Die Entwicklung der Marxistischen Philosophie (review)

376 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY Tibor Hanak. Die Entwicklung der Marxistischen Philosophie. Basel and Stuttgart: Schwabe, 1976. Pp. xiii + 326. Tibor Hanak's book is one of those works about which one can almost instantly feel that it deserves wide recognition and immediate translation into English at least. It is an analytical survey of the developments of Marxist philosophy. The organization is largely chronological. The analysis is dispassionate yet always lively. Preferences or biases are well hidden or else well expressed . The wealth of information--names, dates, trends, problems---is embedded in an almost narrative form of analysis which makes this a highly readable book, rare enough for a work with such a weighty title. Hanak begins with definitions of philosophy and philosophical issues. This first section is in many ways the most difficult and probably the one which is most susceptible to counterarguments , especially by those opposed to a history of philosophy or to the very notion of "Marxist" philosophy. The author treats the origin of Marx's and Engels's philosophical positions, stressing very much Engels's too often overlooked intellectual contributions and thereby restating a too often forgotten fact about Marxism---that it includes in its weightiest philosophical areas a good deal of "Engelism." Marx's unique philosophical system and its own peculiar ontological and epistemological categories are outlined. Much of the recently popular argument among Marxists of various persuasions and between Marxists and non-Marxist readers of Marx focuses on the issue of consistency or differentiation between the "young" and the "old" Marx. Hanak adopts a dispassionate view of the reasons for these arguments and procedes to examine the "gaps" in the Marxist philosophical construct. These gaps include in general the lack of certain central categories present in other traditional philosophical systems: ontology, ethics, logic, and to some extent epistemology and psychology. The author's definition of "gaps" is here so all-inclusive that one is tempted to reflect about what is left within Marxist philosophy that encourages one to continue to define the theory as possessing a philosophy at all. (Certainly beauty too is redefined at least and plays no role in its traditional sense in Marxist philosophy, meaning perhaps that a system of aesthetics also is lacking!) Hanak's justification is perhaps contained in the following passage: Selbstverstandlich wurde der Marxismus in Laufe der Jahre mlt den erforderhchen phdosophischen Diszlplinen und mlt vlelen, hier nicht erwahnten Theorien (z B. mathematlsche Logik) sowle mit verschiedenen Wissenschaftszweigen (z.B. empirische Soziologie) und Forschungsgebieten bereichert. Dleses Thema ~ibersteigtjedoch unseren Rahmen. Der Zweck dieser Zusammenstellung ist es nicht, uber die marxlstische Theorie- und Wissenschaftsentwieklung zu referieren, sondern lediglich jene Bezlehungen--das Problem der verschiedenen Theorie-Ans~itzeund fehlenden Disziphnen--kurz zu erhellen, die bei den Begrundem des Marxismum vorzufinden sind und die die Entwicklung der marxistlschen Philosophic fbrderten oder slch als mnspom erwiesen. The remaining sections (2-8) deal chronologically with the various developments and tendencies within what came to be called Marxism. Section 2 discusses the complex development from Marx to Lenin and covers neo-Kantian, revisionist, and other directions. Section 3 offers a fascinating survey of Marxism from Leninism through Stalinism, defining the latter's role systematically and intelligently. His conclusions about Stalin are precise and compelling: "Stalins systematische Darstellung der marxistisch-leninistischen Philosophie entsprang aus den innenpolitischen und innerparteilichen Forderungen; sie solle bei der Normierung des Denkens und Verhaltens der Untertanen behilflich sein. Die Stalinsche Version des Marxismus-Leninisums hatte die Funktion einer Herrschaftsideologie." Retracing the chronology, Hanak offers in Section 4 an analysis of Gramsci, Korsch, and Luk~cs and their specific contributions to the development of a Marxist philosophy. Section 5 offers a historical survey and analysis of the so-called Frankfurt School, focusing on Horkheimer, Adomo, and Marcuse. Section 6 offers finally a survey of the contribution of Ernst Bloch (the BOOK REVIEWS 377 "philosophy of hope"), Leo Kofler, and the French Marxists from Lefebvre through Althusser. His treatment of Structuralism is perhaps the weakest part of this section. It is too brief. But in his defense it must be added that one comes to expect too much of his book. It quickly becomes a kind of reference grammar for Marxist thought in...