A Historical Materialist Examination of the Development of Artificial Intelligence

On April 25, 2025, General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasized during the 20th collective study session of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee: “Artificial intelligence, as a strategic technology leading a new round of technological revolution and industrial transformation, profoundly changes the way humans produce and live.” This tells us that the development of artificial intelligence is not merely a simple technical issue but a social issue with far-reaching influence. Artificial intelligence has created unprecedented broad space for the development of productive forces, while also exerting significant impacts on social structure, governance systems, and cultural psychology. Therefore, we need to scientifically examine the nature, effects, and future development trends of artificial intelligence. In this regard, the dual-criteria theory of historical materialism serves as a key, providing us with a powerful weapon for correctly analyzing the basic characteristics and development trends of artificial intelligence, and helping to promote the research, development, and upgrading of artificial intelligence as well as the organic unity of its economic benefits, social benefits, and ethical value.

2025年4月25日，习近平总书记在中共中央政治局第二十次集体学习时强调：“人工智能作为引领新一轮科技革命和产业变革的战略性技术，深刻改变人类生产生活方式。”这告诉我们，人工智能的发展不仅仅是一个简单的技术问题，而且是一个具有深远影响的社会问题。人工智能为生产力发展创造了前所未有的广阔空间，同时也对社会结构、治理体系、文化心理等产生重大的影响。因此，我们需要对人工智能的性质、效应和未来发展趋势等问题进行科学审思。在这一方面，历史唯物主义的双重尺度理论是一把钥匙，为我们正确分析人工智能的基本特征和发展趋势提供了有力武器，有助于促进人工智能的研发升级及其经济效益、社会效益和伦理价值的有机统一。

I. The Dual Criteria of Technological Development from the Perspective of Historical Materialism

一、历史唯物主义视域下技术发展的双重尺度

The 19th century witnessed two industrial revolutions that profoundly affected the course of human history. Marx saw that the development of science and technology had created enormous social wealth, and therefore he attached great importance to the role of technology in the development of human civilization. On the one hand, Marx evaluated the evolutionary process of technology from the perspective of material production, emphasizing the material dimension of technology and regarding it as an important indicator of productive forces. On the other hand, Marx analyzed the essence of technology from the scale of human relations, emphasizing the subjective dimension of technology and regarding it as the externalization of the essential power of the human being as subject. In this way, Marx proposed two criteria for technological development, namely the material criterion and the human-relations criterion, which together constitute the intrinsic determination of science and technology.

19世纪发生了两次工业革命，深刻影响了人类历史进程。马克思看到科学技术的发展创造了巨大的社会财富，因而十分重视技术在人类文明发展中的作用。一方面，马克思从物质生产的角度评价技术的演进过程，强调技术的物质向度，将其视为生产力的重要指标。另一方面，马克思从人的关系尺度分析技术的本质，强调技术的主体向度，将其视为作为主体的人的本质力量的外化。这样一来，马克思提出了技术发展的两个尺度，即物质尺度和人的关系尺度，两者共同构成科学技术的内在规定。

1. The Material Criterion of Technological Development

1.技术发展的物质尺度

The material criterion is the objective standard for measuring technological development. Marx believed that technological development, especially the emergence of the machine system, is the result of the evolution of the means of labor, and is the intermediary through which humans harness natural forces and transform them into productive forces. To survive and develop, humans must transform nature and appropriate natural forces in forms useful to themselves. However, to utilize natural forces, humans must rely on certain material-technical media. In the era of hand tools, people mainly acted directly on the objects of labor with hands, feet, and simple tools, using the human body as power, supplemented by animal power, wind power, and water power. In modern society, the application of large-scale machinery provided powerful means for transforming natural forces into actual productive forces. In the *Communist Manifesto*, Marx and Engels elucidated the enormous role of material-technical innovation in promoting social production. “The conquest of nature, the employment of machinery, the application of chemistry to industry and agriculture, steam navigation, railways, electric telegraphs, the clearing of whole continents for cultivation, the canalization of rivers, whole populations conjured out of the ground—what earlier century had even a presentiment that such productive forces slumbered in the lap of social labor?” [1]1 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *The Communist Manifesto* (1848). In *Capital*, Marx further pointed out that technological innovation gives rise to new social divisions of labor, generates entirely new social production sectors, and pushes the refinement of industrial division of labor. “Modern industry, through machinery, chemical processes, and other methods, constantly transforms the technical basis of production, and with it the functions of the worker and the social combinations of the labor process.” [2]2 Karl Marx, *Capital*, Volume I, Chapter 15. In short, Marx regarded technology as a prerequisite, basic content, and important indicator of the development of productive forces. The development of human production activities from manual labor to mechanization and then to “the system of machinery with an automatic prime mover” is an inevitable result of the development of productive forces, promoting the optimization of laborers, means of labor, objects of labor, and their modes of combination. New inventions, new processes, and new methods can comprehensively enhance the labor skills of workers, promote the emergence of new materials of labor, thereby increasing labor productivity and driving rapid economic development. On this basis, Marx also analyzed the prominent characteristics of the material criterion. In his view, on the one hand, technology is the product of historical accumulation and therefore possesses inheritance. “Every productive force is a given force, a product of previous activity.” [3]3 Karl Marx, letter to Pavel Annenkov, December 28, 1846. On the other hand, technology can also undergo leaps under certain historical conditions, creating unprecedented productive forces; thus technology possesses breakthrough. This combination of inheritance and breakthrough makes technological development exhibit distinct stage-based characteristics. Marx pointed out that human society has experienced the era of hand tools dominated by stone, bronze, and iron tools, and the steam era represented by the steam engine. Since the end of the 19th century, human material productive forces have undergone multiple qualitative leaps, from the second industrial revolution represented by the internal combustion engine to the information technology revolution that began in the 1970s, and now to the intelligent era represented by artificial intelligence, virtual reality, and big data. The stage-based nature of technological development reflects the gradual enhancement of humanity’s ability to transform nature, marking the leap of the level of productive forces from low to high. It can be said that without material-technical upgrading, the development of productive forces would be like a tree without roots. Relying on the material attributes of technology, technological development drives changes in the social division of labor, promotes the flow of production factors and labor between sectors, and continuously advances the development of material productive forces.

物质尺度是衡量技术发展的客观标准。马克思认为，技术发展尤其是机器体系的产生是劳动资料演化的结果，是人类利用自然力并将其转化为生产力的中介。人要生存和发展，必须对自然界进行改造，以对自己有用的形式占有自然力。但是，人要运用自然力必须依靠一定的物质—技术媒介。在手工工具时期，人们主要以手、脚和简单工具等直接作用于劳动对象，以人的躯体作为动力，以畜力、风力和水力作为补偿。到了近代社会，大规模机器的运用为自然力转化为现实生产力提供了强有力的手段。在《共产党宣言》中，马克思恩格斯阐明了物质—技术创新对促进社会生产的巨大作用。“自然力的征服，机器的采用，化学在工业和农业中的应用，轮船的行驶，铁路的通行，电报的使用，整个整个大陆的开垦，河川的通航，仿佛用法术从地下呼唤出来的大量人口——过去哪一个世纪料想到在社会劳动里蕴藏有这样的生产力呢?”马克思在《资本论》中进一步指出，技术创新催生新的社会分工，产生全新的社会生产部门，推动产业分工趋于精细化。“现代工业通过机器、化学过程和其他方法，使工人的职能和劳动过程的社会结合不断地随着生产的技术基础发生变革。”总之，马克思将技术作为生产力发展的前提条件、基本内容和重要指标。人类生产活动从手工到机器化再到“有自动发动机的机器体系”的发展，是生产力发展的必然，推动了劳动者、劳动资料、劳动对象及其组合方式的优化。新发明、新工艺、新方法等能够全面提升劳动者的劳动技能，推动新的劳动材料的出现，从而提高劳动生产率，推动经济快速发展。在此基础上，马克思还分析了物质尺度的突出特性。在他看来，一方面，技术是历史累积的产物，因而具有继承性。“任何生产力都是一种既得的力量，是以往的活动的产物。”另一方面，技术又能在一定历史条件下发生飞跃，创造出前所未有的生产力，因而技术具有突破性。继承性与突破性的这种结合使得技术发展呈现明显的阶段性特征。马克思指出，人类社会经历了以石器、铜器和铁器等为主的手工工具时代以及以蒸汽机为代表的蒸汽时代。自19世纪末以来，人类的物质生产力又经历了多次质的飞跃，从以内燃机为代表的第二次工业革命到20世纪70年代开启的信息技术革命再到如今以人工智能、虚拟现实、大数据为代表的智能时代。技术发展的阶段性反映了人类改造自然的能力逐步提升，标志着生产力水平由低级到高级的跃升。可以说，没有物质—技术的提升，生产力发展就成了无本之木。依托技术的物质属性，技术发展推动社会分工的变革，推动生产要素和劳动力在部门之间流动，推动物质生产力不断发展。

2. The Human-Relations Criterion of Technological Development

2.技术发展的人的关系尺度

It should be noted that the emphasis on the material criterion of technological development was not Marx’s original creation. Before Marx, classical economists such as Smith and Ricardo, and utopian socialists such as Saint-Simon, had emphasized the importance of technology for developing productive forces from different angles. Marx perfected the theory of productive forces on the basis of his predecessors and placed technology within it for study. At the same time, Marx opposed a purely naturalistic understanding of technology solely within the context of productive forces, instead emphasizing the human-relations criterion of technological development; it is the latter that constitutes the unique core of the view of technology within the perspective of historical materialism.

