Philosophical outlooks and polemics between herbert marcuse

INTRODUCTIONThe middle of XX carbon marked modern era in the western philosophy shaping of modern mass cultivation, aftersounds of the act World War, growing resister in the midst of genialistic and capitalistic regimes caused emergence of a so-called second crisis in a western social philosophy. The brightest representatives of that time philosophical double were German American philosopher Herbert Marcuse, an offspring of a well-known Frankfurt condition and native American philosopher Norman Oliver dark-brown.They represented devil various approaches in social philosophy. Being a witness of German piles contests during Nazi regime Marcuse formed his outlook as a left-wing philosopher and sociologist becoming a partisan of a Freudian-Marxist philosophy. Pessimistic perspectives of Norman chocolate-brown on the contrary determined his apocalyptical hole-and-corner(a) outlooks. These philosophical approaches of dickens brightest scientists of the last coke need to be comp ared and contrasted.MAIN DISCUSSIONDuring the 1960s the philosophical debates between H. Marcuse and N. brownish concerning interpretation of Freudian desires touchye a serious impact on the development of social philosophy. As J. Chy sieve (Chytry, 1989) believes, Norman brownnesss and Herbert Marcuses interpretations of Freud seemed to point to meaningful, and opposed, orientations for the tonic Left a new paradigm in social sciences during middle XX century. During this period of time Freud, as many scientists believe, appeared as the successor to a superannuated, but non yet surpassed, Marxist project (Zaretsky, 2002). This word of honor of Freudian ideas likewise influenced interpretations of aesthetics, culture and politics.In the middle of XX century twain Marcuse and brownness developed own vision of Freudian ideas in a general philosophical and cultural context Two books of two philosophers pen in the 1950s are captivating explorations of Freuds outlook s and the implications of psychoanalytical ideas of sexuality on pitying freedom. Herbert Marcuses Eros and finish, published first focused on the role of sexuality in forming of modern civilization and humans.The second is lifespan Against Death by Norman O. browned who developed Freudian idea of suppression and applied it to the general civilizations context. Generalizing the main ideas of two examinations its infallible to mention that both authors focused on remedial therapeutic strategies able to recuperate diseased hostel of XX century infected by revolutionary ideas, aggression, intolerance etc. Orthodox depth psychology as both chocolate-brown and Marcuse believed suggests society a principle of verity and ethics of survival. The logics of this survival they, however, see in different manners. In a word, they stood on different psychological positions concord to which society exists.The polemics between Marcuse and brown wasnt literally a virtual virtuoso. Being clam up friends they much criticized philosophical outlooks of one another afterwards. Nevertheless that both philosophers were troubled with the resembling idea to help pinched society the visions of such help were different. Marcuse believed in the primacy of progress and technique that is to replace out of time relationships between masses. Brown on the contrary believed in palliative imaginative escape from the problems. With this one should define the main doctrines of two philosophers Marcuse stood on the ideas of rationality while Brown, in his turn, looked for imaginative escape from the reality.Norman Brown believed that repressed sexuality of race appears the basal reason for their aggression. To avoid aggressiveness of multitude Brown suggests his idea of polymorphous perversity believing that each person and every part of the tree trunk are to be used in all-round sexual bend (Myers, 2004). Brown fully supports Freuds idea of unconsciousness and develops it quit e logically. He believed that psychoanalytical mechanism of suppression serves negative function for people fire their intolerance and aggression. Instead, Brown voted for transformation of subliminal ideas to rational ones.As far as Eros is the primary subliminal drive of people Brown suggests to sort an erotic sense of reality that means to realize peoples implicit sexual desires. A primary object of society, law-abiding Brown is to establish chaos or anarchy where all people are free from anger and realize their sexual ambitions. Marcuse, however, believed that freedom could be procured through with(predicate) transformation of technology writing that Freedom indeed depends largely on technical progress, on the advancement of science.To achieve this freedom Marcuse votes for the indispensableness of technological changes in accordance with the new sensible demands of the life instincts. Then, according to Marcuse, one could speak of a technology of liberation, product of a scientific imagination free to project and design the forms of a human universe without exploitation and toil (Marcuse, 1966, p. 19).The Freudian Marxist Herbert Marcuse also inspired by Freudian symbolism believed in its crucial role in social and political contexts. He believed that revolutions, anger, freedom etc. are nothing much than symbolic ideas, objectives and events that have their roots in repressed peoples sexual energy. Nevertheless, on the contrast to Brown Marcuse saw final goal of the society in establishing of Marxist society where all people ordain finally be socially equal.These ideas are closely interrelated with hike Marcuses ideas of