在目前对资本主义社会“原子化外观”的批判中，学界集中引用了《论犹太人问题》中的文本来支持自己的论点。这一方面与《神圣家族》中“市民社会的成员根本不是什么原子”的表述形成了明显的矛盾，另一方面混淆了人本学的批判和事实与价值相统一的批判。事实上，马克思对“原子式个人”的批判经历了一个从“批判的武器”到“武器的批判”的过程，从起源学和发生学的动态视角切入，才能充分展现马克思不同阶段的思想特质及其成因，探寻马克思对自身思想中契约论因素和人本学因素的清理，概括马克思在理论观点和思维方式方面对启蒙主义的超越，凸显马克思“原子式个人”批判思想原貌的独特价值和现实意义。首先，从理论语境上看，苏格兰启蒙运动为代表的市民文化、黑格尔对“原子式个人”的批判及青年黑格尔派对希腊化哲学的研究是马克思讨论“原子式个人”的思想来源。在这一思想史进程中，“原子”概念逐渐向市民社会下沉，并从抽象走向具体，借助古希腊“原子”自足、偶然的特征，马克思接续了对政治哲学自主、利己的“原子”的讨论。其次，在思想发展分期方面，马克思早期对“原子式个人”的批判经历了革命民主主义阶段、人本学阶段和正式清算阶段。在《博士论文》中，马克思就已经注意到原子作为“抽象个别性”的局限，并试图将原子放置在关系中考察。在《博士论文》和《莱茵报》政论中，马克思主要是站在自由主义立场上对神学“位格主义”传统予以价值批判，其没有突破霍布斯、卢梭以“原子式个人”为起点的契约论思维范式。直到《黑格尔法哲学批判》中，马克思才通过批判黑格尔市民社会的二元论问题意识到“原子式个人”与市民社会实际图景的差异，并在逻辑上达成对契约论方案的初步拒斥。在《论犹太人问题》中，马克思通过对“政治解放”和“人类解放”的区分扬弃了革命民主主义立场，不再将“原子”作为理解市民社会事实的理论起点。不过，他仍然在人本学的视域下使用“原子”一词对市民社会进行道德批判。直至《神圣家族》，马克思基于对市民社会生产关系的前提性理解，再次借助“原子-虚空”的比喻提出了“市民社会的成员绝不是原子”的说法，明确告别了自身思想中原子论因素的残余。最后，马克思对“原子式个人”的批判充分体现了他从抽象到具体、从实体到关系的辩证思维路径，原初历史的创见对契约论自然状态的取代，以及马克思“原子”概念的功能从原本批判向副本批判的转化。马克思“原子式个人”批判思想作为对西方近代政治哲学的超越，对于重新反思中国现代化进程中的个体境遇、价值规范、共同体发展，从理论高度理解人类文明新形态和人类命运共同体的科学构想具有启示性意义。

In the current criticism of the atomistic appearance of capitalist society, the researchers have mainly focused on citing the text in On the Jewish Question to support their arguments. On the one hand, it clearly conflicts with the statement in The Holy Family that "the members of civil society are not atoms". On the other hand, it confuses the humanistic criticism and the criticism based on the unification of fact and value. Actually, Marx's criticism of the "atomistic individual" went through a process from the "weapon of criticism" to the "criticism of weapon". Only based on a dynamic exploration of the origin and genesis, it can be possible to fully demonstrate the characteristics and causes of Marx's thoughts at different stages, to explore Marx's criticism of contractarianism and humanistic factors in his own thoughts, and to summarize Marx's transcendence of Enlightenment in terms of opinions and thinking models. Accordingly, the unique value and practical significance of Marx's criticism of "atomistic individual" will be highlighted.

Firstly, from the perspective of theoretical context, the civic culture represented by the Scottish Enlightenment, Hegel's criticism of "atomistic individual" and young Hegelians' study of Hellenistic philosophy are the theoretical sources of Marx's discussion of "atomistic individual". In this history of philosophy theory, the concept of "atom" gradually sank into the exploration of civil society, and its connotation moved from abstract to concrete. With the help of the self-sufficient and accidental characteristics of "atom" in ancient Greek philosophy, Marx developed his discussion of the autonomous and egoistic "atom" in terms of political philosophy.

Secondly, as for the stage of Marx's the theoretical development, his early criticism of "atomistic individual" mainly experienced the period of revolutionary democracy, the period of humanism and the period of explicit sublation. In his doctoral dissertation, Marx had already noticed the limitations of the atom as "abstract individuality" and attempted to put them in relation. While in Marx's doctoral dissertation and those political essays in The Rhine Newspaper, Marx mainly opposed the tradition of theological "Personality" and its value from a liberalism standpoint and didn’t break the contractarianism thinking paradigm starting from the "atomistic individual" which Hobbes and Rousseau held. It was not until the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right that Marx realized the inconformity between "atomistic individual" and the reality of civil society. He logically reached a preliminary rejection of the social contract theory by criticizing the problem of dualism triggered by Hegel's explanation of civil society. In On the Jewish Question, Marx sublated the standpoint of revolutionary democracy by distinguishing between "political emancipation" and "human emancipation", and no longer took "atom" as the starting point for understanding the facts of civil society. However, he still uses the term "atom" to conduct moral criticism of civil society from the perspective of humanism. Until The Holy Family, based on the premise criticism of the production relations in civil society, Marx once again used the analogy of "atom-vacuum" and proposed the statement that " the members of civil society are not atoms ", marking a clear farewell to the factors of atomism in his own thought.

Finally, Marx's criticism of the "atomistic individual" adequately reflects his dialectical thinking path moving from abstraction to concreteness and from entity to relationship. His innovation of the original history replaced the natural state in social contract theory. Accordingly, the function of Marx's "atomic" concept transformed from original criticism to copy criticism. As a transcendence of modern Western political philosophy, Marx's criticism of "atomistic individual" has enlightening significance for rethinking the individual situation, normative values and community development in the process of China's modernization. It can be also thought-provoking for understanding the new model for human progress and the scientific concept of a global community with shared future from a theoretical perspective.