A Critique of the Technological Enframing of Digital Capitalism

The question of capitalism’s technological enframing of human society is an important issue that the rationalization enterprise of modern human society must address. In today’s era of capital and technology, we seem to be arranged and demanded by an anonymous force. At present, digital capitalism provides us with the technological imaginary of “artificial intelligence,” as if it intends to complete the best physical determination for us and create a perfect foundation of a “world of things” for our social life. However, individuals in reality do not fully accept or even reject this technological imaginary from the depths of their hearts, because it leaves no room for the lives of future people. The life-world of human beings needs to be constructed through daily labor; future people cannot become people without a life-world and without a home due to having nothing to do. Although we cannot yet determine to what extent “artificial intelligence” affects real life, this technological imaginary of digital capitalism is undoubtedly an epochal declaration of capitalism’s inherent technological force. According to this declaration, an artificial intelligence revolution sweeping the globe is grasped as an unstoppable historical trend. The technological force of capitalism cannot be separated from the capitalist mode of production; only by analyzing the logic of motion of the capitalist mode of production can we reveal the internal mechanism of its technological enframing.

资本主义对人类社会的技术摆置问题是人类现代社会理性化事业需要回应的一个重要问题。在今天这个资本与技术时代，我们似乎被一种匿名的力量安排着、要求着。当下，数字资本主义在为我们提供“人工智能”的技术想象，仿佛要为我们完成最好的物性设定，为我们社会生活创造一个完美的“物的世界”基础。但是，现实的个体从内心深处并不完全接受甚至拒绝这一技术想象，因为这一技术想象没有为未来人的生活留有余地。人的生活世界需要日常劳作来建构，未来的人不能由于无所事事而变成没有生活世界和无家可归的人。虽然我们目前无法断定“人工智能”在何种程度上影响着现实生活，但数字资本主义这种技术想象毫无疑问是资本主义固有技术强力的时代宣示。根据这一宣示，一种席卷全球的人工智能革命被把握为一种不可阻挡的历史趋势。资本主义的技术强力离不开资本主义的生产方式，只有通过分析资本主义生产方式的运动逻辑才能揭示其技术摆置的内在机制。

Capitalism begins its historical journey first and foremost by producing commodities, but the commodity is not a simple thing; it is a thing capable of triggering the construction and motion of “social relations,” a thing capable of creating a world. As Marx said, the commodity “is a very strange thing, abounding in metaphysical subtleties and theological niceties.” [1]1 Karl Marx, *Capital*, Volume 1, Chapter 1, Section 4: “The Fetishism of Commodities and the Secret Thereof.” In its motion, the commodity on the one hand creates an objective “world of things” (the world of commodities and their motion), and on the other hand provides “synthetic unity” and “form creation” for real society in its motion. In the exchange abstraction of commodities, not only is the equivalence of human labor manifested, but on the basis of this equivalence, value is created as a universal social form. “In the actual process of commodity exchange, a purely formal process of abstraction is completed, that is, the real abstraction of commodity exchange creates a new reality composed of pure forms.” [2]2 The author is citing or paraphrasing a contemporary Chinese Marxist scholar’s interpretation of Marx’s concept of commodity exchange abstraction. In a society constructed by the value form, people become “things” within value relations, and the social relations between people necessarily manifest as value relations, that is, as a definite and stable “relation between things” among commodities. The value form “fixes” and stabilizes those unstable, fluid relations between people through commodity relations, making the relation between things constructed by commodities the dominant social relation, thereby making capitalism a special type of social production. The commodity is the reified expression of capitalist relations of production; through the mediation of the commodity, human society develops a social form that can dominate humanity itself, thereby also making the commodity the core of social system construction, and the matter of capitalism becomes the matter of “commodities.” People’s desires for interests and various ethical concerns can, through “commodities,” obtain a universalized and rationalized reified social form of expression, making the rationalized life of modern humanity possible. Man becomes man (modern man) through his own creations—what an ingenious journey of man this is! It also reveals the truth of man’s existence and its existential mechanism: man becomes man through the things he creates, and man depends on the “world of things” to support his sociality.

