Isidor Wallimann-Estrangement_ Marx's Conception of Human Nature and the Division of Labor (Contributions in Philosophy) -Greenwood Press (1981)

8/17/2019 Isidor Wallimann-Estrangement_ Marx's Conception of Human Nature and the Division of Labor (Contributions in Philosophy) -Greenwood Press (1981)

1/108


2/108

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Wallimann, Isidor, 1944-Estrangement: Marx s conception of human nature

and the division of labor.(Contributions in philosophy; no. 16 ISSN 0084-926X)Bibliography: p.Includes index.1 Marx, Karl, 1818-1883. 2 Man. 3. Division

of labor. 4. Alienation (Philosophy) I Title.B3305.M74W34 335.4 12 80-929ISBN 0-313-22096-4 (lib. bdg.)Copyright 1981 by Isidor Wallimann

All rights reserved. No portion of this book may bereproduced, by any process or technique, without theexpress written consent of the publisher.Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 80-929ISBN: 0-313-22096-4ISSN: 0084-926XFirst published in 1981Greenwood PressA division of Congressional Information Service, Inc.88 Post Road West, Westport, Connecticut 06881

Printed in the United States of America

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2

Copyright AcknowledgmentsThe publishers listed below kindly gave me permission to reprint from the followingsources:

Grundrisse Foundations o f the Critioue o f nli t i rnl rnnnmv v T


3/108

oNTENTS

Foreword by Gunter W. Remmling XIPreface xv

Introduction xviiAbbreviations xxiii

1. ISSUES ND PROCEDURES 3

2. MARX S CONCEPTION OF HUMAN NATUREMAN VERSUS ANIMAL: THE BIOLOGICAL MODEL IITHE BEHAVIOR OF INDIVIDUALS CHANGES: THE

HISTORICAL MODEL 14

HUMAN NATURE AND MARX S DEFINITION OF MAN

AS SPECIES BEING 6DISCUSSION 7

3. ESTRANGEMENT: THE CONSEQUENCES OF BEINGCOERCED INTO SELLING ONE S LABOR POWER 25WAGE LABOR: THE COERCION TO GIVE UP ONE S

WILL AND CONTROL OVER ONE S BODYTHE CONSEQUENCES OF BEING COERCED INTO

SELLING ONE S LABOR POWER

27

30


4/108

viii CONTENTS

ESTRANGEMENT FROM THE PRODUCT OF ON E'S LABOR

THE WORKER'S ESTRANGEMENT FROM THE ACT OF

PRODUCTION AND FROM HIMSELFESTRANGEMENT FROM NATURE

ESTRANGEMENT FROM THE SPECIES AND FROM MAN

ESTRANGEMENT OF THE CAPITALIST

THE CAPITALIST'S RELATIONSHIP TO THE WORKER

A COMMENT ON MARX'S TERMINOLOGY: ENTAUSSERUNG

ENTFREMDUNG ALIENATION

4. THE NATUR E OF CAPITALIST SOCIETY

A N D ECONOMY

LABOR THEORY OF VALUE, SURPLUS VALUE

SURPLUS VALUE AND EXPLOITATION

DISCUSSION

THE INABILITY TO APPROPRIATE ONE'S PRODUCT

OF LABOR AND ITS CONSEQUENCES

5. MARX S EVALUATION OF THE CONDITION

OF MAN IN PRECAPITALIST SOCIETIES

THE DELINEATION OF THE CAPITALIST MODE OF

PRODUCTION

COMMUNITIES IN WHICH PROPERTY WAS HELD IN

COMMON

COMMUNISTIC SOCIETIES BASED ON THE GENTILE

ORGANIZATION

MARX'S USE OF THE TERM ''PRIVATE PROPERTY"

