How to Present the “Theoretical Original Form” of Ideological and Political Education

The year 2024 marks the 40th anniversary of the establishment of the discipline of ideological and political education. Entering its “age of no doubts,” ideological and political education is a grand undertaking that can only be strengthened, never weakened. On the new journey of the New Era, the disciplinary construction of ideological and political education and its theoretical innovation carry even greater significance and heavier tasks.

2024年适逢思想政治教育学科设立40年。进入“不惑之年”的思想政治教育，是一项只能加强不能削弱的宏大事业。新时代新征程，思想政治教育的学科建设及其理论创新意义更加重大，任务更加繁重。

The book *Research on Marx and Engels’ Thought on Ideological and Political Education* (hereinafter referred to as *Research*), authored by Professor Li Zhongjun of Northeast Normal University and others, combs through the direct and indirect discussions of Marx and Engels related to ideological and political education from four dimensions: “concepts,” “categories,” “content,” and “methods.” It preliminarily constructs a conceptual system, categorical foundation, content framework, and methodological system for Marxist ideological and political education, presenting the “theoretical original form” of ideological and political education. This is a distinctive documentary and theoretical endeavor.

东北师范大学李忠军教授等人所著《马克思恩格斯思想政治教育思想研究》（以下简称《研究》），从“概念”“范畴”“内容”和“方法”四个维度，梳理了马克思恩格斯直接或间接的思想政治教育相关论述，初步构建了马克思主义思想政治教育的概念系统、范畴基础、内容框架和方法体系，呈现思想政治教育的“理论原相”，是富有特色的一次文献和理论尝试。

According to the author’s observation, the “Concepts” section of *Research* analyzes 11 concepts, including “thought,” “politics,” “education,” and “communist ideal and belief,” constituting the original form of the basic “concepts” of ideological and political education in Marxist classical works. The “original form of concepts” constitutes the basic unit of the “theoretical original form,” supporting the “nodes” of the theoretical system of ideological and political education. Therefore, the work of elucidating the connotations of these concepts is crucial.

根据笔者观察，《研究》的“概念篇”分析了“思想”“政治”“教育”“共产主义理想信念”等11个概念，构成了马克思主义经典著作中思想政治教育基本“概念”的原相。“概念原相”构成“理论原相”的基本单位，支撑起思想政治教育理论体系的“结点”。因此，这些概念的内涵阐释工作十分关键。

With the help of concepts, principles can obtain clear logical stipulations. *Research* endeavors to restore the Marxist “concepts” of ideological and political education, thereby enriching the “authentic” Marxist ideological and political education system. However, in the presentation of the aforementioned “original form of concepts,” *Research* does not delve deeply into sorting out the logical relationships among the various concepts. This leaves readers with questions: Why are only these concepts important? Do other concepts, such as “freedom” and “species-essence,” also possess value for ideological and political education?

借助于概念，道理才能得到清晰的逻辑规定。《研究》致力于还原思想政治教育的马克思主义的“概念”，进而丰富了“原汁原味”的马克思主义思想政治教育体系。但是，在《研究》对上述“概念原相”的呈现中，对诸概念之间逻辑关系的梳理没有深入展开。这使读者产生疑问：为什么只有这些概念是重要的？其他诸如“自由”“类本质”等概念也是否具有思想政治教育价值呢？

*Research* excavates the group of “categories” in the science of ideological and political education, summarizing nine pairs of dialectical “categories”: “individual and society,” “thought and interest,” “material weapon and spiritual weapon,” “activity and passivity,” “rationality and irrationality,” “theory and practice,” “education and environment,” “copy and original,” and “sacred image and non-sacred image.” Together, these constitute the inherent contradictions that Marxist ideological and political education must resolve, as well as the basic contradictory movement of ideological and political education.

《研究》挖掘了思想政治教育学中的“范畴”群，总结了“个人与社会”“思想与利益”“物质武器和精神武器”“能动与受动”“理性与非理性”“理论与实践”“教育与环境”“副本与原本”“神圣形象与非神圣形象”等9对辩证“范畴”，共同构成了马克思主义思想政治教育要解决的内在矛盾，也构成了思想政治教育的基本矛盾运动。

“Individual and society” reflects the unity of opposites between the “individual” and “society.” This is the core issue Marx was most concerned with. *Research* specifically discusses the unity of opposites between the “individual” and “society” in the thesis of the “sum of social relations,” and understands “social value” as the priority condition for “individual value.” In this sense, “individual” and “society” are no longer an oppositional relationship; rather, a unified relationship is established between the “social” individual and the “individual” society. Similarly, “thought and interest” is also a social contradiction to which Marx paid great attention. “Interest” is the first historical activity of human existence, that is, Marx pointed out that “food, clothing, and shelter” are the first premise of human history-making. However, the “relationship” between humans and others, and society, must be established in their “thought.” Otherwise, people’s “relationship of interest” becomes separated from “thought,” and “thought once leaves interest will make a fool of itself,” which reflects Marx’s basic stance of historical materialism.

