The Critique of Science:

Historical, Materialist and Dialectical

Studies on the Relation of the Modern
Science of Nature to the Bourgeoisie and
Capital
Will Barnes
Institute
for the Critical Study of Society of Capital
u!lication
The Critique of Science:
Historical, Materialist and Dialectical Studies on the Relation of the Modern Science of Nature
to the Bourgeoisie and Capital
Will Barnes

Institute for the Critical Study of Societies of Capital
St. Paul, 2011
Revised and Edited y
!ic"i Barnes
201#
The revisions that appear in this text ere underta!en at "ill#s request $ade da%s &efore his
death, '( )e&ruar% '(*'+
This revisal includes the folloing: The )irst ,nterlude no incorporates an extended
discussion of the for$al do$ination of capital over la&or at its centuries-old origins, a
theoreticall% $ediated historical anal%sis fro$ hich "ill.s historicall% evidenced, hence
genuinel% concrete theori/ation of for$al do$ination rises+ 0This discussion is &ased directl%
on the posthu$ous or!, Revolutionar% 1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch of Capital#s )or$al
Do$ination over 3a&or in 4roduction+5 The )ifth Stud% has &een re$oved, and the 4ostscript
has undergone a length% alteration hich integrates the anal%ses of capital and technolog%
that appeared in the )ifth Stud%+
The incorporation of $aterials developed in Revolutionar% 1rigins co$pelled "ill to rethin!
his entire perspective on the origins of capitalis$ as it first appeared in The Critique of
Science+ ,n particular, it &rought to his attention a serious shortco$ing 6 a failure to pa%
adequate attention to the crucial di$ension of propert% - in the conception of a tri&utar%
for$ation operate in the latter or!+ ,n the revision, this has &een re$edied+
7ll "ill#s or! exhi&its a central concern ith the pro&le$ of freedo$+ ,n this text, hu$an
freedo$ is resolved, and ith it the possi&ilit% of averting the orst outco$es cli$ate change
can generate, in the revolutionar% transcendence of capital on the &asis of a generali/ation of
councils+ This, though, is $erel% posited as possi&le and, o&viousl%, desira&le+
, have atte$pted to correct the or!s that appear for spellings+ , $ust ad$it that , a$ not
particularl% cut out for editing+ So if an% $isspellings or errors in gra$$ar or s%ntax have
escaped $e, , apologi/e in advance+
$avin% finished his lecture on the for&ation of the %ala'y, solar syste& and planets, Bertrand
Russell as"ed his audience if there (ere any )uestions. *n elderly (o&an raised her hand
and started to spea"+ ,-ou "no(, youn% &an, that none of that.s true./ Pausin%, she resu&ed,
,0he Earth, as you "no( or ou%ht to, rests on the ac" of a turtle./
Russell (as ta"en aac" y her re&ar"s, ut recoverin% )uic"ly, he replied, ,*nd, &ada&,
1ust (hat does the turtle rest on2/
3ot to e deterred, she responded, ,-ou thin" you.re s&art, don.t you./ S&ilin%, she
triu&phantly concluded, ,0here are turtles all the (ay do(n./
1
1
We tell this story a little differently than, a&on% others, Stephen $a("in%s 47 Brief Histor% of Ti$e5. 6ore to the
point, here this story has a far different &eanin% and i&port (hich (e directly counterpose to that intended y
$a("in%s. See the Preli&inary Re&ar"s, i&&ediately elo(.
Contents
Preliminary Remarks
Introduction
The Modern Science of Nature 42001, 3ov 20075
First Study
Science at its 1rigins
The 4ro&le$ of Motion: 8alileo and 7ristotle 48un9*u% 20105
First Interlude 43ov9:ec 2007, 6ar9*pr 20105
Retrospect and Anticipation 46ay9*pr 20105
Second Study
Ne Departures in Science: The Sciences of 3ife 4Sept 2007, :ec 20079;e 20105
Third Study (Short Study)
Ne Departures in Science: The Modern Science of Nature Reneed+ Three S!etches 42001,
3ov 20075
Second Interlude 46ar9*pr 2010, *u% 20105
Fourth Study
The Critique of Scientific Reason 4*pr98un 20105
Conclusion 48un 20105
Postscript
Summary and Prospects
3est our Hopes and 7spirations Beco$e an 2ndless Night$are 46ay, :ece&er 20105
Analytic Table o Contents
reli"inary Re"ar#s
0his te't concerns 1ust one, socially deter&ined for& of "no(led%e in the &illennial old history
of hu&anity, ut a for& that, as it rises fro& daily life in order to provide intentional direction to
that life, thin"s itself< that is, its (holly uncritical conceptual structure holds out no option for
self9reflection on underlyin% assu&ptions, (hile its earers confusedly thin" it< detached
fro& conte't, universal and ,o1ective,/ the o&niscience of a %od privy to an asolute truth, an
unconditioned speech aout nature valid at all ti&es and places... 0he relativi=ation (e intend
is the sense of the epi%ra& that prefaces this (or"... 0his is science, the &odern science of
nature, y (hich (e &ean a social and historical for& of "no(led%e, ori%inally %enerated y a
class 4the our%eoisie5 actin% in a sin%le and sin%ular epoch of history, a history that itself
stretches fro& the ori%ins of a%riculture and stratified societies do(n to the present.
In the follo(in%, (e intend to study only those &o&ents in the history of science< e%innin%
(ith its ori%ins that are i&&ediately and directly related to the develop&ent of capitalis&< at
(hich the o&fuscator% and self-9ustificator% veils $as!ing its relation to capital drop+
Beyond a %eneral state&ent of the relation of science to the our%eoisie deter&ined y the
pro1ect of nature do&ination 4(hich in and of itself is illu&inatin%5, (hat (e intend is to
de&onstrate that the $ost i$portant ne departures in science 4e.%., :ar(inian evolutionary
theory5, even the $ost radical ones 4e.%., )uantu& &echanics5, re&ain %overned y the
ori%inal class teleolo%y of the our%eoisie even if at the &o&ent of their elaorations they
e&odied only the i&peratives of capital. We shall tentatively specify the for&er in ter&s of a
social intentionality and the pro1ect that infor&s it, (hich, as (e said, is nature do$ination<
co&prehended as de%radation, despoliation 4plunderin%5 and destruction (hich recreates
earthly nature as a holdin% arena consistin% solely in unprocessed resources, for (hich all of
reality has the &eanin% of a ra( &aterials asin for capitalist co&&odity production
1
< It is
this pro1ect< as it ca&e to historically develop and its social and historical content too"
eventual shape in for&s driven y a syste&s9i&posed co&pulsion 4i.e., the lo%ic of capital5<
that &ystifyin%ly 1ustifies an endless develop&ent of productive forces as the alle%ed
foundation of the %enuine hu&an co&&unity.
0his is not intellectual history as it is often referred to, far fro& it. Instead, in an inversion of its
usual confused sense, (e are en%a%ed in (ritin% the inner history of science, disclosin% the
structure of those privile%ed &o&ents at (hich the ulti&ate &eanin% and si%nificance of
science for hu&anity is laid are.
1
!ariations on this for&ulation of the &eanin% of nature do$ination (ill recur throu%hout the various studies. Based
on the entirety of this (or", an elaoration of its full sense is presented in the Postscript and its transcendent
significance in the section of that Postscript entitled the ,1rigins of 3ife, 7ncestral Bacteria, Biological Diversit%,/
elo(.
Introduction
The Modern Science of Nature
In the re&ar"s that i&&ediately follo(, (e shall &erely s"etch out the linea&ents of our
position. In the course of our investi%ation this initial theori=ation (ill e refined and re&ade in
a continuous encounter et(een it and that investi%ation in (hich the theori=ation and the
&aterials presented are su1ect to in)uiry, e'a&ination and scrutiny each in li%ht of the other.
$ere that position is offered tentatively. 0he four studies for&in% the entire ody of this
presentation are desi%ned to de&onstrate the truth and efficacy of this thin analysis and
assess&ent, cul&inatin% in our postscript (here this position, no( &ediated and concreti=ed,
is forcefully and fully stated.
Social Bases of the )or$ation of an 1rganic ,ntelligentsia of the Bourgeoisie
0he develop&ent of lar%e uran enclaves on the ed%es of a vast 6editerranean social
for&ation e'hiited the si&ultaneous rise and decline of different social strata. 0(o strata in
particular are discernile. >ver historical ti&e these t(o strata fused to for& the crucial layer
of an or%anic intelli%entsia of the our%eoisie, a develop&ent that (as itself decisive for the
appearance of the latter as a class in history.
0he first stratu& (as &ade up of %reat artisans, or &aster crafts&en.
0he Renaissance 4particularly in (hat today is called Italy5 (as not &erely characteri=ed y a
potent intellectual fer&ent (hich included the discovery and critical evaluation of ancient
4?ree" and @atin5 sources as (ell as the intellectual production of a conception of hu&an
activity as central to the production of the (orld 4Bruno, Pico dell 6irandola5, ut &ore
funda&entally also y the for&ation of po(erful, territorially ased political states 4i&&ediate
antecedents of &odern capitalist, national states5. 0he ne( &onarchies at once rested on
landed aristocracies and political alliances (ith or con)uest of (ealthy uran &erchant
patriciates of cities such as ;lorence, Barcelona, @ondon, etc. 0hese &onarchies, to%ether
(ith that enor&ous te&poral po(er, the Church 4a po(er (hich little reco%ni=ed had already
past its =enith5, en%a%ed in &assive displays of their (ealth, not 1ust in po&p ut in
contriutions to the o1ective sustance that characteri=ed the civili=ation they (ere central to.
>n the one hand, e&pire uildin% re)uired suitale (eaponry. >n the other, uran
ad&inistrative centers housin% those princes and clerics (ere the sites of on%oin% uildin%
construction of vast proportions, cathedrals, palaces, lavish ho&es, etc. 0he %reat &erchant
patriciates of coastal cities 4?enoa, !enice5, too, en%a%ed in si&ilar uildin% construction and
a%%ressively pursued e&pire uildin%, that is, the co&petitive creation of co&&ercial e&pire.
*dvance of their trade re)uired stora%e facilities, doc"s, and fleets of ships and the
ar&a&ents to protect the& as (ell. 0his uildin% construction and &erchant co&&erce %ave
rise to and supported a hu%e ar&y of &aster crafts&en and lesser artisans.
6aster crafts&en nu&ered a&on%st the&selves &en such as stone cutters, %olds&iths and
&asons, and &ariners, shipuilders, carpenters, foundry &en and &iners, that is, artisans
&ore or less directly related to the activity of uildin% construction and overseas co&&erce.
*&on%st the& also could e found a %roup of ,superior,/ ecause for&ally 4if not
hu&anistically5 educated, artisans, artisans that included artists such as painters, sculptors
and architects, sur%eons, &a"ers of nautical and astrono&ical instru&ents as (ell of distance
&eters for surveyors and %unners, surveyors and navi%ators the&selves, &usical instru&ent
artificers, and &ost i&portantly artist9en%ineers such as *lerti, da !inci, Cellini and :Arer.
1
1
0he cate%ory of ,superior/ artisan is developed y Ed%ar Bilsel 4(ho also provides this enu&eration5, ,0he
Sociolo%ical Roots of Science,/ CC29CCD.
3ot a fe( (ere inventors. 6arine co&passes and %uns, paper and sta&pin% &ills, and last
furnaces, for e'a&ple, all date fro& this era. 0he artist9en%ineers, in particular, (ere
responsile for construction of liftin% en%ines, canals and sluices, %uns and fortresses, as they
(ent (ell eyond their roles in cathedral construction and castin% statues.
1
0he %reat artisans of this hu%ely enlar%ed stratu& (ere often e&ployed in their o(n ri%ht (ith
their (or"shops 1ourney&en and apprentices. 0heir status in society and society itself (ere
chan%in% over ti&e. 3o lon%er artists, these %reat crafts&en (ere eco&in% our%eois,
2
and
they &aintained and sustained the&selves as capitalists in the strict sense, i.e., throu%h
e&ploy&ent of (a%ed laor. Because of their %reatly e'panded role in production and society,
and ecause they still operated in a cultural cli&ate in (hich the traditional de%radation of
&anual laor and the &echanical arts in favor of a sterile pursuit of truth 4of the vision of
%oodness or eauty dependin% on (ho& a&on% the ancients one follo(ed5 (as do&inant,
they chafed under the hu&iliation of their i&puted lo(ly status. 0heir activities, in contrast to
School&en and the hu&anist intelli%entsia as (ell 4(hose activities (ere oriented to(ard
syllo%istic e'plication and speculative theolo%ical disputation, and learned assi&ilation of
ancient sources and &odels and careful philolo%ical criticis&, respectively5, (ere concerned
(ith ho( effects are produced, intent on discoverin% rules of operation and en%a%ed in the
investi%ation of causes.
D
Rationality here, then, had an entirely different, oservationally9
e'perientially 4not yet e&pirically5 ased &eanin%. >n the %round of these often sophisticated,
techno9e'periential activities they sou%ht to elaorate for the&selves a perspective on the
relation of "no(led%e to activity, (or" and production that (as )ualitatively different fro& that
e&edded and e'plicit in the inherited traditions of the West, so called. In (ritin%s
characteristically crude y conte&porary intellectual standards, they pole&ici=ed a%ainst the
oo"ish, pedantic culture of the acade&ies and School&enE their pulished (or"s (ere
pulicly accessile 4i.e., non9esoteric5 and e'peri&entally ased upon oservation of ,thin%s/
#
4as opposed to discourse aout sensily contentless concepts5E and, i&plicit in their thou%ht,
(as a vie( that technical operations of artisans and &echanics on nature %ave rise to a for&
of "no(led%e (hich itself constituted insi%ht into the dyna&ics of natural pheno&ena.
*ccordin%ly, they held an alto%ether different evaluation of, one that estee&ed, the
&echanical arts and artisan laor<
0he second stratu& consisted of declassed hu&anist intellectuals, (hich had t(o further
sources that (ould eventually fuse to for& a sin%le layer, first, sons of those aristocratic
fa&ilies of the countryside 4En%land, Italy, $olland5 (ho e'perienced decline as a
conse)uence of the co&&erciali=ation of a%riculture and, second, the youn%est sons of
s&aller patriciates in the %reat cities, particularly those of Italy and the @o( Countries, (ho in
the face of stiff %reat &erchant co&petition could not e supported y the fa&ily usiness.
0he urani=ation of the peripheries of the social for&ations on the European continent and the
ne(ly e&er%in% social order, (hich culturally and civili=ationally co&es do(n to us y the
na&e of the Renaissance, entailed a certain &ar%inali=ation of sei%niorial lords. *ncient nole
fa&ilies, lando(ners ut resident to the cities, (ere politically and 1uridically suordinated y
the risin% ur%hers. 0hus, for e'a&ple, in 12729127D follo(in% a lon% stru%%le, the ;lorentine
patriciate ased in (ool &anufacture, an"in% and trade issued a series of decrees
4>rdinances of 8ustice5 throu%h its control of the co&&une.s polity, the priorate, and rou%ht
the (arrin% old aristocratic fa&ilies of the ;lorentine hinterland 4contado5 under control y
aolishin% serfdo& 4(here it e'isted5 and providin% for the (holesale alienation of land. 4In the
1
,Iid,/ CC2.
2
Paola Rossi, 4hilosoph%, Technolog% and the 7rts in the 2arl% Modern 2ra, 21922, D0.
D
Bilsel, ,Iid,/ C#F9C#7.
#
Rossi, ,&id, 19G.
co&in% decades, the %reat fa&ilies of ;lorence ou%ht up land in the countryside, estalishin%
a for& of e'ploitation, sharecroppin% tenancy or $e//adria dis%uisin% a for& of rural
proletariani=ation, (hich lasted do(n into the t(entieth century.5
1
0he educated sons of the
older, nole fa&ilies, no( essentially e'propriated, for&ed one root of declassed hu&anist
intelli%entsia. 4,$u&anist/ here, of course, does not have its conte&porary sense, ut &ore
than anythin% referred to trainin% in the use of, intense study of and fa&iliarity (ith ancient
sources in the ori%inal @atin and ancient ?ree".5 *t the sa&e ti&e, ne( &en, co&&ercially
oriented landed proprietors and, socially and econo&ically intert(ined (ith the&, (ealthy
&erchants, la(yers, an"ers and cloth &anufacturers, (ho had ta"en to%ether e%un to
e&er%e as (ell9defined social layers, e'hiited real social po(er.
0hese %roups (ere not ho&o%eneous. Based in part on co&&odity production on the
peripheries of one %reat feudal for&ation of the West 4e'istin% lar%ely et(een the @oire and
the Rhine5, strata (ithin these %roups en%a%ed in lon% distance trade as (ell as the &ar"etin%
of lar%ely lu'ury %oods for local consu&ption %eneratin% a thorou%h%oin% co&petition,
et(een, e.%., &erchants and &anufacturers in the historically pri&itive sense.
2
0here (ere
the proverial (inners and losers, a&on%st (hich (ere sons of tradin% classes that did not
fare as (ell as others. In the early part of the chronolo%ical fourteenth century, these youn%
&en found their (ay into the city.s polities,
D
occupyin% for &ost of the century positions
attached to their city %overn&ent 4&ost often en%a%ed in the conduct of forei%n affairs5, and
articulated and elaorated a vision of social life ased on the autono&y, soverei%nty and
pri&acy 4in social life5 of the polity, or%ani=ed participatorily in the narro( oli%archical sense, a
,de&ocracy/ as it (ere of %reat fa&ilies if you (ill.
4:evelop&ent of this sort (ill e repeated else(here+ By the end of the ne't century for a
period of rou%hly a hundred years, 1D7091#F0, (estern Europe e%an to see the for&ation of
a fourth $a9or =one of co&&odity production in En%land, the first three ein% the central
Italian Peninsula, the @o( Countries and Barcelona and its i&&ediate hinterlands. 0his
develop&ent, thou%h, started fro& villa%es and s&all to(ns the countryside, and too" shape
o1ectively, historically and at a certain &o&ent consciously in contradistinction to the
consolidation of the "in%do& of Castile.
#
With the e'ception of the Italian Peninsula, all (ere
ill9defined ,national/ territories in the process of eco&in% such.5
-et the sa&e chan%es that sa( the political consolidation of the po(er of this &erchant
patriciate do&inatin% Europe.s uran enclaves, the rise of an artisan class en%a%ed in
construction of uilt environ&ent 4cathedrals, residents5 includin% 4(hat (e (ould call5
1
;or all this, see The Histor% of )lorence +HEditorIs note.J
2
0he co&&unes collectively 4and ;lorence particularly5 played a central role in the creation of an international &ar"et,
a precondition for the e&er%ence in the West of the capitalist production as the asis of a distinct and novel social
for&.
6erchants, as opposed to industrialists, do not in and of the&selves constitute an alternative to sei%niorial social
orders. $istorically, the &erchant has stood outside production and, thus, cannot levera%e the reor%ani=ation of
society as a (hole. 0he &erchant &erely accu&ulates &oney9(ealth, not Kcapital,/ y e'tractin% profit fro& the
e'chan%e 4circulation5 that it &ediates et(een producers< $ere see 6ar', :apital, Bd+ ,,,; 20. Lapitel
4M?eschichtliches Aer das Lauf&anns"apital,5... 0he e'istence of co&&ercial classes in the late Ro&an E&pire
clearly indicates that these social %roups are not capale fro& out of their o(n activity of %eneratin% capitalist
develop&ent.
3onetheless, fro& the retrospective standpoint of the acco&plished develop&ent of capitalis& as an international
syste&, the &erchant classes of the Italian repulics, to the e'tent they created a (orld &ar"et, &oney as a
transre%ional &ediu& of e'chan%e, also created a historical condition for the e&er%ence of (orld capitalis&. 0his
should, of course, e understood &erely as a condition.
D
Bilsel, ,Iid,/ C#7.
#
See the ;irst Study, Part II, ,Castilian E&pire in Early 6odern Europe, Capitalis& and ;or&al :o&ination,/ elo(.
3on9chronolo%ical and deployed as conceptual pre&ises to illu&inate the relation of science to the our%eoisie, an
alternative periodi=ation is offered in the ;irst Interlude, elo(.
infrastructure 4doc"s, canals5, shipuildin% and instru&ent &anufacture, (itnessed the decline
of the hu&anist intellectuals in official positions as a len%thy stru%%le 4endin%, for e'a&ple, in
;lorence in 1CD05 ensued et(een the %reat centrali=ed &onarchies and the city Repulics, a
stru%%le that dra&atically drained, virtually e'haustin%, the resources of the latter and &ade
these native intelli%entsias e'pendale.
1
:eclassed, they tended to for& a ,free literati/ see"in% out the sa&e an"ers and &erchants
as patrons, ut, &ore li"ely 4as, e.%., in the case of 6achiavelli5, attached the&selves to
princes, rulers of s&all do&ains N statelets in southern Europe, as instructors of their sons
4(hile, of course, atte&ptin% to %arner favor in the for& of appoint&ents to acade&ic chairs in
the universities of ;rance and Italy5. 0his (as the second root of a rootless, cos&opolitan
hu&anistic intelli%entsia.
0he dislod%e&ent of this ,free literati/ fro& official positions, and in &any cases their ne(ly
dependent status, %ave rise to a call for creation of a ,ne( type of %entle&an./ 0his ,ne( &an/
4our ter&5 (as to e one (ho could respond to and e'ploit on%oin% social chan%e, one (ho
(ould e'hiit the re)uisite ,aility in politics, diplo&acy, culture, &anners, and co&petence in
&ilitary and navi%ational s"ills/ 4here )uotin% ?ilert, (ho, had he een ale to reach ac" in
ti&e a half century and "no(n hi&, could have een en%a%in% 6achiavelli5, s"ills that (ere
rapidly eco&in% &ore i&portant than ,lood and irth./
2
0his call also oviously entailed a different evaluation of &anual laor and the &echanical
arts.
D
0hat evaluation (as practically e'hiited in the %reatest, if later, fi%ures of this stratu&,
?alileo, ?ilert, others such as Bacon, for (ho& personal contact (ith s"illed, "no(led%eale
artisans (as the rule.
#
?ilert.s call for a ,ne( &an,/ at any rate, (as concerned (ith develop&ent of technical s"ills.
0he pro%ra&&atic aspects of this ne( for&ation 4Bildung5 (ere consciously set in opposition
to the e'plicitly speculative9theoretical one that held s(ay in the universities. Rhetoric (as, for
e'a&ple, yo"ed to ,political oration and &ilitary speeches,/ political philosophy to the various
functions of the policy of states, e%innin% (ith their histories and inclusive of their types,
ad&inistration and financeE the study of nature philosophy and &athe&atics (as vie(ed
lar%ely in their technical aspects, that is, insofar as they yielded insi%hts into fortification,
strate%y and artillery usa%eE astrono&y and %eo%raphy (ere presented (ith a vie( to
navi%ationE etc.
C
Such a novel perspective clearly si%nified the conte&pt for laor and &echanical activities
traditionally held y aristocratic lords and leisured %entle&en had to e discarded 4a path that
6achiavelli, as a &e&er of one ;lorentine t(enty9five %reat fa&ilies, the 1tti$ati, had
already trodden do(n5. *t the sa&e ti&e, it (as fully con%ruent (ith and, to oot, a historically
essential propaedeutic to assi&ilation of the conceptual fra&e(or" of the &odern science of
nature.
;inally, there (as another %roup that consisted in disaffected clerics.
3early all of ?alileo.s (ell9"no(n pupils, Benedetto Castelli, ?iovanni Cia&poli and !incen=o
!iviani for e'a&ple, as (ell as &any of his correspondents, intellectual peers, and supporters
4ran%in% all the (ay to the top of the Church hierarchy, e.%., 6affeo Barerini5 (ore Ro&an
collars.
O
With a vie( to the ne( science, their si%nificance (as not social... they did not for& a
separate stratu& and &any of the& (ere reinte%rated into the Church intelli%entsia,
1
0he social forces involved in this stru%%le are further clarified elo(. See the ;irst Study, Part I, ,Castilian E&pire in
Early 6odern Europe, Capitalis& and ;or&al :o&ination./
2
Rossi, ,&id, 7, cites the e'a&ple of the En%lish&an, $u&phrey ?ilertE also Bilsel, ,Iid,/ CCC.
D
;or the classical evaluation of laor, see the appended note under the sa&e headin%, elo(.
#
;or contact, Bilsel, ,Iid,/ CCC 4?ilert5, CCC9CCO 4?alileo5.
C
Rossi, ,&id, 7910.
O
*n e'tensive list of these clerics vis9P9vis the ne( science can e found in Pietro Redondi, 8alileo, Heretic, passi&.
i&portantly (ith the 8esuits... Rather, their si%nificance (as intellectual in the narro( sense+
Where they (ere of i&port, they trans&itted theolo%ically &ediated, doctrinal contents of the
ne( science, either to their pupils or, in so&e cases, y leavin% ehind te'ts.
Science and the Bourgeoisie
0hou%h it is co&&on productivist error to %rasp the connection et(een &odern science and
astract laor in ter&s of the %eneral develop&ent of society, hence to see in science the
intellectual patri&ony of hu&anity, it re&ains an error. Science is neither+ 0he internal,
necessary relation of science to the our%eoisie can e %rasped in different, distinctive (aysE
first, in the vision of the (orld 4&an, co&&unity, nature5 pro1ected y science in its stru%%le
a%ainst the old social order and in contradistinction to the old nature philosophy and its vision,
theoretically e'pressin% the or%ani=ation of that old orderE second, it can e %rasped in the
internal conceptual structure of science itself in its structural si&ilarity to the value for&E third,
in the ho&olo%y et(een the ori%inal, social and preco%nitive telos of science at its ori%ins
and our%eois tas"s 4e'pansion of productive forces5E and fourth, societally, in the validation
of scientific ,la(s/ throu%h technolo%ical achieve&ents lin"ed to e'pansion of productivity.
