These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.

These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [xmca] Where is thinking



Andy,

I don't see the mixing of Hegelian and existentialist concepts as
problematic. Existentialism started with Kierkegaard, right? He was writing
a kind of anti-Hegelianism, in which rather than there being a logic that
guarantees the movement of spirit, there are moments in which a leap is
necessary. He wrote of a "leap of faith" but (just as with Hegel) a secular
reading is possible. These are the moments when humans must choose, without
guarantees, without certainty, without transparent rationality.

So existentialism has always had ties to Hegel. The existential-Marxists, it
seems to me, were rediscovering in Marx what Michael just mentioned, a place
for agency on the level of the individual. That has been a valuable
counterpoint to those readings that find in Marx, like Hegel, only an
anonymous movement to the historical process in which no genuine choices are
available.

Martin


On 4/21/09 10:28 AM, "Andy Blunden" <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:

> I'm actually quite fond of Sartre, Martin, and I appreciate
> his efforts in "Critique of Dialectical Reason" to make
> something like an activity reading of Hegel. It is the
> eclectic mixing up of Existentialist concepts with Marxist
> or Hegelian concepts that I object to. What does "Being"
> mean? It depends doesn't it, whether you are reading Hegel,
> Engels or Heidegger. I can't cope with mixing up these
> sources indiscriminately.
> 
> There may be differences between French and German Marxism,
> but I think we are here talking about post-WW2 Marxism, yes?
> and the particular experiences of Algeria, 1968, Berlin, the
> PCF, etc., and Kojeve. And there is no doubt that the legacy
> of the French Revolution still figures hugely in France.
> 
> But I really think this has little to do with a reading by
> Marx or French Marxists of the master-servant narrative at
> any time earlier than 1933.
> 
> For a start, the Phenomenology had not even been translated
> into French until 1939. So a knowledge of the master-servant
> narrative was kept to a pretty small group in France. A few
> professional philosophers like Koyre and Hyppolite.
> 
> When I started up the Hegel-by-HyperText website in 1999, it
> intrigued me that I got mail from two quite distinct groups
> of people. One of these groups I just could not understand
> what they were talking about. After a while I realised that
> these were people who had read Kojeve or were reading Hegel
> in the wake of Kojeve. This is a completely different
> philosopher than the one I learnt as a Marxist, reading
> Marxists texts and then moving on from Marx, Lenin and
> Lukacs to study Hegel's Logic. This other group only knew
> these 2% of Hegel's first book. The other group usually knew
> only the Logic and Philosophy of Right, the books that Marx,
> Engels, Lenin, Lukacs & Co. commented on.
> 
> Why not read my book Martin? Much easier to read than the
> Phenomenology!
> 
> Andy


_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca