Money, the Alienated Power of Humanity
Abstract
From a chronological point of view, the original discourse of Marx on money has been marked, first of all, by the ethical tradition that considers money as a source of corruption in human relations, and connects directly to individual vices such as the greed for money and selfishness. Thus, in the Manuscripts of 1844, Karl Marx adopted the principle of Moses Hess regarding the support to the critical issues of alienation over a certain conception of money (the distorted representation of human activity, an agent of corruption of social life and responsible for a reversal of the normal order of life). In this article, we argue that through Marx's philosophical criticism of money in his third manuscript, through his report on two literature references, he tries to prove the abstraction power specific to money. I have developed this thesis by studying in three times the way in which money generates a triple abstraction-alienation: the abstraction and alienation of the object, the alienation-abstraction of the subject, and the alienation-abstraction of the generic humankind in its entirety.
References
[2] Rockmore T. Marx after Marxism: The Philosophy of the Karl Marx. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers; 2002: 246.
[3] Mihail R. Dominație și alienare. O istorie recentă a înstrăinării umane. București: Editura Eikon; 2017: 167
[4] Tucker RC. Filosofie și mit la Karl Marx. București: Editura Curtea Veche; 2011: 320.
[5] David MW, Gray D. Historical dictionary of Marxism (Historical Dictionaries of Religions, Philosophies and Movements). Lanham: Scarecrow Press; 2007: 440.
[6] Marx K. Manuscrise economico-filosofice din 1844. Bucureşti: Editura Politică; 1987. 154 p.
[7] Opriș O. Hegel. Filosofia social-politică. București: Editura Ideea Europeană; 2016: 215.
[8] Hess M. Philosophische und sozialistische Schriften. 1837-1850. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag; 1961: 516.
[9] D΄Hondt J. Hegel și hegelianismul. Iași: Polirom; 1998: 113.
[10] Smith A. Avuția națiunilor. Cercetare asupra naturii și cauzelor ei. București: Publica; 2011: 410.
[11] Hyppolite J. Études sur Marx et Hegel. Paris: Marcel Rivière & Cie; 1955: 204.
[12] Hegel GWF. Fenomenologia spiritului. Bucureşti: Editura Univers Enciclopedic; 2000: 242.
[13] Henry M. Marx, une philosophie de la réalité. Tome 1. Paris: Tel Gallimard; 1983: 451.
[14] Marx K. Philosophie. Paris: Edition Maximilien Rubel; 1994: 720.
[15] Fontenay E. Les figures juives de K. Marx. Paris: Éditions Galilée; 1973: 152.
[16] Aristotel. Categorii. Despre interpretare. București: Humanitas; 2005: 392.
[17] Marx K, Engels F. Ideologia germană. In: Marx K, Engels F. Opere. București: Editura Politică; 1958; 3: 653.
[18] Althusser L. Citindu-l pe Marx. București: Editura Politică; 1970: 386.
[19] Fontenay É. De. Les figures juives de Marx. Paris: Éditions Galilée; 1973: 152.
[20] Kosik K. La dialectique du concret. Paris: Maspéro; 1970: 170.
[21] Axelos K. Marx penseur de la technique. De l'aliénation de l'homme à la conquête du monde. Paris: Minuit; 1961: 327.
[22] Habermas J. Connaissance et intérêt. Paris: Gallimard; 1978: 392.
[23] Bidet J. Théorie générale: théorie du droit, de l’économie et de la politique. Paris: PUF; 1999: 504.
[24] Salem J. Introduction aux Manuscrits de 1844. In: Marx K. Manuscrits de 1844. Paris: Éditions Garnier Flammarion; 1996: 243.
Copyright (c) 2018 LUMEN Proceedings
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of the conference.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 Unported License, permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
© LUMEN Proceedings Series 2022 . The LUMEN Proceedings Open Access volumes are distributed under the terms of the 