In his recommendation on the reverse of Konstantinos Kavoulakos’s Georg Lukács’s Philosophy of Praxis, Jay Bernstein refers to Lukács’s vision of transformative praxis as being ‘too far ahead of its time’. This echoes a point made by Fredric Jameson in Valences of the Dialectic, in which he refers to History and Class Consciousness (1923) as a text that is ‘yet to be written’, which ‘lies ahead of us in historical time’ (Jameson, 2009: 222). Both of these comments suggest that Georg Lukács’s essays of the early 1920s are not merely historical artefacts, even if that would be sufficient cause to absorb our interest. They indicate that Lukács’s revolutionary writings, far from a ‘finished case’, are part of an ongoing project pertinent to the present and the future. With this rigorous piece of scholarship, Kavoulakos suggests just such a fresh start for Lukács’s ‘dialectical-practical theory of modernity’ (p. 2), enabling its politicaltheoretical and philosophical resources to find renewed resonance in a different historical moment. The book’s aim is

中文翻译：

---

退一步，前进两步：新康德主义与卢卡奇的变革实践

在他对康斯坦丁诺斯·卡沃拉科斯的乔治·卢卡奇的实践哲学的反面的建议中，杰伊·伯恩斯坦将卢卡奇的变革实践愿景称为“太超前了”。这呼应了弗雷德里克·詹姆逊在《辩证法的价》中提出的观点，他将历史与阶级意识（1923 年）称为“尚未写成”的文本，它“在历史时期摆在我们面前” , 2009: 222)。这两种评论都表明，乔治·卢卡奇 (Georg Lukács) 1920 年代初期的文章不仅仅是历史文物，即使这足以引起我们的兴趣。它们表明，卢卡奇的革命性著作远非“已完成的案例”，而是与现在和未来相关的正在进行的项目的一部分。凭借这份严谨的奖学金，Kavoulakos 为卢卡奇的“现代性辩证实践理论”（第 2 页）提出了这样一个新的开始，使其政治理论和哲学资源能够在不同的历史时刻找到新的共鸣。本书的目标是