@GreatGrumbledook It is undeniablly true that most people would prefer to meet Wee Jock McPlop to Macuse. But this is not because they have formed their judgement of him (Marcuse, that is, not McPlop) by reading him, but because they have formed it by reading ABOUT him and what has been written about him has been written, with honourable exceptions, by those who have deliberately set out to misrepresent and demonise him.
Very surprised at Feenberg's short "No" to the last question. Perhaps he meant it in a sort of personal nostalgic sense. But the fact is that Marcuse's rise to fame in the late 60s as a "dangerous, corrupting philosopher" has continued on down to our own times like a baton being passed in a relay race. Zizek's persona and fame today is remarkably similar to Marcuse's in the 1960s. Both command large audiences beyond academic philosophy. Both deal with the deep German idealist roots of left revolutionary thought. And both define themselves by maintaining their attachment to some version of the marxist revolutionary project beyond the current defeatism of the radical left.
+Hic Rhodus Yes, Zizek is a popular philosopher like Marcuse - there is something of a cult among the young lefties around him, too. But there, I think, the resemblance ends. Marcuse is a serious thinking, he is worth reading and thinking about - Zizek is just a bullshit artist.
The Frankfurt philosopher's were the most balanced in their analysis, for they did not give a rule model or an expectation for years to come, they gave just a number of posibilities: Marcuse's vision of technology and capitalist society as means to develop a new way of freedom for human kind or horkheimer's future society where production and men reach two possible endings, to fulfil their dreams or to be subject of slavery to fulfil somebody else's
@GreatGrumbledook Yes, but why call Bolingbroke (i.e. the soon to be king, Henry IV) Marcuse? Anyway, why do you say Marcuse should have been executed? Marcuse saw man as not in the most fundamental sense free. He held that social conditioning alienates man from his authentic self. He was not alone in thinking this. Heidegger, Nietzsche, Marx, Sartre, all of the Frankfurt School philosophers, including Habermas, and many others thought the same. Why so harsh a judgement?
All those «wonderful» philosophers and their theories profoundly misunderstand the anxiété, the needs and aspirations of the working class. They never had to experience what they preach, never work with their hands and get tired. They completely ignore the needs of people who wants the comfort, the simplicité and security bourgeoisie and don’t find beauty in poverty.
And so on and on. The big deal is, if people could only undestand it, that there's not a single truth that will come straight out from anyone. That's why epistemology, or any other discipline within philosophy for that matter, won't ever go to or fro.
@GreatGrumbledook Oh do come out from behind those literary quotations . Why do you think Marcuse should have been executed? Would you burn his books as well? In a democracy, there is a more effective way of killing ideas than executing s/he who holds them. That is to let the mainstream media savage them using well-tested linguistic techniques of manipulation. Marcuse was and is a threat to the established order of things, but not for reasons the masses have been led to believe.
3 interesting points in Q-A: 1. Today critique of technology has been eclipsed. 2. Book has Marcuse's comments on Heidegger's philosophy as fascist, authoritarian. Not criticisms of Heidegger throughout Marcuse's career. 3. Note that Feenberg disagrees with Marcuse on Heidegger.
An illuminating and engaging talk on the life and character of Herbert Marcuse, a hero of the '60s "peace & love" generation, inimical to Mr & Mrs "consume or die".
If you look at it plainly, Plato wanted an static society , a way of life in which people couldn't leave their country unless they had a certain age or social status an promissed not to introduce any sort of new ideas at their return. Marx's vision of a future society (if you manage to find such a thing in his writtings) is equally restrictive, and only sourvives working as an amphibious between models.
14 million people died in World War I, not tens of millions. Marcuse wasn't fired and Feenberg knows that. The decision was made not to allow any professors above the age of 70 to keep their professorships to allow for new blood and this concerned dozens of professors, not just Marcuse. The decision was certainly justified.
@@theRiver_joanbecause Marcuse, who was ghosted since the 70’s, is now being rediscovered as an important thinker and the right wing propaganda machine is trying to keep people from actually reading him and control the narrative. Note the banning of CRT and the attempt to prevent the history and continued racism , particularly the evidence that shows structural racism, from being taught.
