Schiller, Hegel, and Marx

Schiller, Hegel, and Marx: State, Society, and the Aesthetic Ideal of Ancient Greece

Philip J. Kain
Copyright Date: 1982
Pages: 193
  • Cite this Item
  • Book Info
    Schiller, Hegel, and Marx
    Book Description:

    All three believed that the modern world could be remade according to this model, though none succeeded in his endeavor. At times Schiller seemed to recognize the failure of the model; in his mature writing Hegel dropped the model; and Marx, as he grew older, fundamentally modified the model. Nevertheless, focusing upong their attempts and failures allows an explanation of certain aspects of one of the fundamental concerns of current Marx studies: Marx's humanism and the relationship between his earlier and later thought.

    eISBN: 978-0-7735-6399-5
    Subjects: Philosophy

Table of Contents

  1. Front Matter
    (pp. i-vi)
  2. Table of Contents
    (pp. vii-viii)
  3. Acknowledgments
    (pp. ix-x)
  4. Abbreviations
    (pp. xi-2)
  5. Introduction
    (pp. 3-12)

    The purpose of this book is to examine two interconnected themes: Marx’s humanism and the relationship between the earlier and the later Marx.

    The scholars who concern themselves with these issues can be divided into two groups: those who argue for an essential unity to Marx’s thought and those who argue for a fundamental difference between the early and the late Marx.

    At the first pole, the weakest sort of argument for the essential unity of Marx’s thought proceeds in the following, unsound manner. One begins by identifying an important concept, say, in the later writings. One examines, for example,...

  6. I Schiller
    (pp. 13-33)

    Schiller asserts that modern man is fragmented. This fragmentation takes the general form of a separation and opposition of sense and reason, of man’s intellectual and sensuous capacities.¹ The solution to this problem constitutes the most pressing and fundamental need of modern man. Schiller begins his search for this solution by turning for guidance to the culture of ancient Greece. There fragmentation had not yet occurred. “At that first fair awakening of the powers of the mind, sense and intellect did not as yet rule over strictly separate domains; for no dissension had as yet provoked them into hostile partition...

  7. II Hegel
    (pp. 34-74)

    For hegel, the culture of ancient Greece constituted an ideal, a high point of the human condition. Hegel’s concern with this ideal permeated all levels of his social, cultural, and political thought. In his earliest writings, as with Schiller, ancient Greece provided the model after which the modern world was to be remade. In his later writings, to a great extent, Hegel gave up on this hope. Instead, the highest principles came to be represented by Christianity and the development of subjectivity. But even though the Greek principle was transcended in the course of spirit’s development, it continued to appear...

  8. III Marx (1835–48)
    (pp. 75-113)

    Marx accepts only some of Hegel’s assumptions concerning alienation and estrangement. Against Hegel, he turns toward reconciliation with nature through objectification. His model for labor and the state thus is not as close to the views of the mature Hegel as it is to the Greek ideal, to Schiller, and to the parts of Hegel that were closer to Schiller. This, I will argue, is the case in the earlier writings. Marx will change some of these views in later writings.

    The division between the early and the mature Marx is often set at 1845, when Marx and Engels began...

  9. IV Marx (1849–83)
    (pp. 114-151)

    In this chapter I will argue that Marx shifts his position on several of the issues we have been investigating. Most importantly he alters his views concerning the possibility of overcoming alienation in the process of production, and he changes his mind concerning the way in which alienation in exchange can be overcome. Consequently, he modifies the very optimistic position he held in 1844 concerning humanized labor. On the other hand, he works out some of the problems connected with his view of the socialist state, though other problems develop. If we were able to say that before 1848 Marx’s...

  10. V Conclusion
    (pp. 152-158)

    In 1844, Marx’s views on labor were close to those of Schiller. Later they came to resemble those of the mature Hegel. Indeed, Marx’s shift was in certain ways like the shift that Hegel himself made from youth to maturity.

    But with respect to political institutions, Marx remains closer to Schiller. The major change in Marx’s views on the state came in 1843. While there remain some difficulties with the theory of socialism, nevertheless, the way in which Marx wants to envision the state shifts progressively toward a state more like Schiller’s ideal and the ancient Greek state.

    Up to...

  11. Bibliography
    (pp. 159-172)
  12. Index
    (pp. 173-179)
  13. Back Matter
    (pp. 180-180)