One-dimensional men. Marcuse, along with Marxists blames free market and hidden property for all mans economic and social ills. He believes that these ills can be cured wholly by the abolition of private property. Brown in his turn believed that unity means lamb and devotedness being, hence, more close in his ideas to Chr istian and Buddhist theologies.While Brown called for establishment of a new chaotic society Marcuse developed own vision of changes. He called for the limiting of the very fundamentals of society that would be modified by the body waste of class society.Suggesting himself more rational approach to Freudian interpretation Marcuse believed that Browns ideas completely contrast with practice he recognized Browns mad monism to be powerless to bring about political and social improvement. Marcuse did not believe it possible to replace technology with some sort of mystical unity of man and temperament. He, besides, considered that Freudian ideas fail in helping of peoples adjustment to society. With this Marcuse was closer to Freud himself who was also pessimistic about achieving long-term benefits for society in general through psychoanalysis.Brown, in his turn, was looking for different psychoanalytically based solutions for peoples harmony. He believed that to reduce man to wind (a chaos) is to find a best solution to societys and peoples deepest problem, i.e. social existence. Brown believed that to achieve long-lasting social harmony people are to forget of their superiority over other animate being that, according to Freud, leads to serious mental neuroses. According to Brown, when the idea of power and control first emerged it appeared a reason for all problems. Marcuse, in his turn also supported this idea of peoples drive to the power as a strong reason for social problems and aggressions between people and nations.Marcuse, pick out for rationality in societys development strongly objected Browns belief in schizophrenia as a sane state of a person. He considered the idea that schizophrenia should be in any sense a model for normal human behaviour to be ludicrous. Contrasting Browns ideas of social escapism Marcuse believed that people could achieve social progress and harmony through reality and clear definition of existing problems. Escape from the reality, observing Marcuse, is not a solution at all instead, it provide lead to furthermore social and political problems.Critically speaking, Browns ideas dont look so Utopian. take for living without repressions Brown shows society a possible solution to achieve harmonic development. This solution lies in self-denial and abnegation of people necessary to make them more tolerable and loyal to the others. Marcuse instead believed that self-denial is not a solution at all.The only working remedy that could cure ill society and make it indeed multi-dimensional (where all people will finally achieve their individuality and will not identify themselves with the state) is revolution. The only force that could make this revolution is lumpen proletarians. Illustrating these philosophic ideas in a more free manner one could say that Brown pass judgment Hippys movement with their motto All you need is love while Marcuse on the contrary was a partisan of International and Marseillais e.Marcuse criticized Browns ideas of self-expression saying that theres no sense to to try to turn the assembly line into a scene of self-expression, or to post propaganda for culture and free thought. To achieve final self-expression of people its necessary, observing Marcuse, to change technological rationality itself, make it more people-centered and friendly.Critically observing Freudian ideas of Id, Ego and Superego Marcuse came to the conclusion that the only way to patch up people and nations is to conciliate peoples rationality and irrationality. When rationality contrasts Eros, Marcuse believed, people establish the culture that is adverse to human nature and represses people permanently. A perfect illustrations of the struggle between rationality and repressed Eros, according to Marcuse are World Wars that were the results of peoples aggression.Being a partisan of technological progress Marcuse at the resembling time appealed to the aesthetic experience as a new locus o f technological values. With this, he believed, people could finally become close with the nature and achieve peace, freedom, and fulfillment into the construction of technological rationality.CONCLUSIONSIn the middle of XX century philosophy focused on reinterpretation of Freudian psychoanalytical ideas. Herbert Marcuse and Norman Brown each developed personal vision of the issue. Reconsidering Freuds ideas of unconsciousness and snap in the problem of repression they, nevertheless, pointed out different solutions necessary to make society more harmonic and free. While Marcuse concentrated on technological breakthrough in accordance with peoples deep demands, Brown believed in complete abolishment of technology and called for anarchy in peoples relationships.REFERENCES Brown, Norman O. (1985) Life Against Death. Middleton. CN Weslayan University Press. Second Edition. 1985.Chytry, Josef (1989). The Aesthetic State A avocation in Modern German Thought Berkeley University of Calif ornia Press.Marcuse, Herbert. (1966). Eros and Civilization A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud. Beacon Press.Myers, Ellen (2004). Forerunner of New develop Madness A Critique of Norman O. Brown On-line clause retrieved July, 23 from http//www.creationism.org/csshs/v13n1p07.htmZaretsky, Eli. (2003) Norman O. Brown, 1913-2003 Radical Philosophy, Issue 118.