Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T11:14:34.746Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hegel and Marx on Individuality and the Universal Good

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2016

Charlotte Baumann
Charlotte Baumann*
Affiliation:
Technische Universität Berlin, [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Picking up on Marx’s and Hegel’s analyses of human beings as social and individual, the article shows that what is at stake is not merely the possibility of individuality, but also the correct conception of the universal good. Both Marx and Hegel suppose that individuals must be social or political as individuals, which means, at least in Hegel’s case, that particular interests must form part of the universal good. The good and the rational is not something that requires sacrificing one’s interests for the community or denying one’s particular character so as to become an equal rational agent. Very much to the contrary, the rational or the common good is nothing but the harmonious structuring of particular interests. While Section I introduces Marx’s and Hegel’s conceptions of individual and social beings, Sections II and III discuss their respective views of individuality, and Sections IV and V discuss the notion of a universal good containing individual interests.

Type
Articles
Information
Hegel Bulletin , Volume 39 , Issue 1 , May 2018 , pp. 61 - 81
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Hegel Society of Great Britain 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adorno, T. W. (2006), Zur Lehre von der Geschichte und von der Freiheit. Frankfurt a.M: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Avineri, S. (1972), Hegel’s Theory of the Modern State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Baumann, C. (2011), ‘Adorno, Hegel and the Concrete Universal’, Philosophy & Social Criticism 37:1: 73–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beiser, F. (2005), Hegel. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bowman, B. (2012), ‘Labor, publicity and bureaucracy’, in Hegel-Studien 47: 41–73.Google Scholar
Brooks, T. (2007), Hegel’s Political Philosophy. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Chitty, A. (2000), ‘Recognition and Social Relations of Production’, in T. Burns and I. Fraser (eds.), The Marx-Hegel Connection. London: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
Franco, P. (1999), Hegel’s Philosophy of Freedom. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hardimon, M. (1994), Hegel’s Social Philosophy: The Project of Reconciliation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Houlgate, S. (2005), An Introduction to Hegel: Freedom, Truth and History. Malden MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lefebvre, H. (1969), Dialectical Materialism. London: Jonathan Cape Edition.Google Scholar
Leopold, D. (2007), The Young Marx: German Philosophy, Modern Politics, and Human Flourishing . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marcuse, H. (1967), Reason and Revolution. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.Google Scholar
Neuhouser, F. (2000), Foundations of Hegel’s Social Theory: Actualizing Freedom. London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Patten, A. (1999), Hegel’s Idea of Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pippin, R. (2000), ‘What is the Question for which Hegel’s Theory of Recognition is the Answer?’ European Journal of Philosophy 8:2: 155–172.Google Scholar
Pippin, R. (2008), Hegel’s Practical Philosophy: Rational Agency as Ethical Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sayers, S. (2007), ‘Individual and Society in Marx and Hegel: Beyond the Communitarian Critique of Liberalism’, Science & Society 71:1: 84–107.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. (1975), Hegel. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar