The most prominent Czech philosopher, Karel Kosík, makes a few hints to the Vienna Circle, Otto Neurath and "positivism" in his important book, DIALECTICS OF THE CONCRETE (1963). I mine these few remarks for a better understanding of the conflicts, as well as connections, between the social progressivism of the Vienna Circle and the later Marxist humanism.
In this essay a vision of the synthesis of thought on the part of the Checkoslovakian philosopher Karel Kosick is presented. His work inspired by theMarxist dialectic and the philosophy of praxis, is, and will become ever more so, a theoretical reference for the understanding of the development o..
[Against Method: Karel Kosik on Architecture and Urbanism] A critical analysis of the views of a prominent Czech philosopher who transitioned from humanist Marxism to Heideggerian conservatism. This philosophical development is also reflected in his occasional reflections on the built environment.
Karel Kosík’s book Dialectics of the Concrete. A Study on Problems of Man and World, elaborated under the impact of the de-Stalinization process, is one of the important attempts to rethink Marxist philosophy; it was an attempt to overcome the theoretical stagnation caused by the Stalinist period. It considers the state of Marxist theory, its relations to the past theoretical tradition, as well as it attempts to develop a critical and creative dialogue with different contemporary theoretical conceptions, then hegemonic. (...) Through his reading of Marx and his A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy project, Kosík searches for ways of discussing different relationships between philosophy and economics in the contemporary world, and, in particular, he analyzes different theoretical or ideological forms of the reified characteristics of the pseudoconcrete world of care, homo oeconomicus and economic factor. (shrink)
While the Vienna Circle had virtually no impact on the Czech-speaking philosophical community during the 1930s, one can find a curious meeting point in the field of theory of architecture. There is now a growing literature on Otto Neurath as a theorist of architecture and urbanism, who emphasized the social aspects of modern building and approached architecture from his idiosyncratic viewpoint of Marxism interpreted as a physicalistic social science. It is less well known that a young Czech architecture critic and (...) theorist, Karel Teige, cultivated strikingly similar views during the same period—from 1920s to 1930s—albeit without any knowledge of Neurath’s thought in particular, or for that matter the Vienna Circle in general. The chapter reveals similarities as well as differences between Neurath and Teige on Marxism, science and architecture, and the Bauhaus, as well as a discussion of the relations of both to the contemporaries, most importantly Adolf Loos, Josef Frank and Hannes Meyer. (shrink)
After the revolutionary year 1848 both Slovak and Czech political representations faced the same challenge in their searching for a new constitutional order, although their respective state-forming activity differed. In this context the overlapping conceptions of Ján Palárik and Karel Havlí?ek Borovský are worthy consideration. They both underline the strategy of gradualism in the nation-forming process as well as cultural distinctiveness combined with civic ethos. Further, they both combined the romanticism grounded in national feeling with the Enlightenment ideas and (...) the importance of practical reason. Their liberalism underlining the national and civic equality and the bottom up political activity thus can be seen as a new incentive in creating the constitutional grounds of both Slovak and Czech nations. (shrink)