Deleted
Deleted
6 years ago in #culture by steemilicious (37)
$0.13
- Past Payouts $0.13, 0.00 TRX
- - Author $0.11, 0.00 TRX
- - Curators $0.02, 0.00 TRX
Deleted
Deleted
Deleted
I upvoted your post for the fact that it references interesting content, but interesting it may be, I’m certain some of it is fairly wrong.
Because, on ththe front end, I’m not so sure Arendt had the authority to speak on much of anything, let alone on how societies and cultures work. The sheer amount of times her “points” ended up just being tautologies, or, some deep-seeded ethnocentrism is actually mind-boggling.
Her “banality of the evil,” idea alone, threw so many people into asking questions about whatever banal things were evil and how to identify them, that the western world largely forgot that this ignores all the evil that’s not so banal and which continued to pop up in places like Serbia, Rwanda, Aleppo, and Rakhnine today.
If she said that Marx discovered how labor intersecta and interacts with other parts of the world and human nature, then she was just straight wrong on that one. You can find lots of older economists of all stripes talking about the importance of other factors of production, and if non-economic concepts that exist and interact with human psychology and biology to make up society and culture. Marx just plopped some Hegel into it and called it a day.
I will say this, though.
I LOVE the fact you even brought this up on your blog. Steemit needs more political philosophy, so thanks for that!
"If she said that Marx discovered how labor intersecta and interacts with other parts of the world and human nature, then she was just straight wrong on that one."- I must apologize. I wrote that text wrongly. I try to make it more clear. What Arendt said is that Marx realized that if there is only labor it disappears. However she did not make any claims that this would be possible to accomplish in any way by humans. That labor thing is part of "vita activa". This labor is philosophical term, rather than economical Deepest apologies.
I have not read that Eichman book yet, but I know that Hannah Arendt later admitted that she went too far with that "banality of evil" claim. I would argue, but I am not sure if I understand word "banality" excactly.
And now reading my text, I realize it is written just plain badly. I realy need to improve my writing.