H. Marcuse: Toplumsal Bir Umut Olarak Eleştiri, No: 14 - 12/2018
Başlık
:
H. Marcuse: Toplumsal Bir Umut Olarak Eleştiri
Yazar(lar)
:
Erdal İSBİR
İngilizce Başlık
:
H. Marcuse: The Critique as a Social Hope
Anahtar Kelimeler
:
Marcuse, Hegel, Freud, tarihsellik, bilinç, eleştiri.
İng. Anahtar Kelimeler
:
Marcuse, Hegel, Freud, historicity, consciousness, the critique
Özet
:
Frankfurt Okulu, Weimar Cumhuriyeti’ni desteklemek ile Bolşevik Devrimi’ni sosyalist hareketin lideri kabul etmek arasında sıkışıp kalmış Marxizmi, yeniden canlandırmak amacını taşır. Bunun için geliştirdiği, eleştirel teori, tarihsel materyalizmi yeniden temellendirmeyi dener. Horkheimer ve Adorno’nun denemeleri, toplumsal değişime yönelik bir karamsarlıkla sonuçlanır. Oysa Marcuse, onların aksine, eleştiriyi, toplumsal bir umut olarak ortaya koymak ister. İşte bu çalışmada, Marcuse’un toplumsal değişime dair umudunun felsefi dayanakları tartışılmak istenmektedir. Marcuse, toplumsal değişime dair umudunu, bilincin özgürlüğüne ve gücüne dayandırır. Bu nedenle, bilincin özgürlüğünü ortaya koymak için, tarihsel materyalizme fenomenolojik bir temel arar. Önce Heidegger ile Marx’ı uzlaştırmaya çalışsa da daha sonra fenomenolojiyi tarihsellikle uyuşturan asıl kaynağa, yani Hegel’e geri döner. Hegel’e referansla, bilincin özgürlüğünün gizli bir güce sahip olduğunu ancak uygarlık tarihi boyunca bu gücün bastırıldığını iddia eder. Bilincin özgürleştirici gücünün bastırılmasını, Freud’a referanslarla gösteren Marcuse, bu açıdan da psikanaliz ile Marxizmi yakınlaştırır. Hegel ve Freud yorumlarıyla, tarihsel materyalizmi yeniden temellendiren Marcuse, bilincin özgürlüğünü eleştirinin kökeni olarak kabul eder. Yine bu çalışmada, Marcuse’un bu kabulden hareketle, toplumsal değişime dair nasıl bir reçete sunduğu ve bu reçetenin içeriğindeki imalar ele alınmaktadır.
İngilizce Özet
:
Frankfurt School aims to revive Marxism that sticks in between supporting the Weimer Republic and acknowledging the Bolshevik revolution as leader of the socialist actions. Critical Theory that developed for realizing this aim tries to re-establish the historical materialism. Horkheimer and Adorno’s essays result in pessimism about the social alterations. However, on the contrary, Marcuse seeks to exhibit the critique as social hope. This essay purposes to argue the philosophical basis of Marcuse’s hope about social alterations. Marcuse attributes his hope about social alterations to the freedom and the power of consciousness. Therefore he seeks a philosophical basis that introduces the freedom of consciousness. In this regard, even though he firstly tries to adapt Heidegger to Marx, returns to Hegel, namely the main origin of historical phenomenology. He claims that the freedom of consciousness has a secret power by reference to Hegel. According to him this power has suppressed during the history of civilization. He demonstrates that the emancipating power of consciousness has suppressed by reference to Freud. Thusly he achieves to adapting Freud's psychoanalysis to Marxism. Marcuse, who re-establishes the historical materialism with his interpretations about Hegel and Freud, acknowledges that the freedom of consciousness is origin of the critique. This essay aims to discuss what suggestions Marcuse has exhibited about the social alterations and what contents those suggestions have.
