首页> 外文学位 >German Marxist critiques of Nietzsche, 1890-1900: Essays on the theory in practice.
【24h】

German Marxist critiques of Nietzsche, 1890-1900: Essays on the theory in practice.

机译:德国马克思主义对尼采的批判,1890-1900年:实践理论随笔。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This study reassesses the Marxist Nietzschekritik of Paul Ernst and Franz Mehring in its historical, Party-political, and theoretical contexts. Since Ernst's Marxist period (1886-1896) has never been scrutinized properly, Ernst's status as the founder of the Marxist critique of Nietzsche has been forgotten or suppressed. Consequently, Marxists and non-Marxists have exaggerated the quality and import of Mehring's Nietzsche criticism. In the Freie Buhne in 1890, Ernst established the critical practice and much of the critical agenda for Mehring and for all later Marxist Nietzsche critics, including Plekhanov, Gunther, and Lukacs. But these facts have been ignored in most recent scholarship on naturalism and socialism, on the Marxism of the 1890's, and on Nietzsche's early receptions. This study challenges major scholarly misconceptions in these areas as well.; Chapter I sketches Paul Ernst as Party Literat, and confronts the specious legend of Nietzsche's deleterious impact (Lukacs, Hamann/Hermand et al.) or liberating influence (Hinton Thomas, Vivarelli, Aschheim) on the Jungen movement and on Ernst, who took part in it. Chapters II and III establish the theoretical context by historicizing the contemporary "state of the science." Chapter II takes on Lukac's retroactive discreditation of Engels and of the so-called "vulgar" Marxism of the Second International. Crucial here are new readings of Engels's late letters on historical materialism and of Lukac's misrepresentations thereof. Chapter III recovers the historical theory available to Ernst and Mehring by reassessing Engels as the main transmitter of Marxism to the younger generation, by refuting T. Carver's recent attacks on Engels, and by rediscovering the prototypical Ideologiekritik developed by Engels and Kautsky in the late 1880's.; Against these backgrounds, Ernst and Mehring can be read historically, in terms that fit the 1890's. Chapter IV traces Ernst's pioneering struggles to adapt to Nietzsche the available Marxist models for the critique of bourgeois philosophy, and analyzes Ernst's work within a complete survey of Nietzsche's presence in the Freie Buhne, 1890-1894. Against E. Behler's recent attempts to rehabilitate Mehring, Chapter V argues that Mehring's Nietzschekritik was a derivative, plagiarizing, self-defensive polemic against the naturalists, his favorite enemies.
机译:这项研究在历史,党派政治和理论背景下重新评估了保罗·恩斯特和弗朗兹·梅林的马克思主义尼采。由于从未对恩斯特的马克思主义时期(1886年至1896年)进行过仔细的审查,因此恩斯特作为马克思主义尼采批判的奠基人的地位被遗忘或压制。因此,马克思主义者和非马克思主义者都夸大了梅林的尼采批评的质量和重要性。恩斯特(Ernst)在1890年的弗莱·布恩(Freie Buhne)中为梅林(Mehring)以及后来的所有马克思主义尼采评论家(包括普列汉诺夫,冈瑟和卢卡奇)提出了批判性作法和很多关键性议程。但是,这些事实在最近关于自然主义和社会主义的学术,关于1890年代的马克思主义以及对尼采的早期接受的学术研究中都被忽略了。这项研究也挑战了在这些领域的主要学术误解。第一章以保罗·恩斯特为党文人速写,并面对尼采的有害影响(卢卡奇,哈曼/赫曼等人)或解放力量(辛顿·托马斯,维瓦雷利,阿施海姆)的有害传奇(对辛根运动和恩斯特的影响)在里面。第二章和第三章通过对当代的“科学状态”进行历史化来建立理论背景。第二章讨论了卢卡奇对恩格斯和第二国际所谓的“庸俗”马克思主义的追溯性歧视。这里至关重要的是对恩格斯关于历史唯物主义的晚期信件及其卢卡奇的错误陈述的新读物。第三章通过重新评估恩格斯作为马克思主义对年轻一代的主要传播者,驳斥了T.卡佛最近对恩格斯的攻击,并重新发现了恩格斯和考茨基在1880年代后期开发的原型思想论,从而恢复了恩斯特和梅林可用的历史理论。 。;在这些背景下,恩斯特(Ernst)和梅林(Mehring)可以用适合1890年代的术语进行历史性阅读。第四章追溯了恩斯特为适应资产阶级批判的马克思主义模型对尼采所做的开拓性努力,并在对尼采在1890-1894年的弗涅布涅(Freie Buhne)中的存在进行的全面调查中分析了恩斯特的工作。第五章反对E. Behler最近试图恢复Mehring的尝试,认为Mehring的Nietzschekritik是对博物学家,他最喜欢的敌人的derivative窃,自,自卫的辩论。

著录项

  • 作者

    Vahlbusch, Jefford Bristol.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Michigan.;

  • 授予单位 University of Michigan.;
  • 学科 Literature Germanic.; Philosophy.; History European.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1998
  • 页码 866 p.
  • 总页数 866
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 哲学理论;欧洲史;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号