何谓价值形式的辩证法？——对阿瑟“新辩证法”的批判性分析

What Is the Dialectics of Value Forms?—A Critical Analysis of Arthur’s “New Dialectics”

摘要: 辩证法与价值形式的结合，既体现了对黑格尔唯心辩证法的颠倒，也实现了对古典经济学劳动价值论的科学超越。价值形式的辩证法是基于现实，扎根历史，内含矛盾的辩证法，表现为研究方法与叙述方法、逻辑与历史、内容与形式的对立统一。阿瑟的“新辩证法”从思辨理性出发，以抽象概念为逻辑起点，以价值形式为理论载体，尝试通过概念范畴的逻辑展开阐释资本主义总体的内部结构。因而，“新辩证法”是对研究方法和叙述方法的严格对峙，对逻辑与历史的强势二分，最终囿于形式层面的抽象解读之中，演变成形式统摄内容的体系辩证法，抹煞了辩证法的批判性和革命性。只突出价值形式的重要性，聚焦于交换价值和流通领域，而忽略和回避生产问题，使阿瑟背离了活劳动价值一元论，陷入唯心主义。因此，批判阿瑟及其“新辩证法”理论主张，对于厘清真正的价值形式辩证法，具有重大的理论意义。

Abstract: The integration of dialectics and value forms not only embodies a reversal of Hegel’s idealist dialectics but also achieves a scientific transcendence over the labor theory of value in classical economics. The dialectics of value forms is grounded in reality, rooted in history, and imbued with contradictions. It manifests as the unity of opposites between research methods and narrative methods, logic and history, as well as content and form. Arthur’s “new dialectics” starts from speculative rationality, takes abstract concepts as the logical starting point, and uses value forms as the theoretical carrier. It attempts to explain the internal structure of capitalism as a whole through the logical unfolding of conceptual categories. Consequently, “new dialectics” is a strict confrontation between research methods and narrative methods, a strong dichotomy between logic and history. It ultimately becomes confined to abstract interpretations at the formal level, evolving into a system dialectics where form dominates content, obliterating the critical and revolutionary nature of dialectics. By emphasizing only the importance of value forms, focusing on exchange value and circulation fields, while ignoring and avoiding production issues, Arthur deviates from the monism of living labor value and falls into idealism. Therefore, criticizing Arthur and his theoretical propositions of “new dialectics” holds significant theoretical significance for clarifying the true dialectics of value forms.