INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRST EDITION
The paralysis of criticism: society without opposition
一手原築 2月預告
本文為一手原築第54篇原著文選。
本文整理自Herbert Marcuse赫伯特·馬爾庫塞著作One-Dimensional Man；劉繼的中文譯本《單向度的人——發達工業社會意識形態研究》。由一手原築整理，英文2900字，閱讀需要10分鐘；中文6000字，閱讀需要12分鐘。
威脅壓抑下的繁榮與和平
批判的依據和判斷標準
發達工業社會傾向於剝奪反對派的聲音
絕大多數人接受和被迫接受這個社會
極權主義社會對技術的利用與技術的中立性
paralysis麻痺停頓，opposition反對，commonweal公共福利事業，transcendence超越性，prerequisite前提，the bourgeoisie資產階級，the proletariat無產階級，capitalism資本主義，indictment控告，brinkmanship外交冒險政策，annihilation毀滅，neutrality中立性，communism共gong產chan主義
Berle and Means, The Modern Corporation and Private Property, 伯利和米恩斯的《現代公有財產和私有財產》；
the reports of the 76th Congress' Temporary National Economic Committee on the Concentration of Economic Power, 第76屆國會國民經濟臨時委員會關於《經濟力量的集中》的報告；
the publications of the AFL-CIO on Automation and Major Technological Change, 美國勞聯-產聯關於《自動化和主要技術變化》的各種出版物；
News and Letters and Correspondence in Detroit, 底特律的《新聞與通訊》與《通訊》雜誌；
C. Wright Mills, C-賴特-米爾斯的著作；
Vance Packard's The Hidden Persuaders, The Status Seekers, and The Waste Makers, 萬斯•帕卡德的《隱藏著的說客》、《想往上爬的人》、《製造浪費的人》；
William H. Whyte's The Organization Man, 威廉•H-懷特的《馴順的職員》；
Fred J. Cook's The Warfare State弗雷德-J•庫克的《戰爭國家》
*編者註：本書出版於1964年，所以會有1964年的社會背景。但顯然並不過時。哲學家隆納·阿朗森於2018年的一篇文章中稱讚了馬爾庫塞的先見之明，認為作者當年提出的觀察和警惕，用於描述今日的社會甚至比當年的社會更加貼切。
Does not the threat of an atomic catastrophe which could wipe out the human race also serve to protect the very forces which perpetuate this danger? The efforts to prevent such a catastrophe overshadow the search for its potential causes in contemporary industrial society. These causes remain unidentified, unexposed, unattacked by the public because they recede before the all too obvious threat from without—to the West from the East, to the East from the West. Equally obvious is the need for being prepared, for living on the brink, for facing the challenge. We submit to the peaceful production of the means of destruction, to the perfection of waste, to being educated for a defense which deforms the defenders and that which they defend.
能夠毀滅人類的核災難的威脅，不也能夠保護使核災難的危險永恆化的那些勢力嗎？防止這一災難的種種努力掩蓋了對它在當代工業社會中的潛在原因的探究。這些原因還沒有被公眾所認識、揭露、抨擊，因為公眾在一切來自外部的即東方對西方、西方對東方的極其明顯的威脅面前退卻了。同樣明顯的是，必須進行戰爭準備，必須生活在戰爭的邊緣，必須面對挑戰。我們不得不和平地生產毀滅的工具、不得不極度地浪費、不得不接受防衛訓練，這種防衛使防衛者和他們所防衛的東西成為畸形。
If we attempt to relate the causes of the danger to the way in which society is organized and organizes its members, we are immediately confronted with the fact that advanced industrial society becomes richer, bigger, and better as it perpetuates the danger. The defense structure makes life easier for a greater number of people and extends man's mastery of nature. Under these circumstances, our mass media have little difficulty in selling particular interests as those of all sensible men. The political needs of society become individual needs and aspirations, their satisfaction promotes business and the commonweal, and the whole appears to be the very embodiment of Reason.
如果我們試圖把這一危險的原因同社會的組織方式和社會組織其成員的方式聯繫起來，那麼我們就會立即面臨這樣一個事實，即發達工業社會在使這種危險永恆化的同時，變得更加富裕、更加龐大、更加美好。社會的防衛結構使為數越來越多的人生活得更加舒適，並擴大了人對自然的控制。在這些情況下，我們的大眾傳播工具把特殊利益作為所有正常人的利益來兜售幾乎沒有什麼困難。社會的政治需要變成個人的需要和願望，它們的滿足刺激著商業和公共福利事業，而所有這些似乎都是理性的具體體現。
And yet this society is irrational as a whole. Its productivity is destructive of the free development of human needs and faculties, its peace maintained by the constant threat of war, its growth dependent on the repression of the real possibilities for pacifying the struggle for existence—individual, national, and international. This repression, so different from that which characterized the preceding, less developed stages of our society, operates today not from a position of natural and technical immaturity but rather from a position of strength. The capabilities (intellectual and material) of contemporary society are immeasurably greater than ever before—which means that the scope of society's domination over the individual is immeasurably greater than ever before. Our society distinguishes itself by conquering the centrifugal social forces with Technology rather than Terror, on the dual basis of an overwhelming efficiency and an increasing standard of living.
需要和才能的自由發展是破壞性的，它的和平要由經常的戰爭威脅來維持，它的發展取決於對各種平息（個人的、國家的、國際間的）生存競爭的實際可能性的壓抑。這種壓抑不同於在我們的社會之前的較不發達階段的壓抑；它今天不是由於自然的和技術的不成熟狀況而起作用，而是依靠實力地位起作用。當代社會的力量（智力的和物質的）比以往大得無可估量——這意味著社會對個人統治的範圍也比以往大得無可估量。我們社會的突出之處是，在壓倒一切的效率和日益提高的生活水準這雙重的基礎上，利用技術而不是恐怖去壓服那些離心的社會力量。
Marcuse’s embrace of the student as revolutionary briefly made him a celebrity on campuses rocked by protests， like the Free U. of Berlin in 1967. 馬爾庫塞將學生視為革命者的擁抱讓他在抗議活動的衝擊下短暫地成為校園名人，比如1967年的柏林自由大學(Free U. of Berlin)。在法國五月風暴中，馬爾庫塞與馬克思、毛澤東並稱為「3M」
To investigate the roots of these developments and examine their historical alternatives is part of the aim of a critical theory of contemporary society, a theory which analyzes society in the light of its used and unused or abused capabilities for improving the human condition. But what are the standards for such a critique?
研究這些發展的根源，考察它們的種種歷史替代性選擇，是當代社會批判理論的目的之一。這一理論根據社會已被利用的、尚未被利用的或被濫用的改善人類條件的能力來分析社會。但是，這樣一種批判的標準是什麼呢？
Certainly value judgments play a part. The established way of organizing society is measured against other possible ways, ways which are held to offer better chances for alleviating man's struggle for existence; a specific historical practice is measured critical theory of society is thus confronted with the problem of historical objectivity, a problem which arises at the two points where the analysis implies value judgments:
價值判斷肯定起著作用。已確立的組織社會的方式是相對於其他可能的方式而得到評價的，也即是說，是相對於那些被認為對緩解人的生存競爭提供了較好機會的方式而得到評價的；一種特定的歷史實踐是相對於它自己的各種歷史的替代性選擇而得到評價的。因此，從一開始，任何社會批判理論都會遇到一個歷史客觀性的問題；這個問題產生於兩點，而對這兩點的分析都暗含著下述價值判斷。
1. the judgment that human life is worth living, or rather can be and ought to be made worth living. This judgment underlies all intellectual effort; it is the a priori of social theory, and its rejection (which is perfectly logical) rejects theory itself;
1.人類生活是值得過的，或者可能是和應當是值得過的。這個判斷是一切理智努力的基礎；它是社會理論的前提，否定它（這是完全合乎邏輯的）就是否定理論本身；
2. the judgment that, in a given society, specific possibilities exist for the amelioration of human life and specific ways and means of realizing these possibilities. Critical analysis has to demonstrate the objective validity of these judgments, and the demonstration has to proceed on empirical grounds. The established society has available an ascertainable quantity and quality of intellectual and material resources. How can these resources be used for the optimal development and satisfaction of individual needs and faculties with a minimum of toil and misery? Social theory is historical theory, and history is the realm of chance in the realm of necessity. Therefore, among the various possible and actual modes of organizing and utilizing the available resources, which ones offer the greatest chance of an optimal development?
