韩庆祥

（中国马克思恩格斯研究会副会长 中共中央党校教授、博士生导师）

由重庆市马克思主义中国化研究学术带头人、中共重庆市委党校副校长罗晓梅教授主持的2008年度国家社会科学基金项目——《科学发展观的范式创新与实践张力研究》，经过全国哲学社会科学规划办公室组织专家评审，以良好成绩顺利通过结项。项目以《科学发展观的范式创新研究》为题公开出版发行。课题对科学发展观的范式创新进行了全面的研究，是一个把实践理性与学术理性有机统一的积极尝试，课题研究取得了很大的成功。

长期以来，人们在对感性认识与理性认识的理解上，似乎形成了一种错觉：实践都是感性的，理性是实践行动完成后认识飞跃的成果。其实，感性认识与理性认识的区别，不在于与实践行动或先后、或远近关系，而在于认识成果本身所包含或达到的真理性认识水平。所以，理性的存在“场域”，既可以是学术成果、也可以是贯穿于实践行动始终的过程。

学术成果形式的学术理性，是人们比较熟悉与认可的理性或真理存在的方式。以学术成果形式存在的学术理性，虽然也分为各个研究领域与学科，其学术性的表现方式也存在差异，正如恩格斯1893年在《致弗·梅林》的信中所说，各门学术虽然都有自己的特殊研究领域与对象；但是，特殊研究领域与对象的事实，都经历以前各代人耗尽毕生精力的研究成果作“学术积累”基础，所以，人们看到的学术成果形式的学术理性是概念的逻辑架构，其“学术味是那么浓”，那些特殊研究领域与对象的事实似乎就被“屏蔽”了。

关于行动理性，最先提出这个概念的是科尔曼。他认为，理性行动的目标是提供一种以个人理性为基础的社会行动理论，并以此将社会学的宏观理论和微观理论结合起来。在20世纪90年代，中国学界就有把理性分为认知理性、实践理性、评价理性三个类型的观点，认为实践理性是人在实践中的自我提高及其对实践本身的审辨能力。“行动”与“实践”其实是可以相互置换的概念。关于这一点，恩格斯在《路德维希·费尔巴哈和德国古典哲学的终结》的第四章中谈到自然盲目动力与社会实践动力的区别时，就有过精辟的论述。总之，提出行动理性或实践理性，是有学术依据的。

值得注意的是，马克思主义理论在一百多年与时俱进的发展中，已经事实上形成了学术理性、实践理性的分野。

马克思主义的创立者马克思的研究成果是集学术理性与实践理性完美统一的典范。马克思的著作既具有标准的规范的学术性概念、架构和逻辑，又有对现实问题明确的针对性及其穿透力。马克思能做到研究成果的学术理性与实践理性的完美统一，是主客观条件具备的一个典范。正是马克思主义学术的规范性架构与逻辑力量，使其理论具有了高度的科学性；正是马克思主义对现实问题的关注及其穿透力，使其理论具有了显著的实践性。

从列宁开始，马克思主义重心从创立与宣传理论，转向了运用这个理论解决特定国情及其世界环境下的革命与建设问题，并在解决革命与建设实际问题的实践中去创新和发展理论。面对革命或建设中复杂多变的问题，马克思主义的学术理性必然让位于实践理性，即应现实亟待解决的重大问题之需要去创新实践理性。这就是毛泽东所说，理论的目的全在于运用，在于解决实际问题。进一步说，这一时期就是如何使马克思主义具体化的问题。正如毛泽东1938年在党的六届六中全会上报告中所强调的：“使马克思主义在中国具体化，使之在其每一个表现中带着必须有的中国的特性，即是说，按照中国的特点去应用它，成为全党亟待了解并亟待解决的问题。”2539664这就是把马克思主义的基本原理与各国具体革命实践相结合的行动理性阶段。

俄国“十月革命”成功、中华人民共和国成立，开始了共产党执政的新时代。在各种研究机构、大学开始有了一大批专门从事马克思主义理论教育、宣传和研究的学者群，他们的马克思主义理论研究成果明显带有规范性学术成果的共同特点，也可以称为“学术理性”。

学术理性与实践理性各有其优势。学术理性因其历史传承，尤其是理论形式的规范性与内容的深刻性及其逻辑性，客观上就可认同为“学术”，且一旦被人接受其影响力就会持久。当然，学术理性的缺陷是容易受学科“壁垒”的影响而产生局限性。实践理性既有丰富的学术基础与张力，最主要的是解决实际重大问题的有效性，加之可以动员广泛的传播手段进行宣传与运用政治、行政系统力量予以迅速影响实践而家喻户晓，其“指导作用”是学术理性无法企及的。当然，实践理性本身的缺陷也是不容回避的，主要是因其理论基础与张力并未充分挖掘与展现，加上产生传播与影响的手段非理论本身的逻辑力量，其影响力的深入、持续也难度不小。

