“物象化”（Versachlichung）是马克思使用的概念，其核心含义是人的关系转化为物的属性。这一概念旨在揭示资本主义社会中物与人的颠倒，即物的力量成为主宰并统治着人的现实状况。与以人们往将统治着人的神秘力量归结为宗教力量、实体性观念或自然规律不同，马克思将其归结为资本的拜物教，并通过物象化概念揭示了现实中物与人的颠倒结构实际上是由人们的历史活动产生的道理。在物象化概念的研究史上，早期的研究者如韦伯、卢卡奇和鲁宾等提出了与物象化相关的物化、拜物教理论；广松涉则通过提出“从异化论到物象化论”的飞跃命题首次使物象化成为一个独立的研究主题。然而，由于他过度依赖现象学理论来说明物的关系在存在论上的优先性，缺乏对物与人之间颠倒的足够关注，这与马克思本人的理论倾向有着本质的不同。广松涉之后，日本的马克思主义者将马克思的物象化和黑格尔哲学结合起来，将物象化重新解释为具备黑格尔哲学“科学（Wissenschaft）”结构的概念；并对资本主义社会中的物象化现象进行概念分层；形成了一个物象化程度逐渐加深的动态的物象化理论模型，从而开启了马克思本人语境下的“物象化理论结构”的构建工作。本研究旨在上述成果的基础上，通过对物象化基本规定和方法论特征的考察，系统地探讨物与人的颠倒结构的形成、内部层次及其加深过程来重构马克思本来的物象化概念，以推进上述构建“物象化理论结构”的工作：首先，本文使用文本考证的方法，探讨了马克思本人对物象化的基本规定，以《剩余价值理论》中的“最高度的物象化”理论为基础，提出物象化的三个方法论特征：独立化、无中介、无概念，并通过引入黑格尔的相关论述来对这一物象化的方法论特征进行补强。其次，在此基础上借助《德意志意识形态》和所谓的《拜物教笔记》等新文本，将物象化理论置入更广阔的人类历史视角中，探讨物与人的颠倒结构在历史中的产生和发展过程，指出物象化现象并非是由现实之外的抽象观念造成的，而是由人的历史活动的狭隘性所引发的。最后，借助《资本论》等文本，通过刻画出物象化在商品、货币、资本以及生息资本中的不断加深和客观化的过程，说明物对人的统治并非意识的主观错认，而是现实地存在于资本主义的经济生活之中。总之，本研究证明了，资本主义的拜物教通过物象化将自身伪装成了物的自然属性，但其本质却仍然是人们的活动所形成的社会力量。
"Reification" (Versachlichung) is a concept employed by Marx, fundamentally signifying the transformation of human relations into attributes of objects. This concept exposes the inversion of roles between things and humans in capitalist societies, where the power of objects dominates and governs human realities. Marx diverged from earlier interpretations that attributed these governing powers to religious, philosophical, or natural laws, instead linking them to capitalist fetishism of commodities and using the concept of reification to demonstrate that this structural inversion is a product of human historical activities.Historically, early scholars like Weber, Lukács, and Rubin introduced theories related to reification and fetishism. Hiromatsu Wataru then established reification as a standalone research topic by proposing the transition from alienation to reification. However, Hiromatsu‘s over-reliance on phenomenology to explain the ontological precedence of object relations led to an underemphasis on the inversion between things and humans, which significantly differs from Marx’s theoretical orientation. Subsequent Japanese Marxists integrated Marx’s reification with Hegelian philosophy, reinterpreting it as a concept with a structure akin to Hegel’s "science (Wissenschaft)." They layered the phenomena of reification in capitalist societies into a dynamic theoretical model of progressively intensifying reification, thus beginning the construction of a "reification theoretical structure" within the context of Marx’s ideas.This study, building on these achievements, systematically explores the formation, internal hierarchy, and intensification process of the inversion structure between things and humans to reconstruct Marx‘s original concept of reification. Initially, through textual analysis, this research explores Marx’s basic stipulations on reification, based on the "highest degree of reification" theory from "Theories of Surplus Value," identifying three methodological characteristics of reification: autonomization, no mediation, and no concept, and enhancing these characteristics through relevant discussions from Hegel. Subsequently, utilizing texts like "The German Ideology" and the so-called "Notes on Fetishism," this paper contextualizes the reification theory within a broader historical perspective, examining the historical emergence and development of the inversion structure, and asserting that reification phenomena are not caused by abstract ideas external to reality but by the limitations of human historical activities. Lastly, employing texts such as "Capital," the study illustrates the deepening and objectification process of reification in commodities, money, capital, and interest-bearing capital, showing that the domination of things over humans is not merely a subjective misrecognition but a tangible reality in the economic life of capitalism. In summary, this research demonstrates that capitalist fetishism, through reification, masquerades as the natural properties of objects, yet its essence remains a social force shaped by human activity.
