Lecture 7: Resurgent Collectivism
Hegel, Marx, and the Post-Kantian Turn
Historical Context
- 1806: Napoleon sweeps through German states → humiliating defeat for Germany.
- Napoleon viewed himself as a product of Rousseau and the French Revolution.
- Philosophy shifts from France/England to Germany in the 19th century.
- Post-Kant question:
- Kant: reality (noumenal) is unknowable.
- Choice:
- Follow reason → accept phenomenal world only (analytic, positivist path).
- Pursue reality beyond reason → non-rational, emotional, even irrational methods (romantics, poets, Hegel, Marx).
Romantic Reactions
- Poets like Goethe & Keats criticize philosophy as “cold,” “gray,” and life-denying.
- Emphasis on feeling over abstract reason:
- “Gray, dear friend, is all theory, but green is life’s golden tree.” — Goethe.
- “Philosophy will clip an angel’s wings.” — Keats.
Hegel’s Philosophy
Phenomenology of Spirit (1807)
- Written as Napoleon defeats Prussia.
- Hegel sees history as a developmental process of Spirit (Reason).
- Dialectic: thesis → antithesis → synthesis → new thesis.
- Contradiction is built into reality itself.
- World-Historical Individuals: Napoleon, Caesar, Alexander — used by Providence to advance Spirit’s goals.
Theodicy Problem
- Classical dilemma: If God is good, all-powerful, and all-knowing, why evil?
- Hegel’s solution:
- God/Spirit unfolds over time, growing in self-awareness.
- History = God realizing Himself.
- Evil, suffering, “slaughter-bench” of history = part of divine development.
Collectivism
- Reason (capital R) = divine, infinite, providential force.
- Individuals are expendable; states and peoples matter most.
- “So mighty a form must trample down many an innocent flower.”
- True morality = merging the self into the state.
- “The state is the divine idea as it exists on earth.”
Marx’s Transformation of Hegel
- Trained as a philosopher; influenced heavily by Hegel.
- Flips Hegel “on his head”:
- Hegel → Spirit drives history.
- Marx → Material conditions drive history.
Core Philosophical Premises
- Determinism: social/economic development follows inevitable stages:
- Tribal → Feudal → Capitalist → Dictatorship of Proletariat → Communism.
- Materialism: ideas, religion, morality = “phantoms” reflecting material conditions.
- Religion under feudalism mirrors feudal hierarchy.
- Protestantism mirrors capitalist individualism.
- Social Essence:
- No innate individual soul/nature.
- “The human essence is the ensemble of social relations.”
- True being = communal, not individual.
Necessity of Revolution
- Contradictory logics (different classes, cultures) cannot be reconciled rationally.
- Only violence resolves contradictions.
- Marx/Engels: revolution requires terror and bloodshed.
- “The revolutionary terror.”
- “Entire reactionary peoples” may disappear. — Engels.
Hegel vs. Marx on Collectivism
| Hegel | Marx |
|---|---|
| Spirit/Reason drives history | Material/economic forces drive history |
| Religion integrated with state | Religion = illusion/epiphenomenon |
| State is divine reality | State will “wither away” under communism |
| Individuals must obey & merge with collective | Individuals shaped entirely by social/economic class |
| Violence justified as Providence’s tool | Violence necessary as material law of history |
Key Concepts
- Dialectic: conflict → contradiction → synthesis.
- World-Historical Individuals: great leaders used by Providence/History.
- Slaughter-bench of History: individuals sacrificed for higher purposes.
- Scientific Socialism: Marx’s claim that socialism/communism follows material laws like science.
Review Questions
- How did Kant’s noumenal/phenomenal distinction set the stage for post-Kantian philosophy?
- Why did Romantic poets like Goethe and Keats reject “cold philosophy”?
- How does Hegel reinterpret history and solve the problem of evil?
- What role do “world-historical individuals” play in Hegel’s philosophy?
- How does Marx “invert” Hegel’s system?
- Why does Marx argue that violence is necessary in social change?
- How do Hegel and Marx each redefine the role of the individual vs. the collective?