6 THE DIVISION OF LABOR A N D ITS

CENTRALITY FOR MARX S THEORY OF

ESTRANGEMENT

INVOLUNTARY DIVISION OF LABOR

INVOLUNTARY DIVISION OF LABOR AND ITS CENTRALITY

TO THE THEORY OF ESTRANGEMENT

TRUE COMMUNISM A N D ITS BASIS ON A

VOLUNTARY DIVISION OF LABOR

TRUE COMMUNISM

COMMUNISM AS THE ELIMINATION OF THE CONFLICT

BETWEEN THE INDIVIDUAL AND THE GROUP

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INDIVIDUAL

DISCUSSION

MARX'S DEFINITION OF HUMAN NATURE RECONSIDERED

31

32

34

35

37

38

4

47

47

57

6

62.71

71

73

76

81

9r

· 94

96

99

1

1 61 9

115

122

CONTENTS

8 IS ESTRANGEMENT LIMITED TO CAPITALIST

SOCIETIES?

ESTRANGEMENT AND PRECAPITALIST C, NON-PRIMITIVE SOCIETIES

DISCUSSIONIS MARX AN ANTI-INDUSTRIALIST ROMANTICIST?

9. THE SCOPE A N D APPLICABILITY OF MARX S

THEORY OF ESTRANGEMENT

THE QUESTION OF BEING MORE OR LESS ESTRANGED

WHAT MARX CALLS ESTRANGEMENT: A CAUSE OF CERTAIN

IDENTIFIABLE BEHAVIOR OR ATTITUDES?

ESTRANGEMENT AS AN OBJECTIVELY DEFINED CONCEPT

10 CONCLUSIONS

If ESTRANGEMENT AND THE ABOLITION OF PRIVATEPROPERTY

i A NOTE ON THE APPLICABILITY OF MARX'S THEORY OF

ESTRANGEMENT

Selected BibliographyIndex·

ix

129

129

136

137

147

50

155

16

165

169

171

1779


5/108

FoREWORD BY G u N T E R W R E M M L I N G

When Marx informed his collaborator Arnold Ruge that he had decidedto make man into man, he rejected the notion of a human being s

no more than an estranged producer of commodities belonging to some-one else. More importantly, Marx had communicated to Ruge the centralidea that was to give purpose to his entire life s work: the realization ofthe true character of men and women. Marx crystallized this idea in theintellectual fires that produced his differentiation from Hegel and Feuer-bach. The idea persuaded him to concentrate all his remarkable energieson identifying the forces that could dissolve the contradiction betweenidea and reality. Therefore, Marx set out to discover those elements insocial action that had the power to break down the existing socioeconomic

relations-elements that, because of their own inner contradiction, wouldnegate the general estrangement in social life.

Marx understood that these elements had to be found in the relationsof active life. He realized that they were present in the relations that domi-nate as a nameless force the relations between persons-that is, in the eco-nomic relations wherein all estrangement originates. While commoditiesrelinquish their ultimate qualities in money, men and women relinquish


6/108


7/108

· ·

PREF CE

While this study owes much to many people in one way or another hereit is possible to express my appreciation only to those who were most

directly involved.Gunter Remmling gave generously of his time and valuable advice. I

gained immeasurably from the breadth of his knowledge relatin g to thework of Karl Marx and other subjects as well as from the many hoursspent in pleasant conversation and friendship. I am also very appreciativeof David Edelstein both for his interest in me and my work and for hispersonal encouragement. I am particularly grateful for the many mean-ingful questions he raised in connection with this study. I would alsolike to thank him as well as Ephraim H Mizruchi and Willie Lamouse-

Smith for their pertinent suggestions. In addition I am thankful for theacademic support and friendship I received from Jerry Jacobs HaroldOrbach George Zito Nicholas Tatsis Barry Glassner Allen Large andDorothy Zito.

This study also owes much to Linda Brasington who devoted much ef-fort and patience to the typing of a manuscript interspersed with so manyawkward foreign and English words; and to my friend Carol Leonard

. ~ ~ ~ ~ = = ~ ~ ~ = = = ~ = = = = = = = = = = =


8/108

xvi PREF CE

without whose emotional support and direct involvement in the editionsof the material, this study would not have been possible. A research grant

from Syracuse University and support from Hobart and William SmithColleges facilitated this study considerably.