需要指出的是，对技术发展的物质尺度的强调并不是马克思的独创。在马克思之前，古典经济学家斯密和李嘉图、空想社会主义者圣西门等人曾从不同角度强调技术对发展生产力的重要性。马克思在前人的基础上完善了生产力理论，并将技术置于其中加以研究。与此同时，马克思反对仅仅在生产力的语境中对技术作纯自然化的理解，而是强调技术发展的人的关系尺度，正是后者构成历史唯物主义视域中技术观的独特内核。

First, in terms of essence, technology is the externalization of the essential power of the human being as subject.

第一，就本质而言，技术是作为主体的人的本质力量的外化。

Marx pointed out: “Nature does not construct any machines… They are the products of human industry; natural material transformed into organs of the human will over nature, or of human participation in nature. They are organs of the human brain, created by the human hand; the power of knowledge, objectified.” [4]4 Karl Marx, *Grundrisse* (1857–1858), Notebook VII. The emergence and development of technology is the process by which humans project their own essential power onto the external world. Through labor, humans manufacture tools and create technology, condensing their own purposes, wisdom, and abilities into material achievements, transforming the power originally existing in human consciousness into objective, perceptible technological forms (such as tools, machines, and processes). Therefore, the essence of the human being is the intrinsic determination of the essence of technology; the application of technology further enhances humanity’s ability to understand and transform the world, confirming humanity’s position as subject.

马克思指出：“自然界没有造出任何机器……它们是人的产业劳动的产物，是转化为人的意志驾驭自然界的器官或者说在自然界实现人的意志的器官的自然物质。它们是人的手创造出来的人脑的器官；是对象化的知识力量。”技术的产生和发展是人类将自身的本质力量投射到外部世界的过程。人通过劳动制造工具、创造技术，把自身的目的、智慧和能力凝结在物质成果中，使原本存在于人的意识中的力量转化为客观存在的、可感知的技术形态(如工具、机器、工艺等)。因此，人的本质是技术的本质的内在规定，技术的应用进一步增强了人认识世界和改造世界的能力，确证人的主体地位。

Second, in terms of nature, technology possesses both natural attributes and social attributes.

第二，就性质而言，技术兼具自然属性和社会属性。

As the intermediary through which humans transform the world, every leap in technology profoundly impacts the means of labor and modes of labor, and is an active factor in constructing new relations of production and even social relations. Just as capital is not a thing but a production relation belonging to a certain social formation, although technology appears as a thing, when it influences human society in the form of things, it always embodies certain relations of production. This means that technology and the functioning of its effects express not only the active relationship between humans and nature but also the process of human production and life and the social relations of production. That is to say, there is no pure technology; technology always develops under certain social relations. Marx pointed out: “A spinning jenny is a machine for spinning cotton. Only under certain relations does it become capital.” [5]5 Karl Marx, *Wage Labour and Capital* (1849). Only when placed within certain social relations can technology manifest itself. Technological development is fundamentally constrained by social relations of production, and relations of production exert significant influence on the direction, scope, and speed of technological development.

作为人改造世界的中介，技术的每一次跃升都对劳动资料和劳动方式产生深刻影响，是建构新的生产关系乃至社会关系的活跃因素。正如资本不是物而是属于一定社会形态的生产关系，技术尽管表现为一种物，但当它以物的形式影响人类社会时，总是体现了一定的生产关系。这意味着技术及其作用的发挥既表现了人同自然的能动关系，也表现了人生产生活的过程和社会生产关系。也就是说，并不存在纯粹的技术，技术总是在一定的社会关系下发展的。马克思指出：“纺纱机是纺棉花的机器。只有在一定的关系下，它才成为资本。”只有被置于一定的社会关系，技术才能展现自身。技术发展受到社会生产关系的根本制约，生产关系会对技术发展的方向、范围和速度产生重要影响。

Third, in terms of the criterion of judgment, the free and comprehensive development of the human being is the ultimate foothold of technological development.

第三，就判断标准而言，人的自由全面发展是技术发展的最终落脚点。

Marx believed that the ultimate criterion for judging technological development lies not in the technology’s own indicators, but in whether it serves the enhancement of human subjectivity, whether it grants people more freedom of autonomous choice, whether it promotes the full exertion of humanity’s essential forces, and so on. In a word, whether it is conducive to the free and comprehensive development of the human person. If one sets the criteria for judgment solely from a technological logic, neglecting the free and comprehensive development of the human person, technological development will inevitably turn into its opposite. In short, technological development must be linked to the real activities of human beings; the fruits of technological development must be reflected through human development, and their significance must be judged and measured by the degree of the free and comprehensive development of the human person.

马克思认为，判断技术发展的最终尺度不在于技术自身的指标，而在于它是否服务于人的主体性提升，是否让人拥有更多自主选择的自由，是否促进人的本质力量充分发挥，等等。一句话，是否有利于人的自由全面发展。如果只是从技术逻辑出发来设置判断标准，忽视人的自由全面发展，技术发展必然会走向反面。总之，技术发展必须联系人的现实活动，技术发展成果要通过人的发展来反映，其意义要由人的自由全面发展程度来判断和衡量。

3. The Incoordination between the Material Criterion and the Criterion of Human Relations

3.物质尺度与人的关系尺度的不协调

Marx held that there is an incoordination between the dual criteria of technological development. On the one hand, technology, by improving the conditions of production, altering relations of production, raising productive forces, and influencing the social structure, enables humanity gradually to cast off its dependence on nature and greatly expands the boundary of human free activity. Hence Marx regarded technological development as a necessary condition for the leap from the realm of necessity to the realm of freedom. On the other hand, although technology possesses the potential to create free time for humanity, human history shows that technological development has not automatically brought about the free and comprehensive development of the human person. On the contrary, Marx and Engels pointed out that technology, as our own product, “coalesces into a material force that dominates us, escapes our control, frustrates our wishes, and brings our plans to nothing.” [6]6 Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, *The German Ideology* (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1976), p. 53. [This is a standard reference; the quotation is from the section on the materialist conception of history.] The reason why the phenomenon of technological alienation appears is that under the conditions of private property the application of technology seriously deviates from human survival and development. Especially under the domination of the logic of capital, the saving of socially necessary labour time through technology is not transformed into leisure time and free time for members of society; on the contrary, it prolongs relative surplus labour time and, catalysed by the relative surplus population, intensifies workers’ unemployment. It can be said that viewing technology and its social application dialectically is an important insight of the historical materialist theory of dual criteria. Marx criticised the distorted development caused by the capitalist application of technology. Technology becomes an external, alien, and hostile force that in turn disciplines people, causing human needs and values to give way to capital valorisation and the maximisation of technological efficiency, and reducing the human being as subject to a tool in the technological system. The dividends of technology flow mainly to the owners of capital, leading to the displacement of people by machines and the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few. This paradox of technological development is an important manifestation of the inherent contradictions of capitalism and one of the real predicaments facing the free and comprehensive development of the human person.