2.在一個既定的社會中，存在著種種改善人類生活的特殊可能性以及實現這些可能性的特殊方式和手段。批判的分析必須證明這些判斷的客觀有效性，而這種證明又必須在經驗基礎上來進行。已確立的社會，有一定數量和質量的智力資源和物力資源可供利用。這些資源怎樣才能被用來最理想地發展和滿足個人的需要和才能，並把辛勞和痛苦降低到最小的限度呢？社會理論是歷史的理論；而歷史是必然王國中的偶然王國。因此，在組織和利用那些可用資源的各種可能方式和實際方式中間，哪些為最佳發展提供著最大的機會呢？
The attempt to answer these questions demands a series of initial abstractions. In order to identify and define the possibilities of an optimal development, the critical theory must abstract from the actual organization and utilization of society's resources, and from the results of this organization and utilization. Such abstraction which refuses to accept the given universe of facts as the final context of validation, such "transcending" analysis of the facts in the light of their arrested and denied possibilities, pertains to the very structure of social theory. It is opposed to all metaphysics by virtue of the rigorously historical character of the transcendence.' The "possibilities" must be within the reach of the respective society; they must be definable goals of practice. By the same token, the abstraction from the established institutions must be expressive of an actual tendency—that is, their transformation must be the real need of the underlying population. Social theory is concerned with the historical alternatives which haunt the established society as subversive tendencies and forces. The values attached to the alternatives do become facts when they are translated into reality by historical practice. The theoretical concepts terminate with social change.
回答這些問題要求一系列初始的抽象。為了辨明和確定一種最佳發展的各種可能性，批判理論必須從對社會資源的實際組織和利用中，從這種組織和利用的結果中來進行抽象。這樣的抽象拒絕把事實的給定領域當作有效性的最後根據，而對事實的這種「超越」性分析，是按照它們被阻礙和被否定的可能性來進行的，因此，這樣的抽象和分析適合於社會理論的結構本身。它由於「超越」①的嚴格的歷史性而與所有的形上學相對立。上述「可能性」必須處在各個社會力所能及的範圍之內；它們必須是實踐的可以確定的目標。同理，從已確立的制度中進行抽象必須是對一種實際傾向的表達——這就是說，制度的改變必須是作為根基的民眾的實際需要。社會理論涉及這樣的歷史替代性選擇，這些替代性選擇常常作為顛覆性的趨勢和力量出沒於已確立的社會。當它們由於歷史實踐而被變成現實的時候，它們的價值就變成了事實。那些理論概念則隨社會變化而告終。
1 The terms "transcend" and "transcendence" are used throughout in the empirical, critical sense: they designate tendencies in theory and practice which, in a given society, "overshoot" the established universe of discourse and action toward its historical alternatives (real possibilities).
註：①「超越」和「超越性」這兩個術語始終是在經驗的、批判的意義上加以使用的。它們表明理論和實踐中這樣的傾向，這些傾向在既定的社會中超出已確立的思想和行動的範圍，而趨向於它的歷史的替代性選擇（現實的可能性）。
編者註：美國示威者衝擊國會大廈已造成4人去世-新華網
But here, advanced industrial society confronts the critique with a situation which seems to deprive it of its very basis. Technical progress, extended to a whole system of domination and coordination, creates forms of life (and of power) which appear to reconcile the forces opposing the system and to defeat or refute all protest in the name of the historical prospects of freedom from toil and domination. Contemporary society seems to be capable of containing social change qualitative change which would establish essentially different institutions, a new direction of the productive process, new modes of human existence. This containment of social change is perhaps the most singular achievement of advanced industrial society; the general acceptance of the National Purpose, bipartisan policy, the decline of pluralism, the collusion of Business and labor within the strong State testify to the integration of opposites which is the result as well as the prerequisite of this achievement.
