[主持人语]:近年来,国内哲学界开始以新的视角审视马克思政治经济学批判的理论逻辑和意义。新动态在两个方向上特别明显:一是对“资本逻辑”的批判;二是作为一种“历史叙事”的政治经济学批判。前一个方面可能受到了现实的激励与国际理论动向的影响,后一个方面则是前一个方面引发的更基础的问题。本刊编发的这组稿子的话题属于后一方面,它们通过时间、物、人等视角,回应了政治经济学的历史性质问题及其在当代引发的理论争论。在其中,胡大平博士以“客观性、规律性和时间”的含义及其之间关系的辨析,阐明了政治经济学批判之历史叙事在主体与结构之间张力协 [Moderator Language]: In recent years, the domestic philosophical circles have begun to examine the theoretical logic and significance of Marx’s critique of political economy from a new perspective. The new dynamics are particularly evident in two directions: one is the critique of “capital logic”; the other is the critique of political economy as a “historical narrative.” The former aspect may be influenced by realistic incentives and international theoretical trends, while the latter aspect is the more fundamental one triggered by the previous aspect. The topics compiled by this issue belong to the latter aspect. They respond to the historical nature of political economy and its contemporary theoretical controversy through the perspective of time, material and human. Among them, Dr. Duda Ping interpreted the meaning of “objectivity, regularity and time” and the relationship among them, and illustrated the tension between the subject and the structure in the historical narrative of political economy criticism