Refine
Language
- German (183)
- English (170)
- Indonesian (1)
- Italian (10)
- Korean (1)
- Polish (2)
- Portuguese (2)
- Spanish (3)
- Chinese (14)
Document Type
- Articles (308)
- Books (26)
- Reviews (23)
- Dissertations (11)
- Collections (10)
- Event Reports (5)
- Forewords (2)
- dissertatopm (1)
Year of publication
- 1987 (386) (remove)
Presents evidence suggesting that (1) E. FROMM (1947) increasingly diverged from K. Marx in his concept of human nature, (2) FROMM's construct of the >social unconscious< is the locus where mystical and psychoanalytic notions become confused with Marxian ideas, and (3) FROMM's reconstruction of Marx in idealist terms does serious violence to Marx's theory and is accomplished only at the price of major distortion.
Die verschiedenen theoretischen Programme, die Erich FROMM im Verlauf seiner Werkgeschichte verfolgt hat (Freudo-Marxismus, analytische Sozialpsychologie, Neo-Psychoanalyse, humanistischer Sozialismus) werden zusammenfassend dargestellt und auf eine gemeinsame Leitidee in Form einer impliziten >Theorie des Subjekts< zurückzuführen versucht. Grundsätzliche Probleme subjekttheoretischer Ansätze werden in diesem Zusammenhang diskutiert. – Aus dem Inhaltsverzeichnis: (1) Zur Konzeptualisierung subjekttheoretischer Problemlagen in humanistischer Absicht. (2) Vom Gottesbegriff zur Menschennatur. Der Ursprung des FROMMschen Humanismus im jüdischen Gesetz. (3) Biologistische Werturteile im Menschenbild der Psychoanalyse. (4) Die Kontroverse um den heuristischen Wert der Freudschen Triebtheorie respektive der Metapsychologie. (5) Die begriffliche Struktur der analytischen Sozialpsychologie. (6) Konstruktionsprinzip und Begründungsprobleme der FROMMschen Anthropologie. (7) Schwerefeld >Materie< und Schwerefeld >Menschennatur< im Kontext der FROMMschen Marxrezeption. (8) Zum normativen Problemüberhang kritischer Subjekttheorien. Überlegungen im Hinblick auf das Verhältnis von Tugendethik und normativer Ethik.
Zweimal Weißer Saal
(1987)
Gesammelte Schriften, Band 11: Nachlassene Schriften 1914-1931, Frankfurt am Main (Fischer) 1987.
(1987)
Gesammelte Schriften, Band 9: Nachlassene Schriften 1914-1931, Frankfurt am Main (Fischer) 1987.
(1987)
Gesammelte Schriften, Band 2: Philosophische Frühschriften, Frankfurt am Main (Fischer) 1987.
(1987)
Language and the Self
(1987)
A Clinical Illustration of >Langs'Communicative Interactional Model of the Mind< (A Symposium)
(1987)
Using the editing of psychoanalytic journals as a model, the conflicts experienced in setting standards involved in selection, separation, and differentiatedness are examined. Erich FROMM's analysis of the Apollonian and Dionysian traditions is cited, claiming that setting standards derives from a classical, intellectual posture, while failing to do so stems from a romantic orientation, in which the primary focus is compassion. It is argued that rigid standards without compassion result in isolating elitism; however, compassion without standards erodes quality, with consequent cynicism. Qualities of acceptability involve enlightenment, originality, scholarship, and literateness. Pitfalls for editors (and administrators of training programs) lie in their seduction by their needs for affiliation, desire for positive affect, and agreement with a writer's intentionality. The editor's task lies in confronting the anxiety of choice, his ability to tolerate disappointment and loss, and his willingness to use his power responsibly and judiciously. (References inadvertently omitted.)
Die Psychoanalyse
(1987)
Father-Daughter Incest
(1987)
Vorwort,
(1987)
Our work >Fromm’s Normative Humanism< — which, as a matter of fact, is divided in six topics: 1] Sacred Contemporaneity; 2) Ideologic Logos; 3) One more >ism< to rhyme with Reformism; 4) Fromm’s Marx; 5) The Frommian man; and 6) The Metaphysical Terrorism — has as its main aim the critical >break-up< of the theoretical conjectures which are the structure of Fromm’s work (and specially, his The Sane Society), whose analytical insufficiency, for us, is notorious, being determined somehere in the text as follows: – >E. Fromm confines himself to repeat the humanistic myth of the supernatural man, in which the opposition nature/culture assumes the shape of methodological directive of all his discourse.< – However, even if our analysis has as its focal point Fromm’s conceptualization of the being of man in the contemporaneous society, it is not restricted by this subject, because it generically fits in the whole problematic of humanism. – Really, in the last resort, the text reveals not only a criticism to Fromm’s theoretical posture, but also a criticism >Flumianism<, whose definition to us is the metaphisical determination of man edified by the occidental thought. So, won’t be somewhat problematic the title of our dissertation? Is it really possible to achieve a humanism without a normative imposition? Owing to this, by the by, it would be stimulating to read the >Brief über den ‘Humanismus’<, by Heidegger. Finally, it must be said — to eliminate possible misunderstandings — that being theoretically anti-humanistic isn’t properly to be against man. This seem to be clear, but as to many people it isn’t, we let here the warning.