naturaltime. The so-called "natural time" means time understood and illustrated acmotiontakingplace in nature. This natural cordingto the mode of matter's time, separated fromhumanactivities,cannothistorically show the connotational difference the concepts of of time in varioussocieties, and it cannotprofoundly demonstrate special social and the historical societiesandits intrinsic relationto the meaningof the theoryof time in capitalist

Front. Philos. China (2006)1: 114-123

119

theoretical important problemsof value and freedom.This conceptof time did not makea of of thoroughcritiqueand clarification the theoretical assumptions the old materialistic of time;thatis to say, it only methodologically triedto overcomethe mechanical concept characteristic the traditionalconcept of time, but it did not make any fundamental of matter transformations the abstract of carrier the traditional of conceptof time (i.e., abstract fromhumanactivitiesof practice). this way, Marx'soriginative In separated theoryof time was was put on the basis of traditional and materialism, thus,its epoch-making significance concealed. Marx'view of time is not a view of natural time held by traditional philosophyandthe textbooks Marxist of but philosophy a view of "socialtime."In otherwords,Marx'sview of timedidnot takethe staticobservation human of in as beingson motionsof matter nature its as pointbut took humanpracticeof production its starting starting point. humanproductivelabor on the basis of Accordingto Marx,we should not illustrate abstract matter the view of natural and we and the time;instead, shouldunderstand illustrate of matter timeon the basisof productive and labor.It is in theprocessof productive problem laborthatabstract matterseparated fromhumanbeings transforms the basic factorsof into raw materialsof proof (e.g., factorybuildingsand equipments production, production of duction,instruments production, etc.) products,castoffs of the process of production, and as existence.In the capitalist modeof immediately consequently appears human-related the and production, generalform of matteris commodity, commodityis createdby labor. of Hence,Marxsaid, "laboris the living, form-giving fire;it is the transience things,their Marx as temporality, the processof theirformation living time"([8], p. 286). Noticeably, by mentions"living time"here. This living time is in accordance with productivelaboras fire"andit endowsmatter with"form." Fromthisimportant "living,form-giving passage,we can drawthe followingthreeconclusions: First of all, social time originatesin humanproductive labor.As pointedout by C. C. and "forMarx,laboris the originof time--both of humantime-consciousness of the Gould, measureof time"([9], p. 41). In otherwords, it is laborthat createdtime and objective broughtit into the world. Gould thinksthat Marx'sview of time and that of Kant'shave in that However,Kantsets off something common; is, theybothstartfromhumanactivities. fromhuman activities consciousness, of whereas Marxsets off fromhuman labor. productive As for Heidegger,althoughhe discussedtime on the basis of the existent activitiesof "Daseinitself,"he "comprehended temporal the activitiesof Daseinnot as the objectifying activitiesand not as social activitieswhich change the nature"([4], p. 62). This is the fundamental difference betweenhis theoryof time and thatof Marx's. time; it has different Secondly,social time is differentfrom uniformlyflowing natural essential characteristics different phases of history. Gould noticed: "Marx further in varieshistorically. Thusit mightbe said thatfor suggeststhatthe use of time as a measure him time is itself qualitatively differentat differentstages of social development" ([9], p. use not 64). In the precapitalism phase, laborwas measured by time but by the different the valuesof goods. Only when society developedinto, as Marxmentioned, secondphase, thatis to say,the phaseof capitalism, "thepossibilityof time as a measure laborarises" for ([9], p. 64). In addition,in the thirdphase of social development,i.e., the communist of society depicted by Marx, what constitutesa kind of measurement abundanceis of In precisely"freetime or time for the free development individualities. this society,labor becomesthe creative whichaccording Marxis 'realfreedom'" to activityof self-realization, ([9], p. 68).