Finally, I would like to extend my gratitude to the staff of GreenwoodPress for devoting many hours of careful work to this manuscript and giv-ing useful advice on numerous occasions. I would especially like to thankJames Sabin, Margaret Brezicki, Kathie Stone, and Anne Kugielsky.

.

INTRODU TION

Although the term alienation is used frequently in popular and scientificcircles, its precise meaning remains so unclear that many have questioned

its value. Because the term has been imprecisely used and because present-day usage seems equally imprecise, it has also been recommended thatthe term alienation be either abandoned or conceptually clarified and

more rigorously defined.This study attempts to show that Marx used the terms alienation and

estrangement both precisely and systematically, and that calls for theabandonment or clarification of the terms are unjustified with regard tothe works of Marx. e are not convinced, however, that the lack of pre-cision inherent in today's use of the term alienation is reversible and

that the term is at all useful as it has been employed in modern studies.It is therefore important to distinguish strictly between Marx s precisionand today's ambiguity and thus to abandon the widely held notion thatmany modern studies involving the term are somehow related to the Marx-ian tradition, when in fact they are not.

There are several reasons for today's lack of consensus and systematicuse of the term alienation. In this short space, we can only briefly


9/108


10/108


11/108

I

I

BBREVI TIONS

German Sources 1 English Sources 2

Volume No. Volume No.

MEW, EB, l .T. CW, 3

MEW, 2 cw 4MEW, 3 CW, 5MEW, 3 cw 5MEW,4 CW, 6

MEW, 4 CW,6

MEW,G GMEW, 13 CPE

MEW, 16 WPP

MEW, 19 CGP

1. Marx Engels: Werke MEW).2. Marx/Engels: Collected Works CW).

Title

Economic and Philo-sophie Manuscripts o1844The Holy Family

Theses on FeuerbachThe German IdeologyThe Poverty o Philos-ophyManifesto o f the Communist PartyGI UndrisseA Contribution to theCritique o PoliticalEconomyWages, Price and ProfitCritique o the GothaProgramme


12/108

xxiv 1\BBREVIATIONS

MEW 20 AD

MEW 21 OF

MEW 23 ClMEW 24 C2MEW 25 C3MEW 26 1 TS1

MEW 26 2 TS2

MEW 26 3TS3

EN

-

r

Herr Eugen Duhring sRevolution in Science

(Anti-Duhring)The Origin o f theFamily, Private Propertyand the StateCapital Vol. ICapital Vol. IICapital Vol. IIITheories o SurplusValueTheories o SurplusValue

Theories o f SurplusValueThe Ethnological Note-books o f Karl Marx

ESTR NGEMENT


13/108

I s suEs ND PROCEDURES

In the 1920s, along with the ascent of the Frankfurt School, Marxianthought experienced a revival that had far-reaching effects. The revivaloccurred in a political atmosphere that, to say the least, was quite pluralistic. The Weimar Republic, despite its short life-span (1919-1933), presented a stage on which, s Remmling (1973:3-43) has pointed out, marginal characters in the society could suddenly become socially accepted majorcharacte rs (see also Meja, 197 5). Thus, very unlike the situation duringWeber s imperial Germany, Marxists were suddenly found at the university.This increasingly tolerant environment also provided fertile ground forthinkers like Mannheim who drew heavily from Marx and whose intellectualquestions pertaining to the sociology of knowledge might easily be viewed

s

socially threatening (Remmling, 1975).Given the revival of Marxism and the interest in the sociology of knowledgein Weimar Germany, it is therefore not surprising that renewed attention wasalso paid to Marx s theory of estrangement. In fact, this theory must be considered a central element in the evaluation of his contribution to the sociologyof knowledge (Remmling, 1967). Outside the particular sphere of the sociology of knowledge, Marcuse (1964, 1970, 1972) and Fromm (1961, 1968)-


14/108


15/108


16/108


17/108


18/108


19/108


20/108


21/108


22/108


23/108


24/108


25/108


26/108


27/108


28/108


29/108


30/108


31/108


32/108


33/108


34/108

[


35/108

4T H E N ATURE OF CAPITALIST

S o c i E T Y ND E c o N O M Y

In an attempt to review what Marx saw as key elements of capitalism, topicssuch as surplus value and division of labor must be addressed.

LABOR THEORY OF VALUE, SURPLUS VALUE

A full review of the economic debates in which Marx engaged concerningthe labor theory of value is not possible here, nor will elaborate on what isknown today as the "transformation problem." Labor theory of value, surplus value, and exploitation will be defined not in terms of price but in termsof time, as Marx did throughout much of his work. For an account of theprincipal ways in which he analyzed capitalist society, this procedure willbe adequate and not misleading.

Because the worker is forced to sell his labor power and to let it be subject to an alien will, he not only becomes estranged, but also divests him-

' self entaussert sich) of labour as the force productive of wealth" (G, p. 307). 1

Through this exchange in which the worker receives wages, the capitalistcontrols the labor of the worker and becomes the owner of the product oflabor (see MEW 23, pp. 199-200). In the Grundrisse, Marx writes that the"separation between labour and property in the product of labour, between

Jabour and wealth, is thus posited in this act of exchange itself" (G, p. 307;MEW G p. 214). He explicitly postulates that labor is the source of wealth

. . . . , - . = ' c . W ' · ~ - ' - - - - , ~ · - ·· · · · · -


36/108


37/108


38/108


39/108


40/108


41/108


42/108


43/108


44/108


45/108


46/108


47/108


48/108


49/108


50/108


51/108


52/108


53/108


54/108


55/108


56/108

T H E DIVISION O LABOR

AND ITS CENTRALITY OR MARX S

THEORY o F EsTRANGEMENT

According to Marx, the division of labor under the communism of primitivesociety was based on age, sex, and physical strength (MEW, 23, p. 372).This division was, therefore, not yet a true division of labor. Division of 'labour only becomes truly such from the moment when a division ofmaterial and mental labour appears (CW, 5, pp. 44-45; MEW, 3 p. 31).At this point, however, private property has also arisen. Division of labourand private property are, after all, identical expressions: in the one thesame thing is affirmed with reference to activity as is affirmed in the otherwith reference to the product of the activity (CW, 5 p. 46; MEW 3p. 32).

Marx's treatment of the emergence of the division of labor is similarto that of the emergence of private property. Although there was personalproperty at earlier stages of development, it was not private property asMarx tends to use the term; and although there had been a division oflabor, it became truly one only with the emergence of private proper ty-with the emergence of a division between mental and material labor. InCapital Marx also postulates that true division of labor goes beyond aphysiologically base d one and is accompanied by exchange. It is based

on exchange and on the trend that products have become commodities


57/108


58/108


59/108


60/108


61/108


62/108


63/108


64/108


65/108


66/108


67/108


68/108


69/108


70/108


71/108


72/108


73/108


74/108


75/108


76/108

s EsTRANGEMENT LIMITED

T CAPITALIST SociETIES

If the foregoing interpretation of Marx, with its emphasis on the in-voluntary nature of the division of labor, s correct, it would have tobe concluded that man s estranged whenever an involuntary division

of labor exists. Such a conclusion would be the logical consequence ofa theory that postulates estrangement to result from the involuntarynature of the division of labor and that assumes the lack of any estrange-ment under communism because of the absence of such a division oflabor. In this chapter instead of merely drawing the logical consequences,the attempt s made to investigate Marx s views on precapitalist, non-communistic societies in order to determine whether such a conclusionholds up and how the conclusion can be termed valid.

ESTRANGEMENT AND PRECAPITALISTIC

NONPRIMITIVE SOCIETIES

Marx thinks the division of labor became involuntary following thedestruction of the communism of primitive societies. This belief is moreconcretely expr essed in Marx s discussion of the nature of the master-servant relation Herrschaftsverhi:iltnis):

1

:1. 1

i

I


77/108


78/108


79/108


80/108


81/108


82/108


83/108


84/108

~ll


85/108

T H E S c o P E AND APPLICABILITY

o F M A R X S T H E O RY OF EsTRANGEMENT

Before anything can be said about the scope and applicability of Marx'stheory of estrangement, we must clarify whether it is legitimate to speakof only on theory of estrangement. If it is not legitimate to speak of onlyone theory, it will have to be specified which theory of estrangement isreferred to when addressing the applicability of Marx's theory of estrange-ment.

Some students of Marx maintain that he abandoned the terms estrange-ment and alienation in his later work, and based on this assertion, theyargue that Marx also abandoned or changed his theory of estrangement.This argument is weak on at least two counts. First, the content of a theoryshould not, and cannot, be evaluated solely on the basis of whether a certainvocabulary is present. Thus, by investigating the properties of Marx's theoryof estrangement in the foregoing analysis, it was possible to show that theseproperties do not change, although the vocabulary may undergo somechanges. It was shown that Marx's theory of estrangement is derived fromhis definition of human nature, a definition that is present in both his earlyand later work. Man is said to be estranged if, contrary to his nature, he is

prevented from subjecting his labor power, s well s the product of hislabor, to his own will. If one is so prevented, the existence of an involun-tary division of labor can be implied. If , therefore, it can be shown that

: :

,li

i

:

,Ill i


86/108


87/108


88/108


89/108


90/108


91/108


92/108


93/108

1

I

,i

II

I

I

~II


94/108

1oNcLusioNs

Marx distinguishes between two concepts of human nature: generalhuman nature, which refers to those human qualities that are invariable,and specific human nature, which consists of qualities that may vary fromsociety to society and in history. Marx derived his concept of human nature

in general from a comparison of man with animals. Estrangement resultswhen man is prevented from living according to his human nature, that is,general human nature. Unfortunately, students of Marx have not made aclear distinction between the two concepts of human nature embodied inhis work, and as a result, his theory of estrangement has frequently beenmisunderstood and inadequately interpreted. Our interpretation therefore

stands in opposition to Petrovic s (1967:146). Translating esen withessence instead of nature, and using, as does Oilman, alienation

instead of estrangement, he says that if alienation of man from his es-

sence is to be possible, his essence must not be conceived as something thatall men have in common. e also find Oilman s (1976:135) view to bemisleading and lacking in clarity, as is evident in the following statement:

If alienation is the splintering of human nature into a number of mis-begotten parts, we would expect communism to be presented as a kindof reunification. By clearly making this distinction, we have laid the

I II

I

i II

,

II

: I


95/108


96/108


97/108


98/108


99/108

I

III

l i ~,Iii


100/108

c

-----------------··

SELECTED BIBLIOGR PHY

BOOKS

Adler, G J. 1864 Dictionary of the German and English Languages.New York: Appleton

Andrews, E A. 1854 Copious and Critical Latin-English Lexicon.

New York: Harper Brothers.Apthekar, Herbert (ed.). 1965. Marxism and Alienation: A SymposiumNew York: Humanities Press.

Aron, Raymond 1969 Marxism and the Existentialists. New York:Harper Row.

Avineri, Shlomo. 1968 The Social and Political Thought o Karl Marx.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Axelos, Kostas (ed. ). 197 6. Alienation Praxis and Techne in the Thoughto f Karl Marx. Austin, Tex.: University of Texas Press.

Baczko, Bronislaw. 1969 Weltanschauung Metaphysik Entfremdung:Philosophische Versuche. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp

Bedeschi, Giuseppe. 1968 Alienazione e feticismo net pensiero di Marx.Bari: Laterza.

Bell, Daniel. 1967 The End o f Ideology: On the Exhaustion o PoliticalIdeas in the Fifties. New York: Free Press.

~

1111,

I

I

'III1 ~ 1I

I I

l1

1 I

1'

1

I

I

li;l .

lli,i,,


101/108


102/108


103/108


104/108


105/108


106/108


107/108


108/108

Documents

Isidor Wallimann-Estrangement_ Marx's Conception of Human Nature and the Division of Labor (Contributions in Philosophy) -Greenwood Press (1981)