This study discusses the limits of Marx’s reinterpretation of Hegel’s conception of dialectics as a self-mediation of the fundamental by way of historical reality: we will show Marx’s disessentialisation of the (already quite monistic) Hegelian absolute spirit, and the consequences of Marx’s conception of consciousness as of a conscious being for the concept of culture, reduced that is to interest-conditioned, “ideological” praxis and its self-reflection. The study thus subjects to criticism the reduction of objectivi¬ty to totality in György Lukács, the founder of modern western Marxism; it points to the residuum (in no way objectively unlicensed) of self-positing subjecti¬vism in his “class-consciousness”; and it compares this immanentist conception with, on the one hand, the utopian conception of Ernst Bloch, foreshadowing Derrida’s stress on the auto criti¬cism of Marxism as a philosophy of the historicity of categories (as Lukács himself theo¬retically understood it!), and, on the other hand, with the dialectical non identity of the possible of Theodor W. Adorno. By reflecting on Marx’s concept of (historical) consciousness (of conscious Being) through critical insight into its most (in our view) signi¬ficant interpretations of the 20th century, the study attempts to capture the limi¬ts of the monistically-conceived dialectic for democratic social pra¬xis, preserving the “principle of hope” in the openness of the unsubsumable individual.
Autor přijímá implicitní výzvu k dialogu nad knihou I. Markové nazvané Dialogičnost a sociální reprezentace. Všímá si toho, jak Marková rozebrala dvě situace – z Joyceova Odyssea a Havlovy Moci bezmocných. V jejím podání dominuje někdy v sociálním životě lidí jednání (jakožto znak) nad slovem, které o funkci znaku přichází. Oproti tvrzení o osudových dopadech jednání občanů na jejich identitu v minulém režimu autor formuluje myšlenku, že lidé nemuseli přicházet o autentičnost, i když nemluvili pravdu či byli „odpojeni“ od slov jakožto znaků. Polemizuje i s myšlenkou o nekomunikativnosti jazyka. Oproti teorii sociálních reprezentací se odvolává na analýzu diskurzu. V diskuzi pak nabízí jiné výklady „chování zelináře“.
This extensive study by E. Schadel is inspired by the pansophy of J. A. Comenius. The first of its three principal parts elucidates Comenius’ idea of a pansophical reform and his project of a universal reform of human affairs. The main topic of the second part is dialogue – its conditions and potentials. In this connection some further problems are discussed: the I –You relation as the medium for the elucidation of problematized things, the turn from instrumental reason to communicative reason, the phases of an integral dialogue, the onto-analogical foundations of the dialogue, the role of analogy as a combining „middle“ between an equivocal pluralism and an univocal monism, Trinity as process and „ultimate foundation“ of analogical thinking and dialogical speaking, etc. The final part pursues the idea of the divine dialogue as a paradigm for the inwardness of the human mind and for an institutional world reform. Comenius’ conception of a reconciliation of mankind in the fields of politics, science and religion is also examined.