Extended Summary
:
The way opened by Horkheimer and Adorno begins with individual self-consciousness and ends with reconstruction of society. For this reason, the critical theory does not only oppose against traditional rational thinking but it also demonstrates to the role of self-consciousness within reconstruction of society. The social analysis of critical theory does not compare the existing society with the conditions of a better society. This not means that the critical theory refuses to utopic consciousness. On the contrary, for Adorno, the rejecting to damaged life is a rebellion against the existing society and requires to utopic consciousness. If utopic consciousness is about the possibility, Adorno emphasizes that the art accompanied by this consciousness has the possibility of rebellion. Nevertheless, he does not notice the art has the role harmonizing individuals. Thus, in Adorno's thought, the critical way that goes to the reconstruction of society cannot be completed. Marcuse completes this way. Because he emphasizes that the critical thinking and its aesthetical dimension are not only an individual rebellion but also are a social hope. Adorno has pessimism about the changing of society rather Marcuse speaks hopeful about this matter. This paper investigates the intellectual basis of Marcuse’s hope and his suggestion about the changing of society. If criticism purposes to change human life, according to Marcuse, it should be converted to the science. For this reason, he seeks a phenomenological basis for criticism. Marucse, who firstly found this basis in Heidegger’s thought, subsequently returns to original source, namely to Hegel. Hegel’s dialectics, although using concepts of reason and freedom explains self-realization of the individual, claims that realization of freedom is not a case but a duty and this duty begins with negation. For Marcuse, Hegel’s dialectics eventually returns to affirmation therefore not Hegel's but Marx’s dialectics is a criticism. Because Marx, who shows that the relation of production which restricts and distorts human ability determines to the consciousness, emphasizes that negation should begin from society. Modern industrial society should be negated because it removes the difference between rational and irrational. In this regard, if the criticism would be hope about the changing of society, it must provide that the existing order of society is negated and surpassed. This feature prevents that the criticism presents ultimate theoretical solutions and shows that every oppressions carry in possibility of rebellion. If the criticism takes negation as a duty, so that it can be hope for the hopeless life. Marcuse founds theoretical basis of this hope within Freud’s psychoanalysis. Because Freud emphasizes that the individual does not entirely internalize the social control. The Freudian concept of unconscious indicates to the internal individual area in opposed to the external social conditions. Only within this area of freedom, the individual could be himself. Therefore the possibility of rebellion against the social oppression should be searched in this area. For Freud, this area is a field that the individual realizes his desires. Marcuse determines this field as the imagination. For Marcuse, the imagination shows that the Hegelian concept of recognition and the Freudian principle of pleasure do not carry only possibility of negation and rebellion. Aesthetical dimension of the imagination re-attaches sensuality and consciousness which the existing social conditions separated them from each other. This indicates to aesthetic creation. An aesthetic judgment is not oppressive and carries out the possibility of changing to the individual’s attitudes and behaviours. Marcuse, by using Schiller’s concept of play, explains that the imagination re-establishes the relation between sensuality and consciousness. According to this, the individual should play with existing things and must comprehend that he becomes free within limits of his sensuality. Thus the play impulse becomes the principle of civilization and so this enables to open door to a humanly life. The key of this door is a critical reflection that arises only in the individual’s aesthetic expression. Because unlike Adorno, Marcuse claims that such expressions are not only a rebellion but also a new beginning. In other words, the aesthetic dimension of critical thinking forces individuals to being common while isolates them from each other. The liberation of society should be sought in this place. The foundation that Marcuse rest on when he was speaking hopeful about the changing of society is the historicity. The historicity indicates that the society constantly changes. Thus the criticism that does not suppress to aesthetic dimension of historical consciousness can surpass one dimensional thinking. Therefore it keeps alive the hope of creation a new and humanly life. Marcuse explains this claim by ideas such as “the totality of human nature” and “the alienation of alienation” that they have romantic origin. So this demonstrates that the place which Marcuse moved away from Heidegger and Hegel is actually ground which those two thinkers came from. Of course it should not means that Marcuse is a romantic thinker. Marcuse’s achievement is that he uses such a romantic ideas for indicating to creative power of consciousness and attributes the critical theory to this power. Marcuse acknowledges that the inter-subjectivity is created aesthetically and linguistically while he achievements this. It means that Marcuse’s thoughts have hermeneutical implications. But his contributions are to the critical theory not to the hermeneutics. Nevertheless it can be claimed that he leads to arising “the critical hermeneutics”. Moreover the fact that his student Habermas followed this way by the ideas of “the critique of ideology” confirms this claim.
