>>> "Tahir Wood"
This is from the last chapter of Hegel contra Sociology:
“Missing from Marx’s oeuvre is any concept of culture, of formation and re-formation (Bildung). ^^^ CB: This is interesting, but what about superstructure ? That corresponds to culture. Marx doesn't spend a lot of time writing about superstructure, but he talks about it some. Anyway, it would be interesting to see how Rose develops the concept of culture. Her reference to "representations and subjectivity", and "structural change" below are interesting
^^^^^
There is no idea of a vocation which may be assimilated or re-formed by the determinations or law which it fails to acknowledge or the strength which it underestimates. Because Marx did not relate actuality to representation and subjectivity, his account of structural change in capitalism is abstractly related to possible change in consciousness. This resulted in gross oversimplification regarding the likelihood and the inhibition of change. This is not the argument that Marx’s predictions about the conditions of the formation of revolutionary consciousness were wrong. It is an argument to the effect that the very concept of consciousness and, a fortiori, of revolutionary consciousness, are insufficiently established in Marx.
This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com