dc.contributor.author |
Brassier, Ray |
dc.date.accessioned |
2022-07-05T07:46:11Z |
dc.date.available |
2022-07-05T07:46:11Z |
dc.date.issued |
2020 |
dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/10938/23488 |
dc.description.abstract |
This essay argues that Marx’s distinction between concrete-in-thought
and concrete-in-reality does not invoke a conceptual or empirical difference but
a difference-in-act. This difference is verified in social practice rather than in
thought. The actuality of practice verifies that of thought without there being a
metaphysical correspondence between them. While thought can adequately represent
the structure of practice, there is no similarity or resemblance between the
structure of thought (what is concrete-in-thought) and that of practice (concretein-
reality).What is concrete-in-reality is a practical act whose nature does not reveal
itself either to those executing it or to the theoretical consciousness that
takes the consciousness of practitioners as its starting point. |
dc.language.iso |
en |
dc.publisher |
De Gruyter |
dc.subject |
Marx, materialism, critique, abstraction, concrete-in-thought, practice, exchange |
dc.title |
Concrete-in-Thought, Concrete-in-Act: Marx, Materialism, and the Exchange Abstraction |
dc.type |
Book chapter |