Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 17:13:30 +0000
From: Mervyn Hartwig <mh-AT-jaspere.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: BHA: to John and Dick




Phil Walden <phil-AT-pwalden.fsnet.co.uk> writes

Hi Phil Etc,

>Possibly I am too
>influenced by Adorno, who seems to think humanity is incurably alienated
>from nature (but then again it still seems convincing to me).  But where I
>would definitely line up with Adorno (and I think Hegel) is in holding that
>their was no original "state of grace" or what some Marxists call "primitive
>communism".  For me, it seems the lives of early humans (homonids) must have
>been a desperate struggle against the (mainly) hostile forces of nature.

I think this is basically right re Hegel (and Adorno), BUT for Hegel
there was a 'primitive union' of reason and nature prior to split,
separation and disenchantment (alienation) and subseqent reconciliation.
In terms of modern anthropological and pre-historical evidence about
pre-class societies, this is surely correct - humans both saw themselves
as, and acted as if they were (they were!), an integral part of the
cosmic whole, which they revered. This must now be revisited at a
'higher' level.

'*Against* nature' - no! (again, the bourgeois enlightenment view).
'Desperate struggle'? - pretty Hobbesian; e.g. there's a good deal of
evidence that hunter-gatherer societies in favourable environments
enjoyed the highest standard of living ever in terms of leisure (what's
left over in a day after the subtraction of socially necessary labour),
not everything was tough.

For the re-enchantment of reality,

Mervyn





>Hi John, Dick, listers,
>
>Good to hear from you J and D.
>
>John, you ask whether I am failing to ground my concept of alienation in
>terms of specifying how alienated ideology relates to different modes of
>production.  (I use the Marxist terminology here, because that is how I
>think about history).  I am open to argument on this.  Possibly I am too
>influenced by Adorno, who seems to think humanity is incurably alienated
>from nature (but then again it still seems convincing to me).  But where I
>would definitely line up with Adorno (and I think Hegel) is in holding that
>their was no original "state of grace" or what some Marxists call "primitive
>communism".  For me, it seems the lives of early humans (homonids) must have
>been a desperate struggle against the (mainly) hostile forces of nature.  So
>no "fall from grace".  It seems to me we are still in a (slightly less)
>desperate struggle to lessen our alienation from nature and from ourselves.
>I read Hegel as arguing that humanity, by prioritizing reason over emotion,
>will, instinct, faith, etc, can progressively overcome alienation.  Hope
>this helps a bit.
>
>Dick, I want to say that I respect your Christian beliefs even though I
>don't agree with them.  What I mean by that is that I am truly interested in
>why Christians (and other faiths) hold their religious beliefs.  I am also
>interested in the distinction that James Daly, Mervyn (and perhaps others)
>are making between what they call the "bourgeois Enlightenment" and the
>"spiritual Enlightenment".  I am conscious of my own relative ignorance of
>certain thinkers who might be invoked in support of this distinction (e.g.
>Aquinas).
>
>Best regards to you both,
>
>Phil
>
>
>
>     --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---



     --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---