Wolfdietrich Schmied-Kowarzik .和自然团结实践。二十一世纪马克斯辩证工作哲学世纪.威斯特伐利亚汽船,明斯特2022年205 pp工作.€25.00 .

IF 0.8 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY International Review of Social History Pub Date : 2023-07-12 DOI:10.1017/S0020859023000263
Horst Müller
{"title":"Wolfdietrich Schmied-Kowarzik .和自然团结实践。二十一世纪马克斯辩证工作哲学世纪.威斯特伐利亚汽船,明斯特2022年205 pp工作.€25.00 .","authors":"Horst Müller","doi":"10.1017/S0020859023000263","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Wolfdietrich Schmied-Kowarzik, the author of Solidarische Praxis in Allianz mit der Natur. Marx’ dialektische Praxisphilosophie für das 21. Jahrhundert, was professor of Philosophy and Education at the University of Kassel from 1971 to 2007. He worked intensively in the field of a dialectical philosophy of practice and, through international conferences, was a promoter of “Philosophy of Practice”, the important school of thought that followed Marx. This volume comprises a selection of articles from 1998 to 2018 and two in-depth contributions to the specialist literature. They aim to elaborate and continue the dialectical–practical–philosophical core of Marx’s thought as a current, ground-breaking, and “historically significant” “critical philosophy of social practice” (p. 132). It is, in this sense, that Marx should be rediscovered. And in this way, Schmied-Kowarzik counters shortened and petrified receptions of Marx and relies on excellent citations and a systematic argumentation. With the approach of dialectical practical thinking, a positivist or objectivist understanding of science, which is also widespread in Marxist movements, is simultaneously rejected. Herbert Marcuse, Ernst Bloch, and Henri Lefebvre are particularly highlighted from the philosophy of practice that followed Marx. Schmied-Kowarzik draws an arc from Plato and Aristotle to the constellation between Hegel and Marx, in which philosophical thought culminated at the time. Marx’s “Theses ad Feuerbach” testify that he, again, placed thinking, as Plato once did, in the “primacy of practice” (pp. 16, 121). In the process, Marx came to terms with Hegel’s affirmative understanding of knowledge of reality and bourgeois society (p. 45) and with the latter’s dialectic. He developed the mode of “intervening critique” (p. 16) and his dialectical philosophy of praxis, so the original notation or “Philosophie der Praxis” in German. Accordingly, bourgeois social philosophy does not go beyond the idea of legal equality based on private property, i.e. the property, appropriation, and power relations of bourgeois economic society. But in this constitutional form, according to Marx, the “true, realised selfdetermination of the people” (p. 45) is not achieved. He found the roots of social problems in the political–economic conditions of capitalism, politicized himself, and developed the idea or “project” of a social upheaval as human and humanitarian “emancipation” (pp. 134–150). The coherence of Marx’s concrete research and of his work is explained by the core concept. In this context, practice, embedded in the “productivity of living nature” (p. 23), is conceived as the human mode of existence and reality in general. People","PeriodicalId":46254,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wolfdietrich Schmied-Kowarzik. Solidarische Praxis in Allianz mit der Natur. Marx’ dialektische Praxisphilosophie für das 21. Jahrhundert. Westfälisches Dampfboot, Münster 2022. 205 pp. € 25.00.