Su&&arily de&onstratin% this connection i&poses t(o re)uire&ents on us, na&ely, e'hiitin%
the internal, historical connection of the our%eoisie as a class to science as theory, and
de&onstratin% that si%nificant ele&ents of the internal conceptual structure of science are
inseparale fro& the our%eois process of accu&ulation, that is, seein% and reco%ni=in% the
constitution of science as theory is indissoluly lin"ed to production of the socio9historical
(orld (e call capitalis&.
@et us e%in y e&phasi=in% that (e are spea"in% of the our%eoisie as a class+ 0he concept
of the our%eoisie as it appears here is not desi%ned to &as" national differences, distinct life
situations and the conflictin% interests of this ne( class as a (hole as it first e&er%ed in
history. 0his &uch said the concept re&ains unitary, one that cannot e rele%ated to the status
of a construct, to say an ideal type. Instead it refers to the &ost enli%htened individuals,
especially to the social %roups in (hich they (ere situated and (hich provided the& (ith
reality and their identities. In this respect, it (as this essential sociality, a shared o1ective
position in society that per&itted these individuals to &utually reco%ni=e one another and to
reali=e and appreciate that the ne( class they relationally for&ed could not freely reathe the
air of the old order, rather its at&osphere (ould cho"e and suffocate it and the&.
0he first of these enli%htened individuals e%an to appear a&on% ne( social %roups late in the
history of the uran enclaves of a 6editerranean social for&ation, especially in the Italian
Peninsula and then in the @o( Countries. *s (e have seen, they first appeared in t(o
distinctive, )uite different social strata in the late 1Cth and early 1Oth centuries, na&ely, as
&aster crafts&en a&on% the %reat artisans and as declassed hu&anist intellectuals< 0heir
children, as (e "no(, (ill e our%eois... *cross these distinctive social strata, o1ectively
(ithout reco%nition, they ca&e to%ether in elaoratin% a criti)ue of *ristotelian nature
philosophy, or its &edieval, Scholastic develop&ent and presentation. *fter 1O00, ho(ever,
they eca&e fa&iliar (ith one anotherE there (as active, su1ective conver%ence+ 0hey
sou%ht each out. 6odern science at is ori%ins ore the &ar" of their criti)ue, and cannot e
understood apart fro& it.
Central to and decisive for this relation (as the type of technical "no(led%e for&ed in the
activities of the %reat artisans+ It (as self9conscious "no(led%e, so (hat declassed hu&anistic
intellectuals reco%ni=ed in it (as that (hich %reat artisans already understood+ 0his technical
"no(led%e (as characteristically, and in its inner essence 4so &any of the intellectuals
ar%ued5, inventive, cooperative, pro%ressive, and perfectile. It follo(ed, and these
intellectuals e'plicitly noted, the &ethods and procedures of artisans, technicians and
en%ineers (ere cultural for&s leadin% to a pro%ressive, cu&ulative enlar%e&ent of "no(led%e
on (hich society< one they &i%ht so&eday he%e&oni=e< itself could e ased. Science, as
the elaoration, refine&ent and deepenin%, and theori=ation, of these &ethods and
procedures 4ta"en to%ether constitutin% a )ualitative transfor&ation of the&5, developed out of
the conver%ence, interaction and practice of these t(o strata< no lon%er distinct ut as a
our%eois intelli%entsia< over t(o or three %enerations. @earned &en (ritin% and pulishin%
in the vernacular as opposed to the traditional @atin sy&oli=ed their conver%ence, (hether
the lan%ua%e (as En%lish, Italian or ;rench. *s layers of a class in the historical process of
for&ation, as lar%e &erchants and cloth &anufacturers, %reat artisans eco&in% industrialists,
i% peasants eco&in% capitalist far&ers, differentiated the&selves out of estates 4StQnde5 of
the older social for&ations of Europe, an identifiale or%anic intelli%entsia of our%eois
ori%ins< the first true &en of science< e%an to appear y no later than 1O00, and set
the&selves apart y unitin% &ethodical, rational procedure (ith e'peri&ental and
oservational practices. *&on% the very %reatest of these &en (e nu&er ?alileo, Bacon,
?ilert and, perhaps :escartes 4perhaps, ecause there (as very little in the (ay of
e'peri&ent and oservation in his (or"5.
Retrospectively, (e can see that on the asis of the critical elaorations of the relations of the
&echanical arts to theory carried out y several %enerations of late 1Oth century uran %reat
artisans and declassed hu&anist scholars, an intellectual layer of 1Gth century classical
our%eoisies 4i.e., educated social layers orn of the strata aove as they e&er%ed in the
Italian repulics, :utch and ;rench uran enclaves, and in @ondon and the En%lish
countryside5 created and developed the &odern science of nature co&ple'ly &ediatin% the
daily our%eois practice of accu&ulation.
But ho( and (hen2
Step ac" and e'a&ine that &o&ent at (hich the ne( class i&plicitly reco%ni=ed itself, i.e., in
its diver%ence fro& the old order. It (as the life9activities 4accu&ulation of &oney (ealth, later
capital5 of this ne( class that per&itted it to raise itself to this understandin%+ Rsury la(s, %uild
re%ulations, a reli%iously sanctioned cultural at&osphere dictatin% the oli%ations of the lord as
&aster of laor and li&itin% e'ploitation of that laor 4or, alternately, in the case of our%eois
intellectuals estalishin% the onto9theolo%ical pre&ises of in)uiry (hich it could not )uestion5,
etc., ha&strun% its activity and &ade it clear it could not flourish in the old order, particularly
(ith a vie( to un)uestioned Church authority, and craft and sei%niorial relations %overnin%
production.
*nd, in this re%ard, science2
Science, an intellectual production disclosin% the structure of the naturally real, (as desi%ned
y its creators 4a%ain, ?alileo and Bacon, ?ilert, :escartes, others5 as a theoretical (eapon
in a %enuinely fierce struggle against the Church and its lar%ely cleric intelli%entsia, the
Catholic princes (ho supported it, even the &assive peasant strata that du&ly provided the
Church its social asis, a stru%%le over the vision of the (orld 4in astrono&y and physics5 and
for the autono&y of thou%ht 4i.e., those ,innovators/ (ho thin"5. Si&ultaneously it, science,
(as a conceptual for&ulation of oth the practical and theoretical conditions and &eans of the
&astery of nature to ,lessen the laor of &an/ 4:escartes5, i.e., to increase the so9called
productive forces of society.
1
Stated differently, in openin% up vistas of nature &astery and
1
Discourse on Method, Part I.
We &ay &elieve, &ytholo%ically and ideolo%ically, this stru%%le (as &erely an internal develop&ent (ithin the
intellectual history of the West or an ar%u&ent a&on% individuals over co&petin% theories of nature, ut these &en
4Bacon, :escartes, etc.5 clearly understood (hat (as at issue and (hat (as at sta"e. We &erely recall the title of one
of ?alileo.s %reat (or"s, Dialogues Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s, and note the structure of this dialo%ue
in (hich the Peripatetic vie(s are su1ect to scrutiny and criti)ue. See the ;irst Study, Part III, ,Pole&ic and the
@o%ics of *r%u&ent in the Dialogue,/ elo(.
do&ination it (as science that allo(ed this class as a (hole< as it for&ed fro& &erchants,
%reat artisans and i% far&ers< to intuitively aleit oli)uely %rasp< an understandin%
&ediated y concepts of personal salvation, doin% ?od.s (or", self9enrich&ent and creation
of national (ealth< the si%nificance of the co&pulsion that at any rate %ripped it, the
e'pansion of productive forces of society and hu&anity. In the o1ective historical sense, it
(as a theory &ediatin% the practice of a risin% class slo(ly eco&in% conscious that its
e'istence, social independence in the pursuit of its life practices and its co%nitive elaorations
4science itself and later its specific study or ,science/ of society, political econo&y5 re)uired its
o(n societal he%e&ony. 0hat is, this understanding ca$e together and resolved itself into the
insight that the creation of a ne social order had to &e theoreticall% $ediated in a ne a%+
,n the end, it as this shared insight, and all its ra$ifications as the% ere grasped, that
cohered the &ourgeoisie alloing it to appear and act as a class in histor%+ In this conte't, e
should reco%ni=e that nature do$ination as 0and continues to &e5 the point of contact
&eteen science and the &ourgeoisie, a social pro1ect %overnin% a co%nitive9cultural for& that
&ediates itself to the class in (hose life it is rooted and (hose activity it intentionally directs.
Beyond this, science le%iti&i=es the our%eoisie socially and historically+ In its capital
accu&ulative pursuit of nature do&ination in the interests of hu&anity as understood fro& the
perspective of our%eois society, science has and continues 4especially today as a fused
techno9science5 to function as an ideational underpinnin% of the consciousness of a class that
once aspired to universality, a elief that today has its translation in the vain, arro%ant
conviction that it is the only class that can or%ani=e society as a (hole.
It should e clear, then, this elaoration of science, as the critical &o&ent in the stru%%le
a%ainst the old order restin% on the insi%ht that the creation of a ne( social order had to e
theoretically &ediated in a ne( (ay, involved the further insi%ht a&on% all our%eois
individuals (ho too" even a passin% interest in scientific studies+ 0heir science (as no &ere
theory. Rather it (as e&edded in< dialectically pre&isin%, issuin% in and stren%thenin%< a
(orld vision+ * di==yin% flood of insi%hts constituted the contents of this vision+ Efficacious to
this day, it entails a vie( of &an, society and nature 4hu$anit% consists in privati=ed and
e%oistic individuals, societ% is or%ani=ed around co&&odity production and e'chan%e (hich
pits these individuals each a%ainst all and, nature is an open, infinite, and deter&inistic
universe for&ed of indivisile, individual ele&ents5. Science in this sense, that is, as a (orld
vision, (as intuitively transparent to the our%eoisie ecause it i&&ediately and practically
illu&inated its activities in production and society, and ecause it provided it (ith a sense of its
role and function in history 4a sense of (hich (as e&er%in%5. It (as not o1ectivity 4i.e.,
position in society5 and it (as not activity as such, thou%h to e sure there are for&al points of
identityE rather, it (as precisely this understanding that, as (e said, cohered the &ourgeoisie
alloing it to appear and act as a class in histor%. It is this vision of the (orld, and the science
that underlines and in the end renders it intelli%ile, that has internally and historically
connected the early co&&ercial our%eoisie 4the cloth &anufacturers, &erchants, an"ers
and traders of the uran enclaves on the ed%es of the 6editerranean5, (ho accu&ulated
&oney9(ealth ut (ho had never en%a%ed in capital accu&ulation, to later industrialists,
capitalists in the strict sense 4those (ho, &ore and &ore as &ere personifications of capital,
have since the latter nineteenth century syste&atically pursued accu&ulation throu%h the
or%ani=ation of the (or" processes and their suordination to capitalist rationality5, (hose
(orldly outloo" (as thorou%hly scientific and yet (hose social e'istence lay three centuries
into the future eyond the for&ative period of science.
1
1
0his is not to say that there (as no connection et(een the develop&ent of specifically capitalist practices and those
intellectual productions that for&ed the necessary conceptual foundations for the develop&ent of the &odern science
of nature. But if the &odern &athe&atical presuppositions of science developed to%ether (ith &odern for&s of
;or us, (hat are the i&plications of this (orld vision2
If science is not a &ere theory, in the societally efficacious sense it is dialectically underlain y
and issues in, (hile reinforcin%, a vision for (hich the production of the (orld 4the uilt
environ&ent, the universe of use o1ects, &eanin%s and si%nifications, hu&ani=ed nature,
hu&anity itself5 is (ithout a%ent, a (orld in (hich &en and (o&en appear as &ere o1ects
a&on% other o1ects to e used up as ra( &aterial in production, a (orld (hose &o&ents are
&erely said ra( &aterial for the production of co&&odities. 0his is a (orld (hose constitution
is su1u%ated to the lo%ic of capital accu&ulation, to the value for&. It is a (orld in (hich an
autono&ous and autono&i=ed ,su1ect/ lac"in% (ill and consciousness 4capital or value5 has
po(er over and ,co&&ands/ a &ystified, productive one, and in (hich o1ectified and
&ateriali=ed dead laor do&inates sensuous, active hu&an ein%s. Such an inverted vision
constitutes the precognitive infrastructure of the &ourgeoisie as a class considered orld-
historicall%+ 0his (orld vision, effectively science, (as ori%inally and continues to e %rounded
in our%eois life(orld activities, in accu&ulation, (as 4and is5 thro(n up as a theoretical
&ediation %uided y the teleolo%y of nature do&ination, pro1ectin% itself as operative
assu&ptions aout &an, nature, and the %ood life. 0hese assu&ptions 4pre&ises5 and the
practices they issue in, the&selves socially validated ane( (ith each scientific advance, (ere
initially if only tacitly &ade and for&ed sui generis on the asis of accu&ulatin% practices ut,
socially reproduced in and throu%h these activities, have in turn historically co&e to
intentionally direct accu&ulation and related activities.
0entatively, then, this satisfies our first re)uire&ent lin"in% the our%eoisie as a class to
science as theory, specifically as a (eapon in its stru%%le a%ainst leadin% ele&ents of the old
order in a stru%%le for societal do&inance.
2le$ents of the Conceptual Structure of Science
Second, (e are re)uired to trace out the internal connection or unitary structure that e'hiits
the inseparaility of the internal conceptual structure of science and the our%eois process of
accu&ulation. 0his can e achieved lar%ely y sho(in% that this structure is indissoluly lin"ed
to the constitution of the socio9historical (orld (e call capitalis& y (ay of nature do&ination
4and, in doin% so, (e shall also atte&pt to further e'hiit the ho&olo%ous relation of this
conceptual structure (ith that to the intelli%ile structure of this (orld, that of the value9for&5.
1
0he develop&ent of productive forces is not (hat distin%uishes the our%eoisie as a class in
history, particularly at its ori%ins. Rnderstood as a decisive feature of hu&an history in its
entirely, productive forces are a %ross conceptual astraction (ithout real referent. 0he reality
of productive forces is constituted durin% the course of capitalist develop&entE ut at its ori%ins
the latter cannot e understood in ter&s of the for&er. 0he funda&ental social re)uire&ent for
the e&er%ence of productive forces, the productivity of laor, etc., is the institutional
separation out of an econo&y fro& socially undifferentiated precapitalist for&ations, (hich in
actual history rests on the social %enerali=ation of capital.s for&al do&ination over laor in
production.
2
Rntil this develop&ent occurs, it is utter nonsense to spea" aout productive
forces and their role in history or, here, at the ori%ins of capitalis&.
What does distin%uish the our%eoisie as a class in history is the pro1ect of nature do&ination.
*t the sa&e ti&e, at its ori%ins and prior to all e'plicit theori=ation and e'peri&entation, the
capitalist accountin%, this is a &ove&ent strictly in thou%ht and says nothin% aout the intuitions that arose on the
%rounds of daily practices, insi%hts that, dialectically, e'plained those practices and in turn, once %enerali=ed 4i.e., as
intellectual intuition of essential relations, not inductively5, created the &o&ents of a vision of the (orld that
illu&inated everythin% else. ;or the ho&olo%ous relation of &athe&atics and oo""eepin%, see Bilsel, ,Iid,/ C#O9C#G.
1
0o secure this insi%ht, it &ust e as valid for the ne( physics 4)uantu& &echanics5 as for the old 4classical physics5.
See the first of three s"etches in the 0hird Study, elo(.
2
*nd on the inau%uration of real do&ination. Both are discussed at len%th, elo(. See the ;irst Interlude.
&odern science of nature is &otivated y the sa&e telos of nature do&ination, an atheoretical
yet co&prehensive %oal of scientific activity e&edded in the internal conceptual structure of
science as an anticipatory pro1ection of a &athe&ati=ed nature. 4*nd it is the societal &eanin%
of a &athe&ati=ed nature that is at issue.5
While reconstruction of this pro1ect as the hidden telos ani&atin% &odern science can e
underta"en fro& the standpoint of the technolo%ical achieve&ents of scientific practice, it is
i&portant to reco%ni=e that it is not necessary to do so. Rather, this pro1ect, one that
necessarily presupposes our%eois life9practices centered on &oney 4and later capital5
accu&ulation, can e read off, as (e are su%%estin%, the internal conceptual structure of
science itself.
Be%in (ith earl% &odern science. 0his e%innin% is not aritrary+ 0o &a"e a case le%iti&i=in%
the a&itions it pursues, a risin% class is co&pelled to array any nu&er of ar%u&ents, so&e
rational and discursive, to 1ustify itself, its social analysis, its prescriptions, those pursuits+
Early &odern science (as the intellectual &o&ent in a roader political stru%%le for societal
he%e&ony. Its proponents effected a confrontation (ith the hitherto rei%nin% cultural for& of
nature theory, &edieval 4*ristotelian5 natural philosophy. 0hat confrontation rou%ht the
conflictin%, ecause inco&&ensurate, conceptual and lo%ical structures of the t(o co&petin%
theories into play, and, to a certain e'tent, the conflict itself allo(ed the advocate9practitioners
of the ne( science to eco&e conscious of this inco&&ensuraility. 0o precisely this e'tent,
these &en also rou%ht the roader political stru%%le itself to ear on the confrontation, i.e., in
e'tra9theoretical efforts to le%iti&i=e their ne( science they &ade clai&s to a universality the
urden of (hich their theory 4and their social class5, it (as fervently elieved, could shoulder.
