2007-10-24 03:30:08 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
I myself feel that this is a line which is tilted towards apathy more than it is to progress.
That's why I am against the position which it is.
2007-10-24 03:34:39 · update #1
As a working man, I would say everybody deserves the maximum possible, or they will endure pain before they die...
I do not see wisdom either in nihilism or most schools of thought which do not have a direct influence upon greneration of outcomes...
I am no fan of university professors which like to twiddle their thumbs whilst others suffer...
2007-10-24 03:38:52 · update #2
Whether or not you agree with his ideas, it is pretty much indisputable that they were - and arguably still are - influential. To ignore him and his work, then, is to leave a gaping hole in your understanding of history, society, economics, politics, and likely other fields as well. I cannot say I would wish such ignorance even on my enemies, and would say that the only person who deserve to have it is one who overtly cultivates such foolishness.
What's next? Ignore Aristotle? Ignore Hitler? Ignore Jesus? You don't have to like ANY of these people. But they ARE important.
2007-10-24 05:32:26 · answer #1 · answered by Doctor Why 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Karl Marx had put his imprint on Economic transformation at least in USSR and east European Countries. Today's boom in Chinese economy is primarily based on his theory with major modification suited to that Country. Economics is a dynamic subject it changes according to the needs of the time and Society. Hence we can not wish off Karl Marx so easily.
2007-10-24 03:56:04 · answer #2 · answered by Brahmanyan 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He deserves our attention as the cause of more suffering and death than of any person in history. When he said, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs," he diminished the value of the individual to nothing more than a means to an end--the means and end of people who believed they could make it happen, and in doing so gave permission for all the mass murders and destruction of great civilizations by dictators who knew the only way to make Marx's philosophy work was to to use force.
2007-10-24 15:33:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends. Are you a historian, a politician, or a socioanthropologist? If so, then Karl Marx does not deserve your attention, but you deserve an opportunity to study him.
Are you a clinical psychologist? Then Karl Marx does, indeed, deserve your attention. In fact, you could both have benefited greatly from devoting some attention to him, were he alive.
2007-10-24 04:48:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
On certain issues he does not, like economics. Other issues such as social and literary theory his is canonical. With regards to philosophy he does not belong to the analytic tradition. Additionally he statements are more realistic descriptions than they are normative prescriptions. He is a titan of thought and thus deserves our attention but he is not a great philosopher.
2007-10-24 03:39:08 · answer #5 · answered by spartanmike 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Fizzdude likes you! i think of that's honest. LOL think of my marvel while i become at point one and emailing to everyone in sight. I had to ask a question approximately that so others would be attentive to I wasn't ignoring them. i'm uncertain I see the element of constrained emails for the reason that they haven't any factors. So unfair!
2016-11-09 08:53:40 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sure he does (it's unfair)... and not exactly as the 'bad guy' (like many pplt see him for his ideology). the ideology was more of one aimed at creating a eutopia. but it's the actions of OTHER communist leaders (and some of their fatal blunders) that have lead to the failure of his ideology.
Besides, how can u say that someone doesn't deserve something? what yardstick do you use especially when it comes to something as subjective as this. so, its extreme to say that he (completely) doesn't deserve our attention.
2007-10-24 03:47:35 · answer #7 · answered by sadia1905 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it varies on who percieves the question... if the person is a social-historical aficionado then the answer would be "unfair', on the other hand, if the person is passive, lapdash, and never-conserned-to-social-issues, then it will be never his business...then it's fair enough for him to think that why should bother of such Marx thing. right???
2007-10-24 03:48:03 · answer #8 · answered by mai2 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He deserves our attention, if not for his ideas, for the influence his works exerted on a large part of the world for the best part of two centuries.
2007-10-24 03:36:05 · answer #9 · answered by simonetta 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Fair depends on what school of morality/ethics you are basing your question. There is not one single answer to that.
As a nihilist, for example, I would say there is no such thing as fair. Nobody 'deserves' anything
2007-10-24 03:34:30 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