From: Jurriaan Bendien (adsl675281@TISCALI.NL)
Date: Sat Sep 30 2006 - 07:29:19 EDT
I notice that the article begins with the statement that "Karl Marx's materialistic philosophy of history might seem to exclude all possibilities of a spiritual dimension to human existence." This just shows what a terrible caricature the ruling Marxisms have made of Marx. Still, it seems difficult to reconcile Marx with Buddhism, given e.g. Marx's comments on religion in "A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right" http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/critique-hpr/index.htm, which refer to the practical, specific and active overcoming of the conditions that create human suffering, rather than the abstract eternalization of suffering (or its overcoming by means of the destruction of the self, and quietist meditation/contemplation). I would say that the evidence is that for Marx, need and desire are part of what it means to be human - so it's not a question of wandering around with a begging bowl or clutching a horse's neck, but of trying to satisfy those needs and desires practically, in healthy ways, and thus realise human potential. For that reason, I don't think Nietzsche's in-denial philosophy would have appealed to Marx - who rarely told people how, in general, they should live but lived his own life (one of the very few comments he made in this regard is recorded by Paul Lafargue: ""Science must not he a selfish pleasure," [Marx] used to say. "Those who have the good fortune to be able to devote themselves to scientific pursuits must be the first to place their knowledge at the service of humanity." One of his favourite sayings was: "Work for humanity."." http://marxists.architexturez.net/archive/lafargue/1890/xx/marx.htm Jurriaan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Oct 02 2006 - 00:00:07 EDT