“个人与社会”反映的是“个体”和“社会”的对立统一关系。这是马克思最为关切的核心问题。《研究》专门讨论了“社会关系的总和”这一论断中“个体”与“社会”间的对立统一关系，并且把“社会价值”理解为“个体价值”的优先条件。在这个意义上，“个体”与“社会”就不再是一个对立的关系，而是确立了“社会”的个人与“个人”的社会的统一关系。同样，“思想与利益”也是马克思非常关注的社会矛盾之一。“利益”是人类生存的第一个历史性活动，即马克思指明的“吃穿住”是人类创造历史的第一个前提。但是，人与他人、社会的“关系”必须在自己的“思想”中确立起来。否则，人们的“利益关系”与“思想”相分离，“思想一旦离开利益就会出丑”，这体现了马克思的历史唯物主义基本立场。

However, in presenting the theoretical original form of the various “categories,” *Research* seems not to explain the dialectical principle of “categories.” According to the principle of dialectical materialism, “categories” always appear in pairs, that is, they confirm themselves in mutually constitutive “opposites.” The “principle of the unity of opposites” in dialectics constitutes the basic logical principle of “categories.” The dialectical principle of these “categories” is neglected, thus also causing confusion for readers: Why do “categories” always appear in pairs, while “concepts” can exist alone?

然而，《研究》在对诸“范畴”的理论原相呈现中，似乎没有对“范畴”的辩证法原理加以说明。根据唯物辩证法原理，“范畴”总是成对出现，亦即在相互成就的“对立面”中确证自己。辩证法的“对立统一原理”构成了“范畴”的基本逻辑原则。这些“范畴”的辩证法原理被忽略了，因而同样给读者带来困惑：为什么“范畴”总是成对出现，而“概念”却可以单独存在呢？

In his logic, Hegel treats phenomena and essence, form and content, cause and effect, etc., as important logical categories, all of which appear in paired forms. Moreover, according to the principles of dialectics, it is necessary not only to have “pairs” but also to understand categories at the level of the dialectical relationship of “thesis-antithesis-synthesis.” Clearly, *Research* notes the “paired nature” of categories but has not yet risen to the height of the “synthesis” after the unity of both sides to understand the essence of categories. In contrast, “concepts” are the smallest units of thought, just as Hegel said, the relationships among concepts are linked only by the word “and,” thus existing merely as independent entities of thought.

黑格尔在其逻辑学中，把现象与本质、形式与内容、原因和结果等作为重要的逻辑范畴，它们均是以成对的形式出现。而且，按照辩证法的原理，不仅要“成对”，而且要进一步上升到“正—反—合”的辩证关系上来理解。显然，《研究》注意到范畴的“成对性”，但还没有上升到双方统一后“合题”的高度来理解范畴的本质。与此不同，“概念”则是思维的最小单位，正如黑格尔所说的，诸概念之间的关系“仅凭一个‘又’字”联系在一起，因而只是作为独立的思维实体而存在的。

After the logical positioning of “concepts” and “categories,” *Research* clarifies the basic content of ideological and political education, namely, the ten educational contents: “political education,” “class interest education,” “theoretical arming,” “worldview education,” “communist education,” “moral education,” “education combining with productive labor,” “education for the all-round development of the human person,” “party education,” and “strategy education.” The entire theory of Marx and Engels can be summarized as “communism,” which is a discourse on the development trend and objective laws of all world history. The primary educational content of ideological and political education is to establish the communist ideal and belief. *Research* presents the “theoretical original form” of communism in Marx and Engels’ works such as the *Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844*, *The German Ideology*, and *Critique of the Gotha Programme*, analyzes the internal connections of these ideas, and particularly elucidates the rich connotations contained in communist thought in various periods, thereby constituting the core content of ideological and political education. However, this kind of “respect” for texts often has drawbacks, namely, it restricts the “living soul” that runs through various texts, thus inevitably exhibiting a certain tendency of “blind men feeling the elephant.”

