Somebody who understands idiot english

Killa_ken

Killa_ken

Killa_ken

Soldato
Joined
18 Jul 2006
Posts
5,704
Location
Geneva
Could somebody please tell me what exactly this idiot is going on about below? I dont understand why people have to write like pricks honestly.

This feudal system of land ownership had its counterpart in the towns in the shape of corporative property, the feudal organisation of trades. Here property consisted chiefly in the labour of each individual person. The necessity for association against the organised robber-nobility, the need for communal covered markets in an age when the industrialist was at the same time a merchant, the growing competition of the escaped serfs swarming into the rising towns, the feudal structure of the whole country: these combined to bring about the guilds. The gradually accumulated small capital of individual craftsmen and their stable numbers, as against the growing population, evolved the relation of journeyman and apprentice, which brought into being in the towns a hierarchy similar to that in the country.
Click to expand...
 
Killa_ken said:
that second one helped thanks.......we are supposed to be answering what marx means by the word. He is an idiot if you ask me. :mad:
Click to expand...
Basically Marx was saying that feudal lords and vassals are the stage of development which create a distinction between working class people and higher class people. In Feudalism the lord had the people on his land working for him, in an industrial society the "boss" has people working for him.
 
yoou want to be a real star and answer me these two questions so I can go and play poker instead of sitting here like a numpty on a saturday night?


8. What does Marx mean when he claims to begin from “real premises”? What does this have to do with his claim that “the first premise of all human history is, of course, the existence of living human individuals.” As opposed to what?

Marx writes that “man’s own deed becomes an alien power opposed to him, which enslaves him instead of being controlled by him.” (185) Explain this statement. What is the cause of alienated labor? Why is it a problem? What will the solution to the problem be and how does it solve the problem?

:D:D:D LOVE YOU LONG TIME
 
Quite honestly and truthfully a fail.

The grammar makes an unconfortable read but what that 'idiot' man talks about is pretty much well, true.
 
Killa_ken said:
I wish, my teacher would not be impressed :p
Click to expand...

Course they will, if they argue just tell them that you are challenging established academic norms for critiquing work. See if that doesn't get you top marks. ;)

As for your questions, Marx must have had quite a bit of an ego - to disclaim all other theories as not beginning from "real premises" (i.e. they are based falsely) makes for a poor argument - in essence saying, "well, you've all started from the wrong place and therefore I'm right so neh".

Alienated labour might be similar to what we'd call a disenfrachised workforce currently but I haven't read enough Marx to properly comment.
 
It's a well written paragrpah. If you cant understand it....well....good luck in yer studies. An english course might be a good idea?
 
Tenzen said:
It's a well written paragrpah. If you cant understand it....well....good luck in yer studies. An english course might be a good idea?
Click to expand...

What lesson did they teach you to put four full stops either side of "....well...." ?

:D :D :D

Nothing like a early morning Troll :p
 
No help from me Ken, but I thought you were studying something related to medicine, etc? It was a long time since I last talked to you though on MSN. :p

EDIT: May also require some help from you regarding uni in the US in a little while, if you don't mind of course. :)
 
semi-pro waster said:
Alienated labour might be similar to what we'd call a disenfrachised workforce currently but I haven't read enough Marx to properly comment.
Click to expand...

OK, so after much reading I have finally understood this concept and that marx is basically saying you end up in your own little world and become content with what you have living ignorant of what people in other classes have.

what I cant see is where Marx outlines the soloution to this problem? or is communism what he is saying is his answer? how does communism fix the problem? :(


Tenzen said:
It's a well written paragrpah. If you cant understand it....well....good luck in yer studies. An english course might be a good idea?
Click to expand...

sorry I never took fag studies.

G-MAN2004 said:
No help from me Ken, but I thought you were studying something related to medicine, etc? It was a long time since I last talked to you though on MSN. :p

EDIT: May also require some help from you regarding uni in the US in a little while, if you don't mind of course. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah Im doing medicine, I still need 3 more elective credits and thus had to take the BS subject that is philosophy :o

just holla at cha boi on the msn :cool:
 
Killa_ken said:
OK, so after much reading I have finally understood this concept and that marx is basically saying you end up in your own little world and become content with what you have living ignorant of what people in other classes have.
Click to expand...

So if you are giving an appropriate precis of Marx's thoughts then he objects to people being satisfied with what they have. What is slavery for one man can seem like almost boundless freedom for another, it depends on their starting point and what they wish from life.

Killa_ken said:
what I cant see is where Marx outlines the soloution to this problem? or is communism what he is saying is his answer? how does communism fix the problem? :(
Click to expand...

To misappropriate a Churchill quote on socialism "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries". Much the same for communism, you can argue about there never having been an entirely communist society (wouldn't have a government so all states thus far fail this simple test) trialled on a large scale so we don't have a true example of whether it would work - my personal feeling is that it is a nice idea to have everyone equal and classless but it is unlikely to ever work because people desire property, money, power etc. Unless we alter human nature then we are probably stuck as we are, capitalism is far from ideal either but like democracy it is the best we've got.

This is one of the best and worst things about philosophy it solves nothing but can give you a decent mental workout.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom