So are you actually suggesting that philosophy should end as an endeavour? Surely, Marx changed his view because he saw the importance of thinking rather than simply acting. Also, philosophy is more than just about politics.

In so far that Philosophy is a process of cultivating a way of life, how far beyond the political does it really extend?

I think that, in the text, Marx, somewhat tellingly, posits that the German philosophy of his time would culminate in the abolition of philosophy as such, meaning that, once brought to an ostensive apex, it would cease to be the cultivation of the life of the mind almost exclusively for those of the wealth, status, and class who could afford it and would become a somewhat transcendent project of and for all.

He actually uses the term, "aufheben", which only loosely translates to "abolish".

But that is just taking philosophy from a Marxist approach. There are many different angles and ways of seeing life, death and the universe. Surely, to try to overthrow philosophy from a view of Marx, which he himself challenged, would be a very narrow perspective.

No, I agree with that there is a lot more to life outside of Politics, specifically, the politics of Communist revolution, which, to go to the letter, if such things could ever be done, of Marx, I don't even advocate. I just think that it's an interesting concept of his.

Karl Marx's — thewonder

The first step is the vilification of critical thinking, the second, the complete submission of truth, and the third, only the party knows...

I don't know if I consider him a monster, or a genius for having created the best ideology of power so far in human history.

\

Well Marx and Engels did renounce dogmatic interpretations of their theories on a number of occasions, despite their long and proud history of isolating and castigating their political opponents. The way I see it is that it was just kind of a character flaw that became the basis for totalitarianism. I can see why an Egoist, such as yourself, would take both a disliking and fascination to the most notable detractors of "Saint Max". Marxism-Leninism really does have almost nothing to do with the theories of Marx and Engels, though.

A strange aside: I'm pretty sure that the section of The German Ideology, a text that I don't really at all like, critiquing the philosophy of Max Stirner is actually longer than The Ego and Its Own.

I can see why an Egoist, such as yourself, would take both a disliking and fascination to the most notable detractors of "Saint Max". Marxism-Leninism really does have almost nothing to do with the theories of Marx and Engels, though. — thewonder

Of course an egoist individual would be interested in and abhor the scriptures of Marx and Engels. Both described perfectly what a egoist life is - and should be -, but transvested with a false altruism worthy of repudiation. Marx and Engels: The greatest examples of how the shame of Being can destroy the individuality external to the Unique.

A strange aside: I'm pretty sure that the section of The German Ideology, a text that I don't really at all like, critiquing the philosophy of Max Stirner is actually longer than The Ego and Its Own. — thewonder

Another example of their intellectual immaturity. They both resented Stirner and his philosophy for expressing what the individual most covets: The total freedom of the concept of "group".

Their resentment towards the truth that Stirner spat with his manuscripts was so great that Engels had felt obliged to write down his paranoid thoughts in one of his poems - now considered comic -, The Triumph of Faith:

"Look at Stirner, look at him,
the peaceful enemy of all constraint.
For the moment, he is still drinking beer,
soon he will be drinking blood
as though it were water.
When others cry savagely
«Down with the kings»
Stirner immediately supplements
«Down with the laws too».
Stirner full of dignity proclaims;
you bend your will power,
and you dare to call yourselves free,
You become accustomed to slavery;
Down with dogmatism, down with law."

Here it is, the truest face of Marx and Engels' ideology. Enjoy - the resentment!

I feel like Marx and Engels foresaw something in Stirner, which is the reason for their diatribes, absurd as they are. I'd still hold it against them; it's just I feel like they foresaw something in him.

it's just I feel like they foresaw something in him. — thewonder

They both resented Stirner and his philosophy for expressing what the individual most covets: The total freedom of the concept of "group". — Gus Lamarch

for me philosophy is an endless endeavour because it is an attempt of a system to understand a system that it is inherently born of. In this way i mean that even if a philosophical ultimatum is arrived at at any point in history that is considered to render all further contemplation as null and void is is only an ultimatum in that present circumstance. And because time and the human condition relative to a time is ever changing ... so too must the ultimatum as time progresses. For example if we take ethics as an example ... the capacity for moral is always changing as science and medicine progresses... it would be pointless to ask the questions “ is it morally correct to live forever?” Or “should artificial intelligence be given the same conscious rights as organic life?” 100 or more years ago when in The future these may be very real and practical concerns to humans. If our abilities as a society and technologically capable being are always advancing so to does the domain of contemplation of such matters. In history we encounter such ideas as is it right to give slaves freedom? Which is now considered much more of an arbitrary question as we generally accept that slavery is for the majority a thing of the past.

If thought changes due to the course of human civilisation and culture then I would imagine the questions we must address both now and in the future also change

I'm talking about the abolition of Philosophy as system, though. I'm talking about it becoming praxis.

I'm talking about the abolition of Philosophy as system, though. I'm talking about it becoming praxis. — thewonder

Everything that human beings do is literally praxis. Philosophers teaching at schools are engaged in philosophical praxis. Are you saying that every philosophical theory should be realized as a specific type of action? Seems to cry out for some more details.

Everything that human beings do is literally praxis. — Pantagruel

A highly contentious, but charmingly optimistic statement.

I have decided to leave this forum for the time being, and, so, don't think that I'll be able to fully hash this out. Perhaps philosophical "praxis" would be the cultivation of a way of life which prefers wisdom or an understanding, proceeding from the reification of various, hopefully, veritable philosophical theories. I feel like it has something to do with the concept of becoming.

As an aside, I don't know if you've ever heard anyone on the Left use the word "praxis" before, but there is a certain degree of truth to that it is just something that we like to say.

Anyways, I am taking off, but feel free to carry on with this or any extenuating threads. So long!

Why do you feel the need 'to take off' suddenly after creating a number of threads?

I just like tossing ideas out there and spend too much time on the internet to concentrate on my studies. I don't know. I just get bored.

Like I said, though, I am taking off, and, so, so long!