马克思主义在实践中的运用与发展，形成了学术理性与实践理性的分野，这在一定程度上看是不可避免的。但是，如何使马克思主义的学术理性与实践理性成果不变成始终相互分离，甚至对立的东西，使它们在实践中相互贯通、相互强化，共同推动马克思主义理论的中国化、时代化、大众化，这是值得关注的。

自觉实现马克思主义学术理性与实践理性创新成果的有机统一，是实现马克思主义中国化、时代化、大众化的重要路径与举措。作为学者，应该担当起自己的责任，为此作出实际努力。研究科学发展观的范式创新与实践张力，就是尽这样的责任、作这样努力的有益尝试。《科学发展观的范式创新研究》这一学术理论成果，在促进马克思主义理论学术理性与实践理性创新成果形成相互贯通、相互强化的有机统一中，有值得注意的三个学术贡献：

首先，该课题通过研究方法的创新，对科学发展观进行了学术层面的再研究。课题成果把科学发展观置于马克思主义的实践唯物主义世界观基础上，再导入库恩的范式创新研究方法，对科学发展观进行了学术层面的再研究。科学发展观是以胡锦涛为总书记的党中央根据21世纪现代化建设新的阶段性特征，提出的中国特色社会主义的战略思想。科学发展观的第一要义是发展，核心是以人为本，基本要求是全面协调可持续，根本方法是统筹兼顾。其实质就是要实现中国特色社会主义又好又快的发展。科学发展观作为一种战略思想，它是我们党对中国特色社会主义认识和概括的重大理论成果，有着深刻的内涵。因此，对它的理论内涵和科学实质进行深入的学术解读，是践行科学发展观的重要前提，也是理论工作者的重大职责。我想，作为《科学发展观的范式创新研究》的作者们正是以这种自觉的意识在辛勤地探索。每一个时代都需要有一大批这种辛勤的探索者，何况我们正处在这样一个伟大的时代，这个时代更需要我们不断地进行理论创新。只有对科学发展观这一战略思想进行深入研究，才会使科学发展观的坚实学术基础、学术张力得到进一步彰显，才可以加深人们对科学发展观的理解，从而提高深入贯彻落实科学发展观的自觉性。

其次，该课题用“理论硬核”的学术分析工具，对科学发展观理论的逻辑框架进行了探索。党的十七大报告对科学发展观理论的形成、主要理论内容进行了阐述。在此基础上，课题研究成果运用“理论硬核”的学术分析工具，对科学发展观与邓小平理论、“三个代表”重要思想既一脉相承、又与时俱进的关系进行了学术探讨；同时，又运用“理论硬核”的学术分析工具，对科学发展观的主要理论内容之间既主次有序、又不可分割的关系及意义进行了学术论证。这种研究路径的探索，有助于揭示科学发展观固有的、内在的逻辑力量，有助于克服长期以来对党的创新理论作简单化的理解。

最后，该课题对党的创新理论的实践张力的“域界”进行了有创新意义的探索。党的具有“实践理性”特征的创新理论对实践具有巨大的指导作用，这是毋庸置疑的。但是，党的创新理论的实践张力有无“域界”？过去对这个问题的探讨甚少，以致出现“什么都能指导”或“什么具体问题也解决不了”的两种极端思维。说“什么都能指导”，这是对党的创新理论的实践张力的不负责任的夸大或“捧杀”；说“什么具体问题也解决不了”，这是对党的创新理论的实践张力的轻视或否定。课题研究成果认为，党的创新理论的实践张力的“域界”是战略层面的战略性问题。成果认为，“促进发展上水平”、“促进社会和谐”、“实践城乡统筹”、“确立中国负责任大国形象”，是21世纪中国现代化建设中科学发展观发挥实践张力作用最值得重视的四个方面。显然，这些研究成果是具有启发性的。

探讨和处理好学术理性与实践理性的关系，对实践理性进行学术层面的再研究，彰显科学发展观的理论底蕴和实践张力，是时代赋予我们的职责。正是从这样的角度可以看出，罗晓梅教授等同志的努力是具有重大意义的！愿更多同人一齐努力来做好这件事情！

