This text is a classic of Lenin - his essay explores materialism and its relation to capitalism and how Communism can get over this psychological wish for material and empirical ownership.

On the anniversary of Lenin's work of genius, the significance of this book for Marxist philosophy as a whole and, particularly, for the dialectical materialist theory of knowledge can be understood especially clearly. Turning today to the history of Marxist-Leninist thought in the twentieth century, we comprehend fully the enormous role played both by Lenin's defense of the principal propositions of dialectical materialism against revisionists and open enemies of Marxism dabbling in philosophy and his creative development of the underlying foundations (...) of Marxist theory — those foundations that, in the final analysis, determine both the manner of posing and the method of resolving all other problems in Marxism, not just those of a theoretical nature but those of a practical political nature as well. Many questions elaborated in Lenin's work of genius acquire particular timeliness for Marxist-Leninist philosophy specifically at the present stage in the development of science and under current conditions in the ideological struggle. In the present article we shall deal with the significance of Materialism and Empirio-Criticism for the interpretation of certain pressing problems of the Marxist-Leninist theory of knowledge. (shrink)

Hans Kleinpeter’s letters to Ernst Mach held in the Deutsches Museum Archive in Munich are of the greatest importance in order to learn some details of the working relationship between these scholars. In the three letters here entirely published for the first time Kleinpeter shows his interest for Nietzsche’s thought, and states that some of the latter’s ideas are in compliance with Mach’s epistemology.

Tra i numerosi autori attivi nel campo delle scienze naturali che Friedrich Nietzsche ebbe modo di conoscere nel corso della propria vita, Ernst Mach rappresenta certamente un caso significativo. La sua presenza all'interno degli scritti del filosofo è pressoché nulla, ma la comunanza dei temi trattati e la particolare affinità delle prospettive adottate in materia di teoria della conoscenza invitano ad avvicinare questi due autori e a ipotizzare un qualche tipo di influsso diretto tra loro. Ciononostante, fino ad oggi non (...) era mai stato svolto uno studio critico e completo che esaminasse e discutesse tale relazione. Muovendo dai contenuti di una delle principali opere di Mach, i "Beiträge zur Analyse der Empfindungen" (1886) questo volume delinea un quadro esegetico che fa di Mach non tanto un referente diretto, quanto piuttosto il segnale di una prospettiva di ricerca che in qualche modo stimolò l'interesse di Nietzsche e che per molti aspetti egli mostra di condividere. (shrink)

A longstanding criticism of Lenin is that his epistemological contributions to the theory of scientific socialism prompted the decline of Marxism in dogmatism and despotism in the twentieth century. According to this narrative, Lenin claimed to possess the objective truth, and he therefore refused to tolerate alternative perspectives. This article subjects these claims to a textual analysis, and it argues that they are erroneous. Lenin defends a fallibilist account of science that affirms the uncertainty of knowledge in the natural, (...) philosophical and social sciences. This fallibilism pervades the text that supposedly showcases his intolerance, Materialism and Empirio-Criticism. Lenin’s scientific socialism opposes rigid conceptions of socialism, and it encourages an atmosphere of democratic debate. Whilst Lenin’s writings have their flaws, they are not the founding documents of Marxist dogmatism that they are often portrayed as being. Lenin is not the narrow-minded vulgariser of Marxism that he is routinely taken to be. (shrink)

This book is a radical reappraisal of positivism as a major movement in philosophy, science and culture. In examining positivist movement and its contemporary impact, I had the following goals. First, to provide a more precise and systematic definition of the notion of positivism. Second, to describe positivism as a trend of thought concerned not only with the theory of knowledge and philosophy of science, but also with problems of ethics, social, and political philosophy, and show that its representatives usually (...) thought that the problems of the latter cannot be solved without solving the former first. Third, to examine the development of positivism as a movement which preserves a certain tradition and hence possesses some coherence, although the forms of this movement changed in different historical circumstances: it was born in the eighteenth century during the Enlightenment, took the form of social positivism in the nineteenth century, was transformed at the turn of the twentieth century with the emergence of empirio-criticism, and became logical positivism in the twentieth century. Fourth, to reveal the external and internal factors of this evolution. Fifth, to disclose the relation of positivism to other trends of philosophy. Sixth, to determine the influence the positive mind had not only upon philosophy, but upon other cultural phenomena, such as the natural and social sciences, law, politics, arts, religion, and everyday life. (shrink)

