: Its that bit which I'll address in apost soonCan't wait.
: Thanks for the link by the way. I will have to agree more with the absent Joel where Hegel is concerned - all that essentialism you know. what he seems to be saying, in essence, is that people work in a manner seemingly unconnected and become dissaffected this way.
Or, more to the point, their labour becomes alien to them, and is no longer an expression of their self-hood, but becomes rather a dominating force. Also, watch out on his essences, all, I don't think, is not what it seems.
: His earlier quotation "man produces not for himself, but, on a reciprocal basis, for others as well." is followed by an arguiable conclusion "Labour becomes social labour, and men's aims in the process of labour are not only their individual aims, but broader, trans-individual ones". That conclusion does not have to follow - it sounds like an argument for mutual benefit in open trade, except it suggests that the intent is different.
Well, the conclusion follows thusly:
1:I work to produce for myself, I ahve conplete personal control over my production (classic robinsonade scenario).
2:I begin to exchange some of my Labour with others, I enter ionto social Networks I must therefore produce according to the needs of the Other (the Market), i.e. you'd be daft to keep on producing things folks wouldn't buy.
3:Via division of labour, and specialisation, due to competition, you become more and more embroiled in the market, only producing for *it* rather than for yourself, you become tangled up in chains of social production, as it were, thus the needs of the market become a trans subjective driving force, and production is no longer a source of self-expression, struggle for recognition.
Basically, the market comes to dominate.
: You might also be like this critique of hegel
Cheers.
: http://www.mun.ca/animus/1997vol2/staford1.htm
None.
