Divergent Paths: Hegel in Marxism and Engelsism (The Hegelian Foundations of Marx's Method)
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
Divergent Paths is the first volume of a groundbreaking three-volume work. Its purpose is to explore the relationship between Hegel and Marx; to define the relationship between Hegel and Engels; and to distinguish between the theories of Marxism and Engelsism. Marx used Feuerbach towards the critique and ultimate transformation of Hegel's phenomenology and humanism. This transformation, which cut out Hegel's idealism by identifying the environment in which people produced their sustenance as the subject of history, marks the genesis of historical materialism. Marx continued to use Hegel's logical categories. In chapter three of Divergent Paths, Norman Levine conducts an in depth study of Marx's 1841 doctoral dissertation, The Difference Between Democritus' and Epicurus' Philosophy of Nature. It is the center of gravity and controversy of Levine's study. Placed alongside Hegel's Philosophy of History, Levine isolates the categories Marx appropriated from Hegel to show, conclusively, that Marx was not a dialectical materialist. Levine then claims that Engels totally distorted the Hegelian legacy, and this debasement is enshrined in his 1887 essay 'Ludwig Feuerbach and The End of Classical German Philosophy.' Levine brilliantly locates Marxism as the theory of Marx, and Engelsism the theory of Engels. According to Levine both embodied a separate view of history and society, and their contradictions are expressive, in part, of their divergent receptions of Hegel. This is an analysis like no other published to date with two more volumes planned. Philosophers, sociologists, anthropologists and historiographers of Marx and Engels cannot afford to miss this study.
one extreme to another. The philosophical systems of Stoicism, and Epicureanism are such; Skepticism forms the negative of this dogmatism, while the other philosophies disappear. The third period is the affirmation, the withdrawal of the opposition into an ideal world, or a world of thought, a divine world. This is the idea developed into a totality, which yet lacks subjectivity as the infinite being-in-itself.(37) In these passages Hegel outlined the development of Greek and Roman philosophy
The System of Ethical Life, Jenaer Realphilosophie I and II, as well as Hegel’s extended commentary on Steuart and his knowledge of Adam Smith, became sources for the supersession of History and Class Consciousness. The possession of these new sources demanded that Lukacs present a new vision of Hegel, and he did. They also demanded that he offer a new vision of Marx as well as a new formulation of Hegelianized Marxism, and he did. Relying upon these new bibliographical sources, Lukacs painted a
1974. Iljenkow, E.W. Die Dialektic des Abstrakten und Konkreten in “Kapital” von Karl Marx. Berlin, West Germany: Verlag Das Europäische Buch, 1979. Jedrestski, Joachim. Gutzkow als Pionier des Literarischen Journalismus. Frankfurt, West Germany: Suhrkamp, 1988. Jones, Gareth Stedman. “Engels and the History of Marxism.” In The History of Marxism. Edited by Eric Hobsbawm. Vol. 1. Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 1982: 290—326. ———. “Introduction”, The Communist Manifesto. New
estrangement from his father and family. The young Engels’s divided self, Young German rebel at night and ambitious, rising business entrepreneur during the day, is clearly captured in his early correspondence with his sister Marie Engels and to his friends, the Pastors Friedrich and Wilhelm Graeber, which spanned the years 1838—1842. In essence, the young Engels engaged in two separate correspondences, one with his sister, in which he dealt with the details of his everyday life, in which he
dialectic of consciousness in Hegel appeared to be a formula by which mind constantly negated the objective, and the dialectical made the unity of subject and object an impossibility. Schelling also charged that mind could never certify being. Negative philosophy, which claimed the exclusivity of reason, must always be contained within reason. The dialectic, purely a procedure of consciousness, must remain within consciousness, could never pass beyond it, and thus could offer no proof of being.