Introduction to a Future Way of Thought: On Marx and Heidegger

by Kostas Axelos, Stuart Elden (Editor), Kenneth Mills (Translation)

"Technologists only change the world in various ways in generalized indifference; the point is to think the world and interpret the changes in its unfathomability, to perceive and experience the difference binding being to the nothing." Anticipating the age of planetary technology Kostas Axelos, a Greek-French philosopher, approaches the technological question in this book, first published in 1966, by connecting the thought of Karl Marx and Martin Heidegger. Marx famously declared that philosophers had only interpreted the world, but the point was to change it. Heidegger on his part stressed that our modern malaise was due to the forgetting of being, for which he thought technological questions were central. Following from his study of Marx as a thinker of technology, and foreseeing debates about globalization, Axelos recognizes that technology now determines the world. Providing an introduction to some of his major themes, including the play of the world, Axelos asks if planetary technology requires a new, a future way of thought which in itself is planetary.

Genres: Philosophy

180 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1966

About the author

Kostas Axelos (also spelled Costas Axelos; Greek: Κώστας Αξελός) was a Greek philosopher. He was born in Athens and attended high school at the French Institute and the German School of Athens. He enrolled in the law school in order to pursue studies in law and economics. With the onset of World War II Alexos became involved in politics. During the German and Italian occupation he participated in the Greek Resistance, and later on in the Greek Civil War, as an organiser and journalist affiliated with the Communist Party (1941–1945). He was later expelled from the Communist Party and condemned to death by the right-wing government. He was arrested and escaped.
At the end of 1945 Axelos moved to Paris, France, where he studied philosophy at the Sorbonne. From 1950 to 1957 he worked as a researcher in the philosophy branch of C.R.N.S, where he was writing his dissertations, and subsequently proceeded to work in Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes. From 1962 to 1973 he taught philosophy at the Sorbonne. His dissertation "Marx, penseur de la technique" (translated as "Alienation, Praxis and Techne in the Thought of Karl Marx") tried to provide an understanding of modern technology based on the thought of Heidegger and Marx and was very influential in the 1960s, alongside the philosophy of Herbert Marcuse.
Axelos was a collaborator on, columnist with, and subsequently editor of the magazine Arguments (1956–1962). He founded and, since 1960, has run the series Arguments in Edition de Minuit. He has published texts mostly in French, but also in Greek and German. His most important book is Le Jeu du Monde (Play of the World), where Axelos argues for a pre-ontological status of play.

Reviews

[Otto · Rating 4 out of 5]

Algumas leituras de Axelos ficam, evidentemente, datadas, mas vejo aqui possíveis pontes de serem construídas entre o pensamento planetário de Axelos e a globalização/totalidade de Milton Santos. Certas partes não foram tão acessíveis para a minha interpretação por ainda não ter uma base tão boa em Heidegger, mas tal pobreza já tem os seus dias contados.

Li a edição brasileira, de 1969, pela Tempo Brasileiro, mas que não está no catálogo do Goodreads.

[Joe]

Comment:

The texts collected here date from the mid-fifties to the early sixties. They are an early attempt to bring the thought of Marx and Heidegger into closer proximity. Amazing that this was being discussed back then! Of course, these essays are now sixty years olde!
I think that the aspect that has worn the most is our author's discussion of 'The Planetary' and 'Play'. It is the assumption of an ever-victorious universalism (after our awful particularist postmodernism) and the notion that the End of Work would lead to an era of 'play' and leisure (after the collapse of the middle class) that resounds through the third section of these texts that today sounds (at times) quite utopian, ...if not a little wacky. But when they were written, I am certain they were far more compelling.
That said, I think sections I and II regarding Marx/Heidegger remain very interesting and they definitely deserve a detailed review.