Refine
Language
- English (9)
In >Can We Live Together?< Alain Touraine combines a consummate analysis of crucial social tensions in contemporary societies with a strong normative appeal for a new emancipatory >Subject< capable of overcoming the twin threats of atomisation or authoritarianism. He calls for a move from >politics to ethics< and then from ethics back to politics to enable the new Subject to make a reality out of the goals of democracy and solidarity. However, he has little to say about the nature of such an ethics. This article argues that this lacuna could usefully be filled by adopting a form of radical humanism found in the work of Erich Fromm. It defies convention in the social sciences by operating from an explicit view of the >is< and the >ought< of common human nature, specifying reason, love and productive work as the qualities to be realised if we are to move closer to human solidarity. Although there remain significant philosophical and political differences between the two positions, particularly on the role to be played by >the nation<, their juxtaposition opens new lines of inquiry in the field of cosmopolitan ethics.
During his years as a member of the Frankfurt School, Erich Fromm developed a strong interest in the idea that there were distinctive male and female character orientations. Drawing on the positive evaluation of matriarchy made in the nineteenth century by the Swiss anthropologist J. J. Bachofen, Fromm argued that a >matricentric< psychic structure was more conducive to socialism than the patricentric structure which had predominated in capitalism. His interest in maternalism and his opposition to patriarchy played an important part in his rejection of Freud's theory of drives and in the development of a humanistic ethics in which love plays a central part. The idea of a gendered humanism is central to Fromm's social thought, although there is a danger that the over‐emphasis of sex‐based character differences unintentionally re‐opens the danger of the kind of sexual stereotyping which he resolutely opposed.
Examines the relationship between the humanistic psychological ethics of Erich Fromm & his commitment to socialist politics. The concept of >social character<, first formulated in >The Fear of Freedom< (1997, 1941), which provided the analytical framework for much of his subsequent work, is considered. Also discussed is his attempt to formulate a humanistic ethics grounded in a theory of human essence in >Man for Himself< (1997, 1947). Fromm's attempts to develop an ethical socialist politics at three levels – everyday life, democratic institutions, & the emerging >One World< – are introduced. It is argued that Fromm endorses a variety of strategies from old & new social movements that challenge the value structures of modern capitalist society. In conclusion, the claim is pressed that Fromm's social thought, developed on the foundations of his humanistic ethics, constitutes a significant contribution to emancipatory theory. Adapted from the source document.
>Solidarity< conjures up positive images of the strength of togetherness and community, but in practice it is experienced by groups when confronted by a real or perceived threat from other groups. The ideal of a universal human solidarity appears tenuous and flimsy. However, Richard Rorty and Axel Honneth have attempted, in different ways, to bring this ideal under philosophical consideration. Their treatment of human solidarity is flawed by their a priori rejection of the normative idea of a common human nature. Such an idea, termed ‘radical humanism’, is reconstructed from the work of Erich Fromm, and one of its chief implications – the rejection of liberal nationalism – is proposed as part of a radical challenge to contemporary social and political theory.
Introduction
(2001)