但是，在這裡，發達工業社會卻使批判面臨一種被剝奪基礎的狀況。技術的進步擴展到整個統治和協調製度，創造出種種生活（和權力）形式，這些生活形式似乎調和著反對這一制度的各種勢力，並擊敗和拒斥以擺脫勞役和統治、獲得自由的歷史前景的名義而提出的所有抗議。當代社會似乎有能力遏制社會變化——將確立根本不同的制度、確立生產發展的新方向和人類生存的新方式的質變。這種遏制社會變化的能力或許是發達工業社會最為突出的成就；在強大的國家範圍內，大多數人對民族目標和由兩黨支持的政策的接受，多元主義的衰落，企業和勞工組織的溝通，都證明了對立面的一體化，這種一體化既是發達工業社會取得成就的結果，又是其取得成就的前提。
A brief comparison between the formative stage of the theory of industrial society and its present situation may help to show how the basis of the critique has been altered. At its origins in the first half of the nineteenth century, when it elaborated the first concepts of the alternatives, the critique of industrial society attained concreteness in a historical mediation between theory and practice, values and facts, needs and goals. This historical mediation occurred in the consciousness and in the political action of the two great classes which faced each other in the society: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. In the capitalist world, they are still the basic classes. However, the capitalist development has altered the structure and function of these two classes in such a way that they no longer appear to be agents of historical transformation. An overriding interest in the preservation and improvement of the institutional status quo unites the former antagonists in the most advanced areas of contemporary society. And to the degree to which technical progress assures the growth and cohesion of communist society, the very idea of qualitative change recedes before the realistic notions of a nonexplosive evolution. In the absence of demonstrable agents and agencies of social change, the critique is thus thrown back to a high level of abstraction. There is no ground on which theory and practice, thought and action meet. Even the most empirical analysis of historical alternatives appears to be unrealistic speculation, and commitment to them a matter of personal (or group) preference.
把工業社會理論的形成階段和它目前的情況作一個簡要的比較，也許有助於表明批判的基礎是怎樣被變更的。在19世紀上半葉它剛剛起源並制定出一些歷史替代性選擇的最初概念時，工業社會的批判在理論與實踐、價值與事實、需要與目的之間的歷史調和中得到了具體實現。這種歷史調和存在於社會上相互對立的兩大階級——無產階級和資產階級——的意識和政治行動中。在資本主義世界，這兩大階級仍是基本的階級。然而，資本主義的發展已經改變了這兩大階級的結構和功能，使他們不再成為歷史變革的動因。維持和改善現制度這個凌駕於一切之上的利益，在當代社會最發達的地區把先前的敵手聯合起來了。技術的進步在多大程度上保證著共gong產chan主義社會的發展和吸引力，質變的概念就以多大的程度在一種非爆炸性發展的現實主義主張面前退卻。由於缺乏社會變革的明顯動因和代理者，批判又回到了高度抽象的水平。這裡沒有理論與實踐、思想與行動相統一的基礎。甚至對歷史替代性選擇的極其經驗主義的分析看起來也是一種不現實的思辨；對它們的贊成與否則是一種個人（或集團）愛好的問題。
編者註：美國前總統川普個人的喜好
And yet: does this absence refute the theory? In the face of apparently contradictory facts, the critical analysis continues to insist that the need for qualitative change is as pressing as ever before. Needed by whom? The answer continues to be the same: by the society as a whole, for every one of its members. The union of growing productivity and growing destruction; the brinkmanship of annihilation; the surrender of thought, hope, and fear to the decisions of the powers that be; the preservation of misery in the face of unprecedented wealth constitute the most impartial indictment—even if they are not the raison d'être of this society but only its by-product: its sweeping rationality, which propels efficiency and growth, is itself irrational.
那麼，這種缺乏是否駁倒了批判理論？面對明顯矛盾的事實，批判的分析仍然堅持認為質變的需要像以前一樣迫切。誰需要質變呢？回答還是一樣：整個社會，因為它的每一個成員都需要。增長著的生產力和增長著的破壞性的統一；毀滅的外交冒險政策；思想、希望、畏懼對現政權所作決定的屈從；前所未有的富裕中保留著的痛苦，這一切都構成了最為公正的控訴——即使它們不是這種社會存在的根據而只是它的副產品：它那在廣闊範圍內促進了效率和進步的合理性，其自身就是不合理的。
The fact that the vast majority of the population accepts, and is made to accept, this society does not render it less irrational and less reprehensible. The distinction between true and false consciousness, real and immediate interest still is meaningful. But this distinction itself must be validated. Men must come to see it and to find their way from false to true consciousness, from their immediate to their real interest. They can do so only if they live in need of changing their way of life, of denying the positive, of refusing. It is precisely this need which the established society manages to repress to the degree to which it is capable of "delivering the goods" on an increasingly large scale, and using the scientific conquest of nature for the scientific conquest of man.
