Gramsci and idealism

[JustinG]

Much of the writings of Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Gramsci) were concerned with political, social and cultural issues. However, he also wrote a lot on philosophy, including its connections with idealism. So, I am starting this thread to explore the relations between Gramsci’s philosophy, which he called the ‘philosophy of praxis’, and metaphysical idealism.

In particular, the thread will focus on unpacking and trying to make sense of the following statement of Gramsci, which is written in the context of the social transition from a conflict-ridden ‘realm of necessity’ to a realm of freedom:

‘Absolute idealism, or at least certain aspects of it, would be a philosophical utopia in the realm of necessity but could become "truth" after the transition from one realm to the other.’ (PN vol. 2, 188 - references in brackets are to page numbers in Gramsci’s Prison Notebooks)

By way of background, Gramsci was heavily influenced by the Italian idealist philosopher, historian and politician Benedetto Croce (1866-1952) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benedetto_Croce). Gramsci was highly critical of Croce in some respects, but also built on and incorporated many of Croce’s insights. His philosophy of praxis has been referred to as ‘Crocean Marxism’.

Here are some more statements of Gramsci which give a bit of the flavor of his philosophy of praxis, and its relation to idealism:

‘The starting-point of critical elaboration in consciousness is “knowing thyself” as a product of the historical process to date which has deposited in you an infinity of traces, without leaving an inventory.’ (SPN 324)

‘Philosophy cannot be separated from the history of philosophy, nor can culture from the history of culture.’ (SPN 324)

‘What is philosophy? Is it a purely receptive, or at the very most, ordering actvity? Or is it an absolutely creative activity?... But what does creative mean? Should it mean that the external world is created by thought? But what thought and whose?... To escape simultaneously from solipsism and from mechanistic conceptions implicit in the concept of thought as a receptive and ordering activity, it is necessary to put the question in an “historicist” fashion.’ (SPN 345)

‘Creative, therefore, should be understood as … thought which modifies the way of feeling of the many and consequently reality itself, which cannot be thought without this many.’ (SPN 346)

‘If it is true that every philosophy is the expression of a society, it should react back on that society and produce certain effects, both positive and negative. The extent to which it reacts back is the measure of its historical importance..’ (SPN 346)

‘If the philosophy of praxis affirms theoretically that every “truth” believed to be eternal and absolute has had practical origins and has represented a “provisional” value (historicity of every conception of the world and life), it is still very difficult to make people grasp “practically” that such an interpretation is also valid for the philosophy of praxis itself..” (SPN 406)

‘As a result even the philosophy of praxis tends to become an ideology in the worst sense of the world... This is particularly true when … it is confused with vulgar materialism, with its metaphysics of “matter” which is necessarily eternal and absolute.’ (SPN 407)

‘According to the theory of praxis it is evident that is it not atomic theory that explains human history but the other way about..’ (SPN 468).

I will update this thread with more posts on an irregular basis. Anyone is welcome to make comments, as I will make a table of contents if the thread gets unwieldy.

[SanteriSatama]

‘The starting-point of critical elaboration in consciousness is “knowing thyself” as a product of the historical process to date which has deposited in you an infinity of traces, without leaving an inventory.’ (SPN 324)

Translating from Greek to Finnish, gnothi seauton becomes tunne itsesi. Translating back from Finnish to English, the maxim becomes: Feel thyself.

[Lou Gold]

‘Absolute idealism, or at least certain aspects of it, would be a philosophical utopia in the realm of necessity but could become "truth" after the transition from one realm to the other.’

Interestingly, perhaps also a way to describe a Second Coming? And there's a networked desire amongst modern kids to do it without Jesus or Marx?

[Lou Gold]

‘The starting-point of critical elaboration in consciousness is “knowing thyself” as a product of the historical process to date which has deposited in you an infinity of traces, without leaving an inventory.’ (SPN 324)

Translating from Greek to Finnish, gnothi seauton becomes tunne itsesi. Translating back from Finnish to English, the maxim becomes: Feel thyself.

Spinoza and Descartes?

If you feel you can heal?

[Lou Gold]

Much of the writings of Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Gramsci) were concerned with political, social and cultural issues. However, he also wrote a lot on philosophy, including its connections with idealism. So, I am starting this thread to explore the relations between Gramsci’s philosophy, which he called the ‘philosophy of praxis’, and metaphysical idealism.

In particular, the thread will focus on unpacking and trying to make sense of the following statement of Gramsci, which is written in the context of the social transition from a conflict-ridden ‘realm of necessity’ to a realm of freedom:

‘Absolute idealism, or at least certain aspects of it, would be a philosophical utopia in the realm of necessity but could become "truth" after the transition from one realm to the other.’ (PN vol. 2, 188 - references in brackets are to page numbers in Gramsci’s Prison Notebooks)

By way of background, Gramsci was heavily influenced by the Italian idealist philosopher, historian and politician Benedetto Croce (1866-1952) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benedetto_Croce). Gramsci was highly critical of Croce in some respects, but also built on and incorporated many of Croce’s insights. His philosophy of praxis has been referred to as ‘Crocean Marxism’.

