关键词：
马克思
自由观
庄子
逍遥观
第二个结合
摘要：
马克思自由观与庄子逍遥观虽处于不同的时代背景,但两者都包含对“人的解放”这一问题的思考,其目的都是为了构造理想世界,在其中积极发挥了人的主动性。马克思自由观与庄子逍遥观的发展路径不同,庄子对于逍遥的追寻诉诸于道,在精神世界中不断发展,而马克思对于自由的追寻落在现实中,在现实世界中不断发展,一个成为了人类向往的境界,一个成为了人类实践的方法论。马克思自由观与庄子逍遥观都对自然、知识、人等方面进行探讨,但两者对这些方面的观点却是不同的。马克思自由观希望人类去理解并掌握自然规律,而庄子逍遥观认为应该遵循自然的本性;马克思认为对于知识的获取是一个无限发展的过程,而庄子认为人过度去获取知识是违背自然规律的;马克思自由观立足于现实的人的发展,而庄子逍遥观是对于人的超越。基于两者的异同点进行有机结合,发展了习近平总书记提出的“第二个结合”,有益于构建现代自由观。Although Marx’s view of freedom and Zhuangzi’s view of peripateticism are in different historical backgrounds, both of them contain the thinking on the issue of “human liberation.” Their purpose is to construct an ideal world, in which people’s initiative is actively exerted. The development path of Marx’s view of freedom is different from that of Zhuangzi’s view of peripateticism. Zhuangzi’s pursuit of peripateticism resorts to the Tao and continues to develop in the spiritual world, while Marx’s pursuit of freedom falls in the reality and continues to develop in the real world. One has become the realm of human yearning and one has become the methodology of human practice. Both Marx’s view of freedom and Zhuangzi’s view of peripateticism discuss nature, knowledge and human beings, but their views on these aspects are different. Marx’s view of freedom hopes that human beings can understand and master the laws of nature, while Zhuangzi’s view of peripateticism believes that we should follow the nature of nature. Marx believes that the acquisition of knowledge is an infinite process of development, while Zhuangzi believes that people’s excessive acquisition of knowledge is contrary to the laws of nature;Marx’s view of freedom is based on the development of real people, while Zhuangzi’s view of peripateticism is the transcendence of people.
