Talk:Karl Marx: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Martin Baldwin-Edwards
mNo edit summary
imported>Larry Sanger
No edit summary
Line 2: Line 2:
|                abc = Marx, Karl
|                abc = Marx, Karl
|                cat1 = Philosophy
|                cat1 = Philosophy
|                cat2 = History
|                cat2 = Economics
|                cat3 = Politics
|                cat3 = Politics
|          cat_check = n
|          cat_check = n
Line 14: Line 14:


Larry--let's your experts handle this one please. Let the philosphers contribute but so far they have not made a contribution here.  As fir the economists, he's a minor figure as the article explains. [[User:Richard Jensen|Richard Jensen]] 13:44, 20 October 2007 (CDT)
Larry--let's your experts handle this one please. Let the philosphers contribute but so far they have not made a contribution here.  As fir the economists, he's a minor figure as the article explains. [[User:Richard Jensen|Richard Jensen]] 13:44, 20 October 2007 (CDT)
I don't believe we have anyone here who is an expert about Marx.  If you can find one, Richard, perhaps we should consult him or her. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 15:04, 20 October 2007 (CDT)


::This is a tough call. In the narrow social sciences, Marx's contribution is I think in the order Politics, Sociology, Economics. History is clearly a major component -- not only because of his historical importance, but also because of the role of history in his own writings. Arguably, his account of the transition from feudalism to capitalism was the best thing he wrote. And, yes, he also has a role in philosophy. How to prioritise? I have no idea. --[[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 13:48, 20 October 2007 (CDT)
::This is a tough call. In the narrow social sciences, Marx's contribution is I think in the order Politics, Sociology, Economics. History is clearly a major component -- not only because of his historical importance, but also because of the role of history in his own writings. Arguably, his account of the transition from feudalism to capitalism was the best thing he wrote. And, yes, he also has a role in philosophy. How to prioritise? I have no idea. --[[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 13:48, 20 October 2007 (CDT)
Line 73: Line 75:
#Theory and Society > Vol. 22, No. 3 (Jun
#Theory and Society > Vol. 22, No. 3 (Jun
# [[User:Richard Jensen|Richard Jensen]] 14:34, 20 October 2007 (CDT)
# [[User:Richard Jensen|Richard Jensen]] 14:34, 20 October 2007 (CDT)
That proves little.  Try searching for "Marx OR Marxian OR Marxist".  Philosophers, in discussing Marx's philosophy, might not use the phrase "Karl Marx" so much in titles, of course.  Articles in the history of philosophy rarely use the full name of a thinker.  Another reference point would be which departments offer courses in which Marx is a major figure.
''Capital'' is, of course, as much a treatise of economics as anything, and it is the main source of his reputation as a theoretician.  How history is included and economics is not is beyond me.  Removing history again, on these rather obvious grounds. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 15:04, 20 October 2007 (CDT)

Revision as of 15:04, 20 October 2007


Article Checklist for "Karl Marx"
Workgroup category or categories Philosophy Workgroup, Economics Workgroup, Politics Workgroup [Categories OK]
Article status Developing article: beyond a stub, but incomplete
Underlinked article? No
Basic cleanup done? Yes
Checklist last edited by Larry Sanger 13:29, 20 October 2007 (CDT); Eddie Ortiz Nieves 10:59, 20 October 2007 (CDT)

To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist.





Richard, sorry, but Marx is obviously a philosopher first and foremost, and an economist. Those are the subjects that he wrote about and is famous for. He also really belongs in politics because of his foremost position as the political theoretician of the left. He had a great impact on history, obviously, but via his impact on philosophy, economics, and politics. The leading experts about Marx are not historians, but philosophers, economists, and political theorists. --Larry Sanger 13:29, 20 October 2007 (CDT)

Larry--let's your experts handle this one please. Let the philosphers contribute but so far they have not made a contribution here. As fir the economists, he's a minor figure as the article explains. Richard Jensen 13:44, 20 October 2007 (CDT)

I don't believe we have anyone here who is an expert about Marx. If you can find one, Richard, perhaps we should consult him or her. --Larry Sanger 15:04, 20 October 2007 (CDT)

This is a tough call. In the narrow social sciences, Marx's contribution is I think in the order Politics, Sociology, Economics. History is clearly a major component -- not only because of his historical importance, but also because of the role of history in his own writings. Arguably, his account of the transition from feudalism to capitalism was the best thing he wrote. And, yes, he also has a role in philosophy. How to prioritise? I have no idea. --Martin Baldwin-Edwards 13:48, 20 October 2007 (CDT)
History comes in because he had an enormous influence on historiography. Economics on the other hand --he had little influence there. ("a minor ricardian" as Samuleson says.) In 2007 among active scholars I would guess he is best represented in literature departments! The problem is that the coding system allows only three categories. The solution is to chnage a line or two of code and make that 5 categories. Richard Jensen 14:19, 20 October 2007 (CDT)
I concur with Samuelson on that.--Martin Baldwin-Edwards 14:52, 20 October 2007 (CDT)

who studies Marx?

