The dissertation aims to investigate the reception of Fichte’s philosophy in the young Hegelian thought, to identify which Fichte’s conceptual structures contributed to the genesis of the young Marx’s philosophy of praxis and his contextual abandonment of speculative philosophy. Following this order of issues, it is indeed possible to record – in the period of the Vormärz crisis – a phenomenon of “reactivation” of Fichte’s thought, aimed at reconfiguring the relationship between philosophy and the material reality of institutions and social relations. The structure of the dissertation is articulated into two parts. The first part, divided into five chapters, is dedicated to the discussion of some general methodological questions and the identification of the conceptual cores that make up the “constellation” of problems reopened by the reactivation of Fichte’s thought. This “constellation” emerges through the active “legacy” of the Young Hegelians and their construction of Fichte as a “polemical” typification to oppose Hegelian philosophy. The second part of the dissertation also consists of five chapters, each of which is dedicated to a Young Hegelian thinker and to the specific way in which Fichte’s thought interacts with the structures of his philosophy. The sixth chapter is devoted to Feuerbach, with a focus on the role that Fichte’s transcendental philosophy played in the genesis of Feuerbach’s genetic-critical philosophy. The latter, thanks to the “reactivation” of the genetisch element of transcendental philosophy, is emerging as a new anti-dogmatic and anti-ideological device, capable of unmasking the claims of absoluteness of philosophical systems and connecting philosophy to its contingent material genetic source. In the seventh chapter, we focus on August von Cieszkowski’s philosophy of praxis. In his Prolegomena to Historiosophy, the Polish baron seems to “reactivate” Fichte’s philosophy as a “futurological” philosophy structurally devoted to an “application” in the real, to avert the risks of “theoreticalism” and the “end of history” perceived as problematic elements of Hegel’s philosophy. The eighth chapter unfolds through two writings by Karl Friedrich Köppen, in which the philosopher sets out to “renew” the memory of Fichte in his contemporaries. Special attention is paid to the article Fichte und die Revolution, in which Köppen emphasizes the importance of going back to Fichte’s writing on the French Revolution to look for “political” solutions to the “reactionary-conservative” failure of his times. The ninth chapter is dedicated to the exploration of Moses Hess’s philosophy of action, which refers directly to Fichte to discuss the foundation of philosophical socialism. In Hess’ thought, we can observe the most explicit connection of the “praxeological” theme of Fichte’s philosophy with the foundation of socialism and the analysis of some elements of political economy. Again, with a progressively shifted focus on material institutions, Fichte assumes the function of a critical conceptual device that makes it possible to deconstruct the “facts” of political economy, tracing their genetic origin beyond alienating abstractions. In chapter five, we focus on the “environmental” – mediated – reception of Fichte in the young Marx, paying attention to the role Marx played in the collective formulation of an anti-Hegelian and anti-speculative conceptual toolkit. In this way, through the “prism” of Young Hegelian’s thought, it is possible to reconstruct the process of conceptual translation, by which some patterns of Fichte’s philosophy were reactivated in the young Marx’s philosophy of praxis in his phase of detachment from Hegel and – in a more radical way – of separation from the other young Hegelians, as well as from speculative philosophy in general.
La dissertazione si propone di indagare la ricezione della filosofia di Fichte nel pensiero giovane hegeliano, al fine di individuare quali strutture concettuali fichtiane contribuirono alla genesi della filosofia della praxis del giovane Marx e al suo contestuale abbandono della filosofia speculativa. Seguendo questo ordine di problemi, è infatti possibile registrare – nel periodo della crisi del Vormärz – un fenomeno di “riattivazione” del pensiero fichtiano, funzionale alla riconfigurazione del rapporto tra filosofia e realtà materiale delle istituzioni e dei rapporti sociali. La struttura della tesi è articolata in due parti. La prima parte, divisa in cinque capitoli, è dedicata alla trattazione di alcune questioni metodologiche generali e all’individuazione dei nuclei concettuali che compongono la “costellazione” di problemi riaperti dalla riattivazione del pensiero fichtiano. Questa “costellazione” emerge grazie all’ “ereditare” attivo dei giovani hegeliani e alla loro costruzione di un Fichte come tipizzazione “polemica” da opporre alla filosofia hegeliana. La seconda parte della dissertazione è anch’essa composta da cinque capitoli, ciascuno dei quali dedicato ad un pensatore giovane hegeliano e al modo specifico in cui il pensiero Fichte interagisce con le strutture della sua filosofia. Il sesto capitolo è dedicato a Feuerbach, con particolare attenzione al ruolo che la filosofia trascendentale fichtiana svolse nella genesi della feuerbachiana filosofia genetico-critica. Quest’ultima, grazie alla “riattivazione” dell’elemento genetisch della filosofia trascendentale, si va profilando come un nuovo dispositivo antidogmatico e antiideologico, in grado di smascherare le pretese di assolutezza dei sistemi filosofici e connettere la filosofia alla sua sorgente genetica materiale contingente. Nel settimo capitolo, ci si concentra sulla filosofia della praxis di August von Cieszkowski. Nei suoi Prolegomeni alla Storiosofia, il barone polacco sembra “riattivare” la filosofia fichtiana in quanto filosofia “futurologica” e votata strutturalmente ad una “applicazione” nel reale, per scongiurare i rischi di “teoreticismo” e