Han Qingxiang (Vice President of China Marx and Engels Research Association, Professor and Doctoral Supervisor of the Party School of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China) presided over the 2008 National Social Science Foundation project "Research on Paradigm Innovation and Practical Tension of Scientific Outlook on Development" presided over by Professor Luo Xiaomei, academic leader of Chongqing Marxism Sinicization Research and vice president of the Party School of Chongqing Municipal Committee of the Communist Party of China, which was successfully completed with good results after expert review organized by the National Office of Philosophy and Social Science Planning. The project was published under the title of "Research on Paradigm Innovation of Scientific Outlook on Development". The project has carried out a comprehensive study on the paradigm innovation of the scientific outlook on development, and is an active attempt to organically unify practical rationality and academic rationality, and the project research has achieved great success. For a long time, people seem to have formed an illusion in the understanding of perceptual cognition and rational cognition: practice is emotional, and rationality is the result of a leap in understanding after the completion of practical action. In fact, the difference between perceptual cognition and rational cognition lies not in the relationship with practical actions or succession, or in the distance and proximity, but in the level of truth understanding contained or achieved by the cognitive results themselves. Therefore, the existence "field" of rationality can be both academic achievements and a process that runs through practical actions. Academic rationality in the form of academic achievements is the way in which reason or truth exists that people are more familiar with and recognized. Although academic rationality in the form of academic achievements is also divided into various fields of study and discipline, its academic expression is also different, as Engels said in his letter to F. Merlin in 1893, although each discipline has its own special research fields and objects; However, the facts of special research fields and objects have been based on the "academic accumulation" of the research results of previous generations who have exhausted their life's energy, so the academic rationality in the form of academic achievements that people see is the logical framework of concepts, and its "academic flavor is so strong", the facts of those special research fields and objects seem to be "shielded". Regarding rationality for action, it was Coleman who first proposed the concept. He believes that the goal of rational action is to provide a theory of social action based on individual rationality, and in doing so to combine macro and micro theories of sociology. In the 90s of the 20th century, Chinese academics divided rationality into three types: cognitive rationality, practical rationality and evaluative rationality, believing that practical rationality is people's self-improvement in practice and their ability to judge practice itself. "Action" and "practice" are interchangeable concepts. On this point, Engels had an incisive discussion in the fourth chapter of "Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of German Classical Philosophy" when he talked about the difference between the blind drive of nature and the dynamic of social practice. In short, there is an academic basis for proposing rationality in action or rationality in practice. It is worth noting that in the more than 100 years of development of Marxist theory with the times, it has in fact formed a distinction between academic rationality and practical rationality. The research results of Marx, the founder of Marxism, are a model of the perfect unity of academic reason and practical reason. Marx's works not only have standard normative academic concepts, structures and logic, but also have a clear pertinence and penetrating power to practical problems. Marx's ability to achieve the perfect unity of academic rationality and practical rationality of research results is a model of subjective and objective conditions. It is the normative structure and logical force of Marxist scholarship that makes its theory highly scientific; It is precisely Marxism's attention to practical problems and its penetrating power that gives its theory a remarkable practical character. Beginning with Lenin, the focus of Marxism shifted from the theory of creation and propaganda to the use of this theory to solve the problems of revolution and construction in specific national conditions and its world environment, and to innovate and develop the theory in the practice of solving the practical problems of revolution and construction. In the face of complex and changeable problems in revolution or construction, Marxist academic rationality will inevitably give way to practical reason, that is, to innovate practical rationality in response to the needs of major problems that need to be solved urgently. This is what Mao Zedong said, the purpose of theory is all about application, about solving practical problems. Further, this period is the question of how to concretize Marxism. As Mao Zedong emphasized in his report to the Sixth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the Communist Party of China in 1938: "To concretize Marxism in China and to make it carry in every expression the necessary Chinese characteristics, that is, to apply it in accordance with Chinese characteristics, has become an urgent problem for the whole Party to understand and solve." 2539664 this is the stage of rational action that combines the basic principles of Marxism with the concrete revolutionary practice of each country. The success of the October Revolution in Russia and the founding of the People's Republic of China ushered in a new era of Communist Party rule. In various research institutions and universities, a large number of scholars specializing in Marxist theoretical education, propaganda and research have begun, and their Marxist theoretical research results obviously have the common characteristics of normative academic achievements, which can also be called "academic rationality". Academic rationality and practical rationality have their own advantages. Academic rationality can objectively be identified as "academic" because of its historical inheritance, especially the normative nature of theoretical form and the profundity of its content and its logic, and its influence will last once it is accepted. Of course, the flaw of academic rationality is that it is easily affected by the "barriers" of disciplines and has limitations. Practical rationality has a rich academic foundation and tension, the most important is the effectiveness of solving practical major problems, coupled with the ability to mobilize a wide range of communication means for propaganda and the use of political