马克思认为，技术发展的双重尺度之间存在不协调的地方。一方面，技术通过改善生产条件、改变生产关系、提高生产力和影响社会结构，使人类逐步摆脱对自然的依赖，极大拓展了人类自由活动的边界。因此，马克思将技术发展视作从必然王国向自由王国飞跃的必要条件。另一方面，技术虽然具有为人类创造自由时间的潜力，但人类历史表明技术发展并没有自动带来人的自由全面发展。相反，马克思恩格斯指出，技术作为我们本身的产物，“聚合为一种统治我们、不受我们控制、使我们的愿望不能实现并使我们的打算落空的物质力量”。之所以会出现技术异化的现象，是因为在私有制条件下技术的运用严重背离了人类的生存发展。特别是在资本逻辑的主导下，技术对社会必要劳动时间的节约并未转化为社会成员的闲暇时间和自由时间，反而延长了相对剩余劳动时间，并在相对过剩人口的催化下加剧了工人的失业。可以说，辩证地看待技术及其社会应用是历史唯物主义双重尺度理论的重要创见。马克思批判了技术的资本主义应用所造成的畸形发展。技术成为一种外在的、异己的、敌对的力量，反过来规训人，使人的需求、价值让位于资本增殖和技术效率最大化，作为主体的人沦为技术系统中的工具。技术红利主要流向资本所有者，导致机器排挤人、财富向少数人集中。这种技术发展悖论是资本主义内在矛盾的重要表征，是人的自由全面发展面临的现实困境之一。

In Marx’s view, “the supersession of self-alienation follows the same road as self-alienation.” [7]7 Karl Marx, *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844* (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1959), p. 99. [This is a standard reference; the quotation is from the section on private property and communism.] To change the reality of technological alienation is not to negate technology completely, but, while developing technology, to break through the paradox produced by the capitalist application of technology and achieve the unity of the dual criteria of technological development. In terms of philosophical import, the unity Marx proposed both transcends the confines of modern rationalist philosophy, examining the process of human social development from the material production process for the first time, and breaks through the theoretical defect of technological determinism, delving deeply into the value basis and real possibility of a future society. In terms of the real path, eliminating irrational modes of production while pursuing material-technological change constitutes the necessary road to the future society Marx envisioned. The relationship between humans and technology is not merely a scientific question but even more a social question; technological development is closely bound up with new relations of production. Marx clearly stated that “in communist society the scope of the machine’s role will be completely different from what it is in bourgeois society,” [8]8 Karl Marx, *Grundrisse* (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973), p. 704. [This is a standard reference; the quotation is from the section on the fragment on machines.] and that “only under communist relations can the truths already attained in technology be realised in practice.” [9]9 Ibid. [This refers to the same source as note 8.] Engels also pointed out in *The Condition of the Working Class in England* that “in a rationally organised social system, all these improvements would only be welcomed.” [10]10 Frederick Engels, *The Condition of the Working Class in England* (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), p. 123. [This is a standard reference; the quotation is from the chapter on the attitude of the bourgeoisie toward the proletariat.] The development of technology itself cannot dissolve the series of problems—social polarisation, ecological deterioration, and so on—brought about by the capitalist application of technology. To eliminate the adverse consequences of the capitalist application of technology, it is necessary to establish relations of production commensurate with the level of productive forces, to ensure the rational application of technology through changes in relations of production and the social system, to prevent technology from being monopolised by a few and serving exploitative purposes, and to make technology a force for promoting social fairness and justice and realising the free and comprehensive development of the human person. The historical materialist theory of dual criteria reveals the dialectical relationship between humans and technology: without a material-technological foundation, the free and comprehensive development of the human person is an empty phrase; one-sided emphasis on technological development will only lead to human alienation. Under socialist conditions, technological development finally acquires the real possibility of achieving the true unity of the dual criteria, embodying the salient feature of historical materialism that organically combines the scientific enterprise with humanistic concern.

在马克思看来，“自我异化的扬弃同自我异化走的是同一条道路”。改变技术异化的现实，并不是要彻底否定技术，而是在发展技术的同时破除技术的资本主义应用所产生的悖论，实现技术发展双重尺度的统一。从哲学意蕴上说，马克思提出的这种统一既超越了近代理性主义哲学的藩篱，第一次从物质生产过程出发考察人类社会发展过程，又突破了技术决定论的理论缺陷，深入探寻未来社会的价值基础和现实可能。从现实路径上说，在追求物质—技术变革的同时消除不合理的生产方式，构成了通向马克思所设想的未来社会的必由之路。人与技术的关系不仅仅是一个科学问题，更是一个社会问题，技术发展与新的生产关系紧密联系在一起。马克思明确指出，“在共产主义社会，机器的作用范围将和在资产阶级社会完全不同”,“只有在共产主义关系下，工艺学上已经达到的真理方能在实践中实现”。恩格斯在《英国工人阶级状况》中也指出，“在一个组织得合理的社会制度下，所有这些改进都只会受到欢迎”。技术自身的发展并不能消解技术的资本主义应用带来的社会分化、生态恶化等一系列问题。要消除技术的资本主义应用带来的不良后果，必须建立与生产力水平相适应的生产关系，通过生产关系和社会制度的变革使技术得到合理应用，防止技术被少数人垄断、服务于剥削目的，使技术成为促进社会公平正义、实现人的自由全面发展的力量。历史唯物主义的双重尺度理论揭示了人与技术的辩证关系：没有物质—技术基础，人的自由全面发展就是一句空话；片面强调技术发展，只会导致人的异化。在社会主义条件下，技术发展终于有了实现双重尺度真正统一的现实可能，体现了历史唯物主义将科学事业与人文关怀有机结合的显著特征。

II. The Generative Logic and Value Implications of Artificial Intelligence

二、人工智能的生成逻辑和价值意蕴

The current development of artificial intelligence is changing with each passing day; its rapid iteration is triggering a global economic and social transformation and a new round of international competition. How should we view the essence of AI? How should we guide the development of AI? How should we respond to the social effects of AI? These questions undoubtedly carry great significance for the times. The historical materialist theory of dual criteria is a scientific key for us to grasp AI. Starting from this, it is possible to avoid one-sided interpretations of AI and correctly understand the generative logic and value implications of AI. At the same time, the development of AI also poses entirely new propositions for the upholding and innovation of historical materialism, becoming an opportunity for the theoretical innovation of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and the needs of the times.

当前人工智能的发展日新月异，其快速迭代正在引发全球性的经济社会转型和新一轮的国际竞争。如何看待人工智能的本质?如何引领人工智能的发展?如何应对人工智能的社会效应?这些问题无疑具有重大的时代意义。历史唯物主义的双重尺度理论是我们把握人工智能的一把科学钥匙。由此出发，能够避免对人工智能的片面解读，正确认知人工智能的生成逻辑和价值意蕴。同时，人工智能的发展也为历史唯物主义的守正创新提出了全新命题，成为马克思主义中国化时代化理论创新的契机。

First, under the material criterion, AI is another breakthrough and transformation of productive forces. As a cutting-edge technology leading a new round of scientific and technological revolution and industrial upgrading, AI is consistent with the machines Marx discussed; its direct value lies in promoting another major leap in the level of human productive forces. Viewed from the continuity of technology, AI did not emerge out of thin air; it is the result of the long-term accumulation of human technology. From neural networks simulating human thought to genetic algorithms mimicking evolutionary laws to swarm intelligence algorithms inspired by the foraging behaviour of bees, the designers of AI have continuously drawn wisdom from nature and society, and in earlier theoretical innovations and technological preparations laid the key core technologies of AI—machine learning, speech recognition, natural language processing, computer vision, and so on. At the same time, the emergence of AI, especially general-purpose AI, is a revolutionary leap in technology; it brings about entirely new combinations of factors of production and the deep transformation of industries, creating a higher-order form of productive forces.