120

Front. Philos. China (2006)1: 114-123

the modeof socialtimein the domainof economyis "sociallynecessary Thirdly, essential As labor-time[Gesellschaftlich notwendigeArbeitszeit]." is known,the goal of capitalist is exchange butthe quantity valueof the commodity theground the of as of value, production Marxsays, "sociallynecvalue is measured "sociallynecessarylabor-time." exchange by to is of essarylabor-time the labor-time required produceanyuse-valueunderthe conditions normalfor a given society andwith the averagedegreeof skill and intensityof production labor prevalentin that society"([2], p. 129). For Marx,socially necessarylabor-time is of not with his own objective,for it is determined by any individual producer commodity in subjectivedesirebut is demonstrated certainhistoricalconditions.This time is like a of the specialkindof ether,determining proportion all the "socialthings"(gesellschaftliche in "whatexclusivelydetermines magnitude the the of Dinge, i.e., commodity) the lifeworld: the value of any articleis therefore amountof laborsocially necessary,or the labor-time we for ([2], sociallynecessary its production" p. 129). Fromthis statement, can also see that Marx's"socialtime"is alwaysrelated "exchange to value"of thecommodity socialbeing. as Both the denialof the problemof valuemadeby the writersof recentChinesetextbookson Marxistphilosophyandthe misunderstanding scholarsof axiology, madeby contemporary who mistook value for "use value,"are obstaclesfor a preciseunderstanding Marxist of philosophy. of Wecan see fromwhatwe havediscussedabovethatMarxneverspeaksof the problem but time metaphysically beyondall the historicalconditions alwaysconsidersthis problem underthe specialsocialandhistorical of conditions thecapitalist society.Theepoch-breaking significanceof Marx'sview of "socialtime"consistsin thathe offeredthe new conceptof and and "sociallynecessarylabor-time" revealedthe secretof the valueof commodity, with this new concept,he dividedworker'sproductive labortime"and processinto "necessary value."The importance of "surpluslabortime,"and thus revealedthe secret of "surplus Marx'sview of "socialtime"consistsalso in thatthe problemof freedom,which we will discussbelow,is preciselydevelopedon thiskindof specialhorizonof time,andsincerecent Chinesetextbookson Marxist Marx'sview of time correctly, philosophydid not understand Marx'sview of freedomandhis discussionof the relation betweenfreedomandtime areall outsidetheirfield of vision.

Fromepistemological freedomto ontologicalfreedom The concept of freedomis very important Marx's philosophy,but it has been misin for understood a long time. As we all know, formerSovietphilosophers and M'PoseuTanI definedfreedomin theirA SmallDictionaiyof Philosophyas such: H-IIOa4Ha "Freedom consistsnot in the escapefromnatural laws in imagine,butin theknowledge of them and in the abilityto apply them to practice...the necessityand regularity of nature primary, are whereas human andconsciousness secondary. the will are Peopleact beforetheyknowthenecessity.Buttheywill learnhow to control blindlyandunwarily the necessityandto use it to servethe society once they get to know it. Therefore, free is activityis possibleonly on thebasis of knowledgeaboutnecessity.Freedom nothing but the necessitywhich is recognized" ([10], pp. 171-172).