This volume explores Husserl's theory of sensibility and his conceptualization of spatial and temporal constitution. The author maps the linkages between Husserl's 'transcendental aesthetic', the theory of pure experience in empirio-criticism, as well as Immanuel Kant's transcendental philosophy. The core argument in this analysis centers on the relationship between spatiality and temporality in Husserl's philosophy. The study interrogates Husserl's understanding of the relationship between spatiality and temporality in terms of stratifications, analogies and parallelisms. It incorporates a discussion of (...) the potentialities and limitations of such an understanding. It concludes that such limits can be overcome by adopting an understanding of spatiality and temporality as interwoven moments of sensible experience-a 'spatio-temporal intertwining'. This 'intertwining' is made explicit in a thorough inquiry into three central topics in the phenomenological analysis of sensible experience: spatio-temporal individuation, perspectival givenness and bodily experience. The book shows how such an inquiry can form the bedrock of a dynamic and relational understanding of experience as a whole. (shrink)

In this essay I will argue for the existence of a Bolshevik Center, which coordinated the activities of the Bolsheviks in the Russian Social Democratic Party. This Bolshevik Center was dissolved in an intra-Bolshevik factional dispute on the eve of Lenin''s writing hisMaterialism and Empirio-Criticism. The source of the conflict in the Bolshevik Center related to disagreements over Lenin''s tactics following the 1905 revolution. The leader of the anti-Lenin opposition was Bogdanov. But the struggle over tactics could not (...) be contained in the political sphere; it spilled over to the philosophical. Lenin''sMaterialism and Empirio-Criticism was written as a refutation of Bogdanov''s philosophical thought in an attempt to drive him out of the Party. This essay will trace the events which led to the dissolution of the Bolshevik Center.In order to be able to follow the tactical debates a definition of terms to be used throughout this paper would be helpful. In terms of the strategic problems facing the Bolsheviks, as well as members of the Russian Social-Democratic Party (RSDP), in their attitude to theDuma, the word Boycott will refer to those who argued that the Bolsheviks should not participate in theDuma in any capacity. TheBoycottists maintained that the Bolsheviks should not even participate in the elections to theDuma. The wordUltimatism refers to those among the Bolsheviks who wished to participate in the ThirdDuma, but who favored the total obedience of the Russian Social-Democrats who might be elected to theDuma to the Central Committee of the Party.Ultimatism refers to the control and hegemony of the Central Committee over any social-democratic delegates who might win elections to the Third Duma.Otzovism means removing. TheOtzovists were those among the Bolsheviks, who advocated the removal of any social-democratic delegate in the ThirdDuma who disobeyed the directives of the Party Central Committee. Ultimatism andOtzovism concerned questions of Party authority. The Otzovist recommended the expulsion of any delegate in the Duma who abrogated the authority of the Party organs.Boycottism did not deal with questions of Party authority as such, but rather was fundamentally a tactical question: participation or non-participation in theDuma, e.g. parliamentarism vs revolution. (shrink)

Argument that Marx has a realist ontology and a correspondence theory of truth. His views are compared to both Hegel's and Kant's. This interpretation departs from more Hegelian, 'idealist' interpretations that often rely on misunderstanding some of the work of the early Marx. There is also a discussion and partial defence of Lenin's Materialism and Empirio-Criticism.

In this essay I will argue for the existence of a Bolshevik Center, which coordinated the activities of the Bolsheviks in the Russian Social Democratic Party. This Bolshevik Center was dissolved in an intra-Bolshevik factional dispute on the eve of Lenin's writing his "Materialism" and "Empirio-Criticism." The source of the conflict in the Bolshevik Center related to disagreements over Lenin's tactics following the 1905 revolution. The leader of the anti-Lenin opposition was Bogdanov. But the struggle over tactics could (...) not be contained in the political sphere; it spilled over to the philosophical. Lenin's "Materialism" and "Empirio-Criticism" was written as a refutation of Bogdanov's philosophical thought in an attempt to drive him out of the Party. This essay will trace the events which led to the dissolution of the Bolshevik Center. In order to be able to follow the tactical debates a definition of terms to be used throughout this paper would be helpful. In terms of the strategic problems facing the Bolsheviks, as well as members of the Russian Social-Democratic Party, in their attitude to the Duma, the word 'Boycott' will refer to those who argued that the Bolsheviks should not participate in the Duma in any capacity. The Boycottists maintained that the Bolsheviks should not even participate in the elections to the Duma. The word Ultimatism refers to those among the Bolsheviks who wished to participate in the Third Duma, but who favored the total obedience of the Russian Social-Democrats who might be elected to the Duma to the Central Committee of the Party. Ultimatism refers to the control and hegemony of the Central Committee over any social-democratic delegates who might win elections to the Third Duma. Otzovism means 'removing'. The Otzovists were those among the Bolsheviks, who advocated the removal of any social-democratic delegate in the Third Duma who disobeyed the directives of the Party Central Committee. 'Ultimatism' and Otzovism concerned questions of Party authority. The Otzovist recommended the expulsion of any delegate in the Duma who abrogated the authority of the Party organs. Boycottism did not deal with questions of Party authority as such, but rather was fundamentally a tactical question: participation or non-participation in the Duma, e.g. 'parliamentarism' vs revolution. (shrink)

