马克思所处的时代虽尚无区块链技术，但其《资本论》的科技伦理思想却是我们正视区块链技术时代、理解区块链技术、预见区块链技术未来的重要思想资源。《资本论》的科技伦理思想在逻辑上呈现出辩证性、历史性、批判性的思维逻辑特征以及显著的资本逻辑特征，在内涵上呈现出人本性、生态性、阶级性的理论特征。总结并把握这些特征，对深刻理解该思想并用以指导今日科技伦理体系建构、分析科技发展的社会功能、反思区块链科技伦理问题具有重要现实意义。

区块链具有全面重塑人类社会活动形态的潜力，给社会各领域带来质的变革。在经历了区块链1.0（可编程货币）、区块链2.0（可编程金融）与区块链3.0（可编程社会）三个阶段后，区块链的应用早已超越了数字货币与金融领域，提供了一种具有去中心化、多方协同、高度安全等特征的“算法信任”范式，其与社会融合具有合理性。而同时结合区块链技术的层级架构与作为新兴技术的颠覆性、不确定性的特征。可以认为，放任区块链技术无序发展，将会触发诸多如数据资本垄断风险、公众隐私窃取、数字金融犯罪、大规模失业、消解人的主体地位等伦理风险，引起公众道德的谴责，最终导致全局性风险。

基于马克思所处的历史时代和学术背景，关注《资本论》中对于技术伦理问题的道德规范分析，考察马克思对现代技术产生和发展、技术异化现象和其社会形成原因、异化技术的价值评价与其道德重构、消除技术异化之政治伦理途径等方面的伦理思想，进一步探讨《资本论》科技伦理思想的批判和建构功能,在此基础之上，展开对区块链技术异化的价值评价与道德重构的讨论。运用《资本论》科技伦理思想的原理和方法分析当代资本主义和社会主义在区块链技术伦理问题上的抉择问题，可以发现：区块链技术核心层在开发与维护环节的道德标准不明确、区块链技术服务层的运营与管理伦理审查制度不完善、区块链技术应用层的社会融合预测机制未健全。研究显示，将人的全面发展作为区块链技术伦理标准，通过坚持共产主义作为区块链伦理的制度支持，通过提升应急管理能力加强对区块链技术同社会融合的伦理风险掌控，是区块链伦理风险治理的中国方案。

Although there is no blockchain technology in the era of Marx, the scientific and technological ethics of his ‘capital theory’ is an important ideological resource for us to face up to the era of blockchain technology, understand blockchain technology and foresee the future of blockchain technology. The scientific and technological ethics of ‘capitalism’ logically presents dialectical, historical and critical thinking logic characteristics and significant capital logic characteristics, and presents the theoretical characteristics of human nature, ecology and class nature in connotation. Summarizing and grasping these characteristics is of great practical significance for deeply understanding the thought and guiding the construction of today 's science and technology ethics system, analyzing the social function of science and technology development, and reflecting on the ethical issues of blockchain science and technology.

Blockchain has the potential to comprehensively reshape the form of human social activities and bring qualitative changes to all areas of society. After three stages of blockchain 1.0 ( programmable currency ), blockchain 2.0 ( programmable finance ) and blockchain 3.0 ( programmable society ), the application of blockchain has long gone beyond the field of digital currency and finance, providing a ‘algorithmic trust’ paradigm with decentralization, multi-party collaboration, high security and other characteristics, and its integration with society is reasonable. At the same time, it combines the hierarchical structure of blockchain technology with the subversive and uncertain characteristics of emerging technologies. It can be considered that allowing the disorderly development of blockchain technology will trigger many ethical risks such as data capital monopoly risk, public privacy theft, digital financial crime, mass unemployment, and digestion of human subject status, causing public moral condemnation and ultimately leading to global risks.

Based on the historical era and academic background of Marx, this paper focuses on the analysis of the ethical norms of technological ethics in ‘Das Kapital’ , examines Marx’s ethical thoughts on the emergence and development of modern technology, the phenomenon of technological alienation and its social causes, the value evaluation of alienated technology and its moral reconstruction, and the political

and ethical ways to eliminate technological alienation, and further explores the critical and constructive functions of ‘Das Kapital’ technological ethics. On this basis, the value evaluation and moral reconstruction of blockchain technology alienation are discussed. This paper analyzes the choice of contemporary capitalism and socialism on the ethical issues of blockchain technology by using the principles and methods of ‘capital’ scientific and technological ethics. It can be found that the moral standards of the core layer of blockchain technology in the development and maintenance links are not clear, the operation and management ethics review system of the blockchain technology service layer is not perfect, and the social integration prediction mechanism of the blockchain technology application layer is not perfect. The research shows that taking the all-round development of human beings as the ethical standard of blockchain technology, adhering to communism as the institutional support of blockchain ethics, and strengthening the ethical risk control of the integration of blockchain technology with society by improving emergency management ability are the Chinese solutions to blockchain ethical risk governance.