Here are some more statements of Gramsci which give a bit of the flavor of his philosophy of praxis, and its relation to idealism:

‘The starting-point of critical elaboration in consciousness is “knowing thyself” as a product of the historical process to date which has deposited in you an infinity of traces, without leaving an inventory.’ (SPN 324)

‘Philosophy cannot be separated from the history of philosophy, nor can culture from the history of culture.’ (SPN 324)

‘What is philosophy? Is it a purely receptive, or at the very most, ordering actvity? Or is it an absolutely creative activity?... But what does creative mean? Should it mean that the external world is created by thought? But what thought and whose?... To escape simultaneously from solipsism and from mechanistic conceptions implicit in the concept of thought as a receptive and ordering activity, it is necessary to put the question in an “historicist” fashion.’ (SPN 345)

‘Creative, therefore, should be understood as … thought which modifies the way of feeling of the many and consequently reality itself, which cannot be thought without this many.’ (SPN 346)

‘If it is true that every philosophy is the expression of a society, it should react back on that society and produce certain effects, both positive and negative. The extent to which it reacts back is the measure of its historical importance..’ (SPN 346)

‘If the philosophy of praxis affirms theoretically that every “truth” believed to be eternal and absolute has had practical origins and has represented a “provisional” value (historicity of every conception of the world and life), it is still very difficult to make people grasp “practically” that such an interpretation is also valid for the philosophy of praxis itself..” (SPN 406)

‘As a result even the philosophy of praxis tends to become an ideology in the worst sense of the world... This is particularly true when … it is confused with vulgar materialism, with its metaphysics of “matter” which is necessarily eternal and absolute.’ (SPN 407)

‘According to the theory of praxis it is evident that is it not atomic theory that explains human history but the other way about..’ (SPN 468).

I will update this thread with more posts on an irregular basis. Anyone is welcome to make comments, as I will make a table of contents if the thread gets unwieldy.

Seriously, Justin, I really hope you can get some serious discussion of praxis here. I'm personally pissed that we can't talk of covid and the way ideas fucked everything up in my beloved Brazil, which was positioned with a materialist allopathic health service capable of performing brilliantly.

Associated Press reports 4,000 daily deaths in Brazil.

NY Times chronicles how Brazil's health system was unravelled by the politics of bad ideas.

This is where ontological Idealism fails for me. It needs some compelling purpose in process, a political praxis. Maybe you can figure out how to talk about it.

[SanteriSatama]

All politics is useless nonsense, as long as we can't see and feel the mud from the blinding dazzle of the rainbow.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Seriously, Justin, I really hope you can get some serious discussion of praxis here. I'm personally pissed that we can't talk of covid and the way ideas fucked everything up in my beloved Brazil, which was positioned with a materialist allopathic health service capable of performing brilliantly.

Ahhh, Lou is personally pissed. I've sent a PM, and that is where I'll deal with your pet peeve. Meanwhile I'll give Justin, or others, an opportunity to respond here in some nuanced way, in the hopes that he can articulate whatever it is that you wish to hear about the tragic situation in Brazil that will make you feel better, and appease your pissed-off-ness.

[SanteriSatama]

[SanteriSatama]

What color is missing from the Rainbow, and why? What is the color of Radagast?

[Lou Gold]

Seriously, Justin, I really hope you can get some serious discussion of praxis here. I'm personally pissed that we can't talk of covid and the way ideas fucked everything up in my beloved Brazil, which was positioned with a materialist allopathic health service capable of performing brilliantly.

Ahhh, Lou is personally pissed. I've sent a PM, and that is where I'll deal with your pet peeve. Meanwhile I'll give Justin, or others, an opportunity to respond here in some nuanced way, in the hopes that he can articulate whatever it is that you wish to hear about the tragic situation in Brazil that will make you feel better, and appease your pissed-off-ness.

Dana, that was a confession of personal charge and bias in the name of transparency. I don't really care if folks discuss Brazil. Atrocities and paradoxes abound in lots of places. No, I'm not urging that everyone post their favorite. My general position is reflected in the Yuval Harari recent convid article, which raises the metaphysical issues like "free choice" or the "measurement problem" in a general and nuanced way that points out the central role of politics (certainly dear to Gramsci and the search for praxis). However, that post was quickly removed thus reducing the discussion to being "pissed off."

Here is the Harari article: https://www.ft.com/content/f1b30f2c-84a ... 16796d6841

One key paragraph reads:


The Covid year has exposed an even more important limitation of our scientific and technological power. Science cannot replace politics. When we come to decide on policy, we have to take into account many interests and values, and since there is no scientific way to determine which interests and values are more important, there is no scientific way to decide what we should do.

Even if all our data is accurate and reliable, we should always ask: “What do we count? Who decides what to count? How do we evaluate the numbers against each other?” This is a political rather than scientific task.



Justin, I'd appreciate knowing if you think it's relevant to Gramsci and praxis. PM me if you'd prefer to not open the discussion here.