The elaboration of these principles has rested on the efforts of many thinkers. In presenting the scientific aspect, few have been as lucid and as aware of fundamental issues as the British physicist, J. D. Bernal. Aside from the Soviet tradition, which derives so largely from Lenin's work of critical re-statement, Materialism and Empirio-criticism, little has been done to carry out what has been mainly a program, a series of brilliant aperçus, and a guide. In Bernal's recent writings, (...) the attempt is finally being made to apply these principles and practice their program. His political activities, his philosophical commentary, and his research have blended in his Marxist vision of a scientific way of life. (shrink)

History and the philosophy of science have played a very important role in dialectical materialism; their results have been destined to support the correctness of the ideas of Marxist philosophers, especially in their application in historical materialism.From this point of view, the circumstances of the origin of the works of the Marxist classics cannot be neglected: Engels wrote hisDialectics in Nature in the period of classical physics, and Lenin published hisMaterialism and Empirio-Criticism at the beginning of the 20th (...) century when our modern physics first began: shortly before the publication of Lenin's book, Röntgen and Becquerel discovered new kinds of radiation, Balmer published his ideas concerning the regularity of the hydrogen spectrum, Plank wrote his first articles about the elementary quantum and Einstein published his three famous articles (1905). (shrink)

En este artículo queremos investigar la relación entre las filosofías de Edmund Husserl y Richard Avenarius. A pesar de que este tema ha sido prácticamente ignorado por los estudiosos de Husserl, es de suma importancia si uno quiere iluminar los orígenes del pensamiento fenomenológico de Husserl. Nuestra tesis es que el concepto de Husserl de actitud natural y su correlato, el mundo natural -tal y como ellos surgen en diferentes conferencias durante la década de 1910 y especialmente en Ideas I (...) con respecto a la reducción fenomenológica- se derivan de una temprana confrontación con el punto de vista del empiriocriticismo de Avenarius como fue expuesto en su libro Der menschliche Weltbegriff. Con el fin de mantener esta afirmación, discutiremos el acercamiento gradual de Husserl a las teorías del filósofo suizo-alemán así como su última crítica al mismo. Aunque, de hecho, Husserl concibió el punto de vista den Avenarius como un principio valioso, al final de sus reflexiones pone en cuestión algunas de las premisas de la filosofía empiriocriticista.In this paper I investigate the relationship between the philosophies of Edmund Husserl and Richard Avenarius. Despite this tapie has been almost disregarded by Husserlian scholars, it is of uttermost importance if one aims at illuminating the origins of Hus­serl's phenomenological thinking. My thesis is that Husserl's concept of natural attitude and its correlate, the natural world -as they emerge in various lectures during the 1910s and especially in Ideen I with respectmto the phenomenological reduction- stem from an early confrontation with Avenarius' "empiriocriticist" standpoint as laid out in his book Der menschliche Weltbegriff. In order to up­ hold this claim, I will discuss in my paper Husserl's gradual approach to the theories of the Swiss-German philosopher as well as his late critique of the same. Although Husserl in fact conceived of Avenarius' standpoint as a valuable beginning, he was decisively prompted in his late reflections to call into question sorne of the premises of the "empirio-criticist" philosophy. (shrink)