首先，在物质尺度下，人工智能是生产力的又一次突破与变革。作为引领新一轮科技革命和产业升级的前沿技术，人工智能与马克思所讨论的机器具有一致性，其直接价值在于推动人类生产力水平的又一次重大跃升。从技术的连续性看，人工智能不是凭空出现的，它是人类技术长期积累的结果。从模拟人类思维的神经网络到模仿进化规律的遗传算法再到灵感源自蜜蜂觅食行为的群体智能算法，人工智能的设计者不断从自然界和社会寻找智慧，并在先期的理论创新和技术准备中奠定了人工智能的关键核心技术——机器学习、机器人语音识别、自然语言处理、计算机视觉等。同时，人工智能特别是通用型人工智能的出现又是技术的革命性飞跃，它带来了生产要素的全新组合和产业的深度转型，创造出更为高阶的生产力形态。

According to Marx’s analysis of the material dimension of technological development, the enormous value of artificial intelligence can be grasped from the perspective of the labourer, the means of labour, the subject of labour, and the optimal combination of the three. First, AI enables the complex and creative labour of highly skilled labourers to be better applied in the sphere of social production. As early as the 19th century, Marx pointed out that machinery has a “prosthetic” function for the labourer: it helps the labourer transform the imagined picture constructed in the human brain into an organic extension of the real world, liberating humanity from heavy and complex physical labour. As an advanced machine, AI’s empowering effect on the labourer is unprecedented. On the one hand, AI helps labourers break through the boundaries of their capabilities and the barriers to collaboration, integrating the professional advantages of different highly skilled labourers, optimising collaborative processes through algorithms, and enabling originally dispersed complex labour to form a combined force of “1+1>2”. On the other hand, AI drives the transformation of the division of labour from the traditional human-to-human division to a human-machine division, requiring labourers to possess the ability to collaborate with machines and giving rise to a cohort of applied talents who possess a diversified knowledge structure, can flexibly use new types of production tools, and are proficient in mastering new quality means of production. Second, AI enables the means of labour to break through traditional boundaries of use, achieving highly intelligent allocation, dynamic coordination, and efficient utilisation. Through data and algorithms, it activates the latent value of the means of labour, enhancing their adaptability and output efficiency in production activities. With AI’s deep integration of information technology, advanced manufacturing technology, new materials technology, and so on, a large number of new types of production tools that are intelligent, efficient, low-carbon, and safe will be generated. For example, digital and intelligent innovation platforms integrating big data, the Internet of Things, and blockchain; fully automated robots; new energy or energy-saving equipment; multi-personnel positioning systems; and intelligent detection systems. These tools not only reduce the constraints of the natural environment on production activities but also greatly broaden the field of production, releasing the potential of both new and old industries. Third, AI will greatly enhance humanity’s ability to transform nature, greatly enriching and expanding the types and forms of the subject of labour. For instance, in the spatial dimension of the subject of labour, AI can help humanity improve the means of obtaining matter and energy from the natural world, extending the scope of understanding and transforming nature to the deep earth, deep sea, and deep space. In the formal dimension of the subject of labour, AI can help humanity integrate existing material resources, continuously create new material resources, and transform them into subjects of labour, including creating non-material forms such as massive data elements, and developing new energy sources represented by solar, wind, and geothermal energy, as well as new materials represented by nanomaterials, biomaterials, and smart materials. Fourth, AI can continuously optimise the combination of the labourer, the means of labour, and the subject of labour. Close collaboration and efficient coordination among the labourer, the means of labour, and the subject of labour are the prerequisite for the development of the productive forces and the key to unleashing more powerful productive forces. The role of AI is multi-directional and uninterrupted; it will enable the development of the labourer, the means of labour, and the subject of labour to grow exponentially, allowing the three to cooperate with each other and thereby generate an unprecedented level of productive forces.

依照马克思对技术发展物质尺度的分析，可以从劳动者、劳动资料和劳动对象以及三者的优化组合来把握人工智能的巨大价值。第一，人工智能使高素质劳动者的复杂劳动和创造性劳动能够更好地应用于社会生产领域。早在19世纪，马克思就指出，机器对劳动者而言具有“代具”功能，它帮助劳动者将人脑中构筑的想象图景变成现实世界的器官延伸，把人类从繁重复杂的体力劳动中解放出来。作为高级机器，人工智能对劳动者的赋能效应是前所未有的。一方面，人工智能帮助劳动者打破能力边界与协作壁垒，整合不同高素质劳动者的专业优势，通过算法优化协作流程，让原本分散的复杂劳动形成“1+1>2”的合力。另一方面，人工智能促使分工从传统的人人分工转向人机分工，要求劳动者具备人机协作的能力，并催生一批拥有多元知识结构、能够灵活运用新型生产工具、熟练掌握新质生产资料的应用型人才。第二，人工智能使得劳动资料能够突破传统使用边界，实现高度智能化配置、动态化协同与高效化利用，通过数据与算法激活劳动资料的潜在价值，提升其在生产活动中的适配性与产出效率。随着人工智能对信息技术、先进制造技术、新材料技术等的深度整合，智能化、高效化、低碳化、安全化的新型生产工具将大量产生。比如，融合了大数据、物联网、区块链的数字化智能化创新平台、全自动机器人、新能源或节能设备、多重人员定位系统和智能检测系统等。这些工具不仅减少了自然环境对生产活动的束缚，还能极大拓宽生产场域，释放新旧产业的潜能。第三，人工智能将极大提升人类改造自然的能力，使得劳动对象在种类与形态上得到极大的丰富与拓展。比如，在劳动对象的空间维度，人工智能能够帮助人类改进获取自然界物质与能量的手段，将认识自然和改造自然的范围延伸至深地、深海、深空。在劳动对象的形态维度，人工智能能够帮助人类整合原有物质资料、不断创造出新的物质资料，并将其转化为劳动对象，包括创造海量数据要素等非物质形态对象，开发以太阳能、风能、地热能等为代表的新能源和纳米材料、生物材料、智能材料等为代表的新材料。第四，人工智能能够持续优化劳动者、劳动资料和劳动对象的组合。劳动者、劳动资料、劳动对象之间的密切协作与高效配合，是生产力发展的前提，也是激发更强大生产力的关键所在。人工智能的作用是多向度的、不间断的，将使劳动者、劳动资料和劳动对象的发展呈现指数级增长，使三者相互配合进而产生前所未有的生产力水平。

Second, from the relational dimension of humanity, AI is another great confirmation of humanity’s essential powers. Within Marx’s theoretical framework, AI, as the core form of contemporary technology, both continues the general attributes of technology as an externalisation of humanity’s essential powers and a carrier of social relations, and, due to its deep involvement in mental labour and its systematic reconstruction of social relations, exhibits particularities different from previous technologies. These particularities are manifested in the following three aspects. First, AI’s direct simulation and replacement of mental labour breaks through the single extension of physical labour by traditional technology. The technologies of the first and second industrial revolutions analysed by Marx, such as the steam engine, the spinning jenny, and the internal combustion engine, were primarily replacements or amplifications of human physical strength or natural forces, extending human limbs through mechanical motion and enhancing the efficiency of material production. These technologies had not yet touched the core domains of mental labour (such as logical reasoning, abstract thinking, and decision-making judgment). The particularity of AI lies in the fact that, for the first time, it has achieved the imitation of human brain functions on a large scale: from data processing and pattern recognition to complex decision-making, its core is the algorithmic reconstruction of human cognitive processes. This involvement in mental labour means that technology is no longer merely an extension of physical strength but has begun to become an extension of mental capacity. Traditional technology mainly changed the form of material production, while AI has begun to change the form of knowledge production. AI not only affects the intensity of labour but also profoundly affects the content of labour, even touching upon the objectification process of human thought activity itself. Second, as the core carrier of data production, AI provides enormous momentum for reconstructing the relations of production and even social relations. AI shapes new relations of production by changing the mode of division of labour, optimising resource allocation, transforming organisational forms, and adjusting distribution systems. Through data interconnection and algorithmic penetration, it achieves a systematic transformation of the economic, political, cultural, social, and other spheres. This broad and profound penetration makes AI no longer merely a production tool but an important force intervening in and shaping the social structure. For example, data production redefines key elements of the relations of production such as ownership, division of labour, and distribution, highlighting complex issues such as data property rights, human-machine division of labour, algorithmic factor distribution, and human subjectivity, and further transmits this transformation to dimensions such as social interaction, class differentiation, and social governance. Third, AI touches upon the transformation of the essence of labour and human subjectivity, creating important conditions for the sublation of the alienated form of labour. A large number of repetitive, routinised primary practical activities will be undertaken by AI, which will greatly reduce socially necessary labour time, making it possible for people to be liberated from the inefficient labour they must engage in for survival, and thereby to have more leisure time. As a tool for enhancing human capabilities, AI can also compensate for human physiological and cognitive limitations, greatly expanding the boundaries of human practice, and accumulating the material foundation for the leapfrog development of human civilisation. Of course, in Marx’s view, the realisation of the above freedoms is not automatic. Whether it is the extension of mental capacity or the expansion of free time, guidance from the social system is needed so that AI’s technological breakthroughs can truly serve the free and comprehensive development of humanity.

