The Review Of Manuscripts Of 1844 Based On MEGA2

Economic & Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844(Manuscripts of 1844), an early work totally different from Marx’s later ones, is the most controversial text in the study of Marx’s Thoughts Development ever since its publication. Upon this text, abundant debates in regard to the development track of young Marx’s thoughts were held, and consensuses to some extent were reached. Now it is commonly known that two important "integral transition of Gestalt Psychology" took place during the youth of Marx, which led to the transformation of his primary Idealism to final Historical Materialism. Along with the transformation of Marx’s theory, his political stand changed.In the past, we tended to consider that during 1843 and 1844, Marx criticized and reconstructed Hegelian philosophy, and came to the "first transformation" to "General Materialism" or "Philosophical Materialism". However, simply adding determiners to Materialism cannot accurately explain transformations of Marx’thoughts. Existing studies on Economic & Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 do not pay sufficient attention to the first part of First Manuscript, in which Marx continued his criticism in Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right. Such criticism was done at the accomplishment of Marxism Rent Theory. Marx described the existence of real Civil Society as "Alienation of Labor". Civil Society, the entry point for Marx when expounding his conception of history, was reflected as the initiative of industry upon real estate objectively, while subjectively, it created the main body which Marx paid attention to:human inner necessity, i.e.labor.In the past, we believed that as he changed his thought to "General Materialism", young Marx shifted his political stand to "General Communism". But frankly speaking, "General Communism" is a concept that is more ambiguous than "General Materialism". In the Third Manuscript Marx focused more on criticizing Communism, and his real conception for future society was Socialism. Society herein refers to human beings. Back to Marx’s era, to a large extent he composed Economic & Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 in order to acquire theoretical support for human beings. Back to Marx’s era, to a large extent he composed Economic & Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 in order to acquire theoretical support for European labor movement. However, in the process of composition, Marx’s transformation to Communism wasn’t a change of political stand that matched to his diversion of philosophical stance. Instead, it was a clear demonstration of political theory relating to young Marx’s Humanism Philosophy, or, Humanism View of History. Which is noteworthy, in the Third Manuscript Marx was caught in conflicts of his own logics. On the one hand, his criticism on Communism took direct root in the identification on the mapping relation between material production forms and ’Communist monster’in Die Bewegung der Production by Wilhelm Schulz. On the other hand, we could tell that young Marx tried continuously to explore his own alienation of logic with the help of scientific logic.In accordance with words in Preface, critique of Hegelian Dialectics was the last chapter of Economic & Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844, and the versions like MEGA1 we can find now do arrange in this way. However, when we refer to the original position of Marx, we can find that this is an over-interpretation by Ryazanov. Firstly, at the original logic of Marx, critique of Hegelian Dialectics was written as Gist VI of discussion on Communism, while the objective of Marx’s theory then was the "Self-awareness" philosophy by Bruno Bauer. Secondly, [Critique of the Hegelian Dialectic and Philosophy as a Whole] wasn’t finished yet. From targeting criticism to criticism on "nature", Marx merely finished them in methods of making extracts. Thirdly, [Critique of the Hegelian Dialectic and Philosophy as a Whole] wasn’t integral. Marx kept changing his attitude towards Hegelian Dialectics in the passage from criticizing Bauer at the standpoint of Feuerbach to discovering the "greatness" of Hegelian. In the Preface that was written at last, Marx himself discovered the obstacles of explanation and difficulties for understanding.All problems above show that in Economic & Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 Marx only posed questions while leaving them unsettled. His composition and logic gradually progressed as he deepened his understanding on private property. Therefore, advancing the studies of the development of Marxist Philosophy, we shall keep reviewing the above-mentioned questions. In this process, the location of theory of Economic & Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844 shall be more refined and scientized, and thereby a new image of young Marx shall be rebuilt.