This paper, an extract from my Marxism and Materialism: Studies in Marxist Theory of Knowledge, discusses the epistemological status of philosophical realism. I take realism to be a necessary part of what Marx meant by 'materialism'. I argue that there are no valid, non-question-begging, decuctive arguments for the truth of realism; nor does empirical science inductively 'confirm' realism, in any technical sense of 'confirmation'. I argue that the relationship between realism and science is one of methodological continuity, in a sense (...) difficult to specify exactly, since the denial of the essential independence from the mind of the material world ends in theology, at least in the tradition of absolute idealism. I then examine Lenin's Materialism and Empirio-Criticism, in which I claim to find the same argument about methodological continuity, and show how this claim might be applied to the tradition of subjective idealism, with its use of counterfactuals and logically possible experiences in the 'reduction' of the physical world to experience. (shrink)

The first part of the book is an excellent historico-systematic analysis of the romantic reaction against science underlying and pervading the once popular philosophical currents within the last seventy-five years, such as, e.g., Austro-German empirio-criticism, English neo-Hegelianism, French intuitionism, and Anglo-American pragmatism. The second part studies the new theories of mathematics and physics--including non-Euclidean geometry, non-Aristotelian logic, and non-Newtonian physics--in relation to "the phenomenon of irrationalism" in contemporary thought. The book is definitely worth reading, and anyone acquainted with (...) Morris R. Cohen's Reason and Nature will readily come to realize how Aliotta anticipates remarkably the courageous position that great American classic in contemporary philosophy takes towards "the insurgence against reason" in recent times. (shrink)

Two books have been particularly influential in contemporary philosophy of science: Karl R. Popper's Logic of Scientific Discovery, and Thomas S. Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Both agree upon the importance of revolutions in science, but differ about the role of criticism in science's revolutionary growth. This volume arose out of a symposium on Kuhn's work, with Popper in the chair, at an international colloquium held in London in 1965. The book begins with Kuhn's statement of his position followed (...) by seven essays offering criticism and analysis, and finally by Kuhn's reply. The book will interest senior undergraduates and graduate students of the philosophy and history of science, as well as professional philosophers, philosophically inclined scientists, and some psychologists and sociologists. (shrink)

An accessible introduction to cultural theory and an original polemic about the purpose of criticism. What is criticism for? Over the past few decades, violent disagreements over that question in the academy have burst into the news media. These conflicts have renewed the Culture Wars over the legacy of the 1960s, becoming entangled in national politics and leading to a new set of questions. Does a concern with race, gender, and sexuality, with unacknowledged power and privilege, with identity, (...) give present critics the right to criticize the great works of the past? If we have learned to see those works in terms of historical differences rather than universal truths, how is it that they speak to us at all? In the study of the world's cultures, there is more than one way to avoid being Eurocentric; which way should we choose? Re-examining key thinkers since 1970, including Walter Benjamin, Michel Foucault, Judith Butler, Edward Said, Hortense Spillers, Fredric Jameson, and Stuart Hall, Criticism and Politics offers both a non-specialist introduction to recent cultural theory and a strong new interpretation of how this theory applies to the everyday issue of what cultural critics do and how they should feel about what they do. (shrink)

Now that well-paying jobs in film criticism have largely evaporated, while blogs, message boards, and social media have given new meaning to the saying that "everyone's a critic," urgent questions have emerged about the critic's status and purpose. In Film Criticism in the Digital Age, ten scholars from across the globe, as well as critics and bloggers, come together to consider whether we are witnessing the extinction of serious film criticism or seeing the seeds of its rebirth (...) in a new form. (shrink)

What is the relationship between literary criticism and ethics? Does criticism have an ethical task? How can criticism be ethical after literary theory? Ethical Criticism seeks to answer these questions by examining the historical development of the ethics of criticism and the vigorous contemporary backlash against what is known as 'theory'. The book appraises current arguments about the ethics of criticism and, finding them wanting, turns to the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas. Described as 'the (...) greatest moral philosopher of the twentieth century', Levinas' thought has had a profound influence on a number of significant contemporary thinkers. By paying close attention to his major writings, Robert Eaglestone argues cogently and persuasively for a new understanding of the ethical task of criticism and theory. (shrink)

Most recent discussions of reasons in art criticism focus on reasons that justify beliefs about the value of artworks. Reviving a long-neglected suggestion from Paul Ziff, I argue that we should focus instead on art-critical reasons that justify actions—namely, particular ways of engaging with artworks. I argue that a focus on practical rather than theoretical reasons yields an understanding of criticism that better fits with our intuitions about the value of reading art criticism, and which makes room (...) for a nuanced distinction between criticism that aims at universality and criticism that is resolutely personal. (shrink)