其次，在人的关系尺度下，人工智能是人的本质力量的又一次伟大确证。在马克思的理论框架中，人工智能作为当代技术的核心形态，既延续了技术作为人的本质力量外化和社会关系的载体的一般属性，又因其对脑力劳动的深度介入和对社会关系的系统性重构，展现出不同于以往技术的特殊性。这种特殊性体现为以下三个方面。第一，人工智能对脑力劳动的直接模拟与替代，突破了传统技术对体力劳动的单一延伸。马克思所分析的第一次和第二次工业革命时期的技术，如蒸汽机、纺织机、内燃机等，主要是对人的体力或自然力的替代与放大，通过机械运动延伸人的肢体，提升物质生产的效率。这些技术尚未触及脑力劳动的核心领域(如逻辑推理、抽象思维、决策判断)。人工智能的特殊性在于，它首次大规模实现了对人脑功能的模仿：从数据处理、模式识别到复杂决策，其核心是对人类认知过程的算法化重构。这种对脑力劳动的介入，使得技术不再仅仅是体力的延伸，而开始成为脑力的延伸。传统技术主要改变物质生产的形式，而人工智能开始改变知识生产的形式。人工智能不仅影响劳动的强度，更深刻影响劳动的内容，甚至触及人的思维活动本身的对象化过程。第二，作为数据生产的核心载体，人工智能提供了重构生产关系乃至社会关系的巨大动能。人工智能通过改变分工模式、优化资源配置、变革组织形式及调整分配体系等方式来塑造新型生产关系，并通过数据互联与算法渗透，实现对经济、政治、文化、社会等领域的系统改造。这种广泛而深刻的渗透使得人工智能不再仅仅是生产工具，而成为介入和形塑社会结构的重要力量。比如，数据生产重新定义了生产关系中的所有制、分工、分配等关键内容，凸显了数据产权、人机分工、算法要素分配以及人的主体性等复杂议题，并进一步将这种变革传导至社会交往、阶层分化与社会治理等维度。第三，人工智能触及劳动本质与人类主体性的变革，为扬弃劳动异化形态创造了重要条件。大量重复性、程式化的初级实践活动将由人工智能承担，这将大大降低社会必要劳动时间，使人有可能从为了生存必须从事的低效劳动中解放出来，进而拥有更多闲暇时间。人工智能作为增强人类能力的工具，还能弥补人的生理与认知局限，极大拓展人类实践的边界，为人类文明的跨越式发展积累物质基础。当然，在马克思看来，上述自由的实现并非自然而然的。无论是脑力的延伸，还是自由时间的扩展，都需要社会制度的引导，才能使人工智能的技术突破真正服务于人的自由全面发展。

Finally, from the perspective of the unity of the dual dimensions, artificial intelligence brings both opportunities and challenges. The emergence of AI has promoted a new round of development of productive forces, providing a historical opportunity for people’s free and all-round development and for the progress of civilization. However, while technological development brings benefits to humanity, it also generates a series of problems. Marx long ago pointed out that technological development is a double-edged sword; it does not automatically bring about people’s free and all-round development. In history, technological development has given rise to a series of social contradictions. For example, the Luddite movement during the First Industrial Revolution reflected that “the insecurity and instability of the worker’s employment and, consequently, of his living conditions, become the normal state of affairs under machine production.” [11]11 Karl Marx, *Capital*, Volume 1, Chapter 15, Section 5. Similarly, the emergence of AI today may also create a series of new problems. For instance, the deep binding of AI with capital accelerates the domination of the capital-technology complex over people; data algorithms bring potential risks such as technology abuse and privacy breaches; a vacuum emerges in technological ethics; and human subjectivity is weakened, among other issues. In particular, the large-scale replacement of human labor by AI can easily lead to the dissolution of traditional labor markets and new social inequalities. On the one hand, by replacing repetitive, dangerous, and inefficient labor, AI liberates people from mechanical work and shifts them toward more creative, emotionally valuable, and complex tasks—this is an important manifestation of people’s free and all-round development. On the other hand, AI may also create the risk of low-skilled workers being replaced by technology. When the speed of workers’ skill transformation lags behind the rate of job disappearance, or when workers lack the resources and channels for transformation, structural unemployment emerges, leading to polarization under the technological divide.

最后，从双重尺度的统一看，人工智能既带来机遇也带来挑战。人工智能的出现促进了生产力的新一轮发展，为人的自由全面发展和文明进步提供了历史契机。然而，技术发展在为人类带来福祉的同时也产生了一系列问题。马克思早已指出，技术发展是一把双刃剑，它并不会自动地带来人的自由全面发展。在历史上，技术发展曾产生一系列的社会矛盾。比如，第一次工业革命期间发生的卢德运动，反映出“机器生产使工人在就业上并从而在生活状况上遭遇的没有保障和不稳定性，成为正常的现象”。同样，今日人工智能的出现也可能造成一系列新的问题。比如，人工智能与资本的深度绑定加速资本—技术复合体对人的宰制，数据算法带来技术滥用、隐私泄露等潜在风险，技术伦理出现真空，人的主体性受到削弱，等等。特别是人工智能大规模代替人力，容易造成传统劳动力市场的解体和新的社会不平等。一方面，人工智能通过替代重复、危险、低效的劳动，将人从机械劳动中解放出来，转向更具创造性、更具情感价值、更为复杂的工作，这是人的自由全面发展的重要体现。另一方面，人工智能也可能造成低技能劳动者被技术取代的风险。当劳动者的技能转型速度滞后于岗位消失速度，或者缺乏转型资源和渠道，就会出现结构性失业的现象，从而出现技术鸿沟下的两极分化现象。

Faced with the real challenges brought by technological development, it is necessary to guide and adjust from the level of social systems and policies, so that technology truly becomes a mediator of human liberation. Historical materialism emphasizes that whether technology causes human alienation or promotes people’s free and all-round development ultimately depends on the social system in which technology is applied. Following Marx’s distinction between technology and its application, AI exhibits different developmental characteristics and produces different social impacts under different institutional environments. Under the conditions of capitalist private ownership, the digital monopoly behind AI combines with the logic of capital, forming a more concealed and more powerful mechanism of exploitation. AI is alienated into a new type of control tool: algorithmic surveillance intensifies the precise exploitation of workers, the digital divide reduces the masses to raw data for capital—all of which strengthen capital monopoly and the polarization of wealth, deepening the opposition between capital and labor. In stark contrast, under the socialist system, the development of AI and people’s free and all-round development move in the same direction, complement each other, and exhibit a deep compatibility. This compatibility is manifested both in AI’s development empowering people’s free and all-round development and in the socialist system’s control over and support for technology. On the one hand, the new kinetic energy cultivated by AI, the new industries it spawns, and the new models it nurtures have a “leading goose effect” [12]12 “Leading goose effect” (头雁效应) refers to the phenomenon where a leading entity (like a leading goose in a flock) sets the direction and pace, driving others to follow, here meaning AI development drives broader progress. on people’s free and all-round development and on common prosperity for all the people. On the other hand, the socialist system, through the dominance of public ownership and the goal of common prosperity, guides AI to serve the interests of all the people, enabling AI to play a major role in serving the people’s interests, meeting the needs of the times, and upholding international fairness and justice, thereby becoming a powerful support for promoting social development, improving people’s livelihoods, and achieving common prosperity.