Pdf
:
H. Marcuse: Toplumsal Bir Umut Olarak Eleştiri Tam Metin
No: 14 - 12/2018 - Tüm Makaleler
Makale Arama
Sayı
Anahtar Kelime, Yazar(lar)
Künye
Sahibi / Owner
Ertuğrul Rufayi TURAN
Editör ve Sorumlu Yazı İşleri Müdürü / Editor
Ertuğrul Rufayi TURAN
Editör Yardımcıları / Assistant Editors
Emrah AKDENİZ
Ömer Faik ANLI
Yayın Kurulu / Editorial Board
Ahmet İNAM
(Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi)
Erdal CENGİZ
(Ankara Üniversitesi)
Kurtuluş DİNÇER
(Hacettepe Üniversitesi)
Ertuğrul Rufayi TURAN
(Ankara Üniversitesi)
Sedat YAZICI
(Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi)
Emrah Akdeniz
(Van Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi)
Senem KURTAR
(Ankara Üniversitesi)
Seyit COŞKUN
(Ankara Üniversitesi)
Ömer Faik ANLI
(Ankara Üniversitesi)
Danışma Kurulu / Board of Consultants
A.Kadir ÇÜÇEN
(Uludağ Üniversitesi)
Ayhan SOL
(Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi)
Barış PARKAN
(Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi)
Besim DELLALOĞLU
(Sakarya Üniversitesi)
Cemal GÜZEL
(Hacettepe Üniversitesi)
Çetin TÜRKYILMAZ
(Hacettepe Üniversitesi)
Elif ÇIRAKMAN
(Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi)
Erdinç SAYAN
(Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi)
Güçlü ATEŞOĞLU
(Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi)
Gülay ÖZDEMİR AKGÜNDÜZ
(Bingöl Üniversitesi)
Güzin YAMANER
(Ankara Üniversitesi)
Halil TURAN
(Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi)
Harun TEPE
(Hacettepe Üniversitesi)
Hüseyin Gazi TOPDEMİR
(Muğla Üniversitesi)
Kubilay AYSEVENER
(Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi)
M.Cihan CAMCI
(Akdeniz Üniversitesi)
Melih BAŞARAN
(Galatasaray Üniversitesi)
Nazile KALAYCI
(Hacettepe Üniversitesi)
Nilgün TOKER KILINÇ
(Ege Üniversitesi)
Remzi DEMİR
(Ankara Üniversitesi)
R. Levent AYSEVER
(Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi)
Serpil SANCAR
(Ankara Üniversitesi)
Yasin CEYLAN
(Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi)
Zeynep DİREK
(Koç Üniversitesi)
M. Murat YÜCEŞAHİN
(Ankara Üniversitesi)
Vefa Saygın ÖĞÜTLE
(Muğla Sıtkı Koçman Üniversitesi)
Sekreterya / Secretariat
Zeynep İrem ÖZATAY
Yazışma Adresi / Mailing Address
Ankara Üniversitesi,
Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi, Felsefe Bölümü, Ankara

Posseible Düşünme Dergisi hakemli bir dergidir. Yılda iki sayı olmak üzere elektronik ortamda yayınlanır. Posseible Düşünme Dergisi 2016 yılından itibaren The Philosopher's Index tarafından dizinlenmektedir.
ISSN: 2147-1622
editor@posseible.com
www.posseible.com
Tel: 0 312 310 3280 / 1232 – 1233
Posseible Düşünme Dergisi - editor@posseible.com
İşbu sitenin tüm hakları saklıdır. Site içerisindeki dökümanlar izinsiz ve kaynak gösterilmeden kullanılamaz. © 2012
Web Tasarım