Thank you!! Can't wait to watch! If more people still read Karl Marx, they would not have been so surprised by the housing crisis of 2009. They would have expected it as part of the capitalist cycle of boom and bust.
I could change my mind by the time I get to the end, but as of now I don't find the reference to the Judeo-Christian story, although it was interesting, to be all that helpful for understanding Marx.
You say that Hegel's stage theory of history -- history as the stages of the unfolding of reason -- is a secularization of the Judeo-Christian story, but it's not clear to me why/how that's the case. Even if Hegel's "reason becoming conscious of itself" is the equivalent of the End Times (or something like that), I don't see why you couldn't have skipped the Biblical stuff, gone straight to Hegel's stage theory and then explained how Marx inverted it.
In short, as of now I don't think the Biblical digression added much (although as I say it was interesting and I don't think I knew the stuff about why giving birth is called 'labor'). But unless the last 15 mins or so of the lecture changes my mind, I think you could have skipped the Bible w/o much loss. Just one viewer's preliminary opinion; others' mileage may vary.
The Judeo-Christian story is the idea that history is going somewhere, that at the end of history the golden age will arrive.
The Greeks, as far as I know, didn't see things that way.
Both Hegel and Marx, as far as I know, believe that history is going somewhere and that it is going towards a golden age of sorts.
So I think that it's important to point out that correspondence between the Bible, Hegel and Marx. I've seen it pointed out before, but Professor Wolff seems to be introducing us to Marx, seems to assume that we have very little sense of who Marx is and have read very little secondary, if any, material on Marx. I think that that is good approach, since those of us who know a bit about Marx will not be harmed if we review our knowledge.
Now that being said, I'd say that Professor Wolff could have spent more time explaining Hegel and less time explaining the Bible, since Hegel was one of the chief conscious influences on Marx, while the Biblical story is more of a background narrative to all Judeo-Christian culture. However, maybe he will give us more Hegel as he goes on.
Those are perfectly fair points, s. wallerstein. As I say, I saw the first 40 minutes, haven't quite finished watching it yet.
Btw, roughly at the time, c. 1976/77, when Prof Wolff was having his epiphany, his éclaircissement, about Capital vol. 1, I was reading Capital vol. 1 (or large parts thereof) in Soc Stud 10 (in the program that Prof Wolff helped found some years before).
In retrospect, perhaps I even spent too much time w/ Capital vol. 1. But we won't tell Prof Wolff that. We'll keep it confidential. ;)
Btw, I loved the reference to "whack-a-mole" in connection with the police chasing the radicals from one European city to the other. I thought that was one of the best things in the first 40 minutes.
Thank you.
ReplyDeleteI'll see if I can find you a few more viewers in Chile.
Thank you for a most informative lecture. Looking forward to the next installment with much anticipation.
ReplyDeleteThank you!! Can't wait to watch! If more people still read Karl Marx, they would not have been so surprised by the housing crisis of 2009. They would have expected it as part of the capitalist cycle of boom and bust.
ReplyDeleteHave watched approx. the first 40 minutes.
ReplyDeleteI could change my mind by the time I get to the end, but as of now I don't find the reference to the Judeo-Christian story, although it was interesting, to be all that helpful for understanding Marx.
You say that Hegel's stage theory of history -- history as the stages of the unfolding of reason -- is a secularization of the Judeo-Christian story, but it's not clear to me why/how that's the case. Even if Hegel's "reason becoming conscious of itself" is the equivalent of the End Times (or something like that), I don't see why you couldn't have skipped the Biblical stuff, gone straight to Hegel's stage theory and then explained how Marx inverted it.
In short, as of now I don't think the Biblical digression added much (although as I say it was interesting and I don't think I knew the stuff about why giving birth is called 'labor'). But unless the last 15 mins or so of the lecture changes my mind, I think you could have skipped the Bible w/o much loss. Just one viewer's preliminary opinion; others' mileage may vary.
Much, much better than Trump's State of the Union. I am looking forward to the next installment. Thanks!
ReplyDeleteLFC,
ReplyDeleteThe Judeo-Christian story is the idea that history is going somewhere, that at the end of history the golden age will arrive.
The Greeks, as far as I know, didn't see things that way.
Both Hegel and Marx, as far as I know, believe that history is going somewhere and that it is going towards a golden age of sorts.
So I think that it's important to point out that correspondence between the Bible, Hegel and Marx. I've seen it pointed out before, but Professor Wolff seems to be introducing us to Marx, seems to assume that we have very little sense of who Marx is and have read very little secondary, if any, material on Marx. I think that that is good approach, since those of us who know a bit about Marx will not be harmed if we review our knowledge.
Now that being said, I'd say that Professor Wolff could have spent more time explaining Hegel and less time explaining the Bible, since Hegel was one of the chief conscious influences on Marx, while the Biblical story is more of a background narrative to all Judeo-Christian culture. However, maybe he will give us more Hegel as he goes on.
Those are perfectly fair points, s. wallerstein. As I say, I saw the first 40 minutes, haven't quite finished watching it yet.
ReplyDeleteBtw, roughly at the time, c. 1976/77, when Prof Wolff was having his epiphany, his éclaircissement, about Capital vol. 1, I was reading Capital vol. 1 (or large parts thereof) in Soc Stud 10 (in the program that Prof Wolff helped found some years before).
In retrospect, perhaps I even spent too much time w/ Capital vol. 1. But we won't tell Prof Wolff that. We'll keep it confidential. ;)
Btw, I loved the reference to "whack-a-mole" in connection with the police chasing the radicals from one European city to the other. I thought that was one of the best things in the first 40 minutes.
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telos_(philosophy)
ReplyDeleteI posted this with the wrong blog:
ReplyDeleteGreat start. Impressive as usual. Enticing. Looking forward to the Manuscripts.