Here what I write is the italics preceding by c:
3 According to Marx, this "as he will" forces each
man to view his fellow man as an enemy, a means, an imposed object,
standing in the way of the acquirement or maintenance of property. In
order to retain the right of property, a man must possess property.
Otherwise, the right becomes,hollow and factitious. But, in turn, this
means that each individualm ust accept materialisticg oals as his personal
goals in an attempt to secure both his personal property and his rights.
1 For example, E. From. ed., Socialist Humanism (Garden City: Doubleday &Co., Inc., 1965); R. Tucker, Philosophy and Myth in Karl Marx (Cambridge: UniversityPress, 1964).
If he does not accept materialistic goals, he will be overcome in the
struggle by those who do accept these goals.
Each of the other rights, according to Marx, must be understood as
subservient to the property right. For example, equality in the eyes of
the law: law exists to protect property rights. Therefore, the man devoid
of property has no place before the law.
2 K. Marx, "On the Jewish Question," Karl Marx: Early Writings, trans. T. B.Bottomore (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1963), p. 25.356 PHILOSOPHAYN DP HENOMENOLOGIRCEASLE ARCH
Even though individual workers may not reproduce, many of their same genes are carried and passed on by others in the colony. In this eusocial scheme, naked mole-rats that sacrifice the opportunity to reproduce pass down their genes indirectly by caring for their colony mates. The truth about naked mole rats
Upon Returning. I find I can't believe in nature. There's a whiteness that blinds me every time I look at it. Even when ants are crawling over me, or midges flying into my mouth, there's a profound sense of the unnaturalness of all these organisms, and of my relation to them. I loathe them, and then I loathe them some more because they don't loathe me: they are completely indifferent.
c:[or different?}
c:[or different?}
The only good reason for being a vegetarian is because you hate animals, and can't bear the thought of having them anywhere near you. Anything else is bad faith. You can't love animals. Even the cute-looking ones don't prove the existence of God, they merely exemplify their own unconscious attempt to avoid being killed.
Gosh, I do sound like the sort of person you'd be pleased to invite on a picnic, don't I?
That’s us, of course, which, if you went by the Latin etymology for sapiens would mean that all of us, by definition, are philosophers. Or that we ‘have wisdom/taste’, at least. Seems a little grandiose, though perhaps it is meant ironically (can you have an ironic taxonomy? Of course! Read Borges). As a good rationalist, I do of course believe that the fundamental axiom of philosophy is ‘man thinks’, so it could be worse. Alternatives include ‘homo faber’, ’homo mathematicus’, ‘homo industrialis’, Huizinga’s ‘homo ludens’. I prefer ‘homo antihomo’, which would indicate the primate odd enough to hate itself.
Believers, do not choose the infidels rather than the faithful for your friends. Would you give God a clear proof against yourselves? The Koran, 4:141
That rights, e.g., the property right, cannot be absolute rights is a
perceptive - though almost commonsensical - idea, but it is one that
did not originate with Marx. Rather, this problem of absolute rights has
been apparent to other philosophers. In the First Book of The Republic
Cephalus' definition of right conduct is the rendering to each man his
due. For Socrates this definition is unacceptable since it does not
encompass all of the cases of right conduct. For obviously one would
Also, the very term "equal" in this right can preordain
the inequality of the right in practice. For how can one speak of equality
when individuals are unequal, e.g., in possessions? Unequal individuals
are measured equally by the same yardstick, by the same standard. But
unequals are not equal. The employee is not the employer. This notion
of equality ".. is therefore a right of inequality in its content, like every
right." 4
, man is "mentally and physically
dehumanized,"8 which can be equated with the phrase "alienated
labor." Why alienated? As a direct result of the property right which
emanates from the mode of production, equality has become inequality,
liberty is replaced by self-interest, and security means the protection of
property even when it is the "ownership" of human beings. Since this
property right leads directly to labor which is under the domination of
another man, there is alienation between employer and employee as a
direct function of the disparity in property ownership, use, and need.
