False Consciousness. The concept of false consciousness is a  complex 
cognitive-epistemological and socio-economic political concept. It was  first 
explored in some details by the philosophers of the Scottish Enlightenment  
prominently by Adam Smith and Adam Ferguson but came to be associated with the  
work of 
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. The concept occurs in Marx’s and Engels’  
work at a junction point of various equally complex concepts like theory of  
history, social class, consciousness, social and self consciousness, class  
consciousness, commodification and commodity fetishism, ideology and  
alienation. 
It is often claimed (e.g Joseph McCarney) that Marx does not use the phrase  
false consciousness and Engels is, then, referred to as the only one to use 
it.  This is not true. Both of them use the term. But though it is one of the 
most  central Marxian terms each uses it only once in their whole (published) 
work.  But the use of the Hegelian category of appearance is essential here. 
One 
of the  meanings of the category appearance in Hegelian system is distorted 
and  deceiving reflection of the nature of things. Besides all sorts of 
different  meanings of the term in Hegelian philosophy, Marx and Engels use it 
also 
to  refer to distorted knowledge and or inadequate expression of reality. Marx 
uses  the term in an 1854 in New York published essay Der Ritter vom 
edelmütigen Bewußsein (The knight of noble-minded  consciousness). However, he 
uses it 
not in a conceptual way to categorise a  certain phenomenon. Rather, he merely 
remarks polemically against A. Willich  that he (Willich) is suspecting 
behind the right facts false consciousness. The  connotation of Engels’ usage 
of 
the term is something more substantial but  curious enough it does not occur in 
one of his major writings. In a letter to  Franz Mehring from 14 July 1893 he 
discusses the genesis of  ideology (superstructure) and how it affects 
structure. He admits that he and  Marx emphasized how structure determines 
superstructure but neglected to work  out how superstructure affects structure. 
In this 
context he asserts: ideology  is a process accomplished by the so-called 
thinker. Consciously, it is true, but  with a false consciousness. The real 
motive 
forces impelling him remain unknown  to him; otherwise it simply would not be 
an ideological process. Hence he  imagines false or seeming motive forces. 
It is thank to the work of the first generation of  Marxist philosophers, 
prominently to that of Georg Lukács, that the concept  false consciousness 
assumed the preeminence which it enjoys in contemporary  debates - in 
particular on 
ideology. Lukács works out the meaning of the concept  for example in his 
classical essay Class  Consciousness. He suggests that Marx’s concept of false 
consciousness arises  as a reply to bourgeois philosophy and sociology of 
history. According to Lukács  bourgeois philosophy of history and sociology 
tends to 
give up the sense of  history as progress to justify contemporary form of the 
organization of society  as natural and eternal or it must cut out everything 
in the progress of history  that refers to the future. Consequently, it 
reduces the progress of history to  the role individualities or supernatural 
forces 
like God. Now, Marx resolves  this dilemma of bourgeois theory of history, 
Lukács suggests, by developing his  concept of historical materialism and by 
presenting human relations in  capitalist society as the reification. This is, 
then, the stage where, by  referring to Engels’s above-mentioned letter Lukács 
introduces the concept of  false consciousness. He poses the question whether 
historical materialism takes  into account the role of consciousness in 
history. 
In this connection he speaks  of a double dialectical determination of false 
consciousness. On the one hand,  considered in the light of human relations as 
a whole subjective consciousness  appears to be justified because it is 
something that can be understood, that is,  it gives an adequate expression of 
human relations. But as an objective category  it is a false consciousness as 
it 
fails to express the nature of the development  of society adequately. On the 
other hand, this consciousness in the same context  appears to fail to achieve 
subjectively aimed goals because they appear to be  unknown, unwanted 
objective aims as if they were determined by some mystical  supernatural alien 
forces. 
The whole work of Marx is dedicated to the explanation of  this 
contradiction. As Rosa Luxemburg has shown, Marx’s and Engels’ whole work  is 
driven by 
the question of how human relations can be brought into an  agreement with 
human 
consciousness. The mature work of Marx’s on this question  is Capital. The 
key chapter for the  study of Marx’s concept of false consciousness is the 
first 
chapter of the Capital on commodities. The key concept for understanding of  
this concept is his concept of commodity fetishism, which he develops in this  
chapter. In his analysis of commodity Marx differentiates between value in 
use  and value in exchange. The use-value of commodities is obtained by 
transforming  natural objects into useful objects, say, by transforming wood 
into 
table. This  transformation is accomplished by useful or productive labor to 
satisfy various  human needs. The exchange-value is the relative value of 
commodities, which  refers to socially necessary labor time that was necessary 
to 
produce them. The  use-value is realized in the consumption of commodities. The 
exchange value is  realized in the exchange process, that is, by relating to 
commodities to one  another and exchanging them for one another. Now, in his 
analysis of the  relationship of use-value and exchange value Marx sees a 
mutual 
negative  relationship. He thinks that this negative relationship originates in 
the value  from of commodities because in the exchange process the aim of 
production  (satisfaction of needs) has been reversed into obtaining of 
exchange-values. The  aim of production is, then, no longer satisfaction of 
human needs 
but production  and realization of exchange values. This gives rise to the 
fact that human  products as commodities dominate humans rather than vice versa 
humans their  product. This is, in turn, the reason why everybody strives to 
realize  exchange-values and becomes commodity fetishist. From now on 
commodities (a  trivial thing, if considered in the light of use-value) appear 
to be 
mystified  things endowed with life and turned into supernatural divine forces 
that are  prayed for. As a result human relations take the form of social 
relations  between products. 
The commodification of products, however, requires the  commodification of 
human labor too. The commodification of human labor in turn  requires the 
separation of laborers from their means of production and  monopolization in 
the 
hands of the few (original accumulation) so that the  laborers have nothing to 
sell but their labor forces, that is, their  physiological and intellectual 
functions of their bodies. This is also the  source of the rise of social 
classes 
in capitalist society with their class  consciousnesses or ideologies. In 
capitalist society, then, there are two  contradictory sets of ideologies: on 
the 
one hand, there is the  institutionalized ideology of ruling class claiming to 
represent the whole of  society and there is, on the other hand, the 
subaltern ideology of subordinated  classes. In short, ideology as a form of 
consciousness arises from social class  relations. 
Marx’s concept of ideology has been often  equated with false consciousness. 
But as Theodor W. Adorno has shown as early as 1930s and as Hans  Heinz Holz 
and István Mésáros enforced in the 1970s the equitation of ideology  with false 
consciousness is undertaken in the tradition of Weberian sociology –  in 
particular in the sociology of knowledge of Karl Mannheim. Ideology in  Marxian 
thought has many meanings and false consciousness is just one of them.  To 
introduce a historical perspective into the debate on false consciousness, in  
his 
above-referred essay Lukács suggests considering Marx’s concept of ideology  
in the light of class position vis-à-vis the means of production. Only in this  
manner, Lukács thinks, one can obtain the category of objective possibility 
to  overcome consciousness as ideology and false consciousness. He thinks that  
because of its position vis-à-vis the means of production the only class that 
is  objectively interested in overcoming consciousness as ideology and false  
consciousness is working classes. Marx and Engels formulated this idea as 
early  as 1848 in the Manifest of Communist  Party. 
Doğan  Göçmen 
Further Reading 
István Mésáros, Marx’s Theory of Alienation, Merlin  Press, London,  1986. 
István Mésáros, The Power of Ideology, ZED  Books LTD, London & New York,  
2005.

_______________________________________________
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
[email protected]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Reply via email to