一、学术著作

[1]马克思.资本论(第1卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,2004.

[2]马克思.资本论(第2卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,2004.

[3]马克思.资本论(第3卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,2004.

[4]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯选集(第1卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1972.

[5]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯选集(第3卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1972.

[6]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯文集(第5卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,2009.

[7]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯文集(第8卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,2009.

[8]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集(第2卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1957.

[9]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集(第21卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1980.

[10]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集(第46卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1980.

[11]马克思.1844年经济学哲学手稿[M].北京:人民出版社,2000.

[12]马克思.雇佣劳动与资本[M].北京:人民出版社,2018.

[13]马克思.剩余价值学说史(第1卷)[M].北京:人民出版社,1975.

[14]恩格斯.反杜林论[M].北京:人民出版社,1970.

[15]乔瑞金.马克思技术哲学纲要[M].北京:人民出版社,2002.

[16]汉斯·约纳斯.技术､医学与伦理学:责任原理的实践[M].张荣,译.上海:上海译文出版社,2008.

[17]尤瑞恩·范登·霍温，等.信息技术与道德哲学[M].赵迎欢,等,译.科学出版社,2014.

[18][德]伊曼努尔·康德.道德形而上学原理[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2002.

[19][俄]彼得·科斯洛夫斯基.伦理经济学原理[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,1997.

[20][法]R.舍普等.技术帝国[M].北京:三联书店,1999.

[21][英]克里斯蒂安·福克斯.数字劳动与卡尔·马克思,周延云译[M].北京:人民出版社:2020.

二、期刊论文

[1]曹志平,周千祝.论马克思的“资本-技术”共生体思想[J].厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2022,72(03):1-8.

[2]陈飞.《资本论》的机器观及其人学向度[J]. 教学与研究,2017,No.466(08):40-48.

[3]杜娟. 透视帝国主义在互联网时代的新变化[J]. 马克思主义研究,2018(07):52-59.

[4]付文军.《资本论》的历史哲学意蕴[J].四川大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2023,No.245(02):21-29+187-188.

[5]高奇琦,周荣超.从私权到公权：用公权力来规范私权区块链的发展[J].学习与探索,2021(06):44-50.

[6]高奇琦.区块链在智能社会中的政治经济意义[J].上海师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2021,50(01):108-115.

[7]高奇琦.全球善智与全球合智:区块链全球治理的未来[J].世界经济与政治,2019(7):24-48．

[8]何江新.强人工智能政治伦理的不确定性之中国方案[J].甘肃社会科学,2020(05):53-60.

[9]牟焕森. 国外学者视野中的马克思技术哲学思想[J]. 自然辩证法研究,2002,(02):23-27.

[10]丰子义.从全球化看社会形态的演进[J].河北学刊,2004(01):30-34+49.

[11]李三虎.马克思的技术伦理思想及其地位[J].哲学研究,2005(02):3-11+127.

[12]刘则渊.马克思和卡普:工程学传统的技术哲学比较[J].哲学研究,2002(02):21-27+59.

[13]黄忠义.我国区块链行业应用现状、问题及对策研究[J].科技中国,2020(01):17-26.

[14]李喜英,张荣.一种技术时代的责任伦理何以可能——试论汉斯·约纳斯的责任原理及其实践[J].科学经济社会,2008,110(01):83-86+113.

[15]刘海军. 人工智能的文明作用及其发展悖论——基于马克思《资本论》及其手稿的阐释[J]. 马克思主义研究,2021,No.254(08):87-100.

[16]刘曦子.2019年中国区块链发展形势展望[J].网络空间安全,2019,10(01):31-35.

[17]刘雄伟.《资本论》的技术批判与共产主义[J].南京师大学报(社会科学版),2020,No.232(06):96-104.

[18]梅亮,吴欣桐,王伟楠.科技创新的责任治理:从开放科学到开放社会[J]．科研管理,2019(12):01-10．

[19]莫宏伟.区块链的伦理问题思考[J]．科学与社会,2018(1):14－24．

[20]戚学祥.超越风险:区块链技术的应用风险及其治理[J].南京社会科学,2020(01):87-92.

[21]任颖洁. 《资本论》中“技术进步-产业升级”思想与就业路径研究[J]. 当代经济研究:1-10.

[22]谭九生,杨建武．区块链技术的伦理风险及其协同治理[J].中国行政管理,2019(10):44-50．

[23]王程. 《资本论》中技术创新思想的辩证法[J]. 江苏社会科学,2021,No.319(06):146-154+243.

[24]王维平、韩璐.马克思“从后思索”哲学方法论语境中的“历史思维”[J].山东社会科学,2019,(9):81-87.

[25]王钰,程海东．区块链科技伦理治理内在路径解析[J].自然辩证法通讯,2019(8):87-93．

[26]吴燕妮.金融科技前沿应用的法律挑战与监管——区块链和监管科技的视角[J].大连理工大学学报(社会科学版),2018,39(03):78-86.

[27]吴洋宏,周小亮. 推动高质量发展的《资本论》逻辑基础与拓展分析——基于包容性绿色增长视角[J]. 当代经济管理,2022,44(07):17-23.

[28]杨耕.论马克思的“从后思索法”[J].学术月刊,1992,(5):10-15.

[29]仰海峰.马克思《哲学的贫困》中的历史性思想[J].哲学研究,2020,(5):3-11;128.

[30]于春玲. 《资本论》对技术的文化哲学之思[J]. 马克思主义与现实,2017,No.146(01):22-28.

[31]张庆立.区块链应用的不法风险与刑事法应对[J].东方法学,2019(3):72-86.

[32]赵磊,石佳.依法治链:区块链的技术应用与法律监管[J].法律适用,2020,No.444(03):33-49.

[33]周士跃. 《资本论》及其手稿中科技思想及其对创新驱动发展战略的现实启示[J]. 改革与战略,2017,33(11):79-82.

三、报纸文件

[1]习近平.高举中国特色社会主义伟大旗帜 为全面建设社会主义现代化国家而团结奋斗[N].人民日报,2022-10-26(001)

[2]中共中央办公厅、国务院办公厅.关于加强科技伦理治理的意见[N]. 人民日报,2022-03-21(001).

[3]倪思洁,韩扬眉.科技伦理治理需破壁垒、明权责、共参与[N].中国科学报,2022-03-22(001).

[4]叶蓁蓁.推动区块链安全有序发展(新论)[N].人民日报,2019-11-05(09).

四、英文文献

[1]R.Westrum.Technologies and Society, the taping of People and Things Wadsworth,[M].Inc.1991.

[2]Rosenberg N.Inside the Black Box. Cambridge[M]．Cambridge University:Press,1982.

[3]SWAN·M. Blockchain: blueprint for a new economy[M].New York:O’Reilly Media Inc,2015.

[4]ANGEL J, MCCABE D. The Ethics of Payments: Paper, Plastic, or Bitcoin?[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 2015, 132(3): 603-611．

[5]Ismail L, Materwala H. A review of blockchain architecture and consensus protocols: Use cases, challenges, and solutions[J]. Symmetry, 2019, 11(10): 1198.

[6]Karen Yeung, Regulation by Blockchain: The Emerging Battle for Supremacy Between the Code of Law and Code as Law,The Modern Law Review[J].2019,82(02):207-239．

[7]KEWELL B, ADAMS R, PARRY G,et al.Blockchain for Good[J].Strategic Change,2017,26(5):429-437.

[8]Lind J, Naor O, Eyal I, et al. Teechain: a secure payment network with asynchronous blockchain access[C]//Proceedings of the 27th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles. 2019: 63-79.

[9]Nakamoto S. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system[J]. Decentralized Business Review, 2008:1-9.

[10]Pasztor,J. Bitcoin Investing-An Ethical and Regulatory Quandary[J]. Journal of Financial Service Professionals, 2018,72 (02):30-33．

[11]Upadhyay N. Demystifying blockchain: A critical analysis of challenges, applications and opportunities[J]. International Journal of Information Management, 2020, 54(102120):1-26.

[12]Zachariadis M, Hileman G, Scott S V. Governance and control in distributed ledgers: Understanding the challenges facing blockchain technology in financial services[J]. Information and Organization, 2019, 29(02):105-117.

[13]KRUGMAN P. Krugman: Bubble, bubble, fraud and trouble[DB/OL]. (2018-01-30)[2023-03-22]. http://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion/outlook/article/krugman-Bubble-bubble-fraud-and-trouble-12537817.php.

[14]Wikipedia. Proof of space[EB/OL].WikiMili.(2022-07-13)[2023-03-28],https://wikimili.com/en/Proof_of_space.