《研究》在“概念”和“范畴”的逻辑定位之后，明确了思想政治教育的基本内容，即“政治教育”“阶级利益教育”“理论武装”“世界观教育”“共产主义教育”“道德教育”“与生产劳动相结合的教育”“人的全面发展教育”“政党教育”“策略教育”这10项教育内容。马克思和恩格斯的全部理论概括起来是“共产主义”，这是对全部世界历史的发展趋势和客观规律的论述。思想政治教育首要的教育内容，就是把共产主义理想信念确立起来。《研究》呈现了马克思恩格斯在《1844年经济学哲学手稿》《德意志意识形态》《哥达纲领批判》等著作中关于共产主义的“理论原相”，对这些思想的内在关联也作了分析，特别阐明了各个时期共产主义思想包含的丰富内涵，进而构成了思想政治教育的核心内容。然而，这种对文本的“尊重”往往存在弊端，即限制了贯穿在各个文本之间的“活的灵魂”，因而难免存在一定程度的“盲人摸象”的倾向。

There is a most common summary of ideological and political education: the educational practice of cultivating the “all-round development of the human person.” In this regard, *Research*, based on textual excavation, explores the mode of existence of spiritual life under communism, highlighting the requirements of communism for the spiritual realm of the human person. It should be said that *Research* grasps this subject issue of ideological and political education that Marx was concerned about, aiming to elevate the realm of human spiritual life through ideological and political education, which is also a way to transcend “alienated labor” or simply treating labor as a “means of livelihood.” However, *Research* has not yet deeply interpreted the philosophical connotation of the “all-round development of the human person” proposed by Marx and Engels in the literature, avoiding a most common question: What exactly does “all-round” here include?

思想政治教育有一个最为通行的概括：培育“人的全面发展”的教育实践活动。对此，《研究》基于文本挖掘了精神生活在共产主义中的存在方式，彰显了共产主义对人的精神境界的要求。应该说，《研究》抓住了马克思关心的思想政治教育这一主体问题，旨在通过思想政治教育提升人的精神生活境界，这也是超越“异化劳动”或者单纯把劳动作为“谋生手段”的出路。但是，《研究》尚未能在文献中深度解读马克思恩格斯提出的“人的全面发展”的哲学内涵，回避了一个最为常见的疑问：这里的“全面”究竟包括哪些方面？

The final focus of *Research* is on sorting out the “methods” of ideological and political education inherent in classical works, proposing methods such as “contradiction analysis method,” “historical analysis method,” “class analysis method,” “theoretical inculcation method,” “critical exposure method,” “persuasion and education method,” “emotional infection method,” “propaganda and agitation method,” “organizational education method,” and “self-revolution method.” It should be said that these methods of ideological and political education are distinct in classical literature, and each method manifests the essential characteristics of Marxist ideological and political education.

《研究》最后的落脚点，是对经典著作内蕴的思想政治教育“方法”的梳理，提出了“矛盾分析法”“历史分析法”“阶级分析法”“理论灌输法”“批判揭露法”“说服教育法”“情感感染法”“宣传鼓动法”“组织教育法”“自我革命法”等方法。应该说，这些思想政治教育方法在经典文献中是鲜明的，并且每个方法都彰显了马克思主义思想政治教育的本质特征。

The “theoretical inculcation method” is the most controversial method in ideological and political education. It is generally believed that “inculcation” has external coerciveness, affecting the effectiveness of ideological and political education. *Research* clarifies a key issue: literature from Marx and Engels to Lenin indicates that “inculcation” has an irreplaceable role. However, when *Research* sorts out the rationality of the “inculcation method” in the literature, does it consider Marx’s discourse on the principal position of the people? How does Marx treat the relationship between “inculcation” and the principal position of the masses? If these issues cannot be addressed, perhaps the legitimate status of the “inculcation method” remains obscure.

“理论灌输法”是在思想政治教育中最有争议的方法。一般认为，“灌输”具有外在强制性，影响了思想政治教育的实效性。《研究》澄清了一个关键问题：从马克思恩格斯到列宁的文献都表明“灌输”具有不可替代的作用。但是，《研究》在文献中梳理“灌输法”的合理性的时候，是否考虑到了马克思对人民主体地位的论述？马克思又是如何对待“灌输”和人民群众主体性地位的关系的？如果不能触及这些问题，或许“灌输法”的合理地位就仍然是晦暗不明的。

The “method of critique and exposure” is the most distinctive method of Marxism. The contribution of *Research* lies in grasping the core that the progress of social history is achieved through the critique of the old society. “Critique” possesses revolutionary force, hence Marx proposed “discovering the new world through the critique of the old world,” emphasizing that “dialectics is in its essence critical and revolutionary.” [3]3 The phrase “in its essence critical and revolutionary” is from Marx’s *Capital*, Volume I, Afterword to the Second German Edition, where Marx describes the dialectical method. However, has *Research* taken note of Marx’s “affirmative inheritance” relationship with German classical philosophy? If this issue is overlooked, perhaps “critique” is merely understood as “simple negation,” thereby deviating from dialectics.

