[lit-ideas] Re: Fukuyama and Danto
- From: "Simon Ward" <sedward@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 23:54:03 -0000
----- Original Message -----
From: "Judith Evans" <judithevans1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 11:38 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Fukuyama and Danto
>
>>From: Simon Ward
>
>>Oh no he didn't!
>
>>Surely Hegel was concerned with the spiritual. Marx, however was the
> materialist.
>
>>As for Kojeve:
>
>>"Kojève follows Marx's 'inverted Hegelianism' by understanding the labour
> of historical >development in broadly 'materialist' terms."
> http://www.iep.utm.edu/k/kojeve.htm#H3
>
> (etc.)
>
> Yes. Kojeve did though believe that in capitalism, is history's end.
But did Hegel? That was my point. Hegel was was talking spiritually. Marx,
upending Hegel talked in materialist terms. Kojeve, interpeting Hegel through
Marx (and Heidegger) ended history with Capitalism.
You'll recall that Lawrence said: Fukuyama got the concept from Kojeve (which
he admits) who argued that Marx who turned Hegel upside down was wrong and
Hegel, who argued that Capitalism would be the end of history was right after
all.
Simon
Other related posts:
