<HTML>There is a small but vibrant literature within Marxian scholarship on Marx and ethics/morality, of which Bertell Ollman is a part. But this literature operates on the highest level of abstraction, focusing on the question of whether or not there are ethical or moral presuppositions within Marxian analysis, and might properly be called meta-ethical. What does not exist, as far as I know [I have not seen the Fisk book which Justin cited] is any systemic effort to develop a working philosophy of Marxian ethics, one which could be applied to all sorts of practical ethical issues. Wherever one looks in ethics -- I am most familiar with medical ethics, but it seems to be the case in legal ethics and scholarly research ethics, as far as I can tell -- the only two general systems which are applied to practical issues are Kantian and utilitarian philosophy. What this gap has to say about all of the other philosophical alternatives to Kantian and utilitarian philosophy, which include but are not limited to Hegelian and Marxian philosophy, could be a matter of some debate. It may be that they have not been applied to ethics because those who work within them have other other interests -- or it may be that as systems of philosophical thought, they have major lacunae which keep them from being very useful in the field of applied ethics. Leo Casey United Federation of Teachers 260 Park Avenue South New York, New York 10010-7272 (212-598-6869) Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never has, and it never will. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its waters. -- Frederick Douglass -- </HTML>