试比较“实践本体论”和“物质本体论”

Try to Compare “Practical Ontology” and “Material Ontology”

摘要: 本体论长期被认为是哲学的基础，但是关于马克思主义哲学是否具有本体论，以及其本体论的基础是什么，学界一直存在争议。由于受到苏联教科书的影响，长久以来我国马克思主义一直坚持“物质本体论”，认为物质是马克思主义哲学的基础。改革开放以后，由于思想大解放，中国学界开始从多元角度来理解马克思主义，部分学者提出了“实践本体论”，该观点认为在马克思主义哲学的本体论上，实践比物质具有一些优越性。从“物质本体论”到“实践本体论”，体现了学界对马克思主义哲学认识的深入化。

Abstract: Ontology has long been considered the foundation of philosophy, but there has been ongoing debate in academia about whether Marxist philosophy has an ontology and what its ontological basis is. Influenced by Soviet textbooks, Marxism in China has long adhered to “material ontology,” asserting that matter is the foundation of Marxist philosophy. After the reform and opening up, due to a great liberation of thought, Chinese academia began to understand Marxism from multiple perspectives. Some scholars proposed “practical ontology,” which suggests that in the ontology of Marxist philosophy, practice has some advantages over matter. The shift from “material ontology” to “practical ontology” reflects a deeper understanding of Marxist philosophy in academia.