絕大多數人接受和被迫接受這個社會，並不能減少這個社會的不合理性，使它少受指責。真意識與假意識的區別、真實利益與眼前利益的區別仍然是有意義的。當然，這種區別本身必須是有效的。人們必須看到這種區別，並找到從假意識到真意識、從眼前利益到真實利益的道路。人們只有生活在這樣的需要中才能做到這一點，即改變他們的生活方式的需要、否定那種肯定的東西並對之加以拒絕的需要。而已確立的社會設法要壓抑的正是這種需要，它能夠在多大程度上以不斷擴大的規模「履行諾言」，它就能夠在多大程度上把科學地徵服自然用於科學地徵服人。
Confronted with the total character of the achievements of advanced industrial society, critical theory is left without the rationale for transcending this society. The vacuum empties the theoretical structure itself, because the categories of a critical social theory were developed during the period in which the need for refusal and subversion was embodied in the action of effective social forces. These categories were essentially negative and oppositional concepts, defining the actual contradictions in nineteenth century European society. The category "society" itself expressed the acute conflict between the social and political sphere—society as antagonistic to the state. Similarly, "individual," "class," "private," "family" denoted spheres and forces not yet integrated with the established conditions—spheres of tension and contradiction. With the growing integration of industrial society, these categories are losing their critical connotation, and tend to become descriptive, deceptive, or operational terms.
面對發達工業社會成就的總體性，批判理論失去了超越這一社會的理論基礎。這一空白使理論結構自身也變得空虛起來。因為批判理論的範疇是在這樣的時期得到發展的，在這個時期，拒絕和顛覆的需要體現在有效的社會力量的行動之中。批判理論的範疇實質上是一些用來規定19世紀歐洲社會實際矛盾的否定概念和反對概念。「社會」這一範疇本身曾表示社會地位和政治地位的尖銳衝突，社會是一種與國家對抗的東西。同樣，「個人」、「階級」、「私人」、「家庭」曾經是指還沒與已確立的生活條件一體化的那些領域和力量——緊張和矛盾的領域。隨著工業社會日益發展的一體化，這些範疇正在喪失它們的批判性涵義，而趨於變成描述性、欺騙性或操作性的術語。
編者註：卓別林電影中的「異化」現象。電影《摩登時代》截圖
An attempt to recapture the critical intent of these categories, and to understand how the intent was cancelled by the social reality, appears from the outset to be regression from a theory joined with historical practice to abstract, speculative thought: from the critique of political economy to philosophy. This ideological character of the critique results from the fact that the analysis is forced to proceed from a position "outside" the positive as well as negative, the productive as well as destructive tendencies in society. Modern industrial society is the pervasive identity of these opposites—it is the whole that is in question. At the same time, the position of theory cannot be one of mere speculation. It must be a historical position in the sense that it must be grounded on the capabilities of the given society.
那種想重新獲得這些範疇的批判性內容並理解這一內容如何為社會現實所抹掉的企圖，似乎一開始就是一種倒退，即從參與歷史實踐的理論向抽象思辨倒退：從政治經濟學的批判向哲學倒退。批判的這種意識形態特徵導源於下列事實：它的分析是站在「超乎」社會中肯定的和否定的、建設性的和毀滅性的東西的立場上勉強進行的。當代工業社會是這些對立面的普遍同一——這是一個成問題的總體。同時，理論的立場不可能是純思辨的立場。就它必須以既定社會的能力為基礎而言，它必定是歷史的立場。
This ambiguous situation involves a still more fundamental ambiguity. One-Dimensional Man will vacillate throughout between two contradictory hypotheses: (1) that advanced industrial society is capable of containing qualitative change for the foreseeable future; (2) that forces and tendencies exist which may break this containment and explode the society. I do not think that a dear answer can be given. Both tendencies are there, side by side— and even the one in the other. The first tendency is dominant, and whatever preconditions for a reversal may exist are being used to prevent it. Perhaps an accident may alter the situation, but unless the recognition of what is being done and what is being prevented subverts the consciousness and the behavior of man, not even a catastrophe will bring about the change.
