本文關(guān)鍵詞： 一般生產(chǎn)勞動 雇傭勞動 第一種生產(chǎn)勞動 第二種生產(chǎn)勞動 服務(wù)價值論 勞動價值理論 國民經(jīng)濟核算理論 三次產(chǎn)業(yè)劃分理論　出處：《西北大學(xué)》2005年博士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：生產(chǎn)勞動理論是馬克思政治經(jīng)濟學(xué)這一偉大理論體系的一個重要組成部分,這一理論在他的整個經(jīng)濟理論體系中占有極其重要的地位。由于馬克思的生產(chǎn)勞動觀點一方面是在批判和闡述其他人的觀點時提出的,馬克思對此問題沒有集中、全面的論證,另一方面也由于后世的經(jīng)濟學(xué)家們沒有完整、準(zhǔn)確地領(lǐng)會馬克思生產(chǎn)勞動理論的思想實質(zhì),誤解和曲解了馬克思的原意,致使生產(chǎn)勞動理論成為政治經(jīng)濟學(xué)上的一個老大難問題,成為經(jīng)濟學(xué)界長期討論和爭辯不休的重大理論問題之一。 圍繞生產(chǎn)勞動理論,我國學(xué)術(shù)界曾在五、六十年代和八、九十年代進(jìn)行過極其熱烈的討論,當(dāng)時的焦點主要集中在社會主義生產(chǎn)勞動應(yīng)該如何劃分上,主要形成了所謂寬派、中派、窄派等學(xué)術(shù)派別。在生產(chǎn)勞動問題上,分歧之大,爭論之烈,觀點之異,論文之多,都是眾多政治經(jīng)濟學(xué)問題上所罕見的。 但是,解決生產(chǎn)勞動問題又具有極其重大的理論意義和實際意義。一方面,生產(chǎn)勞動和資本是一雙對偶概念,恰如一枚硬幣的兩面,也似成本-收益這樣的概念對,兩者可以互相發(fā)明、相互闡述。另一方面,生產(chǎn)勞動理論與現(xiàn)代產(chǎn)業(yè)劃分問題和現(xiàn)代國民經(jīng)濟核算問題是什么關(guān)系,也是一個必須搞清楚的重大的理論問題和實踐問題。我國經(jīng)濟學(xué)家大都是從所謂的一般生產(chǎn)勞動觀點出發(fā)來解決現(xiàn)代產(chǎn)業(yè)劃分理論和現(xiàn)代國民經(jīng)濟核算理論的,我們認(rèn)為這是一種完全錯誤的思想方法。 在讀博士學(xué)位期間,筆者全面、系統(tǒng)地學(xué)習(xí)了亞·斯密和馬克思關(guān)于生產(chǎn)勞動理論的全部論述,感覺到國內(nèi)外經(jīng)濟理論界關(guān)于生產(chǎn)勞動理論這個重要問題的討論和研究有陷入誤區(qū)之慮,故決定選擇生產(chǎn)勞動理論這樣一個老大難問題作為自己的博士論文選題,以期能夠為徹底解決這個困擾國內(nèi)外經(jīng)濟理論界多年的老大難問題提供一個新的視角。 本論文共分四個部分。在第一部分中,我們回顧了馬克思對前人生產(chǎn)勞動理論的批判和繼承,這主要包括對亞·斯密以前的重商主義和重農(nóng)學(xué)派經(jīng)濟學(xué)家關(guān)于生產(chǎn)勞動理論的批評;馬克思對亞·斯密生產(chǎn)勞動理論的評論以及馬克思對亞·斯密以后的庸俗經(jīng)濟學(xué)家關(guān)于生產(chǎn)勞動理論的批判。在第二部分中,我們研究了馬克思關(guān)于生產(chǎn)勞動理論的直接論述,這主要包括馬克思在1863-1865年中
[Abstract]:The theory of productive labor is an important part of the great theoretical system of Marx's political economy. This theory plays an extremely important role in his entire economic theoretical system. Since Marx's viewpoint on production and labor was put forward in criticizing and expounding the views of other people, Marx did not have a centralized and comprehensive argument on this issue. On the other hand, because the economists of later generations did not have a complete and accurate understanding of the ideological essence of Marx's theory of productive labor, they misunderstood and misinterpreted Marx's original intention. As a result, the theory of productive labor has become an old and difficult problem in political economy and one of the important theoretical problems which has been discussed and debated for a long time in the field of economics. On the basis of the theory of productive labour, the academic circles of our country held extremely heated discussions in May, 60s and August and 90s. At that time, the focus was mainly on how to divide the socialist productive labour, which mainly formed the so-called broadside. On the issue of production and labor, the differences between them, the fierce debates, the different viewpoints, and the number of papers are rare in many political and economic issues. However, solving the problem of productive labor is of great theoretical and practical significance. On the one hand, productive labor and capital are two dual concepts, just like the two sides of a coin, but also like the concept pair of cost-benefit. On the other hand, what is the relationship between the theory of production and labor, the problem of the division of modern industries and the problem of modern national economic accounting? It is also a major theoretical and practical problem that must be clarified. Most economists in our country solve the modern industrial division theory and the modern national economic accounting theory from the so-called general viewpoint of productive labor. We think this is a completely wrong way of thinking. During my PhD, the author studied all the theories of productive labor by Adam Smith and Marx in a comprehensive and systematic way. Feeling that the discussion and research on the important issue of productive labor theory in the domestic and foreign economic theorists is in a misconception, they decided to choose the old and difficult issue of production labor theory as their own doctoral thesis topic. The aim is to provide a new angle of view for solving this problem which has been puzzling the domestic and foreign economic theorists for many years. This thesis is divided into four parts. In the first part, we review Marx's criticism and inheritance of previous productive labor theory. This mainly includes criticism of Arias Smith's former mercantilist and agricultural school economists on the theory of productive labor; Marx's comments on Adam Smith's theory of productive labor and Marx's criticism of his later vulgar economists on the theory of productive labor. In the second part, we study Marx's direct exposition on the theory of productive labor. This mainly included Marx in the middle of 1863-1865.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西北大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2005
【分類號】：F014.2

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 黃莉;中華體育精神研究[D];北京體育大學(xué);2006年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 王輝茹;我國高校后勤運作模式的選擇[D];寧波大學(xué);2011年

2 王立平;生產(chǎn)勞動理論及其現(xiàn)實意義研究[D];東北大學(xué);2009年

3 劉大欣;馬克思的勞動觀與漢娜·阿倫特的行動觀比較[D];湖南大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號：1536958