为了回答曾簇林教授《马克思关于“美的规律”的客观性再说》一文对我的批评,我最近撰写了《三论“美的规律”及其客观性问题》与其再商榷;但当时文章还未及发表,就看到了她又一篇批评我的长文《三说马克思关于“美的规律”的客观性——并致朱立元同志》(以下简称《三说》)。仔细拜读了她的文章,觉得新意不多,基本上是对她前一篇文章《再说》的复述,只是论述更为繁琐、庞杂些,逻辑也似乎更为混乱些。本不拟另写文章回应,但考虑到:第一,来而不往非礼也,曾先生一而再、再而三地批评我,我若置之不理,有拂她的苦心;第二,《三说》毕竟在论述 In order to answer Professor Keng’s speech on the objectivity of “the objectivity of Marx’s theory on beauty,” I recently wrote a remarks on “the law of beauty” and “its objectivity” in the “three theories.” However, At that time, the article was yet to be published, and saw another piece of paper that criticized my long article “Three Karl Marx’s Theory on Beauty” and “Made Comrade Zhu Lianyuan” (hereinafter referred to as “the three”). Carefully read her article, I feel very little new, is basically a rehearsal of her previous article “to say”, but the more elaborate discussion, more complicated logic seems to be more chaotic. This article does not intend to write an article to respond to, but takes into consideration: first, criticizing me again and again and again without criticism; and if I ignore it and brush her heart, secondly, “three Say ”After all, the discussion