资本主义首先是通过生产商品来开始其历史征程的，但商品不是一个简单之物，而是一个能够引发“社会关系”构造和运动之物，是一个能够创造世界的物。正如马克思所言，商品“是一种很古怪的东西，充满形而上学的微妙和神学的怪诞”。商品在运动中一方面创造了一个客观的“物的世界”（商品及其运动的世界），另一方面商品在其运动中为现实社会提供了“综合统一”与“形式创造”。在商品的交换抽象中不但显现了人类劳动的等同性，而且以此等同性为基础创造了价值这一普遍的社会形式。“在商品交换的现实过程中完成了一次纯粹形式化的抽象过程，即用商品交换的真实抽象创造了由纯粹形式构成的新现实。”在一个由价值形式所构造的社会中，人成为了价值关系中的一个“物”，人与人之间的社会关系就必然表现为一种价值关系，也就是表现为一种确定而又稳定的商品间的“物与物的关系”。价值形式把那些不稳定的、流变的人与人的关系通过商品关系给“固定”下来、稳定下来，让商品所构建的物与物关系成为主导社会关系，从而使资本主义成为一种特殊的社会生产类型。商品是资本主义生产关系的事物化表现，通过商品的中介，人类社会为自己发展出了一种可以支配人类本身的社会形式，从而也使商品成为了社会体系建构的核心，资本主义的事情也就成为了“商品”的事情。人们的利益欲望和各种伦理关怀通过“商品”都可以获得一种普遍化合理化的物化社会表现形式，使人类的现代理性化生活成为可能。人通过人的创造物而成为人（现代人），这是一个多么巧妙的人的旅程，这同时也表明了人的存在及其存在机制的真相：人通过人创造的物而成为人，人依赖于“物的世界”来支撑其社会性。

Just like the synthetic abstraction and creativity of thought, capitalism provides human society with a completely new social mode of production possessing a mechanism of synthetic abstraction and creative effects. For capitalism, the “world of things” composed of numerous commodities is not a static, once-and-for-all world, but a world that must be continuously maintained and constructed through the motion of commodities. At the same time, in terms of the existential mechanism created by capitalism, the construction of the “world of things” is the foundation of social construction; capitalism can only construct its society itself by continuously constructing the “world of things.” Capitalism does not sustain its own life by producing more and more commodities, but by maintaining its mechanism of synthetic abstraction and its creative effects through the production of commodities. Commodities, the machines that produce commodities, and various technological things of human production are all elements that maintain the “world of things.” In terms of existential nature, various technological things and commodities are existences in motion; only in production and motion can commodities create that absent presence (the sociality of value), making possible a complete “world of things” with creative effects. In the world of things marked by the motion of commodities, the qualitative relations between commodities and between various technological things (machines) determine the creative effects of the world of things. Of course, commodities and technological things themselves do not think about their own relations with other commodities and technological things; there is no single technological thing that represents the entire ensemble of technological things. But as Simondon said, man can represent the entire ensemble of technological things as a whole, because man can form thoughts directed at all technological things. [3]3 Gilbert Simondon (1924–1989), French philosopher known for his theory of individuation and the mode of existence of technical objects. The capitalist not only produces commodities, but more importantly creates a living world of relations among things. For the capitalist enterprise, the relations between technological things are a fundamental issue concerning the social organism. But things themselves do not create relations between things; it is the relations that precede things that make things into things in the world (things with relations). As Marx insightfully noted, thingness is merely a pure creation, something posited by self-consciousness, a moment of action. Just as Kant revealed the existence of the cosmic system from Newton’s natural experience, Marx, through thingness, saw the existence of the field-mirror of human social relations. For capitalism, the production and creation of the relations of things and their world is actually more fundamental than the creation of human relations. Capitalism must project its own relations of production and social relations into the world of relations among things through the determination of thingness. Unlike traditional social epistemology, which grasps the “subject-subject” structure as the fundamental driving mechanism of social development, capitalism supports its social organism by creating a “thing-thing” structure. Capitalism pursues the creation of interobjectivity that makes relations among things possible, rather than promoting the brilliance of intersubjectivity. Unlike the social dimensions of intersubjectivity such as understanding, trust, and love, in terms of interobjectivity, the quality and functional level of things and their relations of presence are the key to the construction of the world of things.

正如思维的综合抽象及其创造性一样，资本主义为人类社会提供了一种全新的具有综合抽象机制和创造效应的社会生产方式。对资本主义而言，由众多商品构成的“物的世界”不是一个静止的、一蹴而就的世界，而是要通过商品的运动来不断维持和建构的世界。同时，就资本主义所创造的存在机制而言，“物的世界”的建构是社会性建构的基础，资本主义只有通过不断建构“物的世界”才能建构其社会自身。资本主义不是通过生产越来越多的商品来维持自己的生命，而是通过商品的生产来维持其综合抽象机制及其创造效应。商品及其生产商品的机器与各种人类生产的技术物都是维持“物的世界”的各种要素。就存在性质而言，各种技术物和商品都是一种运动中的存在，只有在生产和运动中，商品才能创造出那种不在场的在场性（价值的社会性），一个完整的具有创造效应的“物的世界”才得以可能。在由商品运动所标明的物的世界里，商品与商品之间及其各种技术物（机器）之间的质性关系决定着物的世界的创造效应。当然，商品与技术物自己不会思考其自身与其他商品与技术物的关系，没有一个代表所有技术物的单个技术物。但正如西蒙东所言，人可以代表整个组合的技术物整体，因为人可以形成针对所有技术物的思想。资本家不只是在生产商品，更为重要的是创造了一个具有生命力的物的关系世界。对资本主义事业来说，技术物之间的关系是一个事关社会生命体的根本问题。但物本身不会创造物之间的关系，是先于物的关系使物成为世界中的物（具有关系的物）。正如马克思的洞见，物性只是纯粹的创造物，只是自我意识所设定的东西，是一个行动的瞬间。正如康德从牛顿的自然经验中揭示了宇宙系统的存在一样，马克思通过物性看到了人的社会关系场镜的存在。对资本主义而言，物的关系及其世界的生产与创造实际上比人的关系的创造更为根本。资本主义必须把自身的生产关系与社会关系通过物性的设定投射到物的关系世界中。与传统社会认识论把“主体—主体”结构把握为社会发展的根本动力机制不同，资本主义是通过创造“物—物”结构来支撑其社会生命体。资本主义追求让物的关系成为可能的物体间性的创造，而非去弘扬主体间性的光辉。与理解、信任、爱等主体间性的社会性维度不同，就物体间性意义来说，物及其在场关系的质性与功能水平是物的世界建构的关键所在。

In the era of digital capitalism, capitalism has initiated a new process of reification. Through digital technology, all objects and subjects can be transformed into digital codes, into things with a thingly character. In the digital world, the mechanisms of interaction between things and their creative effects can be continuously and purposefully regulated and improved, and the functional level of things and their relations can receive sustained social support. Through the constant setting of thingly character, capitalist relations of production can maintain an open state of being present "here and now." Digital capitalism seems to have added wings to the cause of capitalism; digital capitalism sets up and provides us with a world of things that is richer in inter-thingly connotations. Without the thingly setting of digital capitalism and the world of things it sets up, people would be unable to live. In today's digital society, our life experience also shows us that the structure of inter-thingliness is more fundamental than the structure of inter-subjectivity. Without trust and love we can live, but without mobile phones and various digital identities, we would be unable to continue our social life. The thingly setting of digital capitalism is more extensive, holistic, and foundational. The thingly setting of digital capitalism is not the thingly setting of a single self-consciousness, but a thingly setting of a social transcendental consciousness formed on the basis of digital technology. Digital technology, more than a single subject, can form knowledge about the whole of the world and things; digital technology has changed the mode of human cognition of the world. According to the principle of the functioning of knowledge, digital technology knowledge, in terms of its rank, not only precedes individual knowledge but also provides the foundation and framework for individual knowledge and other types of knowledge, and can more effectively act on the whole of things. Based on digital technology knowledge, capitalism can form an anticipatory grasp and anticipatory planning of the world and things. The market operation and thingly setting of capitalism unfold at a new level of self-consciousness (knowledge). In the historical stage of digital capitalism, capitalism is no longer a blind economic system but has become a "transcendental subject" capable of self-planning and higher-level thingly setting. But there is no doubt that the world planned and set up by this "transcendental subject" of capitalism is ultimately a "world of things" characterized by inter-thingliness, not a world belonging to humanity. The crux of the issue is that we must return the world to humanity itself.

在数字资本主义时代，资本主义开启了新的物性化进程，通过数字技术，所有的对象和主体都可以被转化为数字代码，转化成一个具有物性的物。在数字世界，物与物之间的相互作用机制及其创造性效应都能不断得到有针对性的调节和改善，物及其关系的功能水平都能得到持续不断的社会性支持。通过不断的物性设定，资本主义生产关系能够保持“此时此地”不断在场的开放状态，数字资本主义仿佛为资本主义事业的发展插上了翅膀，数字资本主义为我们设定并提供了一个更具物体间性内涵的物的世界。离开数字资本主义的物性设定及其所设定的物的世界，人们将无法生活。在今天这个数字社会，我们的生活经验也向我们表明，物体间性结构比主体间性结构更为基础，离开信任和爱我们可以生活，但离开手机和各种数据身份，我们将无法继续我们的社会生活。数字资本主义的物性设定更具广泛性、整体性和基础性。数字资本主义的物性设定不是一个单个自我意识的物性设定，而是基于数字技术而形成的社会先验意识的物性设定。数字技术比起单个主体来说更能形成关于世界和事物整体的知识，数字技术改变了人对世界的认识模式。根据知识的作用原理来说，数字技术知识按照等级来说不但先于个体知识，并且为个体知识和其他类型的知识提供知识的基础和框架，能更有效作用于事物的整体。根据数字技术知识，资本主义能形成关于世界和事物的先行把握和先行筹划。资本主义的市场运作和物性设定在一个新的自我意识（知识）层次上来展开。在数字资本主义的历史阶段，资本主义不再是一个盲目的经济体系，而是成为了一个可以进行自我筹划和更高层次物性设定的“先验主体”。但毫无疑问，资本主义这个“先验主体”所筹划与设定的世界最终是一个具有物体间性特征的“物的世界”，而不是属人的世界。问题的关键在于，我们要让世界回归人本身。

(The author is a professor at the School of Marxism and the School of Philosophy and Sociology, Lanzhou University)

（作者系兰州大学马克思主义学院、哲学社会学院教授）

Online editor: Huihui

网络编辑：慧慧