THE FIRST WRITINGS OF KARL MARX, ed. Paul Schafer. Brooklyn: Ig
Publishing, 2006. 223 pp.
I recently acquired a copy of this pocket-sized paperback. I don't know
whether it's a fluke or a defect in the whole print run, but there are
several blank pages in my copy.
Note that Marx's work reprinted here comes almost wholly from vol. 1 of
Marx Engels Collected Works (MECW), the only prior edition containing all
the extant material from Marx's dissertation. If you don't have this
volume already and don't plan to buy it, you could consider this paperback
edition, assuming you can find a nondefective copy. If you already own
MECW vol. 1, be advised that the only new material in the book is the
editor's introduction, translations of several letters, and the select
bibliography.
Marx's writings include:
Letter from Marx to his Father (Nov. 1837)
Marx's Doctoral Dissertation: Difference Between the Democritean and
Epicurean Philosophy of Nature
Notebooks on Epicurean Philosophy (Selections)
Recommendatory Reference on the Dissertation of Karl Marx
Letters from Marx (1841)
Letters to Marx (1836-37)
This edition contains the all-important notes to chapter 4 (147-152),
sometimes published separately, but omitted from some other editions of the
dissertation. You can also consult a different translation on my web site:
Philosophy after Its Completion
http://www.autodidactproject.org/other/marxdis1.html
Schafer has selected from the notebooks on Epicurean philosophy extracts
from notebooks 1, 2, 4, 6. He includes nothing from notebook 7, whereas I
found at least one significant passage in it:
Marx's Notebooks on Epicurean Philosophy (Extracts on Total Philosophy,
Praxis, Historiography)
http://www.autodidactproject.org/quote/marx-epicurean1.html
In addition there is some business-related correspondence on Marx's
dissertation, and two letters from dad Heinrich scolding son Marx on his
irresponsibility.
Whether the editor's 60-page introduction justifies the purchase of the
book I couldn't tell you, but given the comparatively little analysis of
the youngest Marx, it might be worth your while. I've never studied the
main body of the dissertation in adequate detail, so I'm not the best
judge. I find Marx's Hegelian take on Democritus and Epicurus very
peculiar. At the end of section 4 of the introduction, Schafer concludes:
----------
[quote]
Though the topic of Marx's doctoral dissertation may at first glance seem
obscure and its conclusions irrelevant to the ideas of even the so-called
"early Marx" of the 1844 Paris Manuscripts, it should now be clear that
this is far from the case. The substantive core of the dissertation--what
we have called its dialectical atomism--provides an original demonstration
of the immanent rationality of the natural world. It demonstrates that
atoms, the so-called building blocks of reality, are properly understood
not as a form of undifferentiated matter, but as a negative self-relation
that unfurls and realizes its substantive being in a dynamic series of
atomic forms. The essential role of negation in the determination of the
atom's being is nicely illustrated by the Epicurean conception of atomic
motion. The swerving atom negates the simple linear motion attributed to it
by Democritus and his followers, thereby allowing for the unpredictable
collision and combination with other atoms that gives rise to the natural
world.
If this account is correct, then it follows that the fate of atoms is
determined not by some pre-ordained natural order or external agency, but
by the swerve that is an expression of their own being. For Marx this idea
was charged with significance, for it demonstrates that atoms embody the
kind of self-sufficiency that necessarily underlies human consciousness and
free will. Ultimately, as we know from his later writings, Marx was not
interested in atoms or the nature of consciousness but in human action and
the social forms that determine its context. Yet by demonstrating the
logical thread linking nature and consciousness, he prepared the way for a
naturalistic theory of human action. Moreover, in considering the atom
dialectically, that is, in the light of its inherent negations (not the
void, not the other atom, etc.), Marx set up a pattern that he would follow
for the rest of his life. Though he may have dropped all interest in
overtly philosophical topics like "being" and "consciousness," he did not
drop the manner of philosophy that attempts to understand the truth of
things by thinking through and resolving their contradictions. In essence,
the dialectical approach is just as characteristic of the magnum opus
Capital as it is of the doctoral dissertation.
[endquote 54-5]
-------------
I don't find any of this very believable. Schafer turns to the
aforementioned footnote on theory and practice.
--------------------
[quote]
In order to fully grasp this early conception of philosophical praxis, it
Will be necessary to draw forth some of the implications of Marx's critical
interpretation of the Epicurean philosophy of nature. The dialectical
analysis of the relation of matter and consciousness forms the necessary
background for comprehending the relation of man and nature, and for
understanding the proper role of human action in the world. With this
background in hand, we can turn to the details of Marx's newly-formed
reconciliation of theory and praxis.
As we have seen, Marx's analysis of the atom prepares the way for a
dialectical re-consideration of nature as a whole. It suggests that the
physical universe should be understood as the necessary manifestation of
the atom's inner logic, and, consequently, that the logical forms
characteristic of atomic being are present in some form in every kind of
being. Indeed, this dialectical atomism demonstrates that what is implicit
in our simplest conceptions of the atom becomes explicit by the time our
thoughts arrive at the highest reaches of nature. For example, the abstract
individuality of swerving atoms becomes concrete and universal in the form
of heavenly bodies whose motion establishes the natural order of all
bodies. But if we turn this grand formulation around, we see that these
meteors (as Epicurus calls them) are nothing more than fully realized atoms.