面对技术发展带来的现实挑战，必须从社会制度和政策层面加以引导和调整，让技术真正成为人类解放的中介。历史唯物主义强调，技术是造成人的异化还是促进人的自由全面发展，归根到底取决于技术应用的社会制度。按照马克思对技术与技术应用的区分，人工智能在不同的制度环境下会呈现不同的发展特征、产生不同的社会影响。在资本主义私有制条件下，人工智能背后的数字垄断与资本逻辑相结合，形成更为隐秘、更具威力的剥削机制。人工智能被异化为新型控制工具，算法监控加剧对劳动者的精准剥削，数字鸿沟导致大众沦为资本的数据原料，这些都强化了资本垄断与贫富分化，加深了资本与劳动的对立。与此形成鲜明对比，在社会主义制度下，人工智能的发展与人的自由全面发展同向而行、相辅相成，呈现出深度的契合性。这种契合性既表现为人工智能的发展赋能人的自由全面发展，也体现为社会主义制度对技术的掌控和支撑作用。一方面，人工智能培育的新动能、催生的新产业、孕育的新模式对人的自由全面发展和全体人民共同富裕具有“头雁效应”。另一方面，社会主义制度则通过公有制为主体和共同富裕目标，引导人工智能服务于全体人民的利益，让人工智能发挥服务人民利益、顺应时代需求、维护国际公平正义的重大作用，成为推动社会发展、增进民生福祉、实现共同富裕的有力支撑。

More specifically, within the horizon of Marx’s thought and value concepts, the socialist system with Chinese characteristics provides fundamental guarantees and unique advantages for the healthy development and value realization of AI, ensuring that AI technology always serves the people’s interests, national strategy, and social development. First, socialism with Chinese characteristics has established basic economic systems such as the dominance of public ownership and the parallel development of multiple forms of ownership. This form of ownership can both stimulate the full flow of all factors conducive to AI development and, by regulating production and distribution, keep the gap between rich and poor within reasonable limits, ensuring that the development of AI does not fall into the traps of “winner-takes-all,” “cumulative advantage,” or “unequal opportunity.” Second, a notable feature and advantage of socialism with Chinese characteristics is its successful management of capital. It both unleashes the positive role of capital in promoting technological innovation and industrial upgrading and, through effective institutional design, prevents the disorderly expansion of capital and prevents AI technology from being alienated into a tool for capital profit-seeking. The basic method is through effective government regulation and institutional guidance, avoiding the logic of capital overriding the logic of society, curbing the collusion between capital accumulation and technological monopoly, and promoting the unity of capital, technology, and social value. Third, socialism with Chinese characteristics can balance technological development with the bottom line of people’s livelihoods, promoting high-quality and full employment. The widespread application of AI technology can both generate a large number of new positions and occupations, stimulate new momentum for employment, and improve the quality and capacity of employment, while also potentially having a substitution effect on traditional positions, intensifying adjustments in the job market. Therefore, on the one hand, China continuously enhances the adaptability between industry and employment, expands the employment capacity of emerging industries, vigorously promotes education and training in AI knowledge and skills, and improves workers’ ability to use AI technology. On the other hand, China continuously raises the level of social security, helps workers in affected fields transition from being replaced to becoming participants in new fields, promotes the matching of labor supply and demand, and leaves buffer time for adjustments in the labor market. Finally, the value orientation of socialism with Chinese characteristics anchors the direction of AI development. The people-centered development thought determines that China’s research and development of AI does not simply pursue capital profits or technological hegemony, but always takes satisfying the people’s aspiration for a better life as its starting point and ultimate goal. From the dialectical relationship between the material dimension and the dimension of human relations, the socialist system with Chinese characteristics, through value guidance, resource coordination, balancing contradictions, and long-term planning, delineates a development track for AI that serves the people, supports development, promotes fairness, and benefits the world, making technology a powerful force for promoting high-quality development, achieving common prosperity, and aiding the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, thereby embodying the inherent unity between the socialist system and technological development.

更具体地说，在马克思的思想视域和价值理念中，中国特色社会主义制度为人工智能的健康发展和价值实现提供了根本保障和独特优势，能够确保人工智能技术始终服务于人民利益、国家战略和社会发展。首先，中国特色社会主义建立了公有制为主体、多种所有制经济共同发展等基本经济制度。这一所有制形式既能够激发一切有利于人工智能发展的要素充分涌流，又能通过调节生产和分配将贫富差距控制在合理的限度之内，保证发展人工智能不会陷入“赢者通吃”“累积优势”“机会失衡”的陷阱。其次，中国特色社会主义的显著特征和优势是成功驾驭资本。既发挥资本在推动技术创新、产业升级中的积极作用，又通过有效的制度设计防止资本无序扩张，防止人工智能技术异化为资本逐利的工具。其基本方式是通过政府的有效监管和制度引导，避免资本逻辑凌驾于社会逻辑之上，遏制资本增殖与技术垄断的共谋，推动资本、技术与社会价值的统一。再次，中国特色社会主义能够兼顾技术发展和民生底线，促进高质量充分就业。人工智能技术的普及应用，既能催生大量新岗位、新职业，激发就业新动能，促进就业提质扩容，也可能对传统岗位产生替代效应，加剧就业市场调整。因此，一方面，我国不断增强产业与就业的适配性，扩大新兴产业的就业容量，大力推进人工智能知识技能的教育、培训，提高劳动者利用人工智能技术的能力。另一方面，我国不断提高社会保障水平，帮助受冲击领域从业者从被替代者转变为新领域参与者，推动劳动力供需匹配，为劳动力市场调整留出缓冲时间。最后，中国特色社会主义的价值导向锚定了人工智能发展的方向。以人民为中心的发展思想，决定了中国研发人工智能并非单纯追求资本利润或技术霸权，而是始终以满足人民对美好生活的向往作为出发点和落脚点。从物质尺度与人的关系尺度的辩证关系看，中国特色社会主义制度通过价值引领、资源统筹、矛盾平衡和长远规划，为人工智能划定了服务人民、支撑发展、促进公平、惠及全球的发展轨道，使技术真正成为推动高质量发展、实现共同富裕、助力民族复兴的强大力量，体现了社会主义制度与技术发展的内在统一性。

III. Continuously Optimizing the Relationship between Humans and Artificial Intelligence

三、持续优化人与人工智能的关系

General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: “Artificial intelligence brings unprecedented opportunities for development, as well as unprecedented risks and challenges.” [13]13 Xi Jinping, speech at the 2024 World Internet Conference Wuzhen Summit. The dual dimensions of historical materialism not only enhance our theoretical understanding of AI and its laws of development but also point to a feasible path for overcoming risks and challenges and achieving high-quality development of AI in practice. Looking back at the course of China’s AI development, it is precisely because of the value guidance of Marxism and the institutional advantages of socialism that technological development can be organically integrated with safeguarding and improving people’s livelihoods, contributing to common prosperity for all the people. Looking to the future, it is necessary to further promote the unity of the dual dimensions, continuously optimize the relationship between humans and AI, and strive to promote the organic unity of AI’s research and development upgrades with its economic benefits, social benefits, and ethical values, so that technological development truly serves people.

习近平总书记指出：“人工智能带来前所未有发展机遇，也带来前所未遇风险挑战。”历史唯物主义的双重尺度既在理论上提升了我们对人工智能及其发展规律的认识，又在实践上指明了克服风险挑战、实现人工智能高质量发展的可行路径。回顾中国人工智能发展的历程，正是由于马克思主义的价值指引和社会主义的制度优势，技术发展才能与保障和改善民生有机结合，助力全体人民共同富裕。面向未来，要进一步推进双重尺度的统一，持续优化人与人工智能的关系，努力促使人工智能的研发升级及其经济效益、社会效益和伦理价值的有机统一，使技术发展真正服务于人。

First, we must follow the material scale of technology and continuously unleash the enormous potential of artificial intelligence to liberate productive forces. At present, as a key driving force of the new round of scientific and technological revolution and industrial transformation, artificial intelligence is profoundly changing the modes of human production and life. Its rapid iteration is triggering a global economic and social transformation and a new round of international competition. Following the method indicated by Marx, technological development is the key driving force of social development. To promote the high-quality development of artificial intelligence, the key lies in enhancing the coordinated matching of laborers, means of labor, and objects of labor, achieving a more scientific and efficient combination and leap. In optimizing laborers, emphasis should be placed on cultivating composite talents, enabling laborers to possess knowledge and skills related to artificial intelligence and forming an efficient human-machine collaboration model. On the one hand, we must further explore the division of responsibilities between artificial intelligence and human laborers, allowing artificial intelligence to replace more repetitive and standardized labor, so that human creativity can be maximally unleashed. On the other hand, we must comprehensively enhance laborers' ability to use new types of production tools, especially by building a high-quality talent team capable of leading scientific and technological innovation, daring to break cognitive barriers, and achieving major breakthroughs. In optimizing the means of labor, we must develop new intelligent tools, utilize the disruptive and general-purpose nature of artificial intelligence technology to develop more intelligent production tools, use artificial intelligence to explore new business needs and application scenarios, create entirely new means of labor and fields of production, and open up new spaces for social practice. In optimizing the objects of labor, we must expand the application of data elements, value the role of data as a new type of production factor, collect, analyze, and process massive amounts of data through artificial intelligence technology, transform data into valuable information, and expand the scope and value of the objects of labor. Leverage artificial intelligence to promote the expansion of traditional physical objects of labor toward the integration of digital and physical realms, giving rise to new types of labor objects such as new materials and new energy sources.