\",\"authors\":\"Horst Müller\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0020859023000263\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Wolfdietrich Schmied-Kowarzik, the author of Solidarische Praxis in Allianz mit der Natur. Marx’ dialektische Praxisphilosophie für das 21. Jahrhundert, was professor of Philosophy and Education at the University of Kassel from 1971 to 2007. He worked intensively in the field of a dialectical philosophy of practice and, through international conferences, was a promoter of “Philosophy of Practice”, the important school of thought that followed Marx. This volume comprises a selection of articles from 1998 to 2018 and two in-depth contributions to the specialist literature. They aim to elaborate and continue the dialectical–practical–philosophical core of Marx’s thought as a current, ground-breaking, and “historically significant” “critical philosophy of social practice” (p. 132). It is, in this sense, that Marx should be rediscovered. And in this way, Schmied-Kowarzik counters shortened and petrified receptions of Marx and relies on excellent citations and a systematic argumentation. With the approach of dialectical practical thinking, a positivist or objectivist understanding of science, which is also widespread in Marxist movements, is simultaneously rejected. Herbert Marcuse, Ernst Bloch, and Henri Lefebvre are particularly highlighted from the philosophy of practice that followed Marx. Schmied-Kowarzik draws an arc from Plato and Aristotle to the constellation between Hegel and Marx, in which philosophical thought culminated at the time. Marx’s “Theses ad Feuerbach” testify that he, again, placed thinking, as Plato once did, in the “primacy of practice” (pp. 16, 121). In the process, Marx came to terms with Hegel’s affirmative understanding of knowledge of reality and bourgeois society (p. 45) and with the latter’s dialectic. He developed the mode of “intervening critique” (p. 16) and his dialectical philosophy of praxis, so the original notation or “Philosophie der Praxis” in German. Accordingly, bourgeois social philosophy does not go beyond the idea of legal equality based on private property, i.e. the property, appropriation, and power relations of bourgeois economic society. But in this constitutional form, according to Marx, the “true, realised selfdetermination of the people” (p. 45) is not achieved. He found the roots of social problems in the political–economic conditions of capitalism, politicized himself, and developed the idea or “project” of a social upheaval as human and humanitarian “emancipation” (pp. 134–150). The coherence of Marx’s concrete research and of his work is explained by the core concept. In this context, practice, embedded in the “productivity of living nature” (p. 23), is conceived as the human mode of existence and reality in general. People\",\"PeriodicalId\":46254,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Review of Social History\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Review of Social History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020859023000263\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Social History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020859023000263","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

woldietrich Schmied-Kowarzik是《安联自然学院的团结实践》一书的作者。马克思的辩证法实践哲学论文集[r];1971年至2007年,他在卡塞尔大学担任哲学与教育学教授。他在实践的辩证哲学领域做了大量工作,通过国际会议,他是“实践哲学”的推动者,这是继马克思之后的重要思想流派。本卷包括1998年至2018年的文章选集和对专业文献的两项深入贡献。他们的目标是阐述和延续马克思思想的辩证法-实践-哲学核心,作为一种当前的、开创性的、“具有历史意义的”“社会实践的批判哲学”(第132页)。在这个意义上,马克思应该被重新发现。通过这种方式,施米德-科瓦齐克反驳了对马克思的简化和僵化的理解,并依赖于出色的引用和系统的论证。用辩证实践思维的方法,同时否定了马克思主义运动中普遍存在的对科学的实证主义或客观主义认识。赫伯特·马尔库塞、恩斯特·布洛赫和亨利·列斐伏尔在马克思之后的实践哲学中尤为突出。Schmied-Kowarzik画了一条从柏拉图和亚里士多德到黑格尔和马克思之间的弧线,在那里哲学思想达到了顶峰。马克思的《提纲和费尔巴哈》证明,他再次像柏拉图那样,把思维置于“实践的首要地位”(第16,121页)。在这个过程中,马克思接受了黑格尔对现实和资产阶级社会的认识的肯定理解(第45页),接受了黑格尔的辩证法。他发展了“介入批判”模式(第16页)和他的辩证实践哲学,因此最初的符号或德语的“哲学实践”。因此,资产阶级社会哲学并没有超越以私有财产为基础的法律平等观念,即资产阶级经济社会的财产、占有和权力关系。但是马克思认为,在这种立宪形式下,“真正实现的人民自决”(第45页)是不可能实现的。他在资本主义的政治经济条件中发现了社会问题的根源,将自己政治化,并将社会剧变的思想或“计划”发展为人类和人道主义的“解放”(第134-150页)。马克思的具体研究及其著作的一致性是用核心概念来解释的。在这种背景下,实践,嵌入在“有生命的自然的生产力”(第23页),被认为是人类存在和现实的一般模式。人
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Wolfdietrich Schmied-Kowarzik. Solidarische Praxis in Allianz mit der Natur. Marx’ dialektische Praxisphilosophie für das 21. Jahrhundert. Westfälisches Dampfboot, Münster 2022. 205 pp. € 25.00.
