Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas
At 9:25 AM -0400 19/6/04, Ted Winslow wrote:
>The ethical doctrine associated with Marx's "materialism" embodies
>the ideas of a "will proper" and a "universal will."
>
>"The Will Proper, or the Higher Appetite, is (a) pure
>indeterminateness of the Ego, which as such has no limitation or a
>content which is immediately extant through nature but is
>indifferent towards any and every determinateness. (b) The Ego can,
>at the same time, pass over to a determinateness and make a choice
>of some one or other and then actualize
> it." (Hegel, The Philosophical Propaedeutic p. 2)
>
>The "Universal Will" is "the Will which is Lawful and Just or in
>accordance with Reason." (Philosophical Propaedeutic p. 1)
>
>Marx adds to this the claim that the "good" that constitutes the
>content of the "universal will" is the activity of creating and
>appropriating beauty and truth within relations of mutual
>recognition. Such relations are the opposite of coercive.
>Moreover, they can't be created coercively. The end determines the
>means with "the rigidity of a law." The "good" in this sense can
>only be fully actualized by "egos" "indifferent towards any and
>every determinateness" freely choosing to make it the determinate
>content of their willing and then actualizing it.
>
>What is the preferable ethical doctrine derivable from ontologies
>such as "structuralism" that have no logical space for these ideas?
>
>Ted
>
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk