Reddit Is humanity geared towards compassion of selfishness? I wanted to start a new column of sorts where I will be discussing topics of philosophic and political nature. It is from my interpretation that the reader will hopefully form their own perspective on a concept they otherwise may have never considered.
But the essence of man is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. In reality, it is the ensemble of the social relations. Feuerbach, who does not enter upon a criticism of this real essence is hence obliged: To abstract from the historical process and to define the religious sentiment regarded by itself, and to presuppose an abstract — isolated - human individual.
Some people believe, for example, that humans are naturally selfish - Immanuel Kant and Thomas Hobbesfor example. Most Marxists will argue that this view is an ideological illusion and the effect of commodity fetishism: Needs and drives[ edit ] In the Manuscripts the young Marx wrote: Man is directly a natural being.
As a natural being and as a living natural being he is on the one hand endowed with natural powers, vital powers — he is an active natural being. These forces exist in him as tendencies and abilities — as instincts. On the other hand, as a natural, corporeal, sensuous objective being he is a suffering, conditioned and limited creature, like animals and plants.
That is to say, the objects of his instincts exist outside him, as objects independent of him; yet these objects are objects that he needs — essential objects, indispensable to the manifestation and confirmation of his essential powers.
For Marx then, an explanation of human nature is an explanation of the needs of humans, together with the assertion that they will act to fulfill those needs.
The German Ideology, chapter 3. There is another one However, when abstracted from other aspects of human activity, and turned into final and exclusive ends, they are animal. They themselves begin to distinguish themselves from animals as soon as they begin to produce their means of subsistence, a step which is conditioned by their physical organisation.
But do not a few other animals also produce aspects of their environment as well? The previous year, Marx had already acknowledged: It is true that animals also produce. They build nests and dwellings, like the bee, the beaver, the ant, etc.
But they produce only their own immediate needs or those of their young; they produce only when immediate physical need compels them to do so, while man produces even when he is free from physical need and truly produces only in freedom from such need; they produce only themselves, while man reproduces the whole of nature; their products belong immediately to their physical bodies, while man freely confronts his own product.
Animals produce only according to the standards and needs of the species to which they belong, while man is capable of producing according to the standards of every species and of applying to each object its inherent standard; hence, man also produces in accordance with the laws of beauty.
The animal is immediately one with its life activity. It is not distinct from that activity; it is that activity.
Man makes his life activity itself an object of his will and consciousness. He has conscious life activity. It is not a determination with which he directly merges.
Conscious life activity directly distinguishes man from animal life activity. Only because of that is he a species-being. Or, rather, he is a conscious being — i. Only because of that is his activity free activity. Estranged labour reverses the relationship so that man, just because he is a conscious being, makes his life activity, his essential being, a mere means for his existence.
Man is a species-being, not only because he practically and theoretically makes the species — both his own and those of other things — his object, but also — and this is simply another way of saying the same thing — because he looks upon himself as the present, living species, because he looks upon himself as a universal and therefore free being.
A spider conducts operations that resemble those of a weaver, and a bee puts to shame many an architect in the construction of her cells. But what distinguishes the worst architect from the best of bees is this, that the architect raises his structure in imagination before he erects it in reality.
At the end of every labour-process, we get a result that already existed in the imagination of the labourer at its commencement.
He not only effects a change of form in the material on which he works, but he also realises a purpose of his own that gives the law to his modus operandi, and to which he must subordinate his will.Are human beings estranged in essence?
This question presents estrangement as requiring a solution, but before addressing the solution I had to establish a definition for estrangement. Estrangement exemplifies quiet and harmless life devoid of friends. Marx's theory of human nature.
Jump to navigation Jump to search. This for other human beings, for sexual relations, for food, water, clothing, shelter, rest and, more generally, for circumstances that are conducive to health rather than disease. This is the most basic way in which they develop and express their human essence' (see also.
It's fairly easy to demonstrate that human beings are not estranged by essence; that is, when you are thinking of the slippery term 'essence' as meaning an immutable human condition, and 'estrangement' in the sense that we are estranged from each other by what is commonly called our Nature.
Are human beings unequal in essence? Yes: Aristotle, Plato, Nietzche--natural hierarchy--superior in relationship with sacred--excellence within person No: Locke, Hobbes--equal in rights received from God--equal in limitations and death--equal in rational being.
Existentialism was coined by Jean-Paul Sartre's endorsement of Martin Heidegger's statement that for human beings "existence precedes essence."In as much as "essence" is a cornerstone of all metaphysical philosophy and of Rationalism, Sartre's statement was a repudiation of the philosophical system that had come before him (and, in particular, .
Are human beings estranged in essence? If human beings are not estranged in essence, why are there so many divisions and conflicts among them?
Can estrangement become overcome through reason?