Wolfdietrich Schmied-Kowarzik, the author of Solidarische Praxis in Allianz mit der Natur. Marx’ dialektische Praxisphilosophie für das 21. Jahrhundert, was professor of Philosophy and Education at the University of Kassel from 1971 to 2007. He worked intensively in the field of a dialectical philosophy of practice and, through international conferences, was a promoter of “Philosophy of Practice”, the important school of thought that followed Marx. This volume comprises a selection of articles from 1998 to 2018 and two in-depth contributions to the specialist literature. They aim to elaborate and continue the dialectical–practical–philosophical core of Marx’s thought as a current, ground-breaking, and “historically significant” “critical philosophy of social practice” (p. 132). It is, in this sense, that Marx should be rediscovered. And in this way, Schmied-Kowarzik counters shortened and petrified receptions of Marx and relies on excellent citations and a systematic argumentation. With the approach of dialectical practical thinking, a positivist or objectivist understanding of science, which is also widespread in Marxist movements, is simultaneously rejected. Herbert Marcuse, Ernst Bloch, and Henri Lefebvre are particularly highlighted from the philosophy of practice that followed Marx. Schmied-Kowarzik draws an arc from Plato and Aristotle to the constellation between Hegel and Marx, in which philosophical thought culminated at the time. Marx’s “Theses ad Feuerbach” testify that he, again, placed thinking, as Plato once did, in the “primacy of practice” (pp. 16, 121). In the process, Marx came to terms with Hegel’s affirmative understanding of knowledge of reality and bourgeois society (p. 45) and with the latter’s dialectic. He developed the mode of “intervening critique” (p. 16) and his dialectical philosophy of praxis, so the original notation or “Philosophie der Praxis” in German. Accordingly, bourgeois social philosophy does not go beyond the idea of legal equality based on private property, i.e. the property, appropriation, and power relations of bourgeois economic society. But in this constitutional form, according to Marx, the “true, realised selfdetermination of the people” (p. 45) is not achieved. He found the roots of social problems in the political–economic conditions of capitalism, politicized himself, and developed the idea or “project” of a social upheaval as human and humanitarian “emancipation” (pp. 134–150). The coherence of Marx’s concrete research and of his work is explained by the core concept. In this context, practice, embedded in the “productivity of living nature” (p. 23), is conceived as the human mode of existence and reality in general. People
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: International Review of Social History, is one of the leading journals in its field. Truly global in its scope, it focuses on research in social and labour history from a comparative and transnational perspective, both in the modern and in the early modern period, and across periods. The journal combines quality, depth and originality of its articles with an open eye for theoretical innovation and new insights and methods from within its field and from contiguous disciplines. Besides research articles, it features surveys of new themes and subject fields, a suggestions and debates section, review essays and book reviews. It is esteemed for its annotated bibliography of social history titles, and also publishes an annual supplement of specially commissioned essays on a current theme.
期刊最新文献
Light and Shadow of the Digital Factory: Response to the Comments Old Wine in New Bottles, or Novel Challenges? A Labour History Perspective on Digital Labour Introduction to the Review Dossier on The Digital Factory: Continuing a Long-Standing Debate “Be a Miner”: Constructions and Contestations of Masculinity in the British Coalfields, 1975–1983 Mapping the Social Relations of Labor in Contemporary Algorithmic Society
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1