Philosophy of History, Political Philosophy, Vitality

One of Marx' important, albeit subsidiary, innovations is to recast Capitalism, a system, as a moment in History.  The possibility of that dual interpretation reflects that its object is both somewhat stable and somewhat unstable, and, so can be extended to the typically fixed objects of Political Philosophy, in general, thereby suggesting that the latter and Philosophy of History are two perspectives of one and the same phenomenon.  Thus, for example, one characteristic, and, not merely an accidental circumstance, of Hobbes' Leviathan is that it stabilizes the preceding 'war of all against all', the concept of which is inspired by the actual English Civil War.  Accordingly, thereby exposed as just as much a threat to Political organization as is instability, is, as has been previously discussed, stagnation as well, i. e. the possibility of rigidification, e. g. Totalitarianism, to which any system is susceptible.  Thus, insofar as Vitality constitutes a mean between instability and inertia in Historical development, it can also serve as a Political ideal.

Instability, Inertia, Vitality

Implicit in the concept of Socialism as merely the resolution of the internal incoherence of Capitalism is the judgment of it as superior on the grounds of stability, not of Justice.  But, instability is not the only deficient mode of stability--inertia is another.  Thus, as events subsequent to Marx have tended to demonstrate, Socialism is no less susceptible to stagnation, e. g. Totalitarianism, than are other varieties of social organization.  Accordingly, instructive in those apparent limitations is that an optimum condition, as a mean between instability and inertia, is what can be called Vitality. 

Logic and History

Like Analytical Logic, Dialectical Logic distinguishes between terms and operations, while unlike the former, it does not conceive terms as atomistic, and, hence, it does not conceive that distinction as absolute, i. e. Dialectical operations are immanent in its terms.  However, a Teleological principle undermines that contrast, since it entails a permanent end state, and, hence, the possibility of a term that inherently precludes any further operations.  Thus, the positing of Socialism as the Telos of History undermines the thesis of Dialectical Materialism that e. g. Feudalism and Capitalism are inherently unstable conditions.  Conversely, proposed corrections to that problem, 'permanent revolution' and 'Negative Dialects', cannot account for any fixed conditions.  So, a more flexible concept of History is one consisting in moments that are more or less stable, requiring a Logic in which differentiation and integration are not mutually exclusive, as are Negation and Conjunction in Analytical Logic, and Negation and Synthesis in Dialectical Logic.

Individual, Dissociation, Hermit

Literally, 'individual' means 'undivided', and in Logic, it functions as a Quantifier of some given type.  In contrast, in common political parlance, it usually connotes 'dissociated'.  Now, dissociation can be absolute only in the case of a unique entity, e. g. a deity.  Furthermore, one, and perhaps, the only, case of dissociation from a species is the process of Mutation, as a phase in the origination of a new species.  Otherwise, within the human species, the closest approximation to absolute dissociation is the hermit, though the sometimes presumed 'self-sufficiency' of the latter tends to abstract from dependency on non-human Nature for survival, e. g. for food, shelter, etc.  Still, as appealing as that image might be under some circumstances, the promotion of it as a Political ideal is often a symptom of social decay, regarding which 'Individualists' tend to be unreflective.

History and Experiment

Suppressed in any expectation is essential uncertainty, e. g. ALS is a reminder of what is taken for granted in even the simplest physiological effort.  Likewise, as unprecedented as is the extent of control that Humankind currently exercises over the rest of Nature, it is hardly infinite, and, so, neither the continuation nor the increase of that control is inevitable, even if likely.  Now, while that suppression may be vital to efficiency of functioning, it is inappropriate in either a Psychological doctrine or a theory of History.  So, instead, given that uncertainty, every new active experiential moment is experimental, i. e. is an attempt at something, with the outcome not guaranteed, regardless of precedence.  In other words, even when all previous efforts have been successful, the fundamental repetition is not of the successful result, but of the underlying experiment.  Likewise, as Washington, Nietzsche, and Dewey appreciate better than does Hegel and Marx, History is essentially a product of such experiments.

Dialectical Materialism and Omnipotence

A necessary condition of pre-determination of a course of events is the omnipotence of the determining force, i. e. to which all antecedent factors must be subject.  Such omnipotence is a premise of Theological doctrines such as Calvinism, and, arguably, is implicit in Hegel's concept of History insofar as it entails eventuation of the return of Jesus Christ.  Likewise, the transition from Capitalism to Socialism is inevitable only if the scope of Dialectical Materialism is Universal, i. e. applies not only to economic arrangements, but to, for example, microorganisms, as well.  In other words, if microorganisms are not included in the sweep of Dialectical Materialism, a Capitalist society can be destroyed before it arrives at Socialism.  Whether or not Dialectical Materialism is an omnipotent deity in Marxism is not clear.

Necessity, Universality, Fate

Spinoza and Schopenhauer agree that the common concept of 'individual' is erroneous, but for subtly different reasons.  For the former, the error is intellectual, i. e. a mistaking a part for a whole, while for the latter, it is Ontological, i. e. mistaking an illusion for a reality.  But, regardless of that difference, in each case, the Individual is conceived as subject to a 'necessity', i. e. to the inescapability of the operation of some Universal.  Now, this 'necessity' is distinct from another, often characterized as 'fate', i. e. as inevitable outcome, and, yet, with which it is sometimes entwined, if not conflated, e. g. in Birth of Tragedy.  However, that one might act spontaneously, shows that an outcome can be not predetermined, even if, in the process, one is still functioning as a member of the species.  In other words, independence from given circumstances is distinguishable from independence from some Universal.  Now, while Nietzsche's study is not compromised by inattention to that distinction, Marx' concept of History arguably is--by conflating the 'necessity' of one's membership in a society, i. e. Class and Species, with 'necessity' of outcome, i. e. of Socialism from the weaknesses of Capitalism.