Gramsci and idealism
Posted: Sun Mar 28, 2021 2:17 am
Much of the writings of Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Gramsci) were concerned with political, social and cultural issues. However, he also wrote a lot on philosophy, including its connections with idealism. So, I am starting this thread to explore the relations between Gramsci’s philosophy, which he called the ‘philosophy of praxis’, and metaphysical idealism.
In particular, the thread will focus on unpacking and trying to make sense of the following statement of Gramsci, which is written in the context of the social transition from a conflict-ridden ‘realm of necessity’ to a realm of freedom:
‘Absolute idealism, or at least certain aspects of it, would be a philosophical utopia in the realm of necessity but could become "truth" after the transition from one realm to the other.’ (PN vol. 2, 188 - references in brackets are to page numbers in Gramsci’s Prison Notebooks)
By way of background, Gramsci was heavily influenced by the Italian idealist philosopher, historian and politician Benedetto Croce (1866-1952) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benedetto_Croce). Gramsci was highly critical of Croce in some respects, but also built on and incorporated many of Croce’s insights. His philosophy of praxis has been referred to as ‘Crocean Marxism’.
Here are some more statements of Gramsci which give a bit of the flavor of his philosophy of praxis, and its relation to idealism:
‘The starting-point of critical elaboration in consciousness is “knowing thyself” as a product of the historical process to date which has deposited in you an infinity of traces, without leaving an inventory.’ (SPN 324)
‘Philosophy cannot be separated from the history of philosophy, nor can culture from the history of culture.’ (SPN 324)
‘What is philosophy? Is it a purely receptive, or at the very most, ordering actvity? Or is it an absolutely creative activity?... But what does creative mean? Should it mean that the external world is created by thought? But what thought and whose?... To escape simultaneously from solipsism and from mechanistic conceptions implicit in the concept of thought as a receptive and ordering activity, it is necessary to put the question in an “historicist” fashion.’ (SPN 345)
‘Creative, therefore, should be understood as … thought which modifies the way of feeling of the many and consequently reality itself, which cannot be thought without this many.’ (SPN 346)
‘If it is true that every philosophy is the expression of a society, it should react back on that society and produce certain effects, both positive and negative. The extent to which it reacts back is the measure of its historical importance..’ (SPN 346)
‘If the philosophy of praxis affirms theoretically that every “truth” believed to be eternal and absolute has had practical origins and has represented a “provisional” value (historicity of every conception of the world and life), it is still very difficult to make people grasp “practically” that such an interpretation is also valid for the philosophy of praxis itself..” (SPN 406)
‘As a result even the philosophy of praxis tends to become an ideology in the worst sense of the world... This is particularly true when … it is confused with vulgar materialism, with its metaphysics of “matter” which is necessarily eternal and absolute.’ (SPN 407)
‘According to the theory of praxis it is evident that is it not atomic theory that explains human history but the other way about..’ (SPN 468).
I will update this thread with more posts on an irregular basis. Anyone is welcome to make comments, as I will make a table of contents if the thread gets unwieldy.
In particular, the thread will focus on unpacking and trying to make sense of the following statement of Gramsci, which is written in the context of the social transition from a conflict-ridden ‘realm of necessity’ to a realm of freedom:
‘Absolute idealism, or at least certain aspects of it, would be a philosophical utopia in the realm of necessity but could become "truth" after the transition from one realm to the other.’ (PN vol. 2, 188 - references in brackets are to page numbers in Gramsci’s Prison Notebooks)
By way of background, Gramsci was heavily influenced by the Italian idealist philosopher, historian and politician Benedetto Croce (1866-1952) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benedetto_Croce). Gramsci was highly critical of Croce in some respects, but also built on and incorporated many of Croce’s insights. His philosophy of praxis has been referred to as ‘Crocean Marxism’.
Here are some more statements of Gramsci which give a bit of the flavor of his philosophy of praxis, and its relation to idealism:
‘The starting-point of critical elaboration in consciousness is “knowing thyself” as a product of the historical process to date which has deposited in you an infinity of traces, without leaving an inventory.’ (SPN 324)
‘Philosophy cannot be separated from the history of philosophy, nor can culture from the history of culture.’ (SPN 324)
‘What is philosophy? Is it a purely receptive, or at the very most, ordering actvity? Or is it an absolutely creative activity?... But what does creative mean? Should it mean that the external world is created by thought? But what thought and whose?... To escape simultaneously from solipsism and from mechanistic conceptions implicit in the concept of thought as a receptive and ordering activity, it is necessary to put the question in an “historicist” fashion.’ (SPN 345)
‘Creative, therefore, should be understood as … thought which modifies the way of feeling of the many and consequently reality itself, which cannot be thought without this many.’ (SPN 346)
‘If it is true that every philosophy is the expression of a society, it should react back on that society and produce certain effects, both positive and negative. The extent to which it reacts back is the measure of its historical importance..’ (SPN 346)
‘If the philosophy of praxis affirms theoretically that every “truth” believed to be eternal and absolute has had practical origins and has represented a “provisional” value (historicity of every conception of the world and life), it is still very difficult to make people grasp “practically” that such an interpretation is also valid for the philosophy of praxis itself..” (SPN 406)
‘As a result even the philosophy of praxis tends to become an ideology in the worst sense of the world... This is particularly true when … it is confused with vulgar materialism, with its metaphysics of “matter” which is necessarily eternal and absolute.’ (SPN 407)
‘According to the theory of praxis it is evident that is it not atomic theory that explains human history but the other way about..’ (SPN 468).
I will update this thread with more posts on an irregular basis. Anyone is welcome to make comments, as I will make a table of contents if the thread gets unwieldy.