and administrative system forces to quickly influence practice, and its "guiding role" is beyond the reach of academic reason. Of course, the flaws of practical reason itself cannot be avoided, mainly because its theoretical foundation and tension have not been fully explored and displayed, coupled with the means of dissemination and influence are not the logical power of the theory itself, and its influence is not difficult to deepen and sustain. The application and development of Marxism in practice has formed a distinction between academic reason and practical reason, which is inevitable to a certain extent. However, it is worth paying attention to how to ensure that the achievements of Marxist academic reason and practical reason do not become things that are always separated from each other or even opposites, so that they can be connected and mutually reinforced in practice, and jointly promote the Chineseization, modernization, and popularization of Marxist theory. Consciously realizing the organic unity of Marxist academic rationality and practical rationality innovation achievements is an important path and measure to realize the Chineseization, eraization and popularization of Marxism. As scholars, we should shoulder our responsibilities and make practical efforts to this end. Studying the paradigm innovation and practical tension of the scientific outlook on development is a useful attempt to fulfill such responsibilities and make such efforts. The academic theoretical achievement of "Research on Paradigm Innovation of Scientific Outlook on Development" has three noteworthy academic contributions in promoting the formation of interconnected and mutually reinforcing organic unity between the innovative achievements of Marxist theoretical academic rationality and practical rationality: First, the topic has carried out academic re-research on the scientific outlook on development through the innovation of research methods. The results of the project put the scientific outlook on development on the basis of the Marxist practical materialist world view, and then introduced Kuhn's paradigm innovation research method, and carried out academic re-research of the scientific outlook on development. The Scientific Outlook on Development is the strategic thinking of socialism with Chinese characteristics put forward by the CPC Central Committee with Hu Jintao as general secretary in accordance with the new phased characteristics of modernization in the 21st century. The first meaning of the scientific outlook on development is development, the core is people-oriented, the basic requirement is comprehensive, coordinated and sustainable, and the fundamental method is to take into account all aspects. Its essence is to achieve the good and rapid development of socialism with Chinese characteristics. As a strategic thought, the Scientific Outlook on Development is a major theoretical achievement of our party's understanding and generalization of socialism with Chinese characteristics, and has profound connotations. Therefore, in-depth academic interpretation of its theoretical connotation and scientific essence is an important prerequisite for practicing the scientific outlook on development, and it is also a major responsibility of theorists. I think that the authors of "Research on Paradigm Innovation in the Scientific Outlook on Development" are diligent in their exploration with this conscious awareness. Every era needs a large number of such diligent explorers, not to mention that we are in such a great era, this era requires us to constantly carry out theoretical innovation. Only by conducting in-depth research on the strategic idea of the Scientific Outlook on Development can the solid academic foundation and academic tension of the Scientific Outlook on Development be further highlighted, and can people's understanding of the Scientific Outlook on Development be deepened, so as to enhance their consciousness of deeply implementing the Scientific Outlook on Development. Secondly, this topic uses the academic analysis tool of "theoretical hardcore" to explore the logical framework of the theory of scientific outlook on development. The report of the 17th CPC National Congress expounded on the formation of the theory of the scientific outlook on development and the main theoretical content. On this basis, the research results of the project use the academic analysis tool of "theoretical hardcore" to conduct academic discussions on the relationship between the scientific outlook on development, Deng Xiaoping Theory and the important thinking of "three represents" and advancing with the times. At the same time, the academic analysis tool of "theoretical hardcore" is used to conduct academic arguments on the orderly and inseparable relationship and significance between the main theoretical contents of the scientific outlook on development. This exploration of research paths will help reveal the inherent and intrinsic logical force of the scientific outlook on development and help overcome the long-standing simplistic understanding of the party's innovation theory. Finally, this topic explores the "domain boundary" of the practical tension of the party's innovation theory. There is no doubt that the Party's innovative theory with the characteristics of "practical rationality" has a tremendous guiding effect on practice. However, is there a "territorial boundary" to the practical tension of the party's innovation theory? In the past, there was very little discussion of this issue, so that there were two extreme thinking of "anything can guide" or "no specific problem can be solved". To say that "anything can be guided" is an irresponsible exaggeration or "killing" of the practical tension of the party's innovative theory; To say that "no specific problem can be solved" is to despise or deny the practical tension of the party's theory of innovation. The research results of the project believe that the "domain boundary" of the practical tension of the party's innovation theory is a strategic issue at the strategic level. The results believe that "promoting the level of development", "promoting social harmony", "practicing urban-rural coordination", and "establishing China's image as a responsible major country" are the four aspects that deserve the most attention in the practical tension of the scientific outlook on development in China's modernization construction in the 21st century. Clearly, these findings are illuminating. It is the duty entrusted to us by the times to explore and handle the relationship between academic rationality and practical reason, to re-study practical rationality at the academic level, and to highlight the theoretical background and practical tension of the scientific outlook on development. It is precisely from this angle that we can see that the efforts of Professor Luo Xiaomei and other comrades are of great significance! May more people work together to do this well!（AI翻译）