There is alienation between worker and worker by virtue of their incessant
strugglef or the fruits of limited employmento pportunitiesT. here is
alienation between the worker and his own work since work is seen as
"unfree activity" borne in the attempt to obtain and retain property.
. The alienated man possesses nothing, not even himself.10 Private
property ". . . is on one hand the product of alienated labor, and on the
other hand the means by which labor is alienated, the realization of his
alienation."
International Phenomenological Society
Karl Marx and the Rights of Man Author(s): Betty A. Sichel
Source: Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 32, No. 3 (Mar., 1972), pp. 355-360 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2105566 .
Marx believes that there will no longer be exploitation,
the evil of property right, and that the freedoms, equality, and
liberty, which had been trampled by private property, will come to the
fore to allow for the authentic dignity of the individual as it could never
exist with "capitalistic" modes of production. Man, instead of being
object, will become subject, the real man absorbing the "abstract
citizen.
not return a weapon to a man who had gone out of his mind (33 le).
Even if he owned the weapon, it is doubtful if anyone would assent to
his retaining it. In itself, taken individually, the property right is not an
absolute right. In addition, not only is a right in itself not absolute, but
also there is the distinct probability that one right may come into conflict
with another right.
, for twentieth century
thinkers, can include other qualities, such as a man's name, his character,
his ideas.'8 If Marx allows for historicosocial process in all human
endeavors and thoughts, then he must allow for the development and
change of any one concept, includingt he meaning of "property
18 E. Kamenka, "Marxian Humanism and the Crisis in Socialist Ethics," Socialist
Humanism, E. Fromm, ed. (Garden City: Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1965), p. 112.
KARL MARX AND THE RIGHTS OF MAN 359
Swedenborg also rejected the doctrine of salvation through faith alone, since he considered both faith and charity necessary for salvation, not one without the other. The purpose of faith, according to Swedenborg, is to lead a person to a life according to the truths of faith, which is charity, as is taught in 1 Corinthians 13:13 and James 2:20.
C:a rattling at the door.
(perhaps that was Swedenborgian demons, who knows
(perhaps that was Swedenborgian demon who knows
Who knows? But more didactically tactic, who wants to know? Or convey. Way.
Down with the fetishisation of the presumed stereotypical bearers of philosophical discourse (or, why it might have been a good idea to have had more than one woman .
C:Well she did not take on me, though I was not applying for comedy. Tragedy?
29 July, 2004
Am writing a lot about Agamben these days, and trying to understand in a 'symptomatic' way why there are just so many bad books about 'humanism' about (and 'antihumanism' - think of John Gray's contemporary cosmic ecological misanthropy). I blame Aristotle, I really do. There's a proper argument for this, honestly, but it all stems from mixing up animato and rationality (one rational animal for sale, anyone? anyone?). The contemporary resurgence of debates surrounding humanism/antihumanism takes up an Aristotelian opposition between life/nonlife, and consequently its understanding of politics is either biological or legal, or an ambiguous concatenation of the two (human 'rights', cf. Agamben's reflections on biopower and biopolitics).
If not rational, as when we are not: spiritual. And what do you call my instinct?
I'm intrigued that the Hitler text has been reprinted. Not sure I have time/stomach to plough through the lot, but might try at some point (tho probably not on the tube)
Feuerbach
The attack on Christianity is followed up in his most important work, Das Wesen des Christentums (1841), which was translated by George Eliot into English as The Essence of Christianity. "In the consciousness of the infinite, the conscious subject has for his object the infinity of his own nature."