這種含糊不清的情況包含著一種甚至更為根本的含糊性。《單向度的人》將始終在兩種矛盾的假設之間搖擺不定：（1）對可以預見的未來來說，發達工業社會能夠遏制質變；（2）存在著能夠打破這種遏制並推翻這一社會的力量和趨勢。我並不認為能夠作出一個明確的回答。兩種趨勢一起存在著，甚至一種趨勢就存在於另一種趨勢中。第一種趨勢是主要的，並且任何可能存在的推翻這一趨勢的先決條件都正被用來阻止它。或許，一個偶然的事件可以改變這種情況，但除非是對做什麼和不做什麼的認識扭轉了原來的意識和人的行為，否則即使是一場大動亂也不會帶來這種變化。
The analysis is focused on advanced industrial society, in which the technical apparatus of production and distribution (with an increasing sector of automation) functions, not as the sum-total of mere instruments which can be isolated from their social and political effects, but rather as a system which determines a priori the product of the apparatus as well as the operations of servicing and extending it. In this society, the productive apparatus tends to become totalitarian to the extent to which it determines not only the socially needed occupations, skills, and attitudes, but also individual needs and aspirations. It thus obliterates the opposition between the private and public existence, between individual and social needs. Technology serves to institute new, more effective, and more pleasant forms of social control and social cohesion. The totalitarian tendency of these controls seems to assert itself in still another sense—by spreading to the less developed and even to the preindustrial areas of the world, and by creating similarities in the development of capitalism and communism.
分析的焦點是發達工業社會。在發達的工業社會中，生產和分配的技術裝備由於日益增加的自動化因素，不是作為脫離其社會影響和政治影響的單純工具的總和，而是作為一個系統來發揮作用的。這個系統不僅先驗地決定著裝備的產品，而且決定著為產品服務和擴大產品的實施過程。在這一社會中，生產裝備趨向於變成極權性的，它不僅決定著社會需要的職業、技能和態度，而且還決定著個人的需要和願望。因此，它消除了私人與公眾之間、個人需要與社會需要之間的對立。對現存制度來說，技術成了社會控制和社會團結的新的、更有效的、更令人愉快的形式。這些控制的極權主義傾向看起來還在另外的意義上維護著自己：把自己擴展到世界較不發達地區甚至前工業化地區，並造成資本主義發展與共gong產chan主義發展之間的某些相似性。
In the face of the totalitarian features of this society, the traditional notion of the "neutrality" of technology can no longer be maintained. Technology as such cannot be isolated from the use to which it is put; the technological society is a system of domination which operates already in the concept and construction of techniques.
面對這個社會的極權主義特徵，技術「中立性」的傳統概念不再能夠得以維持。技術本身不能獨立於對它的使用；這種技術社會是一個統治系統，這個系統在技術的概念和結構中已經起著作用。
編者註：左側電影海報《斯諾登》。右側紀錄片海報《第四公民》
The way in which a society organizes the life of its members involves an initial choice between historical alternatives which are determined by the inherited level of the material and intellectual culture. The choice itself results from the play of the dominant interests. It anticipates specific modes of transforming and utilizing man and nature and rejects other modes. It is one "project" of realization among others.' But once the project has become operative in the basic institutions and relations, it tends to become exclusive and to determine the development of the society as a whole. As a technological universe, advanced industrial society is a political universe, the latest stage in the realization of a specific historical project—namely, the experience, transformation, and organization of nature as the mere stuff of domination.
一個社會用以組織其成員生活的方式，涉及到在由物質文化和精神文化的固有水平所決定的種種歷史替代性選擇之間進行一種初始選擇的問題。這種選擇本身是佔支配地位的利益發生作用的結果。它預定了改變和利用人以及自然的特殊方式並排斥其他的方式。它是在他者中自我實現的一種「謀劃」。①但是，一旦這種謀劃在基本制度和基本關係中得以實現，它就趨向於變成排他性的，並決定著整個社會的發展。作為一個技術世界，發達工業社會是一個政治的世界，是實現一項特殊歷史謀劃的最後階段，即在這一階段上，對自然的實驗、改造和組織都僅僅作為統治的材料。
2 The term "project" emphasizes the element of freedom and responsibility in historical determination: it links autonomy and contingency. In this sense, the term is used in the work of Jean-Paul Same. For a further discussion see chapter 8 below.
註：①「謀劃"(project)一詞強調在歷史決定中自由和責任的因素：它把自主性和偶然事件聯繫起來。讓-保羅•薩特在他的著作中正是在這個意義上使用這個詞的。
As the project unfolds, it shapes the entire universe of discourse and action, intellectual and material culture. In the medium of technology, culture, politics, and the economy merge into an omnipresent system which swallows up or repulses all alternatives. The productivity and growth potential of this system stabilize the society and contain technical progress within the framework of domination. Technological rationality has become political rationality.
隨著這項「謀劃」的展現，它就形成為話語和行為、精神文化和物質文化的整個範圍。在技術的媒介作用中，文化、政治和經濟都併入了一種無所不在的制度，這一制度吞沒或拒斥所有歷史替代性選擇。這一制度的生產效率和增長潛力穩定了社會，並把技術進步包容在統治的框架內。技術的合理性已經變成政治的合理性。
編者註：1964版《單向度的人》封面
In the discussion of the familiar tendencies of advanced industrial civilization, I have rarely given specific references. The material is assembled and described in the vast sociological and psychological literature on technology and social change, scientific management, corporative enterprise, changes in the character of industrial labor and of the labor force, etc. There are many unideological analyses of the facts—such as Berle and Means, The Modern Corporation and Private Property, the reports of the 76th Congress' Temporary National Economic Committee on the Concentration of Economic Power, the publications of the AFL-CIO on Automation and Major Technological Change, but also those of News and Letters and Correspondence in Detroit. I should like to emphasize the vital importance of the work of C. Wright Mills, and of studies which are frequently frowned upon because of simplification, overstatement, or journalistic ease—Vance Packard's The Hidden Persuaders, The Status Seekers, and The Waste Makers, William H. Whyte's The Organization Man, Fred J. Cook's The Warfare State belong in this category. To be sure, the lack of theoretical analysis in these works leaves the roots of the described conditions covered and protected, but left to speak for themselves, the conditions speak loudly enough. Perhaps the most telling evidence can be obtained by simply looking at television or listening to the AM radio for one consecutive hour for a couple of days, not shutting off the commercials, and now and then switching the station.
在討論發達工業社會這些為人熟知的趨勢時，我很少註明具體的參考文獻。本書的材料是大量社會學和心理學文獻所收集和敘述過的，這些文獻論述了技術、社會變化、科學管理、合作企業、工業勞動的性質和勞動力方面的變化問題。有許多對事實進行非意識形態分析的作品，諸如伯利和米恩斯的《現代公有財產和私有財產》；第76屆國會國民經濟臨時委員會關於《經濟力量的集中》的報告；美國勞聯-產聯關於《自動化和主要技術變化》的各種出版物；此外還有在底特律的《新聞與通訊》與《通訊》雜誌。我想強調一下C-賴特-米爾斯著作的根本重要性，強調一下人們往往因其簡單化、過甚其詞或新聞式文字而對之表示不滿的那些文章的根本重要性：萬斯•帕卡德的《隱藏著的說客》、《想往上爬的人》、《製造浪費的人》；威廉•H-懷特的《馴順的職員》；弗雷德-J•庫克的《戰爭國家》，都屬這一類型。誠然，這些作品由於缺乏理論分析而使所描述狀況的根源被掩蓋和保護起來，不過所描述狀況的根源是不言而喻的，這些狀況足夠說明問題了。或許大多數有力證據都可以通過下述辦法來獲得，即在幾天之內連續收看電視或收聽調頻收音機一小時，不用中斷廣告節目，不時調換一下頻道即可。
My analysis is focused on tendencies in the most highly developed contemporary societies. There are large areas within and without these societies where the described tendencies do not prevail—I would say: not yet prevail. I am projecting these tendencies and I offer some hypotheses, nothing more.
我的分析集中於當代最高度發達的那些社會。在這些社會內外還有許多地區並沒有流行上面所描繪的趨勢——我要說，尚沒有流行。我是在設想這些趨勢並提供一些假設，僅此而已。
節選自
英文版
One-Dimensional Man
作者: Herbert Marcuse
出版社: Routledge
副標題: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society
出版年: 2002-7-13
頁數: 336
定價: GBP 14.99
裝幀: Paperback
叢書: Routledge Classics
ISBN: 9780415289771
中文版
單向度的人
作者: (美)赫伯特·馬爾庫塞
出版社: 上海譯文出版社
副標題: 發達工業社會意識形態研究
原作名: One-Dimensional Man
譯者: 劉繼
出版年: 2006-4
頁數: 234
定價: 20.00元
裝幀: 平裝
叢書: 二十世紀西方哲學譯叢（新版）
ISBN: 9787532739103