[endquote 59]
------------------------------------------
More on the atom. Then:
----------
[quote]
We are now in a better position to comment on the relation of man and
nature expressed in Marx's doctoral dissertation. We can say with
confidence that Marx did not consider nature and self-conscious reason to
be distinct from each other, but rather to be dialectically related. The
divine--what Hegel calls the Idea--is not beyond nature, but is embodied in
it; nor is it beyond human consciousness, for human consciousness is itself
ideal. The logical form of consciousness, therefore, is the form of nature.
Ultimately, even the highest sphere of nature, the heavens themselves, must
have the same structure as self-conscious reason, a point which becomes
clear in the final chapter of the dissertation where Marx considers the
Epicurean theory of meteors.
This is not to say, however, that human being can be reduced to natural
being, or vice versa. Though they share the form of self-conscious reason
and, as such, are dialectically linked, man and nature are not identical,
for their unity is charged with negation. Nonetheless, there is an
undeniable parallel between what Lucretius calls lex atomi, the law of the
atom, and lex hominis, the law of the human; both are defined as
self-relating, material being. To extrapolate, we may say that to be fully
human means not only to exist, to have immediate, material being, but also
to be conscious of one's existence. Thus, to exist as a genuinely free
individual involves some minimal recognition of one's material
determination. Yet implied in such recognition is both an acceptance of
one's natural immediacy, and a rejection of the limits imposed by the
burden of such immediacy. To be self-consciously human is to be both for
and against nature. In this sense, the individual human being is like the
atom: it becomes actual only when it frees itself from relative
determination and relates itself to itself. Marx puts it as follows: "Thus
man ceases to be a product of nature only when the other being to which he
relates himself is not a different existence but is itself an individual
human being, even if it is not yet spirit [Geist]." In other words, in
order for humanity to realize the truth of its inner being, it must free
itself from determination by external, relative being (as in the
declination of the atom), and realize itself as its own proper object (as
in the repulsion of the atom). At a very basic level then--what Marx will
call abstract individuality--human beings realize the concept of their
being and become free only when their relative being and the raw instincts
associated with "the power of desire and of mere nature" have been crushed.
Only when such dependence on mere nature has been negated and transcended
do human beings arrive on the doorstep of self-consciousness, for it is
only then that they are freed to determine themselves in relation to other
human beings. Though such self-consciousness is still abstract--it lacks
qualitative and historical determination--it nonetheless contains the seed
of full spiritual actualization.
Recognition of the negativity implied in the relation of man to nature is
the first step toward a new conception of the activity of philosophy
because it redefines the concept of human autonomy. According to the
initial position of the youthful Marx, it is impossible to fully understand
what it means to be human without grasping the dialectical relation of man
to nature. In its most basic sense, this means that to exist as a free
individual is to recognize both one's material determination in and through
nature, and one's formal determination against nature. To be human, in
other words, is both to be natural, possessing immediate, material being,
and to break away from such material determination in the act of free,
self-conscious determination. This second, explicitly negative moment is of
special interest, for it is here that we see the origins of Marx's
conception of human praxis as a form of activity directed against the
external world. In order to realize itself concretely, human
self-consciousness must be active in the creation of a world where free
interaction between individuals is possible. just as the atom attains to
self-sufficiency only when it declines from the straight line and repels
others from itself, human consciousness must be active and critically
present in the world in order to gain autonomy and, thereby, to experience
genuine freedom.
[endquote 62-5]
-------------------------------------
If you understand this, please explain it to me. Schafer concludes his
commentary with an analysis of the relation of philosophy and praxis in
aforementioned famous footnote.
At 01:11 PM 7/27/2006 -0400, Ralph Dumain wrote:
THE FIRST WRITINGS OF KARL MARX
ed. Paul Schafer
Paperback: 200 pages Publisher: Ig Publishing (July 1, 2006) Language:
English ISBN: 0977197220
The First Writings of Karl Marx is the only single volume English language
edition of Marx's earliest work, his doctoral dissertation. This edition
includes the rarely published full text of Marx's dissertation,
accompanied by a handful of his letters from the same period (1837-43),
and selections from the philosophical notebooks he prepared in advance of
the dissertation. These materials comprise the earliest period of Marx's
intellectual life, and offer a detailed portrait of the genesis of his
philosophical worldview. Despite their youthfulness, these writings are
lit with ambition, and contain the seeds of Marx's mature system of
historical materialism.
------------------------
I'll be interested in seeing this new edition when it comes out. In fact,
it has been published in English before. But . . . . one must beware that
sections are missing in some cases. Hopefully this new publication will
correct the problem. The only complete English edition is the Marx Engels
Collected Works, vol. 1. There is also ACTIVITY IN MARX'S PHILOSOPHY
(Norman Livergood)--I think I'm remembering this right--but it omits
crucial footnotes. (Some of Marx's original text is lost, and so there
are footnotes without corresponding main text.) The Marxists Internet
Archive did not do a thorough job of inputting Marx's works, hence one
finds omissions there too. So hopefully this new edition will fill the void.
_______________________________________________
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
[email protected]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
