Drive structure and society

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Drive Structure and Society is one of the most famous works by the German-American sociologist and philosopher Herbert Marcuse . The book was published in 1955 in the USA under the title Eros and Civilization. A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud published; he dedicated the American edition to his wife Sophie Wertheim, who died in 1951. In 1957 the German translation was published by Klett-Verlag under the title Eros und Kultur. A philosophical contribution to Sigmund Freud ; In 1965 the Suhrkamp-Verlag published this translation under the changed title Triebstruktur und Gesellschaft. A philosophical contribution to Sigmund Freud . The author tries to create a synthesis based on Horkheimer from the philosophy of Karl Marx and the psychoanalysis of Sigmund Freud . The work is one of the fundamental works of critical theory . The work was very well received in the context of the German student movement of the 1960s.

overview

The essay Drive Structure and Society is to be understood on the one hand as a contribution to the critical theory project to combine the analytical results of a reflected Marxist social criticism with the statements of psychoanalytic theory, on the other hand as a direct response to Freud's cultural theoretical essay, The Uneasiness in Culture . Marcuse emphasizes in the introduction that the purpose of the essay is "to contribute to the philosophy of psychoanalysis - not to psychoanalysis itself."

The aim of the company was to describe the contradictions of modern social conditions by means of a dialectically proceeding method that grasps the depths of our culture and, in particular, to shed light on the connection between subject and sociality in a theoretically ambitious process. On the other hand, Marcuse also tries to extract from the critical analysis of the given possibilities of a liberated society and a liberated subjectivity , thus a positive draft of future social relations, with the claim not to formulate a utopia , but in the constitution of social reality and human reality To seek out approaches to future liberation for themselves. Marcuse outlined a society in which economic and social progress would make it possible to harmonize reason and eros: eros, culture, art and human happiness would be vitalized, and repressive work would no longer be necessary.

content

I. Under the rule of the reality principle

According to Freud, the condition for the creation of culture and the establishment of stable social relationships is the suppression of destructive and antisocial drives . The original pleasure principle , directed towards the immediate and complete satisfaction of the instinctual wishes, comes under the control of the reality principle under the influence of a reality shaped by material deficiency. The fulfillment of instinctual wishes is postponed under the effect of social domination, thereby creating the conscious, thinking and remembering subject. The pleasure principle is repressed into the unconscious and only the imagination does not come under the rule of the reality principle . The suppression of the pleasure principle, however, weakens Eros in favor of the destructive tendency of Thanatos and thus leads to the sociopathological dynamics of modern societies such as war and mass murder. In contrast to Freud, however, Marcuse sees the ananke, under the influence of which the repression of the instincts develops, as a historically contingent fact and not as a timeless condition of human existence per se. The historically predominant form of the reality principle is the achievement principle . The pleasure principle is limited in time to leisure time and spatially to genitality. This frees up a large part of the time and the human body for the performance of alienated work, so humans can reproduce themselves and their social environment under conditions of natural deficiency. In the current phase, the performance principle is shaped by the requirements of productive efficiency and competition. The alienated labor now itself creates degrees of freedom, especially the freedom of natural constraints and is thus indirectly to the pleasure principle, but at the price of an oppressive culture. Marcuse now coined the term surplus repression, which is not absolutely necessary for the existence of culture, but serves to organize the rule of man over man. Over the course of history, this rule is overcome again and again through revolutionary processes, but is immediately reestablished because the subjects identify rule with the existence of an order that secures life through internalized oppression. This creates a double feeling of guilt through betraying the rule and one's own desires for freedom. Production and consumption justify rule and hide the fact that people can determine their needs themselves.

II. Beyond the reality principle

By increasing productivity in alienated work, however, the reality principle creates the conditions throughout history for the prevailing form of the reality principle to be abolished. "The more complete the alienation , the greater the potential of freedom." Marcuse sees a historical phase in which people can determine their needs themselves. By automating production, the alienated work that continues to be vital could be limited to a minimum in time. Eros would be freed from its destructive restraints to a large extent. However, a precondition for this would be the renunciation of the standard of living that has been achieved in the western world.

In contrast to Freud, Marcuse assumes that such a liberated Eros would not lead to the downfall of culture, on the contrary: “The liberation of Eros could create new, lasting work relationships.” It would lead to a self- sublimation of sexuality, the more cultivated one Would enable relationships between individuals. Marcuse assumes a libidinal morality inherent in Eros , which after the abolition of additional oppression and the associated forms of rule could lead to the development of a liberated society. Thanks to the freed up time resources and the increased possibilities of free choice, work could take on the character of the game. Marcuse sees these development possibilities anticipated in the aesthetic appropriation of reality, in art. This arises from the imagination, which is the only form of thinking that has kept itself free from the dominance of the reality principle. In art, Marcuse sees a form of human labor realized that largely takes place without drive suppression and offers a high degree of libidinal satisfaction without being destructive. In artistic creation and in the reception of art there is at least a temporary liberation of eros. In this way, the aesthetic experience can serve as a model for a world experience freed from repressive structures. In a liberated society the pleasure principle would be used as a reality principle without destroying the culture.

reception

As a reply to Marcuse's criticism of the Neo-Freudian revision, Rainer Funk 's essay The Alleged Radicalism, published by Rainer Funk from Erich Fromm's estate, is to be understood. In it, Fromm criticizes Marcuse's lack of clinical findings, his misunderstanding of the perversions and a misinterpretation of the Oedipus complex .

