Dialectical Humanism: an Ethic of Self-Actualization
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DIALECTICAL HUMANISM: AN ETHIC OF SELF-ACTUALIZATION BY Hernan David Carrillo Submitted to the graduate degree in Philosophy and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ________________________ Chairperson ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ________________________ Date defended: ______________ The Dissertation Committee for Hernan David Carrillo certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: DIALECTICAL HUMANISM: AN ETHIC OF SELF-ACTUALIZATION Committee: _____________________________ Chairperson _____________________________ _____________________________ _____________________________ _____________________________ Date approved: _________________________ ii Abstract In the history of western philosophy, few thinkers have managed to generate as much controversy and confusion as Karl Marx. One issue caught in this controversy and mired in confusion the presence of evaluative language in Marx’s ‘later’ works. Critics have seized on its presence, contending that it contradicts his theory of history, rendering his critique of political economy nothing more than proletarian ideology. These criticisms are based on an inconsistency that is only apparent. As this dissertation will demonstrate, Marx is able to consistently and objectively combine evaluation and description in his ‘later’ works because embedded within his dialectical method is an ethic of self-actualization I call Dialectical Humanism. Since so much of the confusion surrounding this issue stems from a failure to adequately contextualize it, Chapter I places Marx’s life and thought in proper perspective. With the overview of the development of Marx’s life and thought complete, Chapter II examines his theory of history to understand how it explains socio-historical phenomena. Chapter III elucidates Marx’s humanism, tracing its development from an explicit to an implicit aspect of his thought. In order to understand what Marx truly sought through the transcendence of alienation, Chapter IV carefully examines his solution to the problem of alienation. Chapter V then establishes the ‘internal’ relation between alienation and exploitation. Having thus brought out the connection between Marx’s theories, concepts, and methods, Chapter VI identifies his ethic. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………1 CHAPTER 1: The Realization of a Philosopher...…………………….……………………………..4 CHAPTER 2: A Materialist’s Conception of History………………………………………………..38 CHAPTER 3: “Nothing Human is Alien to Me”……………………………………………………..56 CHAPTER 4: The Problem of Alienation…………………………………………………………….76 CHAPTER 5: The Dismal Road to Science…………………………………………………………..101 CHAPTER 6: Dialectical Humanism…………………………………………………………………124 CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………..162 BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………………..166 iv Introduction If Karl Marx can be likened to a philosophical Prometheus for giving humanity some insight into its social reality, then unbounding him from the misunderstandings surrounding his thought is nothing less than a Herculean labor. With scholars and ideologues locked in conflict over the validity of his thought, it is less a philosophic dispute than a clash of worldviews. While a vast body of literature claims to examine Marx critically, much of it is cast through the lens of ideology. One issue caught in its prism is the presence of evaluative language in Marx’s ‘later’ works. Critics have seized on its presence, contending that it contradicts his theory of history, rendering his critique of political economy nothing more than proletarian ideology. These criticisms are based on an inconsistency that is only apparent. As this dissertation will demonstrate, Marx is able to consistently and objectively combine evaluation and description in his ‘later’ works because embedded within his dialectical method is an ethic of self-actualization I call Dialectical Humanism. Propadeutic to any attempt to resolve this problem, it is essential to place it in its proper context. The whole question of whether Marx’s critical project can effectively combine evaluation and description was originally raised and resolved by actively or tacitly opposing the ‘earlier’ against the ‘later’ writings. With complete and unfettered access to his thought, compelling evidence emerged for understanding this issue in a new light. No longer limited to having to reconstruct Marx’s ethic from the available remnants, it is now possible to derive it from patterns and themes discernible in the whole. While some scholars have acknowledged the possibility that Marx had an ethic of 1 self-actualization, certain factors have detracted from its full acceptance. The only constant operating in the debate is the tendency towards one-dimensional analysis. Whether arguing that Marx is best understood as a philosopher, a revolutionary, or a political economist, or trying to see too little or too much continuity to his thought, the modus operandi has been to represent aspects of his thought as its truth. To date, such partial approaches have only yielded partial truths. Progress beyond this impasse requires recognizing that the problem is complex and as much political as it is philosophical. As one of the most controversial figures in the history of western thought, Marx proves par excellance that philosophy never occurs in a political vacuum. Not only has this fact placed almost every aspect of his thought under contention, but it has completely blurred the line between debate and diatribe. Lest one despair that the siren song of ideology dooms all discussion of Marx to founder upon the rocks of polemic, this isn’t a tendency working itself out with ‘iron necessity.’ Breaking its spell does require puncturing some powerful illusions. Principal amongst them is the idea of pure objectivity. Far from facilitating the pursuit of truth, such preconceptions serve as one of its most powerful preventatives. With the possible exception of certain types of mathematics, there is no branch of study that is purely descriptive. It isn’t a matter of whether we impose our values upon experience, but the extent to which we are conscious of doing so. The danger isn’t necessarily that we value, but what we value. Fortunately, objectivity does not require strict impartiality. It merely requires the capacity to remain critical of one's values. So long as any area of inquiry is pursued critically, it is possible to be partial and objective. What this suggests is that any attempt to advance our understanding of Marx must minimize its tendency towards close- 2 mindedness if we are to maximize our capacity to do so adequately. Proceeding on the belief that Marx must be grasped in whole before he can be understood in part, the best way to begin to see how self-actualization constitutes a controlling concern informing his ethic is to gain an overview of the development of his thought. Précis must precede analysis because any substantive treatment of Marx’s concepts, theories, methods without adequate contextualization risks allowing the delimiting dichotomies of ‘earlier’ and ‘later,’ and ‘humanistic’ and ‘scientific’ to detract from illustrating how his fundamental and long-standing concern with self-actualization remains normative in nature. Although such an approach appears to place this dissertation firmly within the framework of existing essentialist interpretations, the unity it seeks to establish is of a different kind. Critics are right to regard much of what passes as essentialism as reductionism. More often than not, this arises from reliance upon principles and methods that emphasize sameness at the expense of difference. The specific difference between the kinds of crude essentialisms common in Marx scholarship compared to my own is its capacity to identify theme without ignoring variation. By cultivating a nuanced appreciation of his thought, it is possible to demonstrate how it constitutes a unity in diversity (identity-in-difference). Hopefully, what will emerge from reconstructing Marx’s thought in this fashion is the recognition that he needn’t be systematic in order to be thematically consistent, value-free in order to be objective, and that much of what is taken as evidence of his inconsistency and ambiguity in his ethical outlook arises from an inability or unwillingness to appreciate how his fundamental concerns can endure a complex evolution in thought. 3 Chapter I: The Realization of a Philosopher Introduction If political economy is the anatomy of civil society, then biography is the anatomy of a life. Each requires holistic explanation to be fully understood. There is no question that some of Marx’s thought is problematic. Part of the reason his ethical outlook remains unclear resides in his failure to make it explicit, the other part in our failure to reconstruct it adequately. More often than not this stems from an inability to balance the personal and philosophical dimensions of the problem. Although it seems as if Marx’s life and thought can be understood separately, such common-sensical presuppositions are precisely what often lead to repeating and reinforcing the tendency towards one- dimensional analyses. While it’s not necessary to detail every aspect of his life or thought, any adequate analysis must reflect their general influence upon each other. As with much in Marx, the key to understanding his thought lies not only in its origins and ending but also