From: Dogan Goecmen (Dogangoecmen@AOL.COM)
Date: Wed Nov 01 2006 - 11:48:05 EST
Karl Marx (1818-1883) was born in Trier/Germany and originates from a Jewish family. His parents were very much attached to the values of humanism, European Enlightenment and French socialism. Following his father’s advice he started studying Jurisprudence, but soon he discovered that he was more attracted to philosophy than Jurisprudence. He studied in Berlin between 1836 and 1841 philosophy in an intellectual atmosphere which was still dominated by Hegelian philosophy. His doctoral thesis was on the difference between Democritus’ and Epicurus’ natural philosophy. After his studies he worked as the chief editor of the Rheinische Zeitung. But because of its leftwing radical views the paper was soon banned. He went to Paris where he met his friend Friedrich Engels (1820-1895) in 1844. From now on almost everything they produced was more or less a common work. The aim of Marx was to develop a total critique of capitalism by analyzing its inner logic (immanent critique). It is sometimes suggested that there is shift or even break between his early and later works. But his whole work may well be seen as a continuation and development of his original aim. He pursued the same question: what is the foundation of a total critique of capitalism. The essence of the whole work of Marx’s is expressed best in his famous 11th thesis on Feuerbach. He asserts: The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it. This statement of Marx’s is often interpreted in a pure actionist sense as if Marx would discard philosophy. However, Marx never gave up philosophy. Rather, he wanted to rescue philosophy from its, say, abstract from and get it involved in practical issues. His program to change the world has two interwoven aims: to revolutionize philosophy and all the rest of theoretical fields and change the world with the revolutionized scientific-philosophical method. The term critique assumes therefore a central role in his work. He starts with the critique jurisprudence, continues with the critique of philosophy and over the critique of politics he arrives at the critique of political economy. The critique of political economy is, then, the basis from which he wants to develop his total critique of capitalist social formation including the state, moral, legal system. Some scholars suggest therefore aptly starting studying Marx’s work from the Capital and viewing his earlier works from this more mature work. Two concepts are essential to understand Marx’s system: dialectical and historical materialism. Dialectic is an Ancient Greek concept but may also be found in the philosophy of other civilizations. It is a theory of logic which wants to reflect the structure and the development of the world. Most comprehensive system of dialectic is developed by Hegel in its idealist form. It is a theory of the motion of the terms. Marx gains his theory of logic by reversing the Hegelian system. It is therefore called dialectical materialism. It wants to explain genesis of the motion in the world from within. It implies that there are laws of motion, which govern nature, society and thought. These fundamental laws concern the nature of natural and social phenomena. It suggests, first, that every natural and social phenomenon may be seen as a unity of opposing qualities. The contradiction or struggle between these opposing qualities is then the cause of motion. It supposes that, second, this motion proceeds from gradual quantitative changes to a revolutionary change of quality. It assumes that, third, in this process of revolutionary change there is a permanent process of negation, which brings about new qualities. Historical materialism is the application of dialectic to society and social history. It implies that the production of the means of subsistence is prerequisite for human history and assumes a complex set of factors that are responsible for the changes in the history of human kind. The change in the history of society derives, on the one hand, from the appropriation or humanization of nature by means of labor, and, on the other hand, from social class struggles in a given society. It explains the genesis of the state, religion, metaphysics, morality and system of law (superstructure) by referring to material relationships (structure) prevailing in a given society. According to Marx (and Engels) every social formation has its specific form of the production of the means of subsistence, which also establishes its adequate ideological superstructure. Doğan Göçmen
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 30 2006 - 00:00:06 EST