Abstract
As is well-known, Lukács put forward a salient proposition on the connection between early Marx and Hegel. The latter identifies objectification with alienation, whereas Marx strictly differentiates between the two. Hegel affirms alienation, whereas Marx negates it. Due to Lukacs’ particular standing, this proposition exerts a profound impact on Marx studies worldwide, especially in China where it is regarded as the guiding principle for surveying the relationship between the two great philosophers. As the author sees it, however, this proposition is not precise enough to be considered accurate. By way of a review of Lukacs and Fujino’s disagreement on the relationship between objectification and alienation, this chapter analyzes the distinction between Hegel and Marx on the concept of alienation and objectification and eventually performs an assessment of Lukács’s proposition in order to dispel its negative influence and reposition early Marx’s thought in relation to Hegel’s dialectic.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Georg Lukács, History and Class Consciousness. Studies in Marxist Dialectics, trans. by R. Livingstone, The MIT Press, 1971, p. xxxvi.
- 2.
Cf. Georg Lukács, The Young Hegel. Studies in the Relations Between Dialectics and Economics, trans. by R. Livingstone, London, 1975, p. 539–541.
- 3.
Ibid., p. 549.
- 4.
Ibid., p. 551.
- 5.
Georg Lukács, Zur philosophischen Entwicklung des jungen Marx (1840–1844), in: Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 2(2), p. 336 (translated into English by K.H.).
- 6.
Ibid., p. 337.
- 7.
Ibid., p. 339.
- 8.
Ibid.
- 9.
Georg Lukács, History and Class Consciousness. Studies in Marxist Dialectics, trans. by R. Livingstone, The MIT Press, 1971, p. xxiv.
- 10.
Ibid., p. xxxvi.
- 11.
Jean Hyppolite, Studies on Marx and Hegel, trans. by J. O’Neill, Basic Books, Inc., 1969, p. 89.
- 12.
Ibid., p. 88.
- 13.
Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, in: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: Collected Works, vol. 3: Marx and Engels: 1843–1844, Progress Publishers, 1975, p. 302f.
- 14.
Alfred Kurella, Der Mensch als Schöpfer seiner selbst, Aufbau Verlag, 1958, S. 93 (translated into English by K.H.).
- 15.
Alfred Kurella, Man as Creator of himself, trans. by W. Fujino, Aoki Shoten, 1972, p. 62 (translated into English by K.H.).
- 16.
For instance, the last sentence of the cited passage, “he also follows the usage inherited from Hegel and Feuerbach”, is problematic, since Hegel and Feuerbach’s notion of alienation are essentially different: Hegel’s alienation is neutral, whilst Feuerbach’s is negative.
- 17.
Gottfried Stiehler, Die Dialektik in Hegels Phänomenologie des Geistes, Akademie Verlag, 1964, S. 280 (translated into English by K.H.).
- 18.
Auguste Cornu, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, vol. 2: 1844–1845, trans. by Pikun Liu et al., SDX Joint Publishing Company, 1980, p. 146 (translated into English by K.H.).
- 19.
Wataru Fujino, Historical Materialism and Ethics, Shin Nibon Shubansha, 1972, p. 285f (translated into English by K.H.).
- 20.
Ibid., p. 272.
- 21.
Ibid., p. 271.
- 22.
Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, in: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: Collected Works, vol. 3: Marx and Engels: 1843–1844, Progress Publishers, 1975, p. 332f.
- 23.
Marx, Economic = Philosophic Manuscripts, trans. by K. Miura, Aoki Bunko, 1974, p. 239, 267 (translated into English by K.H.).
- 24.
Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts, trans. by N. Shirozuka & Y. Tanaka, Iwanami Bunko, 1986, p. 288f (translated into English by K.H.).
- 25.
Wataru Fujino, Historical Materialism and Ethics, Shin Nibon Shubansha, 1972, p. 275.
- 26.
Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, in: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: Collected Works, vol. 3: Marx and Engels: 1843–1844, Progress Publishers, 1975, p. 291.
- 27.
Wataru Fujino, Historical Materialism and Ethics, Shin Nibon Shubansha, 1972, p. 280.
- 28.
Marx, Theses on Feuerbach, in: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: Collected Works, vol. 5: Marx and Engels: 1845–1847, Progress Publishers, 1976, p.
- 29.
Actually, what exactly does this remark of Marx mean has been a puzzling mystery. Syntactically considered, this sentence comprises two parts: “conceives objectification as loss of the object [Entgegenständlichung]” and “as [externalization] and as transcendence of this [externalization]”. According to the diagram below, “stripping-off of objectivity” means to supersede externalized object, to return to itself, which corresponds to the process “③ → ④ → ①”. Since the first part, i.e. “conceives objectification as loss of the object [Entgegenständlichung]”, also coincides with the process “③ → ④ → ①”, it conveys as such the same meaning as the second part, that is “as [externalization] and as transcendence of this [externalization]”. If objectification can be illustrated with the process “① → ② → ③” in the diagram below, then this proposition of Marx actually means that Hegels construes “① → ② → ③” simultaneously as “③ → ④ → ①”. To rephrase it, these two movements are to be thought of as an entirety “① → ② → ③ → ④ → ①”, which includes objectification, externalization = alienation, supersession of alienation and reappropriation of itself. This is what we define as dialectic of alienation.
- 30.
Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit, trans. by A. V. Miller, Oxford University Press, 1977, p. 21.
- 31.
Ibid., p. 6.
- 32.
Lin He & Jiuxing Wang, Translator’s Preface: On Hegel’s Phänomenologie des Geistes, in: Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit, trans. by Lin He & Jiuxing Wang, The Commercial Press, 1962, p. 27 (translated into English by K.H.).
- 33.
Engels, Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy, in: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: Collected Works, vol. 26: Engels: 1882–1889, Progress Publishers, 1990, p. 365.
- 34.
Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, in: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: Collected Works, vol. 3: Marx and Engels: 1843–1844, Progress Publishers, 1975, p. 332.
- 35.
Ibid., p. 341.
- 36.
Marx, Capital. Volume I, in: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: Collected Works, vol. 35: Marx, Progress Publishers, 1996, p. 20.
- 37.
Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, in: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: Collected Works, vol. 3: Marx and Engels: 1843–1844, Progress Publishers, 1975, p. 332f.
- 38.
Ibid., p. 338.
- 39.
Louis Althusser, For Marx, trans. by B. Brewster, The Penguin Press, 1969, p. 36f.
- 40.
Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, in: Karl Marx and Frederick Engels: Collected Works, vol. 3: Marx and Engels: 1843–1844, Progress Publishers, 1975, p. 232.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Han, L. (2020). Is Objectification Identical to Alienation?. In: Studies of the Paris Manuscripts. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9618-3_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9618-3_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-32-9616-9
Online ISBN: 978-981-32-9618-3
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)