In appeals to a ne(ly for&in% concept of ,&an"ind,/ one ta"en over the narro( &edieval
concept of hu$anitas N essentially the co&&unity of Christian elievers, they revealed their
personal convictions ani&atin% this ne( science and, eyond this, the endurin% class
teleolo%y that underpinned it. ;rancis Bacon, co&&oner and 4thirty9si' year5 &e&er of the
$ouse of Co&&ons, theorist and e'peri&entalist, (as one of those enli%htened individuals
(ho fully understood the creation of a ne( social order had to e conceptually &ediated in a
ne( (ay, that, accordin%ly, ,all/ &ust ,consider (hat are the true ends of "no(led%e, and<
see" it not either for pleasure of the &ind, or for contention, or for superiority to others, or for
profit, or fa&e, or po(er, or any of these inferior thin%sE ut for the enefit and use of life</
;or fro& out of the criti)ue of the old theory of nature to%ether (ith the elaoration of a ne(
one< fro& science accordin% to Bacon, ,there &ay sprin% helps to &an, and a line and race
of inventions that &ay in so&e de%ree sudue and overco&e the necessities and &iseries of
hu&anity./
1
If nature &astery could su1u%ate necessity rooted in 4socially or%ani=ed5 &aterial
scarcity, then, on the &asis of its science, the our%eoisie (ould e carryin% out this tas" in the
very interests of hu&anity, instead of &erely ein% a particular class en%a%ed in the
e'ploitation of laor y (ay of nature &astery.
0he for%oin% &erely su&&ari=es this entire &ove&ent. *nd, thou%h (e shall return to it (here
the confrontation is clearest 4in ?alileo, in his three %reat (or"s, The Starr% Messenger, The
7ssa%er and Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s5, (e shall not follo( it here.
Instead<
Rnfoldin% in a political stru%%le a%ainst the old order, early &odern, scientific self9
consciousness conducted this stru%%le (ith &ethods and concepts descriin% a ne( theory of
nature. 0hat &uch (as si&ply crucial. >n e&pirical %rounds alone, the ne( science (ould
have never %otten past its initial hearin%s+ ?alileo.s &ature astrono&y could no etter account
for natural pheno&ena than the i&petus theory he had atte&pted develop as a youn% &an.
*nd, &oreover, in so&e cases the ne( theori=ation (as si&ply inade)uate, for e'a&ple, if the
1
;rancis Bacon, The 8reat ,nstauration, 1O, 2C92O.
Earth (as not the stationary center of the universe, if it did &ove and spun (ith the
tre&endous velocity proclai&ed y Copernicus, (hy didn.t o1ects and ein%s, ran%in% fro&
stones and roc"s to ani&als and &en, fly off at its surface into the heavens2
1
4Recall that
?alileo lac"ed a theory of %ravity5. >n Ptole&aic assu&ptions of an i&&oile Earth, the
*ristotelian9Peripatetic doctrine of natural places, the do(n(ard &otion of ,heavy/ odies, the
up(ard &otion of ,li%ht/ odies, and natural &otion, violent &otion and i&pressed i&petus
had least had the virtue, its aporias aside 4e.%., the re)uire&ent that &otion up(ard al(ays e
acco&panied y a &over so that the &ediu&, air or (ater, itself, pushed an o1ect alon%5, of
providin% such an account.
2
-et the ne( science did prevail, and in its triu&ph characteristically clai&ed that its activity
produced 415 a syste&atic ody of "no(led%e ased upon a description of reality as natural,
the contents of (hich are to e pulic and co&&unicale thou%h al(ays technically so, and
hence trans&ittale and codifileE
D
425 a syste&atic ody of "no(led%e (hich is theoretical,
i.e., not &erely a co&pilation of rules or precepts, ut derivin% its prescriptions fro& %eneral
principles referrin% us ac" to if not ased upon a totality of verifiale factsE and 4D5 a ody of
"no(led%e (hich does not rely on authority, that is, de&ands rational e'planation rooted in
results that can e chec"ed and confir&ed y &eans of practical proof< 0he first t(o points
at least, of course, concern the self9understandin% of science at its ori%ins, and not the
character of science as its i&&anent historical develop&ent reveals it. ;or e'a&ple, the
scientific description of facts is ased on oservation that is theoretically or%ani=ed prior to
any descriptionE results are e'peri&entally constructed and not &erely %ivenE and, &uch later
4after 172C, thou%h so&e say e%innin% (ith ?alileo5,
#
(e find a vie( that science is
deductive proceedin% fro& an a'io&atic syste&ati=ation (hose asic postulates provides the
scientist (ith hypotheses (hich can e e'peri&entally tested... *s descriptive, pulic and
trans&ittale, and theoretical and rational, the theories for&ulated y ?alileo, Bacon
4representin% t(o entirely different traditions in &odern science5 and others &odern scientific
thin"ers stood in sharp relief fro& and in na"ed opposition to speculative, esoteric and divinely
inspired, do%&atic and reli%iously %rounded &edieval natural philosophy and Church social
doctrine< 0his too (as crucial, for it (as a )uestion of the audience to (hich the ne(
doctrine (as addressed, and the societal conte't in (hich this discourse unfolded<
C
0hese
&en, as theorists of early &odern science, pole&ically ai&ed at truth, i.e., a theoretical activity
uncoverin% the intelli%ile structure of reality itself, in a counter&ove&ent to &edieval, natural
philosophy restin% on Church do%&a, that is, on the theolo%ically deter&ined Scholastic
readin% of *ristotle. Concealed in this counter&ove&ent to *ristotelian 4Peripatetic5 physics,
(as a vie( of the (orld, at once pro1ected and presupposed y and in scientific thin"in%, that
%ave theoretical e'pression to the our%eois vie( of &an, co&&unity, and nature. Since the
stru%%le a%ainst Peripatetic natural philosophy (as carried out lar%ely on the terrain of the
truth9value of co&petin% theories, the social contents and precate%orial interest structurin%
1
0his specific issue is ta"en up in ?alileoIs Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s+ It is discussed in the
;irst Study, Part II, ,Pole&ic and the @o%ics of *r%u&ent in the Dialogue,/ elo(.
2
See the ;irst Study, Part III, ,?alileo and *ristotle, I+ 0he Suestion of Pro1ectile 6otion and 3atural Place,/ elo(.
D
0he ,account of the e'peri&ental arran%e&ent and the recordin% of oservations &ust e %iven in plain lan%ua%e,
suitaly supple&ented y technical physical ter&inolo%y. 0his is a clear lo%ical de&and, since the very (ord
Te'peri&ent. refers to a situation (here (e can tell others (hat (e have done and (hat (e have learned./ 3iels Bohr,
7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an :noledge, G2. 40hese re&ar"s actually refer to the relation et(een )uantu& and
classical &echanics. 0herey they e'hiit the unity of the old and ne( physics elaorated on in the 0hird Study
elo(. In point of fact, this understandin% evinced %oes to the roots of science itself.5
#
;or ?alileo and deductive reasonin%, e.%., *le'ander LoyrU, 8alileo Studies+ *&on% theorists, postulative
deductivis& is characteristic of Larl PopperE and in a looser sense a&on% scientists, Einstein startin% especially fro&
the nineteen thirties. See the 0hird Study, Part II, elo(.
C
See the ;irst Study, Part III, ,Conclusion, I+ 0he 0riu&ph of Science,/ elo(.
and or%ani=in% scientific theory (ere occluded. 0hus, early scientific theorists did not e'pose
the internal connection of the (orld vision pro1ected y and underlyin% the old natural
philosophy to the or%ani=ation of a social for&ation ased on e'ploitative social relations that
reproduced landed, aristocratic po(er 4i.e., the structural identity of a closed, hierarchically
ordered, stale and static (orld, and the divinely ordained, unchan%in% (orld of lord, cler%y,
and peasant5E nor, of course, did they then point out the for&er &irrored the latter, and that to
the e'tent the for&er (as declared unchan%in% and unchan%eale it functioned as a cultural
for& 1ustifyin% and le%iti&i=in% (hile &as"in% the oppressive character of those social
relations.
1
0he failure of early &odern scientific thin"ers to do so (as not &erely ecause the historical
conditions under (hich the analysis of Kideolo%yK could e elaorated had yet to develop.