Which disciplines pay most attention to Marx? I looked at the most recent 50 articles (including book reviews) in JSTOR with "Karl Marx: in the title. Here's the list of journals. I think politics and history clearly predominate, with Sociology 3rd and philosophy training behind.

  1. American Ethnologist > Vol. 12, No. 1 (F
  2. American Ethnologist > Vol. 14, No. 4 (N
  3. American Journal of Political Science >
  4. Assemblage > No. 41 (Apr., 2000), p. 21
  5. Canadian Journal of Political Science /
  6. Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers
  7. Comparative Studies in Society and History >
  8. Contemporary Sociology > Vol. 13, No. 6
  9. Contemporary Sociology > Vol. 13, No. 6
  10. Critical Inquiry > Vol. 28, No. 2 (Winte
  11. Europe-Asia Studies > Vol. 49, No. 8 (De
  12. German Studies Review > Vol. 12, No. 2 (
  13. International Political Science Review /
  14. Journal of Interdisciplinary History > V
  15. Latin American Perspectives > Vol. 27, N
  16. Man > New Series, Vol. 20, No. 1 (Mar.,
  17. MELUS > Vol. 28, No. 2, Haunted by History (S
  18. Modern Judaism > Vol. 4, No. 3 (Oct., 19
  19. New German Critique > No. 82,
  20. Noûs > Vol. 22, No. 3 (Sep., 1988), pp.
  21. Perspectives on Politics > Vol. 1, No. 1
  22. Philosophy > Vol. 63, No. 246 (Oct., 198
  23. Political Psychology > Vol. 5, No. 3 (Se
  24. Political Theory > Vol. 12, No. 4 (Nov.,
  25. Political Theory > Vol. 28, No. 4 (Aug.,
  26. Polity > Vol. 22, No. 2 (Winter, 1989),
  27. Reviews in American History > Vol. 22, N
  28. Shakespeare Quarterly > Vol. 43, No. 3 (
  29. Slavic Review > Vol. 43, No. 4 (Winter,
  30. Social Scientist > Vol. 12, No. 9 (Sep.,
  31. Social Studies of Science > Vol. 20, No.
  32. Sociological Analysis > Vol. 46, No. 2 (
  33. Soviet Studies > Vol. 37, No. 1 (Jan., 1
  34. Teaching German > Vol. 19, No. 2 (Autumn
  35. Technology and Culture > Vol. 29, No. 2
  36. The American Historical Review > Vol. 95
  37. The American Historical Review > Vol. 94
  38. The American Historical Review > Vol. 92
  39. The American Historical Review > Vol. 90
  40. The American Journal of Sociology > Vol.
  41. The Economic Journal > Vol. 103, No. 416
  42. The English Historical Review > Vol. 107
  43. The History Teacher > Vol. 29, No. 3 (Ma
  44. The Journal of Modern History > Vol. 69,
  45. The Journal of Modern History > Vol. 62,
  46. The Journal of Modern History > Vol. 62,
  47. The Journal of Politics > Vol. 48, No. 2
  48. The Journal of Religion > Vol. 66, No. 2
  49. Theatre Journal > Vol. 42, No. 3, Women
  50. Theory and Society > Vol. 22, No. 3 (Jun
  51. Richard Jensen 14:34, 20 October 2007 (CDT)

That proves little. Try searching for "Marx OR Marxian OR Marxist". Philosophers, in discussing Marx's philosophy, might not use the phrase "Karl Marx" so much in titles, of course. Articles in the history of philosophy rarely use the full name of a thinker. Another reference point would be which departments offer courses in which Marx is a major figure.

Capital is, of course, as much a treatise of economics as anything, and it is the main source of his reputation as a theoretician. How history is included and economics is not is beyond me. Removing history again, on these rather obvious grounds. --Larry Sanger 15:04, 20 October 2007 (CDT)