According to Bernard Görlich, Marcuse's writing made him the “founder of a political psychology that not only garnishes its subject with Freudian terminology, but also visits the Freudian knowledge center itself”. Scripture proclaimed “anything but an optimistic solution”. Marcuse had always sought images of liberation “ to ground the idea of emancipation ”, but in dealing with Freud's discomfort in culture he tried to find answers to the question “where and why these images were buried”. According to Görlich, Marcuse in no way denied the fundamental conflict between eros and culture, but rather historicized it . The reality principle, made responsible by Freud for their irreconcilability, is to be understood as a historically necessary performance principle, which has made a suppression of the instincts necessary, but which has tended to become superfluous in the present and is only maintained by the social power structures with their "additional suppression".

The philosopher Michael Werz located the script, which dissolves the boundary between psychology and social philosophy , in the context of "beginning movements of liberation and decolonization ". Marcuse relativized the irreconcilable "conflict between life and death instincts " emphasized by Freud in favor of "a new utopian conception".

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Micha Brumlik : Marcuse, Herbert: Drive structure and society . In: Georg W. Oesterdiekhoff (Ed.): Lexicon of sociological works . Westdeutscher Verlag, Wiesbaden 2001, p. 447.
  2. ^ Bernard Görlich: The bet with friend. Three studies on Herbert Marcuse . Nexus, Frankfurt am Main 1991, p. 7.
  3. ↑ Quoted from Bernard Görlich: Die Wette mit Freund. Three studies on Herbert Marcuse . Nexus, Frankfurt am Main 1991, p. 9.
  4. ↑ Wiebke Walther: Erotik . In: Metzler Lexikon Religion. Present - everyday life - media. JB Metzler, Stuttgart / Weimar 2005, vol. 1, p. 289 f.
  5. ↑ Erich Fromm: The alleged radicalism of Herbert Marcuse . In: Ders .: Writings from the estate , Volume 3. Beltz, Weinheim 1990, pp. 149–170. As an e-book edition, ed. by Rainer Funk. Open Publishing Rights, Munich 2015.
  6. ^ Bernard Görlich: The bet with friend. Three studies on Herbert Marcuse . Nexus, Frankfurt am Main 1991, p. 15.
  7. ^ Bernard Görlich: The bet with Freud. Three studies on Herbert Marcuse . Nexus, Frankfurt am Main 1991, pp. 100 and 102.
  8. ^ Bernard Görlich: The bet with Freud. Three studies on Herbert Marcuse . Nexus, Frankfurt am Main 1991, p. 72 f.
  9. ^ Michael Werz: Marcuse, Herbert - Eros and Civilization . In: Kindlers Literatur Lexikon , 3rd, completely revised edition 2009. Updated with articles from the Kindler editorial team online, accessed on September 22, 2019 .

literature

expenditure

  • Herbert Marcuse: Eros and civilization. A philosophical inquiry into Freud . The Beacon Press, Boston 1955
  • Reprinted with a new foreword by the author at Vintage, New York 1962

The German translation is by Marianne von Eckardt-Jaffe. There are four editions of her with two different titles:

  • Eros and culture. A philosophical contribution to Sigmund Freud . Klett, Stuttgart 1957
  • Drive structure and society. A philosophical contribution to Sigmund Freud . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1965, library series Suhrkamp, ​​17th edition 1995, ISBN 3-518-01158-8
  • Herbert Marcuse: Writings, Vol. 5. Drive structure and society. A philosophical contribution to Sigmund Freud. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1979, ISBN 3-518-07564-0 and ISBN 3-518-07554-3
  • Reprint of this edition as part of the reprint of the writings published by Suhrkamp from 1978 to 1989 in nine volumes by zu Klampen, Springe 2004, ISBN 3-934920-46-2

Secondary literature

  • Micha Brumlik : Marcuse, Herbert: Drive structure and society . In: Georg W. Oesterdiekhoff (Ed.): Lexicon of sociological works . Westdeutscher Verlag, Wiesbaden 2001, p. 447 f.
  • Erich Fromm : The alleged radicalism of Herbert Marcuse . Ed. Rainer Funk. e-Book, Open Publishing Rights, Munich 2015.
  • Bernard Görlich : The bet with Freud. Three studies on Herbert Marcuse. Nexus, Frankfurt am Main 1991, ISBN 3-923301-39-1
  • Jürgen Seifert : Freud as a substitute for Marx? In: Die Neue Gesellschaft 6 (1959) 68–70.

See also