MULTITUDE OF BLOGS None of the PDFs are my own productions. I've collected them from web (e-mule, avax, libreremo, socialist bros, cross-x, gigapedia..) What I did was thematizing. This blog's project is to create an e-library for a Heideggerian philosophy and Bourdieuan sociology Φ market-created inequalities must be overthrown in order to close knowledge gap. this is an uprising, do ya punk?

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Hyppolite - Studies on Marx and Hegel [made in istanbul]

hyppolite reloaded!

from eon on this book is non-extant, disenclosure unworks, categorical imperative renders word common.

This collection of essays is a welcome addition to the literature on the early Marx and the relationship to Hegel. They were first published in book form in French in 1955. Half the essays are on Hegel and half are on Marx, and it is the second series that will be of greatest interest to sociologists. Of these, two are of major importance: one is a commentary on Marx's 1843 Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right, a document that importance of which for Marx's development is only just being discovered. The second claims that Capital is unintelligible apart form the philosophical presuppositions that underly it, presuppositions to be found in Marx's early writings and even further back in Hegel. This is particularly interesting at a time when the publication in English of substantial excerpts of the Grundrisse, interest is reviving in Marx's later writings. The most interesting of the essays on Hegel deals with Lukacs' book on The Young Hegel and spells out in detail the notions of alienation and objectification, notions that were identical for Hegel but not for Marx. Two criticisms must be made: firstly, it is very difficult to tell when and where any of the essays were published for the first time; secondly, the introduction to this sort of a book should either deal with the background to Hyppolite's essays, so that the reader can approach them with the knowledge of context, or a critical assessment of them - or even both. Here, however, the 'Introduction' is a little - and wholly admirable - essay comparing the views of Hegel and Marx on history with no reference to what is supposed to be introducing.

stoekl has a nice article 'Round Dusk: Kojève at "The End" have a look,

No comments: