|
|
|
| An Interpretation of the Knowledge Society from the Perspective of the Materialist Conception of History |
| Yao Mingming1,2, Li Xinxin1 |
1.School of Marxism, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
2.Research Center for Marxism Theory Innovation and Communication, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract This article offers a comprehensive analysis of the knowledge society from three interconnected dimensions: conceptual clarification, operational mechanisms, and developmental effects. Conceptually, a knowledge society is constituted by three foundational elements: knowledge workers, knowledge resources, and knowledge productive forces. Its intrinsic characteristics—teleology and regularity, abstraction and concreteness, necessity and contingency—remain firmly situated within the analytical horizon of Marxist theory. Mechanistically, the article demonstrates that the operational logic of the knowledge society is governed by the essential laws of the Materialist Conception of History. Its systemic functioning hinges on the dialectical interplay of its core elements: the subject-object relationship between knowledge workers and knowledge resources; the relations of production between knowledge workers and knowledge productive forces; and the transformative relation between knowledge resources and knowledge productive forces. In terms of developmental effects, the knowledge society represents a salient stage-specific tendency in contemporary social evolution. It engenders far-reaching transformations in material production and social life, yet simultaneously faces challenges such as technological alienation, erosion of subjectivity, and institutional lag. While existing theoretical researches on the Knowledge Society provides useful insights for China’s ongoing development, substantial theoretical space for further elaboration remains.The theoretical contribution of this study lies in its deployment of the Materialist Conception of History as a primary analytical lens to conduct an in-depth analysis of the constitutive elements, operating logic, and developmental implications of the knowledge society. This approach not only elucidates the knowledge society as a salient transitional feature in the trajectory of modern social formations but also extends the three elements theory of productive forces in the Materialist Conception of History by foregrounding the triadic structure of knowledge workers, knowledge resources, and knowledge productive forces, thereby enriching Marxist accounts of social development and productive-force evolution. Practically, anchored in the concrete conditions of China’s shift from high-speed to high-quality development, this study offers conceptual and strategic guidance for harnessing the opportunities and addressing the risks posed by the emerging knowledge society—particularly those associated with technological alienation—and thus contributes to the broader exploration of the Chinese path to modernization.The article’s innovations can be summarized in three aspects. First, at the level of theoretical architecture, it moves beyond conventional understandings of the three essential elements of the productive forces by expanding the connotation of the Materialist Conception of History through the categories of knowledge workers, knowledge resources, and knowledge productive forces, and by reaffirming that the knowledge society does not transcend but rather unfolds within the Marxist analytical framework, thereby laying a solid theoretical foundation. Second, methodologically, it establishes a tripartite analytical model—“conceptual determination-operational mechanisms-developmental effects”—which clarifies the essential attributes of each core element, explicates their dialectical relations, and identifies both transformative impacts and latent challenges, thereby overcoming the limitations of one-dimensional analyses. Third, in terms of research orientation, the analysis of the knowledge society’s elements, characteristics, and mechanisms is grounded in the Materialist Conception of History and closely integrated with the practical agenda of socialism with Chinese characteristics, thereby formulating practical insights for China in navigating the opportunities and risks of the knowledge society and enabling a precise alignment between theoretical reflection and China’s developmental imperatives. Future research may further refine the analysis of operational mechanisms by incorporating complexity theory, and may broaden the analytical horizon to include perspectives such as genetic epistemology or emergent issues arising from the ongoing evolution of the knowledge society.
|
|
Received: 26 May 2025
|
|
|
|
1 美］彼得·F.德鲁克：《后资本主义社会》，傅振焜译，北京：东方出版社，2009年。
2 叶险明：《马克思的“时代观”与知识经济——对“知识经济”的一种时代观梳理》，《马克思主义研究》2003年第2期，第32-40，55页。
3 德］马克思：《资本论》第一卷，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯全集》第42卷，北京：人民出版社，2016年。
4 德］恩格斯：《卡·马克思“资本论”第一卷提纲》，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯全集》第16卷，北京：人民出版社，1964年，第273-325页。
5 韩文龙：《新质生产力的政治经济学阐释》，《马克思主义研究》2024年第3期，第100-115页。
6 刘皓琰：《数字时代的阶级斗争——基于对西方左翼学者理论的批判和反思》，《马克思主义与现实》2023年第2期，第183-189页。
7 德］马克思：《〈政治经济学批判（1857—1858年手稿）〉摘选》，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯文集》第8卷，北京：人民出版社，2009年，第37-209页。
8 德］马克思：《〈政治经济学批判〉导言》，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯选集》第2卷，北京：人民出版社，2012年，第683-712页。
9 德］马克思、恩格斯：《资本论》第三卷，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯文集》第7卷，北京：人民出版社，2009年。
10 德］马克思、恩格斯：《共产党宣言》，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯选集》第1卷，北京：人民出版社，2012年，第376-435页。
11 韩震：《知识形态演进的历史逻辑》，《中国社会科学》2021年第6期，第168-185，207-208页。 |
|
|
|
2026, Vol. 56 