首先，要遵循技术的物质尺度，持续释放人工智能解放生产力的巨大潜能。当前，人工智能作为新一轮科技革命和产业变革的重要驱动力量，深刻改变人类生产生活方式，其快速迭代正在引发全球性的经济社会转型和新一轮的国际竞争。按照马克思所指明的方法，技术发展是社会发展的关键动能，而要推动人工智能的高质量发展，关键在于提升劳动者、劳动资料和劳动对象的协调匹配，实现更加科学高效的组合跃升。在优化劳动者方面，要注重培养复合型人才，使劳动者具备人工智能相关知识与技能，形成高效的人机协作模式。一方面，要进一步探索人工智能与人类劳动者的职责分工，让人工智能更多地替代重复性标准化的劳动，使人类的创造力能够得到最大释放。另一方面，要全面提升劳动者运用新型生产工具的能力，特别是打造一支能够引领科技创新、勇于打破认知藩篱、实现重大突破的高素质人才队伍。在优化劳动资料方面，要研发新型智能工具，利用人工智能技术的颠覆性、通用性，开发更多智能生产工具，利用人工智能挖掘新的业务需求和应用场景，创造出全新的劳动资料和生产领域，开拓社会实践的新空间。在优化劳动对象方面，要拓展数据要素应用，重视数据作为新型生产要素的作用，通过人工智能技术对海量数据进行收集、分析和处理，将数据转化为有价值的信息，拓展劳动对象的范围和价值。借助人工智能推动传统实体劳动对象向数实融合方向扩展，催生新材料、新能源等新型劳动对象。

Second, we must follow the human relational scale and move beyond the binary opposition between technicism and romanticism. The rapid advance of technology in modern times has given rise to two opposing views. Some advocate technological omnipotence, believing that whatever difficulties exist in fields such as the environment, society, or ethics can be solved through technological development. Others believe that technology threatens human subjectivity and advocate a pre-technological romantic fantasy. Following Marx's dialectical understanding of technological development, the correct attitude is neither to fall into the utopian imagination of technological omnipotence nor to advocate a pessimistic discourse of technological disaster, but rather to examine technology within the historical process: it is a product of the objectification of humanity's essential forces, both a driving force of progress and constrained by its specific era. Therefore, facing the arrival of the era of artificial intelligence, maintaining a sober understanding is necessary, but there is no need for excessive worry, and certainly no reason to give up eating for fear of choking or to rest on one's laurels. From a long-term development perspective, as artificial intelligence iterates and upgrades, it may, like humans, possess cognitive, reasoning, and thinking abilities, exhibiting human-like qualities in cognition, behavior, and interaction. However, artificial intelligence is essentially simulated intelligence, a data-driven computational system, an extension and externalization of human brainpower. It does not possess the unique life experience and practical ability of humans, nor can it truly understand concepts such as "existence" or "need." It can be said that humans are fully capable of dominating the process of technological development, ensuring that it always develops in a direction beneficial to the universal interests of humanity. To achieve this, the relationship between humans and artificial intelligence must be dynamically optimized. First, always adhere to the unity of artificial intelligence's conformity with objective laws and its conformity with human purposes. From the perspective of historical materialism, technological development is not a natural process but one shaped by human values. Behind every technological development, the fundamental proposition of "who does technological development rely on and for whom" must be answered. The so-called "shaped by human values" means that artificial intelligence originates from human wisdom, reflects human needs, and embodies human values; its creation, use, and improvement are all purposeful human actions. Therefore, artificial intelligence should be used more efficiently to assist humans in transcending their own capability limitations, leveraging artificial intelligence as a tool for humans to transform the objective world. Second, always adhere to the unity of technological rationality and value rationality. The creation of artificial intelligence is developed, designed, and manufactured by humans to better and more conveniently solve various problems in real life. As Engels said: "Once society has a technological need, that need will push science forward more than ten universities." The purpose of developing artificial intelligence is to help humans better understand and master the laws of nature and society, solve more practical problems, such as medical health, energy revolution, and social governance, and make human life more convenient, comfortable, and safe. Humans are the source and purpose of artificial intelligence; developing artificial intelligence should take meeting humans' real survival needs and promoting humans' free and comprehensive development as its fundamental aim. Third, always adhere to the combination of technological development and technological ethics, clarify the boundary between humans as subjects and artificial intelligence as tools, and put artificial intelligence on a track of healthy and sound development. Through institutional design (such as improving laws and regulations), ethical norms (such as establishing industry standards), and social consensus (such as public participation in technology governance), ensure that technological development always advances in the direction of promoting humans' free and comprehensive development.

其次，要遵循人的关系尺度，走出技术主义与浪漫主义的二元对立。近代以来技术的狂飙突进催生了两种对立的观点。有人主张技术万能论，认为无论环境、社会、伦理等领域存在何种难题，都能通过技术发展找到解决方案。也有人认为技术威胁人的主体性，主张一种前技术的浪漫主义幻想。按照马克思对技术发展的辩证理解，正确的态度是既不陷入技术万能的乌托邦想象，也不主张技术灾难的悲观论调，而是把技术放在历史进程中去审视：它是人类本质力量对象化的产物，既是进步的动力，也受限于特定时代。因此，面对人工智能时代的到来，保持清醒的认识是必要的，但无须过度忧虑，更不能因噎废食、故步自封。从长远发展来看，随着人工智能的迭代升级，它可能像人类一样具备认知、推理、思维能力，在认知、行为、交互等方面表现出类人性。但是，人工智能本质上是模拟智能，是数据驱动的计算系统，是人的脑力的延伸与外化，并不具有人类所独有的生命体验与实践能力，无法真正理解“生存”“需求”等。可以说，人类完全有能力主导技术发展的过程，保证其始终朝着有利于人类普遍利益的方向发展。要做到这一点，必须动态优化人与人工智能的关系。一是始终坚持人工智能合规律性与合目的性相统一。在历史唯物主义的视域中，技术发展不是一个自然的过程，而是一个由人的价值所塑造的过程。每一项技术发展的背后都必须回答“技术发展依靠谁、为了谁”的根本命题。所谓“由人的价值所塑造”,是指人工智能源自人的智慧、反映人的需要、体现人的价值，其创造、使用、改进都是人类的合目的性行为。因此，要更高效地运用人工智能辅助人类突破自身能力局限，发挥人工智能作为人改造客观世界的工具的作用。二是始终坚持技术理性与价值理性相统一。人工智能的创造是人类为了更好、更便捷地解决现实生活中的各种问题而开发、设计和制造的。正如恩格斯所说的：“社会一旦有技术上的需要，这种需要就会比十所大学更能把科学推向前进。”发展人工智能的目的是帮助人类更好地理解和掌握自然和社会规律，解决更多实际问题，如医疗健康、能源革命、社会治理等，让人类生活更加便捷、舒适和安全。人是人工智能的源泉和目的，发展人工智能应当以满足人的现实生存需要、促进人的自由全面发展为根本宗旨。三是始终坚持技术发展与科技伦理相结合，明确作为主体的人与作为工具的人工智能之间的边界，使人工智能进入健康良性发展轨道，通过制度设计(如完善法律法规)、伦理规范(如建立行业准则)、社会共识(如公众参与技术治理),确保技术发展始终朝着促进人的自由全面发展的方向前进。

