“头足倒置”抑或“首尾不一”——马克思《黑格尔法哲学批判》主旨的再考察

马克思的《黑格尔法哲学批判》重点批判了黑格尔国家学说的“头足倒置”与“首尾不一”，前者指黑格尔忽视了市民社会才是国家的决定性因素而非相反；后者指黑格尔未能贯彻自己的原则，既无创见更充满妥协。实际上，“头足倒置”并非直接批判黑格尔国家学说，其主要目标是近代政治哲学，在批判近代政治哲学方面，马克思与黑格尔共享了同一个逻辑。“首尾不一”则沿用黑格尔的逻辑框架指出了黑格尔哲学的“非批判性”之缺陷，这一批判指出了黑格尔法哲学存在的问题，但不是以往研究关注的重点。因此，对于马克思的批判，我们不应简单定论，既要认识到马克思对黑格尔的继承关系，也要认识到马克思批判的错位之处，更要认识到他们各自政治哲学自身发展路径的差异。

″Upside-Down″ or ″ Inconsistency″: A Re-examination of the Purpose of Marx's Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right

Marx's Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right is an important political work in his youth. Scholars often attach great importance to this work, highly affirming Marx's criticism of Hegel's idealism and drawing a clear distinction between his and Hegel's state doctrine. The image of Hegel's state doctrine of ″upside-down″ is also shaped. In fact, judging from the text, Hegel's philosophy of right starts from logic and deduces the specific content of the state doctrine. Marx's Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right comprehensively examines Hegel's internal state system, especially the contents of royal power, administrative power and legislative power, and focuses on the ″upside-down″ and ″ inconsistency ″ of Hegel's state doctrine. Two characteristics are different. The former indicates that Hegel has neglected the civil society, which is the decisive factor of the state rather than the opposite, and which finally moves towards the logical mysticism; the latter indicates Hegel's failure to implement his own principles, neither creative nor full of compromise to the royal family of Prussian. In fact, in Marx's critique, ″upside-down″ is not just a criticism of Hegel's state doctrine, but it is more in line with the ″upside-down″ feature of modern political philosophy. Marx and Hegel share the same logic in criticizing modern political philosophy. They both criticize the abstraction of modern political philosophy. Marx's ″inconsistency″ refers to Hegel's logical framework, which points out that Hegel fails to implement his own doctrine and has the defect of being ″non-critical″. This criticism points out the problem of Hegel's philosophy of right. It can be established, but it is not the focus of previous research, which is also the condolence of the current critical research of Marx's Critique of Hegel's philosophy of right . As far as two kinds of political philosophy are concerned, the basic difference between Marx and Hegel is that Hegel criticizes the abstraction of modern state doctrine and tries to re-establish the foundation of reason for them. On this basis, Hegel believes that the state is the realization of justice, and in this way he advocates that the state transcends civil society. Although Marx agrees with Hegel's critique of modern political doctrine and has absorbed this critique into his own thoughts, Marx does not advocate the idea of realizing justice through the state. He believes that Hegel's state is still abstract and cannot realize economic life vital to the country. Economic life, that is, civil society, is the key to understanding the state, and ultimately turns the perspective of research into social-economic issues. They have different concerns and are not diametrically opposed. These different concerns have brought about different trends in political philosophy. Therefore, for Marx's critique, we should not make a simple conclusion. We must recognize not only the inheritance of Marx from Hegel, the misplacement of Marx's criticism, but also the difference of their developing paths as two kinds of political philosophies. This understanding can not only explain the common critique of the modern political abstraction, but also explain the basic pursuit of the two political philosophies. It also helps us to make a reasonable evaluation of Hegel and Marx.