フォイエルバッハに関するテーゼ
- 言語:
- 英語
- 状態:
- 完全な作品
- 著者性:
- 著者自身による
- テキストの状態:
- 良好なテキスト
- 分量:
- 約 840 語 · 4 節
この作品を引用
- APAカール・マルクス. (n.d.). フォイエルバッハに関するテーゼ. SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/karl-marx/theses-on-feuerbach
- MLAカール・マルクス. "フォイエルバッハに関するテーゼ." SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/karl-marx/theses-on-feuerbach.
- Chicagoカール・マルクス. フォイエルバッハに関するテーゼ. SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/karl-marx/theses-on-feuerbach.
何についての本か
『フォイエルバッハに関するテーゼ』全十一(一八四五年)。紙一枚であり、近代哲学で最も影響力のある文章の一つである。
背景と歴史
目録での短さは**欠陥ではない**。作品そのものがこれだけ短いのだ。マルクスが公けにしなかった覚え書きで、彼の死後にエンゲルスが世に出した。第十一テーゼは彼の墓石に刻まれた一文である。「哲学者たちは世界をさまざまに解釈してきただけである。大事なのはそれを変えることだ。」
これは編集上の背景であり、引用できる典拠ではありません。作品本文の一節とは異なり、これらの記述はコーパスで検証できません。
The main deficiency, up to now, in all materialism – including that of Feuerbach – is that the external object, reality and sensibility are conceived only in the form of the object and of our contemplation of it, rather than as sensuous human activity and as practice – as something non-subjective. For this reason, the active aspect has been developed by idealism, in opposition to materialism, though only abstractly, since idealism naturally does not know real, sensuous activity as such. Feuerbach wants sensuous objects, clearly distinguished from mental objects, but he does not conceive human activity in terms of subject and object. That is why, in The Essence of Christianity, he regards only theoretical activity as authentically human, whilst practice is conceived and defined only in its dirty Jewish manifestation. He therefore does not understand the meaning of “revolutionary”, of practical-critical activity. II The question whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but a practical question. Man must prove in practice the truth - i.e. the reality and power, the worldliness - of his thinking. Isolated from practice, the controversy over the reality or unreality of thinking is a purely scholastic question. III III The materialist doctrine that humans are products of circumstances and upbringing and that, therefore, men who change are products of new circumstances and a different upbringing, forgets that circumstances are changed by men themselves, and that it is essential to educate the educator. Necessarily, then, this doctrine divides society into two parts, one of which is placed above society (for example, in the work of Robert Owen). The coincidence of changing circumstance on the one hand, and of human activity or self-changing on the other, can be conceived only as revolutionary practice, and rationally understood.…