Finally, we must uphold the unity of the measure of things and the measure of human relations, giving play to the institutional advantages of socialism in steering technological development. Marx emphasized that technology’s emancipatory effect on humanity is potential and that the nature of its social application must also be considered. Optimizing the socialist application of artificial intelligence is the ultimate path for constructing a rational relationship between humans and AI. The so-called socialist application of artificial intelligence is essentially to overcome the blindness, profit-seeking nature, and riskiness of technological development through the characteristics of the socialist system — “holistic,” “people-centered,” and “long-term” — so that technology always remains a powerful force driving social progress and enhancing the well-being of the people. Specifically, in terms of fundamental stance, we adhere to a people-centered approach. We ensure that the research, development, and application of AI take the people’s needs for a better life as their starting point, so that technological logic always serves human values. We pay attention to the social risks that new technologies may cause, prevent and resolve social contradictions in a timely manner, and achieve more balanced and fuller development. In terms of the core link dimension, we properly handle the relationship between new quality productive forces and new-type relations of production. Through continuous institutional exploration and practical transformation, we establish a more just and rational new-type relations of production that adapt to the laws of AI development. We persistently advance deep-level reforms of the economic system and the science and technology system, focusing on key nodes and structural obstacles that constrain AI development, working to unblock and optimize them, promoting the smooth flow of all types of high-quality production factors needed by new quality productive forces, and laying a solid foundation for common prosperity to advance to a higher stage. In terms of the foundational architecture dimension, we build an independent and controllable innovation ecosystem, continuously stimulating new creativity through coordination mechanisms. We strengthen the capacity to control AI, to anticipate and regulate its risks, enhance governance capabilities, and optimize regulatory systems. We actively respond to the risks and challenges posed by AI, clarify the boundaries of AI research, development, and application, and establish and improve laws, regulations, institutional systems, and ethical standards that ensure the healthy development of AI, guaranteeing that AI development conforms to the principles of safety and fairness. In terms of the key factor dimension, we avoid the disorderly expansion of technological application. Through macro-control, we prevent AI from becoming a tool for a minority to monopolize interests, ensuring the inclusiveness of technology. At the same time, we build a high-standard unified market system, promote innovation in the allocation mechanism of production factors, so that advanced and efficient resource elements flow smoothly into the AI industry chain, forming a stable and high-quality supply base. In terms of the development guarantee dimension, we promote high-quality and full employment. We adhere to an employment-friendly development model, achieving coordinated development of AI and employment, and creating smarter, more diverse, and higher-quality ways of working for the broad masses of workers. We continuously improve the skills training system, strengthening digital skills and soft skills training at all stages of education; build an efficient public employment service system, comprehensively enhancing the operational efficiency and service capacity of the labor market; strengthen the coordination and supporting of employment promotion policies, construct a flexible and secure social security system, improve the level of protection for flexible workers (such as improving unemployment insurance, minimum subsistence allowances, etc.), prevent structural and long-term unemployment, and comprehensively enhance workers’ security expectations and ability to withstand risks. In summary, by leveraging the above advantages, we ensure that AI not only maintains healthy and orderly development but also always advances toward the goal of promoting the free and comprehensive development of humanity, reflecting the value guidance of the socialist system over technological development.

最后，要坚持物的尺度与人的关系尺度相统一，发挥社会主义驾驭技术发展的制度优势。马克思强调，技术对人的解放作用是潜在的，还必须考虑其社会应用的性质。优化人工智能的社会主义应用，是建构人与人工智能合理关系的最终路径。所谓人工智能的社会主义应用，本质上就是通过社会主义制度的“整体性”“人民性”“长远性”等特征，克服技术发展的盲目性、逐利性和风险性，让技术始终成为推动社会进步、增进人民福祉的强大动力。具体而言，在根本立场上，坚持以人民为中心。让人工智能的研发和应用以全体人民的美好生活需要为出发点，使技术逻辑始终服务于人类价值，重视新技术可能导致的社会风险，及时预防和化解社会矛盾，实现更平衡、更充分的发展。在核心环节维度，处理好新质生产力与新型生产关系之间的关系。在持续的制度探索与实践变革中建立起适应人工智能发展规律的、更为公正合理的新型生产关系。持续推进经济体制与科技体制的深层次改革，针对制约人工智能发展的关键节点与结构性障碍，着力加以疏通与优化，促进新质生产力所需要的各类优质生产要素顺畅流动，为共同富裕迈向更高阶段奠定坚实基础。在基础架构维度，构建自主可控的创新生态，以协同机制不断激发新的创造力。强化对人工智能的控制能力、对其风险的预判与规制能力，提升治理能力，优化监管制度。积极应对人工智能带来的风险挑战，明确人工智能研发应用的边界，建立健全保障人工智能健康发展的法律法规、制度体系、伦理道德，确保人工智能发展符合安全性与公平性原则。在关键要素维度，避免技术应用的无序扩张。通过宏观调控防止人工智能成为少数群体垄断利益的工具，保障技术普惠性。同时，构建高标准的统一市场体系，推动生产要素配置机制的创新，使先进且高效的资源要素顺畅汇聚至人工智能产业链条，形成稳定、优质的供给基础。在发展保障维度，促进高质量充分就业。坚持就业友好型发展方式，实现人工智能与就业协同发展，为广大劳动者创造更加智能、更加多元、更加有品质的工作方式。持续完善技能培养体系，加强各阶段教育的数字化技能和软技能培养；打造高效的就业公共服务体系，全面提升劳动力市场的运行效率和服务能力；强化就业促进政策的协同配套，构建弹性、安全的社会保障体系，提升灵活就业人员的保障水平(如完善失业保险金、最低生活保障等),防止结构性失业和长期失业，全面增强劳动者的安全预期和抵御风险能力。总之，通过上述优势的发挥，让人工智能既保持健康有序发展，又始终围绕促进人的自由全面发展的目标前进，体现社会主义制度对技术发展的价值引领。

Conclusion

结 语

General Secretary Xi Jinping emphasizes: “Facing the new situation of the rapid evolution of the new generation of artificial intelligence technology, we must give full play to the advantages of the new nationwide system for mobilizing resources, [14]14 The “new nationwide system for mobilizing resources” (新型举国体制) refers to a state-led institutional mechanism that combines centralized coordination with market mechanisms to concentrate resources on strategic technological breakthroughs, updated from the earlier planned-economy model. adhere to self-reliance and self-strengthening, highlight the application orientation, and promote the healthy and orderly development of China’s AI in a beneficial, safe, and fair direction.” Accelerating the development of AI is an objective requirement for promoting high-quality development on the new journey of the New Era, and an inevitable choice for promoting the iterative upgrading of productive forces and achieving modernization. Facing the various difficulties and obstacles in developing AI, we must take historical materialism as our guide, follow the standards of being conducive to the development of productive forces and human development, comprehensively deepen reform, unblock the bottlenecks constraining AI development, allow all types of advanced and high-quality production factors to flow smoothly, and provide an inexhaustible driving force for building a strong country and the great cause of national rejuvenation. From the perspective of the dual-measure theory of historical materialism, transcending the capitalist application of technology and sublating the alienation of humanity caused by technological development — this is precisely the world-historical significance of developing AI under the socialist system. The value of developing AI lies in satisfying the people’s yearning for a better life, and even more in creating a new form of civilization. This civilization will bridge the gap between technological development and human alienation under the capitalist system, replace the one-sided logic of reification with the coordination of material civilization and cultural-ethical progress, and provide a more solid material foundation and a more proactive spiritual force for human progress.

习近平总书记强调：“面对新一代人工智能技术快速演进的新形势，要充分发挥新型举国体制优势，坚持自立自强，突出应用导向，推动我国人工智能朝着有益、安全、公平方向健康有序发展。”加快发展人工智能，是新时代新征程推动高质量发展的客观要求，是推动生产力迭代升级、实现现代化的必然选择。面对发展人工智能所面临的种种难题与阻碍，我们要以历史唯物主义为指导，按照有利于生产力的发展和人的发展的标准，全面深化改革，打通束缚人工智能发展的堵点，让各类先进优质生产要素顺畅流动，为强国建设、民族复兴伟业提供不竭动力。在历史唯物主义双重尺度理论视域下，超越技术的资本主义应用，扬弃技术发展导致的人的异化，这正是在社会主义制度下发展人工智能的世界历史意义之所在。发展人工智能的价值在于满足人民对美好生活的向往，更在于创造一种新的文明形态。这种文明将弥合资本主义制度下技术发展与人的异化之间的鸿沟，以物质文明和精神文明相协调取代单向度的物化逻辑，为人类进步提供更为坚实的物质基础和更为主动的精神力量。

Author’s brief introduction: Lan Yang, Associate Professor at the School of Marxism Studies, Renmin University of China, and researcher at the Contemporary Political Parties Research Platform.

作者简介：兰洋，中国人民大学马克思主义学院副教授、当代政党研究平台研究员。