“批判揭露法”是马克思主义最具特色的方法。《研究》的贡献在于，抓住了社会历史的进步是通过对旧社会的批判实现的这一核心。“批判”具有革命性的力量，因而马克思提出“在批判旧世界中发现新世界”，强调“辩证法在本质上是批判的和革命的”。然而，《研究》是否注意到了马克思对德国古典哲学的“肯定性继承”关系呢？如果忽略这一问题，或许“批判”就只是被作为“单纯的否定”来理解，从而偏离辩证法。

In summary, *Research* shows great respect for classical Marxist texts and achieves “arguments must have a basis.” The entire work never treats classical Marxist texts with a “subjective impression” attitude, nor does it show any intention of “forced interpretation” or “arbitrary elaboration.” Instead, it is rooted in the original context of classical Marxist texts, striving to present the “theoretical original form” of ideological and political education as objectively as possible. However, the intention of “organism” contained in this “theoretical original form” is insufficient. Any theory can only achieve its truthful presentation within an “organism,” just as Hegel’s metaphor of “the hand cut off is not a hand.” In *Research*, whether between the four parts or among the various contents within each part, their logical connections are to some extent neglected. Nevertheless, research work first begins with “analysis” and ends with “synthesis,” which must be affirmed. As a classified “analysis,” *Research* seems to present the classical original form of ideological and political education in “anatomy,” which has innovative value and is very necessary for understanding the “organism” of the principles of ideological and political education. Precisely because of this, *Research* opens up space for further tracing the source-flow relationships of classical Marxist theory. Many texts will corroborate each other and generate internal logical thought, effectively deepening innovative research on the principles of ideological and political education.

综上，《研究》高度尊重马克思主义经典文本，并做到了“论必有据”。全书通篇从未以“主观感想”的态度对待马克思主义经典文本，更没有“强制阐释”和“任意发挥”的意向，而是扎根于马克思主义经典文本的原初语境努力对思想政治教育学“理论原相”做出尽可能客观的呈现。不过，这一“理论原相”所蕴含的“有机体”的意向是不充分的。任何一门理论都要在一个“有机体”中才能得到其真理性的呈现，正如黑格尔“割下来的手不是手”的比喻。《研究》中无论是四个部分之间，还是每一个部分中的各个内容之间，它们的逻辑关联在一定程度上是被忽略的。但是，“研究”工作首先起始于“分析”，终止于“综合”，这是需要肯定的。《研究》作为分门别类的“分析”，仿佛是在“解剖学”中呈现思想政治教育的经典原相，是有创新价值的，对于理解思想政治教育原理“有机体”来说是非常必要的。正是因为这一点，《研究》为进一步追溯经典马克思主义理论源流关系敞开了探索空间，诸多文本将在其中相互印证并生发出内在的思想逻辑，有力地深化思想政治教育学原理的创新研究。

Needless to say, as a young discipline, the discipline of ideological and political education faces problems such as vague concept definitions, unclear category connotations, and weak principle logic. Strengthening academic research on classical Marxist texts has the theoretical significance precisely of further addressing these weak issues. Constructing China’s independent knowledge system of ideological and political education urgently requires consolidating the ideological foundation and building a solid theoretical base. The four dimensions unfolded in the four-volume *Research* are interlinked, progressive, and closely connected. From front to back, it is the analytical logic of solving problems; from back to front, it is the constructive logic of responding to problems. This will produce beneficial effects of theoretical innovation for promoting the scientific and theoretical development of the discipline of ideological and political education, making important contributions to the flourishing development of ideological and political education in the New Era.

毋庸讳言，作为一门年轻的学科，思想政治教育学科存在概念界定模糊、范畴内涵不清、原理逻辑弱化等问题，而加强马克思主义经典文本的学术研究，其理论意义恰恰就是要进一步解决这些薄弱问题。建构中国自主的思想政治教育知识体系，迫切需要夯实思想地基、筑牢理论基础。四卷本《研究》展开的四个维度，环环相扣、层层递进、紧密衔接，从前到后是破解问题的分析逻辑，从后往前则是回应问题的建构逻辑。这对于推进思想政治教育学科的科学化和学理化发展，会产生有益的学理创新效应，为繁荣发展新时代思想政治教育学作出重要贡献。

(The author is Dean and Professor of the School of Marxism, Jilin University)

（作者系吉林大学马克思主义学院院长、教授）

Online Editor: Huihui

网络编辑：慧慧