The prior issue of Krisis (42:1) published Critical Naturalism: A Manifesto, with the aim to instigate a debate of the issues raised in this manifesto – the necessary re-thinking of the role (and the concept) of nature in critical theory in relation to questions of ecology, health, and inequality. Since Krisis considers itself a place for philosophical debates that take contemporary struggles as starting point, it issued an open call and solicited responses to the manifesto. This is one of the (...) sixteen selected responses, which augment, specify, or question the assumptions and arguments of the manifesto. (shrink)

In their debate here Jacques Bidet, Gérard Duménil and Urs Lindner confront their interpretations of Marx’s Capital, discussing the usages to be made of it today. Questions addressed here include the place of the philosophy, economics, and social sciences, in the critique of political economy. They examine the points where Marx’s analysis has been reformulated or completed, to what extent it has been rendered obsolete by historical evolutions, and in what respect it still retains its pertinence. These are the principal (...) questions addressed in the discussion. (shrink)

Sumit Sarkar, one of the leading Indian historians of his generation, participated in the Indian-British Subaltern Studies Collective that established new standards in the historiography of colonialism in the 1980’s. In this Interview, Déborah Cohen and Urs Lindner ask him about the achievements and oversights of the Subaltern Studies project, the prospects of global history, Marx’s eurocentrism and the problem of religion.

A collection of essays on philosophy and politics on the occasion of the 65th birthday of the radical philosopher Frieder Otto Wolf.

Rethinking the “Epistemological Break” : Reading Marx with and against Althusser The article critically reconsiders Althusser’s thesis that there is an “epistemological break” in the work of Marx taking place in 1845/46. It is argued that there can indeed be found an important break in Marx at this time, but that it cannot be conceptualised as an “epistemological” passage from ideology to science. Instead, this break should be considered as a purely philosophical one, as a transition from a young-Hegelian to (...) a realist social philosophy. The first part of the article offers a critical re-reading of the young Marx. The second part analyses the entanglements of social philosophy, the philosophy of history and social science haunting Marx after 1845/46. The intention is not to dismiss out of hand Althusser’s interpretation of Marx’s work. The aim is rather to clarify it from the perspective of current debates within the philosophy of science, ethics and social theory. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Zeitschrift für kritische Sozialtheorie und Philosophie Jahrgang: 1 Heft: 2 Seiten: 198-275.