The paper examines the view that Nietzsche's perspectivism about practical judgments, understood as a form of internalism about practical reasons, implies that any legitimate criticism of judgments emanating from a foreign perspective must be in terms that are internal to this perspective. Insofar as it is thought to be motivated by certain general theoretical strictures of perspectivism, this view is incoherent. The paper argues that, on the contrary Nietzsche's recourse to a strategy of internal criticism is motivated by (...) his own particular commitment to preserving the freedom of spirit of his interlocutors. The paper concludes with a discussion of how freedom of spirit is preserved by internal criticism, and how the nature of freedom of spirit affects the particular form such criticism will assume. (shrink)

Moral agency is limited, imperfect, and structurally constrained. This is evident in the many ways we all unwittingly participate in widespread injustice through our everyday actions, which I call ‘structural wrongs’. To do justice to these facts, I argue that we should distinguish between summative and formative moral criticism. While summative criticism functions to conclusively assess an agent's performance relative to some benchmark, formative criticism aims only to improve performance in an ongoing way. I show that the (...) negative sanctions associated with summative responses are only justifiably imposed under certain conditions when persons exercise their agency wrongly — conditions that do not always hold for structural wrongs. Yet even in such cases we can still use formative responses, which are warranted whenever agents fall short of moral ideals. Expanding our repertoire of moral criticism to include both summative and formative responses enables us to better appreciate both the powers and limitations of our agency, and the complexity of moral life. (shrink)

Music Criticism in Vienna records a culture in which musical criticism had achieved the status of a minor art form. The period covered - October 1896 to December 1897 - was an eventful time in Vienna. Bruckner died, then Brahms; Mahler arrived; premieres of works by Czech composers coincidedwith increasing tension in the Empire between Czechs and Germans; Puccini's La Boheme reached Vienna on its sensational progress around the world; and the great programme music debate continued. These events (...) and issues were recorded and debated by some two dozen critics ranging from Eduard Hanslick,widely credited with (and blamed for) raising music criticism to an art, to Heinrich Schenker. The focus of Sandra McColl's monograph is unashamedly on the critics themselves, and her reconstruction of the climate of debate about whatever music or musicians came to their notice. She illuminates theintellectual climate in which the music was created, performed and received, and provides a foundation for the study of musical criticism in the post-Hanslick generation. (shrink)

Imre Lakatos; II—Criticism and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Volume 69, Issue 1, 1 June 1969, Page.

우리의 믿음, 욕구, 의도 등은 주관적인 성격을 갖는다. 예컨대, 우리는 존재하지 않는 대상에 대하여도 주관적으로 믿고, 생각하고, 욕구하고, 의도할 수 있다. 그리고 이와 같은 현상은 이러한 심적 태도의 내용이 외적 세계와 독립적으로, 즉 순수히 개인 내적으로 결정된다는 내재론적 직관을 이해할 수 있게 하여준다. 심성 내용이 내재적으로 결정된다는 전통적 견해는 그러나 버지(T. Burge)에 의해 촉발된 소위 심성 내용 외재론 논의에 의해 오늘날 심각하게 도전을 받고 있다. 버지는 퍼트남(H. Putnam)이 제시한 의미 외재론 논증을 응용하여, 의미뿐 아니라 심성 내용 역시 필연적으로 외적 세계의 (...) 인과적, 사회적 관계에 의존한다고 주장한다. 본 논문은 이 주장을 비판적으로 검토한다. 구체적으로, 이러한 주장을 위해 버지가 제시한 형태의 외재론 논증을 비판적으로 분석하고 그것이 충분한 설득력을 가지지 않음을 보이고자 한다. 이를 위해 본 논문은 우선, 심성 내용 외재론 논증이 전형적으로 어떤 형태를 취하는지 구체적으로 살펴보고, 이를 통해 심성 내용 외재론이 궁극적으로 의미론적 근거에 토대하고 있다는 것을 보일 것이다. 다음으로, 심성 내용에 대한 언어적 기술이 심성 내용을 결정하고 이해하는 데 있어 반드시 필요한지 또는 충분한 조건을 이루는지 구체적으로 검토한다. 이 검토를 통해 결국 언어적 기술은 심성 내용을 결정하고 이해하기 위해 필요하지도 충분하지도 않음이 드러날 것이다. 그리고 이러한 점은 결론적으로 심성 내용 외재론이 제시하고 있는 의미론적 근거는 이 이론이 주장하는 외재론적 견해를 뒷받침할 적절한 근거가 되지 않는다는 점을 드러내 보여줄 것이다. (shrink)

Imre Lakatos; II—Criticism and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Volume 69, Issue 1, 1 June 1969, Page.

Drawing on his knowledge of the worlds of art, criticism, and philosophy, Noèel Carroll argues that appraisal and evaluation of art are an indispensable part of the conversation of life.

It furthers the dialectic when the opponent is clear about what motivates and underlies her critical stance, even if she does not adopt an opposite standpoint, but merely doubts the proponent’s opinion. Thus, there is some kind of burden of criticism. In some situations, there should an obligation for the opponent to offer explanatory counterconsiderations, if requested, whereas in others, there is no real dialectical obligation, but a mere responsibility for the opponent to cooperate by providing her motivations for (...) being critical. In this paper, it will be shown how a set of dialogue rules may encourage an opponent, in this latter type of situation, to provide her counterconsiderations, and to do so at an appropriate level of specificity. Special attention will be paid to the desired level of specificity. For example, the critic may challenge a thesis by saying “Why? Says who?,” without conveying whether she could be convinced by an argument from expert opinion, or from position to know, or from popular opinion. What are fair dialogue rules for dealing with less than fully specific criticism? (shrink)

Introduction: What is criticism? (a preliminary dialogue) -- The critic as artist and vice versa -- The eye of the beholder -- Self-criticism (a further dialogue) -- Lost in the museum -- The trouble with critics -- Practical criticism (another dialogue) -- How to be wrong -- The critical condition -- The end of criticism (a final dialogue) -- Afterword.

In this paper I develop and defend a form of argumentative normativity that is not based on fundamental principles. I first argue that research agendas that aim to discover fundamental principles of ‘good’ argumentative discourse share one crucial weak spot, viz. circularity. I then argue that this weak spot can be avoided in a pancritical view of normativity.

A growing body of literature critical of ethics review boards has drawn attention to the processes used to determine the ethical merit of research. Citing criticism on the bureaucratic nature of ethics review processes, this literature provides a useful provocation for (re)considering how the ethics review might be enacted. Much of this criticism focuses on how ethics review boards _deliberate,_ with particular attention given to the lack of transparency and opportunities for researcher recourse that characterise ethics review processes. (...) Centered specifically on the conduct of ethics review boards convened within university settings, this paper draws on these inherent criticisms to consider the ways that ethics review boards might enact more communicative and deliberative practices. Outlining a set of principles against which ethics review boards might establish strategies for engaging with researchers and research communities, this paper draws attention to how _Deliberative communication_, _Engagement with researchers_ and the _Distribution of responsibility_ for the ethics review might be enacted in the day-to-day practice of the university human ethics review board. This paper develops these themes via a conceptual lens derived from Habermas’ (The theory of communicative action. Volume 1: Reason and the rationalization of society, 1984 ) articulation of ‘communicative action’ and Fraser’s (Social Text, 25(26), 56–80, 1990 ) consideration of ‘strong publics’ to cast consideration of the role that human ethics review boards might play in supporting university research cultures. _Deliberative communication_, _Engagement with researchers_ and the _Distribution of responsibility_ provide useful conceptual prompts for considering how ethics review boards might undertake their work. (shrink)

I tackle the definition of the relation between first and second nature while examining some problems with McDowell's conception. This, in the first place, will bring out the need to extend the notion of second nature to the social dimension, understanding it not just as `inner' second nature — individual mind — but also as `outer' second nature — objective spirit. In the second place the dialectical connection between these two notions of second nature will point the way to a (...) critical use of the concept itself, which will link up with a theory of reification. Furthermore, I shall endeavor to fit my reflection into the problematic constellation of critical theory: my analysis in fact rests on the question whether, within a critical theory, the philosophy of nature can be recaptured today, in such a way as to give meaning to the very notion of socio-philosophical criticism of reality. (shrink)