If you have the common sense of the average tradesman or farmer, or gardener, or someone who actually produces something useful and real, it’s immediately obvious to you that Marcuse was a fool.
prefer war over peace? It depends on the circmstances. If i'm foced to live under an orwellian slave society, and be in perpetual peace or to chose between that or a rational free state in war... I would chose war. The fact is that war/conflict is a natural concomitant of human affairs. And because it is natural it is necessary. To indulge in pipe dreams about "peace" is as nugatory as deciding that humans should sprout wings and fly... attractive but not in our nature.
born equal? I'm not sure I follow? are we all as bright, as talented for everything, as good looking, as tall ... etc ? or legally equal (which depends on the culture) either way again: nonsense
born equal not in a Western hierarchical sense. born equal in the notion that all are entitled to the earth's resources and the necessities of life. measuring "brightness", "talent", and "looks" is subjective to the economic foundation of a society and what that society values to reproduce itself....does this make sense?
So being that you obviously object to that idea, which is from John Locke, you reject John Locke theory as well. Therefore you reject the reasoning for private property. So then why should the culture maintain the religious nonsense belief of private industries.
Marcuse really was horrible. His philosophy makes our lives miserable to this day. He was one of the best at laying out a plan to utilize the useful idiots.
![Rick Roderick on Marcuse - One-Dimensional Man [full length]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/WNAKr1TQ0xc/mqdefault.jpg)
![Rick Roderick on Marcuse - One-Dimensional Man [full length]](/img/tr.png)
It's a pleasure seeing how Feenberg loves to talk about Marcuse, as it makes me love Marcuse (or better to say his philosophical ideas) even more :)
@GreatGrumbledook It is undeniablly true that most people would prefer to meet Wee Jock McPlop to Macuse. But this is not because they have formed their judgement of him (Marcuse, that is, not McPlop) by reading him, but because they have formed it by reading ABOUT him and what has been written about him has been written, with honourable exceptions, by those who have deliberately set out to misrepresent and demonise him.
Very surprised at Feenberg's short "No" to the last question. Perhaps he meant it in a sort of personal nostalgic sense. But the fact is that Marcuse's rise to fame in the late 60s as a "dangerous, corrupting philosopher" has continued on down to our own times like a baton being passed in a relay race. Zizek's persona and fame today is remarkably similar to Marcuse's in the 1960s. Both command large audiences beyond academic philosophy. Both deal with the deep German idealist roots of left revolutionary thought. And both define themselves by maintaining their attachment to some version of the marxist revolutionary project beyond the current defeatism of the radical left.
+Hic Rhodus Yes, Zizek is a popular philosopher like Marcuse - there is something of a cult among the young lefties around him, too. But there, I think, the resemblance ends. Marcuse is a serious thinking, he is worth reading and thinking about - Zizek is just a bullshit artist.
+Steven Yourke "...Zizek is just a bullshit artist..."Thanks. I have nothing to add.
Footnote: Zizek is a source of ear ache.
Thank you, UCTV
What a great talk! Wow, twelve years ago!
hello 2020 people
Great lecture.
An excellent talk.
The Frankfurt philosopher's were the most balanced in their analysis, for they did not give a rule model or an expectation for years to come, they gave just a number of posibilities: Marcuse's vision of technology and capitalist society as means to develop a new way of freedom for human kind or horkheimer's future society where production and men reach two possible endings, to fulfil their dreams or to be subject of slavery to fulfil somebody else's
Effective lecture. Thank you
good work
@JohananRaatz What aspects of Leo Strauss's philosophy exactly do you have in mind?
@GreatGrumbledook Yes, but why call Bolingbroke (i.e. the soon to be king, Henry IV) Marcuse?
Anyway, why do you say Marcuse should have been executed? Marcuse saw man as not in the most fundamental sense free. He held that social conditioning alienates man from his authentic self. He was not alone in thinking this. Heidegger, Nietzsche, Marx, Sartre, all of the Frankfurt School philosophers, including Habermas, and many others thought the same. Why so harsh a judgement?
All those «wonderful» philosophers and their theories profoundly misunderstand the anxiété, the needs and aspirations of the working class. They never had to experience what they preach, never work with their hands and get tired. They completely ignore the needs of people who wants the comfort, the simplicité and security bourgeoisie and don’t find beauty in poverty.
There is much truth in this comment.....the intellectual elites actually hate the working class, that is why they are always trying to change them.
Great lecture ~ great questions.
Thank you.