di “fine della storia”, percepiti come elementi fondamentali della filosofia di Hegel. L’ottavo capitolo si svolge attraversando due scritti di Karl Friedrich Köppen, nei quali il filosofo si propone di “rinnovare” la memoria di Fichte nei suoi contemporanei. In particolare, viene dedicata speciale attenzione all’articolo Fichte und die Revolution, nel quale Köppen sottolinea l’importanza di tornare allo scritto di Fichte sulla Rivoluzione francese per cercare soluzioni “politiche” allo scacco del “reazionario-conservatore” del proprio tempo. Il nono capitolo è dedicato all’esplorazione della filosofia dell’azione di Moses Hess, che rimanda direttamente a Fichte in riferimento alla fondazione del socialismo filosofico. In Hess si ha la più esplicita connessione del tema “prasseologico” della filosofia fichtiana con la fondazione del socialismo e l’analisi di alcuni elementi di economia politica. Anche in questo caso, con un focus progressivamente spostato sulle istituzioni materiali, Fichte assume la funzione di un dispositivo concettuale critico che rende possibile decostruire i “fatti” dell’economia politica, rintracciando la loro origine genetica al di là delle astrazioni alienanti. Nel quinto capitolo, ci si concentra sulla ricezione “ambientale” di Fichte nel giovane Marx, ponendo attenzione al ruolo che Marx svolse nella formulazione “corale” di uno strumentario concettuale antihegeliano e anti-speculativo. In questo modo, è possibile ricostruire il processo di traduzione concettuale, in virtù del quale alcuni schemi della filosofia fichtiana vennero riattivati nella filosofia della praxis del giovane Marx nella sua fase di distacco da Hegel e dagli altri giovani hegeliani.
Dal trascendentale alla praxis. L'eredità di Fichte nei giovani hegeliani e in Marx
GRISTINA, SILVESTRE
2023
Abstract
The dissertation aims to investigate the reception of Fichte’s philosophy in the young Hegelian thought, to identify which Fichte’s conceptual structures contributed to the genesis of the young Marx’s philosophy of praxis and his contextual abandonment of speculative philosophy. Following this order of issues, it is indeed possible to record – in the period of the Vormärz crisis – a phenomenon of “reactivation” of Fichte’s thought, aimed at reconfiguring the relationship between philosophy and the material reality of institutions and social relations. The structure of the dissertation is articulated into two parts. The first part, divided into five chapters, is dedicated to the discussion of some general methodological questions and the identification of the conceptual cores that make up the “constellation” of problems reopened by the reactivation of Fichte’s thought. This “constellation” emerges through the active “legacy” of the Young Hegelians and their construction of Fichte as a “polemical” typification to oppose Hegelian philosophy. The second part of the dissertation also consists of five chapters, each of which is dedicated to a Young Hegelian thinker and to the specific way in which Fichte’s thought interacts with the structures of his philosophy. The sixth chapter is devoted to Feuerbach, with a focus on the role that Fichte’s transcendental philosophy played in the genesis of Feuerbach’s genetic-critical philosophy. The latter, thanks to the “reactivation” of the genetisch element of transcendental philosophy, is emerging as a new anti-dogmatic and anti-ideological device, capable of unmasking the claims of absoluteness of philosophical systems and connecting philosophy to its contingent material genetic source. In the seventh chapter, we focus on August von Cieszkowski’s philosophy of praxis. In his Prolegomena to Historiosophy, the Polish baron seems to “reactivate” Fichte’s philosophy as a “futurological” philosophy structurally devoted to an “application” in the real, to avert the risks of “theoreticalism” and the “end of history” perceived as problematic elements of Hegel’s philosophy. The eighth chapter unfolds through two writings by Karl Friedrich Köppen, in which the philosopher sets out to “renew” the memory of Fichte in his contemporaries. Special attention is paid to the article Fichte und die Revolution, in which Köppen emphasizes the importance of going back to Fichte’s writing on the French Revolution to look for “political” solutions to the “reactionary-conservative” failure of his times. The ninth chapter is dedicated to the exploration of Moses Hess’s philosophy of action, which refers directly to Fichte to discuss the foundation of philosophical socialism. In Hess’ thought, we can observe the most explicit connection of the “praxeological” theme of Fichte’s philosophy with the foundation of socialism and the analysis of some elements of political economy. Again, with a progressively shifted focus on material institutions, Fichte assumes the function of a critical conceptual device that makes it possible to deconstruct the “facts” of political economy, tracing their genetic origin beyond alienating abstractions. In chapter five, we focus on the “environmental” – mediated – reception of Fichte in the young Marx, paying attention to the role Marx played in the collective formulation of an anti-Hegelian and anti-speculative conceptual toolkit. In this way, through the “prism” of Young Hegelian’s thought, it is possible to reconstruct the process of conceptual translation, by which some patterns of Fichte’s philosophy were reactivated in the young Marx’s philosophy of praxis in his phase of detachment from Hegel and – in a more radical way – of separation from the other young Hegelians, as well as from speculative philosophy in general.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
tesi_Silvestre_Gristina.pdf
accesso aperto
Dimensione
2.85 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
2.85 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in UNITESI sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14242/94776
URN:NBN:IT:UNIPD-94776