Front. Philos. China (2006)1: 114-123

121

This is a typical understanding, almost every textbook on Marxistphilosophy and fromthese the in expounds conceptof freedom the sameway.We caninferthreeconclusions sentences:first, Marx'sconceptof freedombelongs to epistemology, and the ontological of implication freedomhas hardlybeen appreciated. Secondly,freedomis connectedwith freedomis not the escapefromthe necessityof i.e., thenatural necessity, regularity. Thirdly, naturein imagination the correctknowledgeof necessity. but the At first sight, it is worthy of no rebuketo understand concept of freedomepisthe becausethe moredeeplywe knowthe necessityof nature, morefreelywe temologically, act andknow.Actually,such a view is completelyspecious.For if it were true,we would with the infer from it thatthe scientistsare the most free, since they are most acquainted it Furthermore, wouldbe nonsensefor peopleto strivefor freedomand necessityof nature. for socialmovementandrevolution, whatis required themto do would and libertythrough to be to studysciences.Thus,the conceptof freedom,thoughit is so important human just Led by such a concept,even into a mere epistemological existence,degenerates concept. ethics could not be set up, for the free will of humanbeings is the basis of ethics, and if freedomis nothingbut the knowledgeof necessity,nobodyneeds to be morallyresponsible for his own behavior. with the relationof humansto nature, It is well knownthatepistemologyis concerned while ontologydealswiththerelationship betweenmen.Kantexpresslysaid:"independence which reasonmust from the determining causes of the world of sense (an independence always ascribeto itself) is freedom"([11], p. 71). Actually,Sartre,a contemporary phimoredefinitely: "there no determinism--man free,manis freedom" is is losopher, explained has ([12], p. 34). Thatis to say,people's freedom nothingto do with people'sknowledgeof the sensuousworldbut is relatedonly to the ontologicaldomain,to the freewill of man.In Kant'sopinion,if someonepersistsin speakingof freedomon the basis of natural necessity, such freedom"isjust like a revolvingbrochette, can revolveautomatically itself once it by someonewinds it" ([13], p. 222). Marx accepted Kant's conception, and his idea of freedom should above all be elucidated, peoplelive in theworldfirstof all as agentswith freewill, and i.e., ontologically then they come to know thingsaccordingto his own intentionfor living. Marxwrote:"as pure ideas, equalityand freedomare merely idealizedexpressionsof this exchange;developedinjuridical, politicalandsocialrelations, theyaremerelythisbasisat a higherlevel" the of ([8], p. 176).Thisimportant passageshowsthatMarxregarded philosophy economyas an entrance revealthe ontologicalmeaningof the conceptof freedomand thatfromthe to time he beginning, linkedthe conceptof freedomcloselywith thatof time,interpreted as the horizonon which freedomcan be actuallyunfolded. Marxwrote:"timeis infact the active existenceof the humanbeing. It is not only the measureof humanlife. It is the space for its development" ([14], p. 493). This is to say that time is ontologicallythe necessary condition under which human beings achieve freedom.If men spend all their time (except for time used on their necessarysleep) on earningtheir living, it is impossiblefor them to have any freedom.As a result,human freedomor "human positive existence"is just basedon the time, which could actuallybe "in maintained: relationto the whole of society, freely disposedby humans.Marxfurther the production disposabletime [can]also [be considered] the creationof time for the as of of of production science, art, etc" ([8], p. 328). For Marx, the development science, art, and otherpublic activitiesof humansare all realizedin the free time of society, and "the

122

Front. Philos. China (2006)1: 114-123

of free time of society is based on the absorption the worker'stime by compulsory labor; for thus he loses room for intellectual development, that is time" ([15], p. 301). Then,how does suchconditionof time come intobeing?Marx'sansweris: "wagelabor, in general, makesits appearance whentheproductive beendeveloped only powerhas already to such an extentthat a significantamountof time has been set free. This setting-free is alreadyan historicalproducthere" ([16], p. 29). Actually,it is the capitalisticmode of that amount time,"andthis createsthe conditions of considerable production "candissociate for some people to posses otherpeople'stime, in otherwords,for some people to deprive othersof theirfreedom.Justin this sense,Marxsaid,"thetheftof alien labortime,whichis the basis of presentwealth"([16], p. 91). On the one hand,the capitalists amasstheirown capitaland wealththroughthe value produced the workers'surpluslabortime; on the by otherhand,they also depriveworkers freedom of labortime of the through usurping surplus workers. It is doubtless Marx'sphilosophy, a revolutionary that as strivesfor philosophy, primarily the workers'time and freedom.Thus, Marxwrote in his Capital:"a realmof necessity, of energywhichis anendin itself,thetruerealmof beyondit beginsthatdevelopment human freedom,which, however,can blossom forthwith this realmof necessityas its basis. The of is ([17], p. 535). Here,"theshortening shortening the working-day its basicprerequisite" of the working-day" meansthe shortening the workers'labortime. ForMarx,this is the of "basicprerequisite" workers haveaccessto freedom, for to because"thesavingof labortime is equivalent the increaseof freetime,i.e. timefor the full development the individual" to of freedomand ([16], p. 97). We can see fromthe above analysisthat,in Marx'sphilosophy, time areinseparably relatedto each other. had of He Marcuse a profound understanding Marx'stheoryof timeandfreedom. divided modern time"(Arbeitzeit), i.e., people'sordinary livingtime intotwo parts:one is "working the time people have to spendto earna living, the otheris "freetime"(Freizeit),i.e., the leisuretime thatpeoplecan freelydisposeafterwork.He wrote:"Thefirstprecondition of so of freedomis to decreasethe working-time as to makethe amount mereworking-time no longer block the human development" ([18], p. 152). These words show that Marcuse understood only the philosophical not meaningof Marx'stheoryof time developedin his betweenMarx'sdoctrine freedom that of and theoryof economybutalsotheinterrelationship of time. Through analysisof the increasingly an of in stronger phenomenon automatization the moderncapitalisticsociety,he pointedout that the automatization would be likely to reversethe relationbetween free time and workingtime, which is the foundation the of that existingcivilization; is, it is possibleto minimizethe workingtime andto makethe free time be the dominant time. Thatreversalwould lead to the radicalrevaluation various of of values. He wrote thus:"afterbeing free from the requirements ruling,the quantitative decreaseof working-time working-energy lead to a qualitative will and changeof human existence:what determines existentcontentsof humanwill be the free time,rather the than the workingtime"([18], p. 218). As a matter fact, whatMarcuseexpounded of here is the idea expressed Marx.Whenhe talkedaboutthe futuresociety,Marxsaid,"thenwealthis by no longermeasured labortime but by disposabletime"([16], p. 94). by of Althoughhe harshlycriticizedvariousphenomena alienationin moderncivilization that (whichareeven embodiedin the controlof men's free time),Marcusestill maintained both the development technologyandthe decreaseof workingtime prepare objective of the conditions modern for Fromthe aboveconsiderations, can we peopleto enjoymorefreedom.