He was not a strategic thinker...a very powerful...I'm going to assume under appreciated critique of Marcuse.
And so on and on. The big deal is, if people could only undestand it, that there's not a single truth that will come straight out from anyone. That's why epistemology, or any other discipline within philosophy for that matter, won't ever go to or fro.
His position is well worth considering. No straw mans here.
Crazy is the operative word in this discussion.
Who doesn't like to do as much? The problem is getting caught...
as well as some Revilo P Oliver and Madison Grant, Lothrop Stoddard, and other rational and learned men....
@GreatGrumbledook Oh do come out from behind those literary quotations . Why do you think Marcuse should have been executed? Would you burn his books as well? In a democracy, there is a more effective way of killing ideas than executing s/he who holds them. That is to let the mainstream media savage them using well-tested linguistic techniques of manipulation. Marcuse was and is a threat to the established order of things, but not for reasons the masses have been led to believe.
Sounds like you're getting pretty heated there. Almost violent or. . .WARLIKE! . . .
@GreatGrumbledook I gather, then, that you don’t think very highly of Marcuse, only you don’t say why. Enlighten me (please).
3 interesting points in Q-A:
1. Today critique of technology has been eclipsed.
2. Book has Marcuse's comments on Heidegger's philosophy as fascist, authoritarian. Not criticisms of Heidegger throughout Marcuse's career.
3. Note that Feenberg disagrees with Marcuse on Heidegger.
maccarthy was right after all
yes....
Of course he was
So deeply short thinking reaveled in this comment. 😢
I think you mean Adolf
An illuminating and engaging talk on the life and character of Herbert Marcuse, a hero of the '60s "peace & love" generation, inimical to Mr & Mrs "consume or die".
The latter are still with us. Ignorant, unreflective and proud of it. See below.
But to criticize Marat9043 one must also be at least of his level...
If you look at it plainly, Plato wanted an static society , a way of life in which people couldn't leave their country unless they had a certain age or social status an promissed not to introduce any sort of new ideas at their return. Marx's vision of a future society (if you manage to find such a thing in his writtings) is equally restrictive, and only sourvives working as an amphibious between models.
14 million people died in World War I, not tens of millions. Marcuse wasn't fired and Feenberg knows that. The decision was made not to allow any professors above the age of 70 to keep their professorships to allow for new blood and this concerned dozens of professors, not just Marcuse. The decision was certainly justified.
The bankers and economists are doing a great job aren't they?
Marcuse is an enemy of humanity.
jeffrey pierce How? I’m genuinely interested in why there’s so many comments on here hating on the guy and his work.
@@theRiver_joanbecause Marcuse, who was ghosted since the 70’s, is now being rediscovered as an important thinker and the right wing propaganda machine is trying to keep people from actually reading him and control the narrative. Note the banning of CRT and the attempt to prevent the history and continued racism , particularly the evidence that shows structural racism, from being taught.
To criticize Marcuse philosopher must at least be of his level...
my dog's level is enough
A logical fallacy. Do you apply that equally to everyone you criticize?
If you have the common sense of the average tradesman or farmer, or gardener, or someone who actually produces something useful and real, it’s immediately obvious to you that Marcuse was a fool.
prefer war over peace? It depends on the circmstances. If i'm foced to live under an orwellian slave society, and be in perpetual peace or to chose between that or a rational free state in war... I would chose war.
The fact is that war/conflict is a natural concomitant of human affairs. And because it is natural it is necessary. To indulge in pipe dreams about "peace" is as nugatory as deciding that humans should sprout wings and fly... attractive but not in our nature.
!?!?
Defenda seu cabelo
born equal? I'm not sure I follow?
are we all as bright, as talented for everything, as good looking, as tall ... etc ? or legally equal (which depends on the culture)
either way again: nonsense
born equal not in a Western hierarchical sense. born equal in the notion that all are entitled to the earth's resources and the necessities of life. measuring "brightness", "talent", and "looks" is subjective to the economic foundation of a society and what that society values to reproduce itself....does this make sense?
So being that you obviously object to that idea, which is from John Locke, you reject John Locke theory as well. Therefore you reject the reasoning for private property. So then why should the culture maintain the religious nonsense belief of private industries.
Should be of zero length.
Marcuse really was horrible. His philosophy makes our lives miserable to this day.
He was one of the best at laying out a plan to utilize the useful idiots.