萨特“实践–惰性”理论视域下的异化新形态探析

An Analysis of New Forms of Alienation from the Perspective of Sartre’s “Practice-Inertia” Theory

摘要: 在马克思主义异化理论的发展谱系中，萨特的“实践–惰性”概念揭示了异化从主客对立“物化”向主客消融的“惰”演化的深层逻辑。面对当代数字资本主义时代算法治理与绩效社会中“内卷”困境的异化新形态，经典物化理论面临着解释力更新的挑战。本文通过深入梳理萨特“实践–惰性”理论的生成机理——从“匮乏”的本体论前提出发，经由个体谋划、实践物化至惰性循环的辩证运动，系统阐释其理论内涵与形态演进。在此基础上，重点剖析异化新形态的核心特征：数字技术作为人类实践的产物，已固化为弥散的“惰性场域”，导致主体性的深层异化；而竞争评价体系则通过“群列”整合，构筑了结构性压迫的内卷困局。通过对比马克思异化理论与萨特实践–惰性理论的异同，本文指出，萨特的理论虽因过度强调“匮乏”而弱化了制度批判的维度，但其对弥散性、日常性异化的敏锐捕捉，为理解当代人的自由困境提供了颇具张力的哲学透镜。打破“惰性”桎梏的希望，不在于等待宏观结构的突变，而在于重拾实践的批判性与创造性，在持续的总体化过程中寻求人的解放。

Abstract: In the developmental genealogy of Marxist alienation theory, Sartre’s concept of “practice-inertia” reveals the deep logic of the evolution of alienation from the “objectification” of subject-object opposition to the “inertia” of subject-object dissolution. Faced with the new forms of alienation embodied in algorithmic governance in the era of digital capitalism and the involution predicament within performance societies, classical objectification theory faces the challenge of updating its explanatory power. This paper systematically expounds its theoretical connotations and morphological evolution by thoroughly tracing the generative mechanism of Sartre’s “practice-inertia” theory—from the ontological premise of “lack,” through the dialectical movement of individual planning and practical objectification, to the cycle of inertia. On this basis, it focuses on analyzing the core characteristics of contemporary new forms of alienation: digital technology, as a product of human practice, has solidified into a diffuse “field of inertia,” leading to deep alienation of subjectivity; meanwhile, competitive evaluation systems, through the integration of “group arrays,” construct the structural oppression of the involution dilemma. By comparing the similarities and differences between Marx’s theory of alienation and Sartre’s practice-inertia theory, this paper points out that although Sartre’s theory, due to its overemphasis on “lack,” weakens the dimension of institutional critique, its sensitive capture of diffuse, everyday alienation provides a highly dynamic philosophical lens for understanding the freedom dilemma of contemporary humans. The hope for breaking the shackles of “inertia” lies not in waiting for sudden transformations of macro structures, but in reclaiming the critical and creative potential of practice, seeking human liberation in the ongoing process of totalization.