행위의 도덕성을 그 행위가 야기하는 결과적 사태의 가치로 판단하는 결과주의에서 원칙적으로 제시하는 유일한 도덕적 판단 기준은 비개인적 관점에서 바라본 전체 세계의 총합적 가치의 최대화이다. 이에 따라 전체의 이익과 충돌할 때마다 개인은 자신의 이익과 신념, 삶의 기획을 모두 포기하도록 도덕적으로 요구되고, 결과적으로 각 개인의 개별성은 적절하게 존중받을 근거를 잃어버리게 된다. 본 논문에서는 결과주의가 도덕적 이론으로서 지닌 한계를 온전성, 분배 정의, 그리고 교환 정의의 측면에서 살펴본다. 우선 온전성의 측면에서, 자신의 신념과 가치관에 따라 온전한 삶을꾸려가야 할 개인은 결과주의적 원칙 하에 전체의 선을 위해 (...) 필요할 때마다 자신의 이익이나 삶의 기획을 포기하도록 도덕적으로강요되며, 따라서 내적으로 분열된 삶을 살게 된다. 둘째, 분배 정의의 측면에서 결과주의는 개인과 사회의 관계를 왜곡시켜 개인이독립된 개별자가 아니라 전체 사회의 선을 위해 기능하는 부품이되게 하는데, 이러한 ‘전체의 선’은 특히 좋음의 관계적 개념에 근거하여 볼 때 공허하거나 부차적인 것으로 드러날 수 있다. 마지막으로 결과주의는 개인 간의 주고받음의 관계에서 손해와 이익이발생할 때 각 당사자가 자신의 손해를 적절하게 보상받아야 한다는 교환 정의의 원칙을 적절히 수용하지 못하는데, 이 교환 정의의원칙은 각 개인의 개별성의 존중을 위해서 뿐 아니라 공동체의 유지를 위해 반드시 필요한 원리이다. (shrink)

이 글의 목적은 니체의 도덕철학에 대한 비도덕주의적 해석을 비판적으로 검토하는 데 있다. 비도덕주의는 기본적으로 도덕에 반대하는 니체의 입장을 이해하려는 시도라고 볼 수 있다. 비도덕주의는 도덕을 부정적 가치나 극복해야만 하는 어떤 것이라고 주장한다. 하지만 비도덕주의는 니체가 도덕적 가치와는 다른 미적 가치, 또는 도덕과는 다른 윤리적 삶의 형식을 지지한다고 주장한다는 점에서 무도덕주의와 다르다. 한마디로 비도덕주의적 입장은 니체가 도덕은 거부하면서도 도덕과는 다른 대안적 시각을 지지한다고 주장한다. 그런데 이러한 가치 평가적 기획에는 메타윤리적 질문이 동반될 수밖에 없기 때문에, 비도덕주의가 지지하는 니체의 대안적 가치가 그가 거부하는 (...) 도덕적 가치에 비해 어떤 특권을 가질 수 있느냐 하는 의문이 제기된다. 이 글에서 필자는 비도덕주의가 니체의 대안적 시각의 규범적 정당화 문제를 해결하기 어렵다고 주장한다. 이러한 주장을 위해 필자는 먼저 그것이 제안하는 대안적 시각의 성격에 따라 비도덕주의를 ‘미학적’ 입장과 ‘윤리적’ 입장으로 나누어 살펴보고, 각 입장의 의의와 한계를 검토한다. 그 결과 니체에 대한 비도덕주의적 해석이 다원화된 새로운 문화에 살고 있는 우리에게 미적이고 윤리적인 대안적 실존의 가능성을 위한 토대를 마련해 주었음에도 불구하고, 니체의 도덕철학에 담긴 대안적 시각을 규범적으로 정당화하기 어렵다고 주장한다. 필자는 그 한계가 비도덕주의적 입장이 여전히 ‘좋은 것의 정초’라는 전통 윤리학의 기본가정에 매여 있기 때문이라고 본다. 즉 필자는 비도덕주의가 도덕적 가치 대신 니체의 대안적 가치를 정초하려고 한다는 점에서 기본적인 한계를 갖는다고 주장한다. 결론적으로 필자는 그 한계가 니체의 도덕철학을 비도덕주의가 아닌 도덕적 자연주의로 이해함으로써 보완될 수 있고, 그 전환의 의미는 니체의 도덕적 자연주의를 ‘정초의 윤리학’이 아닌 ‘금지의 윤리학’으로 파악함으로써 더 잘 해명될 수 있다고 주장한다. (shrink)