Preview

Marx

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
872 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Marx
“In creating an objective world by his practical activity, in working-up inorganic nature, man proves himself a conscious species being, i.e., as a being that treats the species as its own essential being, or that treats itself as a species being” (76)

“It is just in the working-up of the objective world, therefore, that man first really proves himself to be a species being. This production is his active species life. Through and because of this production, nature appears as his work and his reality. The object of labor is, therefore, the objectification of man’s species life: for he duplicates himself not only, as in consciousness, intellectually, but also actively, in reality, and therefore he contemplates himself in a world that he has created” (76).

“[…] the productive life is the life of the species. It is life-engendering life. The whole character of a species – its species character – is contained in the character of its life-activity; and free, conscious activity is man’s species character” (76)

“The animal is immediately identical with its life-activity. It does not distinguish itself from it. It is its life-activity. Man makes his life-activity itself the object of his will and consciousness. He has conscious life-activity. It is not a determination with which he directly merges. Conscious life-activity directly distinguishes man from animal life-activity. It is because of this that he is a species being. Or it is only because he is a species being that he is a Conscious Being, i.e., that his own life is an object for him. Only because of that is his activity free activity.” (76)

“Man is a species being, not only because in practice and in theory he adopts the species as his object […] but also because he treats himself as the actual, living species; because he treats himself as a universal and therefore a free being.” (75)

“The life of the species, both in man and in animals consist physically in the fact that man (like the animal) lives

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    why a relationship between nature and the human race is no longer important, supporting his…

    • 658 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Calpurnia Quotes

    • 418 Words
    • 2 Pages

    “As more individuals are produced than can possibly survive, there must in every case be a struggle for existence, either one individual with another of the same specie, or with the individuals of distinct species, or with the physical conditions of life.”…

    • 418 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Donna Haraway's Analysis

    • 1520 Words
    • 7 Pages

    From a religious perspective, some argue that early Christian views created the first sense of human-nonhuman divisions with the claims that men and women could not be animals since humans are the image of ‘God’. However, according to Linnaeus’ taxonomy and later confirmed and elaborated by Darwin, there was acknowledgment that humans were animals. Richard Ryder, a member of the Oxford Group, which is centered on animal rights, claimed the “full awareness of our kinship with other animals was ‘intermittent’ and became “discouraged by the Church” (Yates PT 1: Human Supremacy: Constructing the ‘Right’ and ‘Wrong’ Sides of The Species Barrier). Moreover, the Church explained that ‘God’ said himself in the Bible to “be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it” (Aitken). Thus began “Man’s ‘dominionism’ over and above creation” and human supremacy is favored (Yates PT 1: Human Supremacy: Constructing the ‘Right’ and ‘Wrong’ Sides of The Species Barrier). From a philosophical perspective, many philosophers can claim that human supremacy is justifiable. Francis Bacon, a 17th century philosopher, declared, “Man was at the center of the world” (Yates PT 1: Human Supremacy: Constructing the ‘Right’ and ‘Wrong’ Sides of The Species Barrier). He continued to argue that if it was not for human control of the natural world, “all would go astray” because there would be “no purpose” and “no aim” (Yates PT 1: Human Supremacy: Constructing the ‘Right’ and ‘Wrong’ Sides of The Species Barrier). Rene Descartes, another great thinker, also believed in human exceptionalism. He supported his claim by cutting both nonhumans and humans, and saw that each contained blood vessels, organs, tissues, etc. He concluded that the reason non-humans differed from humans is that they lack thought (Yates PT 1: Human Supremacy: Constructing the ‘Right’ and ‘Wrong’ Sides of…

    • 1520 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    4. Do you agree with the statement “no way of life is “natural” to humanity (37)”?…

    • 264 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Ransom: Hero and Achilles

    • 4245 Words
    • 17 Pages

    Human condition: “To be seen as a man like other men, humans as we are …would have suggested that I was impermanent and weak”…

    • 4245 Words
    • 17 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    About Animals". In this article he sheds light on the human like qualities of animals,…

    • 907 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    5. What does the author assert is the importance of life? What specific support does he use (what laws) to establish man’s desire to preserve the right to live?…

    • 973 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    It gives basic moral significance to things that are able to experience pain and pleasure. Human’s and non humans can most certainly experience pain and pleasure therefore we all deserve equality. Singer argues that we have a direct duty to animals, to include their interest in our moral reasoning. Whether or not animals can author treatises on mathematics they like us feel pain and we therefore have an obligation not to cause them needless suffering. Singer denounces all forms of what he calls “speciesism” whereby human beings believe they can exploit animals merely because they do not belong to the species homo sapiens. Just because animals aren’t homo sapiens doesn’t mean they are not equal. They have hearts, they pump blood, they breathe and they create life, these are all qualities us humans…

    • 759 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Theories of Learning

    • 465 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Represents the world as a unitary interactive, developing organism: active and adaptive model of man.…

    • 465 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    EASTON, Steward.1975. Man and World in the Light of Anthroposophy. New York, 1975 164 p.…

    • 3625 Words
    • 15 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    there is something it is like to be that organism. He calls this “the subjective character of…

    • 880 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Living Like Weasles

    • 1281 Words
    • 6 Pages

    “That is, I don’t think I can learn from a wild animal how to live in particular—shall I suck warm blood, hold my tail high, walk with my footprints precisely over the prints of my hands?—but I might learn something of mindlessness, something of the purity of living in the physical senses and the dignity of living without bias or motive.”…

    • 1281 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    We see ourselves as outside of nature, we have illusions that we can control it, that we are not embodied beings and are apart from the animal kingdom, this ideal of humans as prey threatens the dualistic vision of human anthropocentrism where we can control and manipulate nature from the outside and thus are the predator never the prey.…

    • 612 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    It is understood that this may be an attempt to encourage readers that may not believe in the concept of animals having rights to look at a bigger picture in relation to this topic and find connections. However, the idea of including aliens as a means of supporting her argument regarding animals is not something that the group was able to connect with as aliens are not considered a part of our society or law. The criticism that Sarah and Katie have regarding this argument is that Midgley discusses how using intelligence is not a viable way to determine if something is or is not a person, but feels that measuring the emotional complexity of the non-human is just as, if not more, challenging to measure accurately. Perhaps in some species, their emotional capabilities are not known to human beings because the animal reflects them in a way that we do not understand. While there is appreciation for the thought that emotions should be included as criteria in determining if something is or is not a person, Midgley should provide some information pertaining to the method in which this information can be…

    • 1370 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Their writing styles will be considered to see how it effects their presentation of nonhuman actors and companion species and if it makes it less or more convincing. Ideas that will be analysed are how animals contribute to society, but how Haraway and Latour differ in the way they see the relationship between animals and humans. How social constructionism influenced their arguments will also be considered, as well as their writing styles such as how many examples they use. How their sociological backgrounds influence their ideas will be explored in greater detail and finally their ideas regarding hybridity will be analysed. It appears that whilst both notions have their strengths and weaknesses, Latour’s is the most widely accepted and is also the most accurate portrayal of the human’s relationship with nonhumans, specifically animals, within contemporary…

    • 3480 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Powerful Essays