Front. Philos. China (2006)1: 114-123

123

concludethatthe essence of Marx'sidea of freedomcan only be broughtto light froman ontologicalpoint of view. In a word,by meansof thefourkey concepts,"thing," and we "time," "freedom," "value," have sketched new pathto thereconstruction Marx'ssystemof philosophy. course, the of Of thisreconstruction and are processis verycomplicated, manytheoretical problems stillopen to exploration. look forward scholar'scomments. We to

References
1. Marx K., Economic and philosophicalmanuscriptsof 1844. In: Mclellan D. (ed.) Karl Marx:Selected Writings,OxfordUniversityPress, 2000 2. Marx K., Capital,vol. 1, New York:Vintage Books, 1977 (translated Ben Fowkes) by 3. GramsciA., Selections from the PrisonNotebooks, New York:International Publishers,1971 4. Heidegger M., Ueber Den Humanismus,Frankfurt A.M.: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1975 5. SchmidtA., The Concept of Naturein Marx, London:New Left Books, 1971 6. 'Notes' on Adolph Wagner.In: Marx: Later Political Writings (pp. 227-257), CambridgeUniversity Press, 1996 7. Lianke L., Introduction Philosophy of Value, Beijing: The CommercialPress, Ltd., 1999 to 8. Karl Marx FrederickEngels Collected Works,vol. 28, Moscow: ProgressPublishers,1986 9. Gould C. C., Marx's Social Ontology,Boston: The MIT Press, 1978 M. 10. Poserrranra and IOunmaH., A Small Dictionary of Philosophy, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 1973 11. Kant I., Foundationsof the Metaphysicsof Morals, New York:The MacmillanPublishingCompany, 1989 (translated Lewis White Beck) by 12. SartreP., Existentialismand Humanism,London:Eyre MethuenLtd., 1978 13. Kant I., Kritkder praktischenVernunft,Frankfurt A.M.: SuhrkampVerlag, 1989 14. Karl Marx FrederickEngels Collected Works,Moscow: ProgressPublishers, 1991, vol. 33 15. Karl Marx FrederickEngels Collected Works,Moscow: ProgressPublishers, 1988, vol. 30 16. Karl Marx FrederickEngels Collected Works,Moscow: ProgressPublishers, 1987, vol. 29 17. Marx K., Capital,vol. 3. In: Mclellan D. (ed.) Karl Marx: Selected Writings,OxfordUniversityPress, 2000 18. MarcuseH., Triebstrukur Gescllschaft,Frankfurt und A.M.: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1970