Notable ideas
|
Religion as the outward projection of man's inner nature
|
Treating of God in his various aspects "as a being of the understanding," "as a moral being or law," "as love"
Mozart's Requiem
maundy [ˈmɔːndɪ] (maudit).
n pl maundies
(Christianity / Ecclesiastical Terms) Christianity the ceremonial washing of the feet of poor persons in commemoration of Jesus' washing of his disciples' feet (John 13:4-34) re-enacted in some churches on Maundy Thursday
[from Old French mandé something commanded, from Latin mandatum commandment, from the words of Christ: Mandātum novum dō vōbīs A new commandment give I unto you]
pol·i·tic (p k)
adj.
1. Using or marked by prudence, expedience, and shrewdness; artful.
2. Using, displaying, or proceeding from policy; judicious: a politic decision.
3. Crafty; cunning.
politic [ˈpɒlɪtɪk]
adj
1. artful or shrewd; ingenious a politic manager
2. crafty or unscrupulous; cunning a politic old scoundrel
3. sagacious, wise, or prudent, esp in statesmanship a politic choice
[from Old French politique, from Latin polīticus concerning civil administration, from Greek politikos, from politēs citizen, from polis city]
C:No comment. Though it revolutionizes me and should do the same as far as democracy revision is if not tackled addressed at least.
// Posted by InfiniteTh0ught @ 12:07 pm
20 July, 2004
jazz and all that, erm, jazz
don’t leave anyone see your former interview before you perform on them.
And thinking that I was already jealousing the part you granted.
Ok let s forget the ecover then.
'I was surprised by the growing number of protest groups. Leaderless and uncoordinated, they sprang up at dinner parties and PTA meetings. One committee planned a sit-in at the offices of the management company responsible for Chelsea Marina's abysmal services, but most of the residents were now set on a far more radical response to the social evils that transcended the local problems of the estate. They had moved on to wider targets - a Pret a Manger in the King's Road, Tate Modern, a Conran restaurant scheduled for the British Museum, the Promenade Concerts, Waterstone's bookshops, all of them exploiters of middle-class credulity. Their corrupting fantasies had deluded the entire educated caste, providing a dangerous pabulum that had poisoned a spoon-fed intelligentsia. From sandwich to summer school, they were symbols of subservience and the enemies of freedom.' Millennium People, J. G. Ballard.
Am utterly fedup with your word I don’t think in my dictionary.
Historical materialism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness. At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or — this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms — with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. From forms of development, of the productive forces, these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution. The changes in the economic foundation lead, sooner or later, to the transformation of the whole, immense, superstructure.
In studying such transformations, it is always necessary to distinguish between the material transformation of the economic conditions of production, which can be determined with the precision of natural science, and the legal, political, religious, artistic, or philosophic — in short, ideological forms in which men become conscious of this conflict and fight it out.
C:I edit this part not because I don’t believe in god, and whatever I would not like atheism to be the next door imposed religion, but because universe is to search, attend and respect, not to own.
of mental abstractions into the realm of sensuous humanity. For Feuerbach, in essence, all 'theology is anthropology'. The true object of religion is not God but idealized humanity. Religion is the alienated form of the individual's recognition of his or her own nature. God is the creation of the human imagination, unknowingly idealizing itself. Thus, Feuerbach claimed that some radical demythologizing was needed. Love of God is really love of humanity in symbolic inverted form. Theology is kind of psychic pathology. The separation between God and humanity is really a separation within humanity itself. Religion is a form of alienation from our essential natures. The demythologizing was to be accomplished by the technique Feuerbach called 'transformative criticism', namely, the interchanging of the subject and predicate of propositions. For example, an understanding of God is not crucial for understanding humanity; conversely, an understanding of human-ity is crucial for understanding the idea of God. The real subject is humanity, the predicate is God.
IT is interesting in itself and has interesting links.
In “Sexual Politics, Torture, and Time”
Power
nous mind nous = us
noumenal adj
V. We feel and perceive no particular things, save bodies and modes of thought.
- Spinoza, Ethics, Part II, Axioms
- Spinoza, Ethics, Part II, Axioms
