Was Marx a deontologist, utilitarian or virtue ethicist? What was his meta-ethical position? Did he develop and advance a particular moral system?
Over the past few days I’ve seen this being discussed on the online left because some content creators have a disagreement over it, and I thought it would be useful to clarify some points.
First, Marx did not have a clearly distinguishable ethics that can be categorized in the framework as it is now taught in philosophy 101 classes. He wrote in a period when this kind of classification did not yet exist, and ethics was merely a sub-discipline of philosophy proper, which in turn encompassed much more than it does today. That is why the statement “Marx was a philosopher” is meaningless: yes, he was, but that says nothing about his position on ethics as we know it today. In fact, the “mature” Marx is often regarded as having developed an anti-philosophy, in that he believed that “positive science”, the investigation of political economy and what we today call sociology ought to be at the foundation of one’s understanding of the world, while subsuming ethics, philosophy, religion, law and other “superstructural” factors to the realm of ideology.
How he saw the relationship between this ideological superstructure and the material/economic/social basis of it is a matter of debate (I happen to think it was more nuanced and sophisticated than is often claimed by his detractors), but it is clear that to him the material base defines and shapes the nature of ideology, and so is primary.
That is why already in The German Ideology of 1846 he announces his departure from philosophy and embrace of political economy: you cannot understand anything by simply contemplating abstractions of ethics, morality, law, reason, the family, culture, and other aspects of ideology focused on by idealist Young Hegelians and Utopian Socialists. Rather, you have to go to their root, which is society, and more specifically the material foundation that makes up society. The famed eleventh thesis on Feuerbach from the same piece captures Marx’s position: “The philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways. The point, however, is to change it.” And this change does not come about by proposing and contemplating some moral system, but by analyzing the foundation and movement of social classes (primarily through political economy), and joining their struggle. The actual material change brought about through these means in turn changes the ideological superstructure—including morality—of society, but how exactly it does so cannot be predicted in advance.
But that does not mean there are no moral statements at all in Marx’s writings, even though there are also explicit rejections of adhering to an overall moral system. This piece by Michael Rosen provides a thorough overview of this, and explains how it relates to Marx’s materialist anti-philosophy position as outlined. I also recommend Balibar’s The Philosophy of Marx, a great introduction that explains in a bit more detail Marx’s “revolution against philosophy”.
I’ll conclude with this: could you theoretically develop a Marxist/socialist account of ethics as deontology, utilitarian or virtue ethics? Yes, of course, and if you look around you will find such attempts, some more successful and persuasive than others (Kamenka’s work in particular is quite interesting). But that was not Marx’s concern, and in fact he would reject it as a frivolous waste of time. Instead, he would argue sociology, economics and history are where one ought to look to properly understand social reality and effect change within it.
Than you for your clarity on this issue and for the references you provided.
I thought this might be the best way to get this info to you...
There is a huge push in corporate culture around this idea of ESG (i.e. sustainable investments) and I can't help but notice how sinister it is.
take a look at this article from the CEO of Blackrock:
https://www.esgtoday.com/larry-fink-ceo-letter-stakeholder-capitalism-is-capitalism/
Would love to get your analysis on stuff like this. I know the basic issues with trying to address problems like inequality and climate change with "more capitalism" but I am immersed in this world and literally no one even understands that the entire premise is wrong and driving us off a cliff even faster. It is being completely hijacked by the most cynical capitalists possible and liberals are applauding it because they see a headline that makes them feel good.