DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2017-1-87-96

Interrelation between phenomena of alienation,
division of labor and class inequality in K. Marx theory

Alampiev Oleg Anatol’evich
Ph.D. in Sociology, Associate Professor
of the Department of Economic Sociology

Belarus State Economic University,
26, Partizanskiy av., Minsk, 220070,
Republic of Belarus;
e-mail: alampijeu@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0003-2832-443X

The object of the research is Karl Marx’s works, the subject is interrelation between phenomena of alienation, division of labor and social inequality in K. Marx theory.

The aim of the article is to reveal phenomena of alienation, division of labor and social inequality in K. Marx theory for the understanding of contemporary social reality.

Author gives the interpretation of Marxist view on alienation phenomenon as a process related to the division of labor and social inequality phenomena in the Capitalist society, which based on the analysis of original sources. K. Marx’s view on reproduction mechanism of specific features of human thinking in Capitalism society in its connection with development of social and economic sphere has been analyzed. The article shows reproduction mechanisms of distinctive features of capitalist society social structure in the context of analyzing alienation phenomenon. There are also shown social and cultural consequences of alienation in the modern society.

In the context of Marxist view on social reality and Marxist heritage in general there explained the role and significance of anthropological aspect of the Marx’s theory. Moreover, Marxist theory heuristic potential for understanding social reality is shown.

Obtained results indicatethe possibility of K. Marx’s theoretical constructs using in the analysis of social processes development trends in the modern society. Results also may be useful for the search of reasons of social contradictions and the development of methods to resolve them.

Keywords: alienation, class inequality, social inequality, the division of labor, K. Marx, Marxism.

References

  1. Marks K. [Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844]. Marks K., Engels F. Sochineniya: v 50 t. [Marx K., Engels F. Works: in 50 vol.]. Moscow, Izdatelstvo politicheskoy literatury Publ., 1974, vol. 42, pp. 41–174. (In Russian).
  2. Lukács G. Istoriya i klassovoe soznanie: Issledovaniya po marksistskoy dialektike [History and Class Consciousness: Studies in Marxist Dialectics]. Moskow, Logos-Al’tera Publ., 2003, 416 p. (In Russian).
  3. Bourdieu P. [Social Space and Symbolic Power]. Bourdieu P. Sotsiologiya sotsial’nogo prostranstva [Bourdieu P. Sociology of Social Space]. Saint Petersburg, Aleteya Publ., 2007, pp. 64–86. (In Russian).
  4. Bourdieu P. [Reproduction strategies and modes of domination]. Bourdieu P. Sotsiologiya sotsial’nogo prostranstva [Bourdieu P. Sociology of Social Space]. Saint Petersburg, Aleteya Publ., 2007, pp. 97–120. (In Russian).
  5. Giddens A. Ustroenie obschestva: Ocherk teorii strukturatsii [The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration]. Moscow, Akademicheskiy prospekt Publ., 2005, 528 p. (In Russian).
  6. Fromm E. [Marx’s Concept of Man: selected chapters]. Marks K. Ekonomichesko-filosofskie rukopisi i drugie rannie filosofskie raboty [Marx K. Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 and and other early works]. Moscow, Akademicheskiy prospekt Publ., 2010, pp. 576–605. (In Russian).
  7. Marx K. [The Holy Family]. Marks K., Engels F. Sochineniya: v 50 t. [Marx K., Engels F. Works: in 50 vol.]. Moscow, Izdatelstvo politicheskoy literatury Publ., 1955. vol. 2, pp. 3–230. (In Russian).
  8. Baudrillard J. K kritike politicheskoy ekonomii znaka [For a Critique of the Political Economy of the Sign] Moscow, Biblion – Russkaya kniga Publ., 2004, 304 p. (In Russian).
  9. Marcuse H. Odnomerniy chelovek: Issledovanie ideologii razvitogo industrial’nogo obschestva [One-dimensional man: studies in the ideology of advanced industrial society]. Moscow, AST: AST MOSKVA Publ., 2009, 331 p. (In Russian).
  10. Lapina T. Transformatsiya otnosheniya k trudu [The transformation of attitude to work]. Vestnik Omskogo universiteta. Seriya: Ekonomika [Herald of Omsk university. Series: Economics]. 2005, no. 3, pp. 46–51. (In Russian).
  11. Magun V. [Range Change (modern Russian labor values and the Protestant ethic)]. Otechestvennye zapiski [Notes of the Fatherland]. 2003, no. 3, pp. 260–275. (In Russian).
  12. Marx K. Konspekt knigi Dzhemsa Millya «Osnovy politicheskoy ekonomii» [Comments on James Mill, Éléments D’économie Politique], Sochineniya. T. 42. [Works, Vol. 42]. Moscow, IIzdatelstvo politicheskoy literatury Publ., 1974, pp. 5–40. (In Russian).
  13. Marx K. [Outlines of the Critique of Political Economy]. Marks K., Engels F. Sochineniya: v 50 t. [Marx K., Engels F. Works: in 50 vol.]. Moscow, Izdatelstvo politicheskoy literatury Publ., 1968, vol. 46, part 1, 585 p. (In Russian).
  14. Marx K. Kapital: kritika politicheskoy ekonomii. [Capital: Critique of Political Economy]. Moscow Gospolitizdat Publ., 1949, vol. 1, 794 p. (In Russian).
  15. Horkheimer M. Zatmenie razuma: K kritike industrial’nogo razuma [Eclipse of the mind: Critique of Instrumental Reason]. Moscow, Kanon+ ROOI Reabilitatsiya Publ., 2011, 224 p. (In Russian).
  16. Wright E.O. [Varieties of Marxist Conceptions of Class Structure]. Skepsis [Skepsis]. Available at: http://scepsis.net/library/id_608.html (accessed 04.11.2016). (In Russian).
  17. Shkaratan O.I. Sotsiologiya neravenstva. Teoriya i realnost [Sociology of inequality. Theory and reality], Moskow, Izd. dom Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki Publ., 2012, 526 p. (In Russian).
  18. Milgram S. Podchinenie avtoritetu: nauchniy vzglyad na vlast’ i moral’ [Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View]. Moscow, Al’pina non-fikshn Publ., 2016, 282 p. (In Russian).

The date of the manuscript receipt 05.09.2016

Please cite this article in English as:

Alampiev O.A. Interrelation between phenomena of alienation, division of labor and class inequality in K. Marx theory // Perm University Herald. Series «Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology». 2017. Iss. 1. P.87–96.DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2017-1-87-96

Категория: Sociology.