2
Such an indict&ent (ould have strai%hta(ay led to a si&ilar insi%ht+ It (ould have revealed
that the (orld vie(ed as an open, infinite, and internally unstructured universe 4(hose
funda&ental ele&ents consisted of perceptually inaccessile, internally unrelated, and
indivisile particles5 &irrored a our%eois society in the process of for&ationE that is, it
transposed into, at once concealin% and &ediately e'pressin% in, thou%ht the structure and
or%ani=ation of a (orld of isolated ecause privati=ed and e%oistic individuals confrontin% an
inco&prehensile other 4society5 that (as co&in% to e unconsciously or%ani=ed around
e'chan%e, transfor&in% social relations in a &ellu$ o$niu$ in o$nes. Reco%nition of the
1
0his is a honored tradition in the Ro&an Church that reaches ac" over a thousand years... &erciless pilla%in% y
%reat lords, triutary e'actions, and ands of &en cut loose fro& social &oorin%s en%a%ed in rapine or, alternatively,
&ercenaries pursuin% the sa&e &a"e the t(o eras si&ilar if not fully conte&poraneous across historical ti&e< Early
in the fourth century in the co&&on era, an e&peror, desperately needin% to re9le%iti&i=e a cru&lin% e&pire, thrust
out a hand li"e a dro(nin% &an. 0his (as Constantine, (ho converted and co&pelled a &ass conversion of his
su1ects to Christianity in D1D. -et in his lifeti&e, he (ould not find a cha&pion. 0hat (as *u%ustine, (ho early in the
fifth century, and 1ust as desperate to institutionally sanction hierarchical po(er over the faithful in the face of risin%
heresy 4i.e., in the face of :onatist opposition to Ro&an authority, in particular, to the 3orth *frican ishopsI alliance
(ith secular Ro&e5, (ho (ith >ptatus 4Bishop of 6ileue and older conte&porary5 %rasped that hand, developin% an
elaorate theolo%y to sanction an alliance at the top et(een secular po(er and the Church. *u%ustine (as the
ishop of $ippo, "no(n as the ,ha&&er of the :onatists./ See Elaine Pa%els, 7da$, 2ve, and the Serpent, 12#912C,
12791D0.
...0here are t(o points (orth &a"in% (ith re%ard to *u%ustine+
;or *u%ustine, the (orld 4nature and hu&an nature5 is irretrievaly corrupt, corrupted y *da&Is sin. 0his corruption
is endlessly trans&itted y se'ual union and the pro%eny it en%enders 4The Cit% of 8od, Boo"s VIII9VI!5. So, first,
(hile it is eyond the scope of these re&ar"s to develop this, (e can point out that here (e find the repression of
se'uality, its narro(in% to a function, procreation, and the institutional sanctity of &arria%e, all characteristic of the
Ro&an Church and all co&in% to%ether at its ori%ins.
In *u%ustine the entire secular, transitor% real& in its (ic"edness, its sufferin%, disease, etc., is counterposed to an
eternal, perfect ?od. 0he city of ?od, the eternal city of the i&&ortal soul is, of course, consciously opposed y
*u%ustine to Ro&e, the city of ,&an/ 4,&id, Boo"s VI, V!, V!III9VIV5. So, second, indeed, no one &ore than *u%ustine
(ould resist (orldly chan%e and de&and su&ission, insistin% on the necessity that the lo(ly and do(ncast, here the
peasant &asses, ,%ive unto Caesar/...
But to return to that honored tradition+ 0his relation of cos&olo%y to alle%ed unchan%in% social relations did not 1ust
find echoes in, ut (as transposed in toto into, natural philosophy in the for& of an e)ually sharp contrast et(een
non9%enerated, incorruptile, unalterale, indivisile and per&anent or eternal and %enerated, corruptile, alterale,
division and transitory, paired oppositions that underpinned Peripatetic cos&olo%y, fro& the Scholastics at the end of
the thirteenth century do(n to ?alileoIs ti&e.
?alileo (as acutely conscious of this. :urin% a heated discussion on the first day in the Dialogue Concerning the To
Chief "orld S%ste$s, a discussion over the ,validity/ of precisely this Peripatetic natural philosophical foundations, he
had Sa%redo, pole&ically and al&ost lasphe&ously, say ,;or &y part I consider the earth very nole and ad&irale
precisely ecause of the diverse alterations, chan%es, %enerations, etc., that occur in it incessantly./ ,&id, CF.
See the footnoted discussion of this issue in the ;irst Study, Part III, ,Pole&ic and the @o%ic of *r%u&ents in the
Dialogue,/ elo(.
2
3a&ely, for&ation of a s%ste$ of production, an ,econo&y,/ as a see&in%ly autono&ous re%ulator of social life in
(hich the interests of social classes are constituted and, once constituted, on the asis of (hich ideal9typical and
i&puted ecause reified for&s of a(areness can e reconstructed.
social and, retrospectively, historical relativity of such an insi%ht (ould have contradicted the
principle of truth in the na&e of (hich stru%%le a%ainst &edieval natural philosophy
4*ristotelian physics5 and Church do%&a (as carried out. 40his very sa&e principle of
ahistorical truth and the lindness to an e'tra9theoretical, &otivatin% interest (ere and re&ain
intert(ined. 0a"en to%ether, they %uaranteed the i&possiility of thin"in% science at its ori%ins
as a social pro1ect and class9ound pheno&enon.5
*t its foundations and ori%ins, the ne( science (as a &echanics, a study of odies in &otion
that considers these odies strictly in their )uantifiale, &easurale aspect. 4*s such, it also
(ould and does have tan%ile advanta%es over *ristotelian physics, ut only fro& the
practico9technical perspective of nature &astery. ,t ould otherise &e $eaningless.5
?alilean &echanics 4si&ilarly 3e(ton5 ta"es as its point of departure sensuous nature, al(ays
understood fro& its instances, as an a%%re%ate totality of odies in &otion, that is, it is
re%arded solely in its for&al odily, and hence )uantifiale, aspects. 0he point of departure,
then, already rests on an astraction 4in ?alileo, a %eo&etrical one5 since sensuous nature
4the apperceived totality of perceptual pheno&ena5 al(ays presents itself as an undivided
(hole, a unity of )ualitative and )uantitative, e&otive and aesthetic characteristics. >n the
asis of this initial astraction, the scientist proceeds to select data 4pheno&ena5 (ith a vie(
to possile connections that hold et(een certain )uantitative properties of pheno&ena<
0his (as the "ey prole&, a )uestion of ho( to render pheno&enal )ualities, that data of
sense e'perience, (hat in the *ristotelian9Scholastic le'icon (as ter&ed ,accidents,/
)uantitative, hence, su1ect to nu&er, i.e., to &athe&atical analysis< In and throu%h a
series of for&ali=in% and &athe&ati=in% operations N additional astractions, products of
&ethodolo%ically canali=ed su&9ective capacities of the scientist 4her su1ectivity5, sensuous
nature re%arded )uantitatively is further reduced to a series of for&ulae that e'press the
Kla(ful re%ularityK of natural pheno&ena. In later develop&ents 4eyond ?alileo5, this
re%ularity constituted in its la(fulness for the purposes of prediction can e su1ect to
e'peri&ental validation 4that is, the prediction can e validated or falsified.5 0his
&ethodolo%ical orientation has very specific ra&ifications for (hat passes as scientific
"no(led%e. Episte&olo%ically, scientific thin"in% has arrived at odies in &otion, i.e.,
constituted the& as such, y proceedin% (ith oservation and description on the asis of 4i.e.,
in fact, prior to all o&servation5 a distinction et(een pri&ary and secondary )ualities, )uantity
and )uality, and, &ore radically, reality and illusion. 0his construction 4odies in &otion,
K&atterK5 si%nifies the eli&ination of not only the sensuous characteristic of o1ects of scientific
investi%ation ut of e&otive and valuative ones as (ell.
1
It renders those odies< re&e&er
science started fro& &echanics, so fro& odies in &otion< su1ect to &athe&atical analysis
4actually, the anticipatory &athe&atical pro1ection per&its this analysis5, (hich, in turn, (ill
&a"e prediction, e'peri&ent and validation, the deconstruction and reconstruction 4i.e., the
&anipulation5 of pheno&enon, etc., possile.
0a"en to%ether, these astractions therey %uarantee the postulate of a perspectiveless
o1ectivity. 0hey are, thou%h, theory9laden constructions restin% on an ontolo%ical pro1ection.
0hat is, prior to all $ethodologicall% grounded strict o&servation and rigorous description is
the anticipation and pro9ection of a funda$entall% $athe$atical orld-in-itself, that is, an
1
Si&ilarly, Bohr 4,&id, OF+ ,0he develop&ent of the so9called e'act sciences, characteri=ed y the estalishin% of
nu&erical relationships et(een &easure&ents, has indeed een further... HdevelopedJ y astract &athe&atical
&ethods ori%inatin% fro& detached pursuit of %enerali=in% lo%ical constructions. 0his situation is especially illustrated
in physics (hich ori%inally understood as all "no(led%e of that nature of (hich (e ourselves are part, ut %radually
ca&e to &ean the study of the ele&entary la(s %overnin% the properties of inani&ate &atter./ We (ould ta"e issue
(ith the ,%radual/ character of this develop&ent+ It, the develop&ent, (as %iven (ith the pro1ect of nature do&ination
in the for& that and as it ori%inally too" shape< prior to the elaoration of the &odern science of nature< in
our%eois practices of accu&ulation.
asse$&lage of &odies in $otion calcula&le in advance hich, having alread% ontologicall%
eighted pri$ar% against secondar% qualities, ta!es this orld to &e the reall% real+++ 0his
pro1ection can e found in the &odern science of nature at its ori%ins, in ?alileo 4as our ;irst
Study (ill de&onstrate5 and reaches all the (ay for(ard to its co&pletion, as it (ere, in
Einstein...
1
0he (orld of nature 4includin% &an as natural5 that is anticipated is thus
ho&o%eneous, flattened out, odies, events and processes in nature lac" )ualitative &eanin%
and deter&ination. 3ature no( appears as an a%%re%ate totality of o1ects to e analy=ed or
deco&posed, then reconstructed, &anipulated and disposed, i.e., the fittin% su1ect of
capitalist develop&ent in its full sense 4i.e., as a ra( &aterial asin5 only if anticipatorily. ,t is
onl% ithin the fra$eor! constituted &% this pro9ection 0anticipation5 that an event in nature
can occur as such, i+e+, &eco$e visi&le as an event+
0he distinctions of pri&ary and secondary )ualities, etc., and, &ore funda&entally, the
anticipatory ontolo%ical (ei%hin% of the for&er a%ainst the latter ta"en to%ether constitute the
scientific pro1ection of the (orld of nature as o1ect9li"e 4&erely the other, ideal side of the
reality of societies of capital5. >1ect9li"eness is thou%ht, in reductionist and crude &aterialist
ter&s at least since :escartes, as essentially and si&ply e'tension, as contentless, infinitely
&alleale K&atterK susistin% in ho&o%eneous space, devoid of any internal lo%ic, life or
su1ectivity.
But K&atterK is not KrealK at least in the sense &odern physical science su%%ests, ut, in fact,
is the product of scientific analysis and reconstruction. *ll &odern physical theory is analysis,
conceptually deco&poses its o1ect, natural odies. This is ho( understanding is arrived at.
>nce achieved, a (hole can e reconstructed, this o1ect can e reconstituted fro& the
ele&ental, itself a construct, on up. ;or e'a&ple, scientific understandin% of a roc" one &i%ht
(ish to )uarry is reached only (hen it is conceptually dissolved into its che&ical co&ponents,
the&selves understood in ter&s of their ato&ic structures and their interactions. >nly then can
(e say (e have understood (hat this roc" is, an ore consistin% in so &uch &a%nesiu&,
alu&inu&, iron, etc., co&ponents (hich the&selves have such and such ato&ic structures
and are related 4onded5 in such and such (ays, all of (hich allo(s us to ,understand/ the
o1ect 4roc"5, to %rasp it in ter&s of a ra( &aterial 4iron ore5 to e used in co&&odity
production 4steel5. 0hus, scientific understandin% is al(ays attained a&stractl%, in the
$ove$ent fro$ a hole to the $ost ele$ental, itself a conceptual construct. 1nl% then are
these ele&ental constructs a%%re%ated, a (hole reconstructed. 0hat (hole is an astract
totality, a conceptual (hole that is in a practical sense entirely ho&olo%ous (ith its
ele&entary, infinitely &alleale &aterial co&ponents+ Preco%nitively, this understandin%
penetrates a(areness per&ittin% the o1ects science has constructed to function as ideal,
&anipulale &o&ents of our%eois practices in accu&ulation<
It is here that the deep penetration of the value-for$ into the conceptual structure of science is
disclosed, science ith its reductionist $ethod 0anal%sis and deco$position of the o&9ect5, its
ato$is$ 0ontological pri$ac% of indivisi&le, actuall% infinitel% divisi&le, ele$entar% particles5
and its o&9ectivis$ 0nature a&sent productivit% as its $otive or its driving force< and
su&9ectivit% as a passivel% constituted and full% deter$ined ele$ent, one ele$ent in the
aggregate, lafull% governed hole that is nature5 is full% ho$ogeneous, perfectl% congruent,
ith capital, ith its ato$is$ 0the co$$odit% as the funda$ental realit% of &ourgeois societ%5,
its reductionis$ 0hu$an activit% rendered a&stract, i+e+, generali/ed, te$porall% quantified,
$ateriali/ed and o&9ectified as =value,> existing solel% as an ele$entar% o&9ect that, ith other
1
,3ature is the reali=ation of the si&plest conceivale &athe&atical ideas./ >r, a%ain, ,In the li&ited nature of the
&athe&atically e'istent si&ple Helectro&a%netic, %ravitationalJ fields and the si&ple e)uations possile et(een
the&, lies the theoristIs hope of %raspin% the real in all its depth/ 4e&phases added5. *lert Einstein, 2ssa%s on
Science, 1G, 17 respectively.
such ele$entar% o&9ects collected in production, ta!e the shape of $echanicall% asse$&led,
sociall% co$&ined la&or poer, as a&stract la&or5 and its o&9ectivis$ 0societ% as a
deter$inistic s%ste$ su&ordinate to las discovered &% political econo$%, li!es those alleged
to rule nature5: ?overned y the anticipatory pro1ection of nature as an asse&la%e of odies
in &otion 4itself preco%nitively &otivated y the telos of nature do&ination5, ato$is$,
reductionis$ and o&9ectivis$ are spontaneous $odes of the &ourgeois apprehension of
realit%, and scientific categories are, or $ore generall% the overarching conceptual
architecture of science is, an ela&orate, $ultifarious and $ultifaceted $ediation of this
i$$ediac%?
0his already presupposes too &uch and (e should pause and state e'pressly fro& the
standpoint of episte&olo%y as social theory (hat is at issue here+ Startin% fro& the real
do&ination of capital over laor, the value9for& or%ani=es daily life 4i.e., the e'istential
deter&inants of social life are for&ed in production5, the cate%ories 4araric co&&on sense5
in (hich reality is i&&ediately apprehended arise in the sa&e daily life, and conse)uently tacit
conceptual &odels and precate%orial e'pectations of the structure of relations that otain
a&on% events and processes are all ready to hand and, a&sent a critical-historical reflection
on the genesis and for$ation of those categories, for& the asis of hi%her order theori=ations+
It is not that scientific theori=ations ,reflect/ or si&ply conceptually reproduce in thou%ht the
structure of value9for&+ 0hey do not, ut instead are first and fore&ost one of &any
)ualitatively different for&s 4a&on% (hich are the social relations structurin% institutions,
socially or%ani=ed play and %a&es, literatures of all sorts etc.5, all co&ple'ly &ediated, in
(hich the order of capital itself finds e'pression and throu%h (hich it shapes social life in its
entirety...
1
Return to the criti)ue of science+
0he la(s of natural and hu&anly natural pheno&ena allo( the scientist to %enerate
predictions. It is this very ai& that de&ands e'tra9theoretical confir&ation that, conse)uently,
secures scientific validity. 0o e sure, if science is to e successful at predictin%, it &ust at the
level of concepts capture ideali=ed, aleit fetishi/ed aspects of reality itself. 3onetheless, the
peculiar and (idely reco%ni=ed validity science as theory has achieved does not refer us ac"
to its cate%orial acco&plish&ents, its ,la(s/ of pheno&ena, ut to e'peri&ental verification at
the level of scientific activity and to practical verification in the order of society. It is here, then,
that confir&ation is achieved, ,proof/ ta"es the e'tra9scientific for& of socially %enerali=ed
seein%, approval, and acclai& for the technolo%ical achieve&ents ased on and e'hiited as
nature do&ination+ ;or the validation of those la(s de&onstrates, (hatever else they are,
they are also social prescriptions for the $anipulation of infinitel% $allea&le &odies, $atter or
ra $aterials, in the production of a orld of co$$odities. 0he constitution of such la(s is
asolutely essential to rationali=in% construction of a deter&inate socio9historical life(orld,
societies of capital. ,n the societal validation of prediction, science and capitalis$ are
reunited, the categorial telos of scientific activit% 0prediction5 re9oins the original class
0&ourgeois5, pre-categorial, and hidden telos of the $aster% of nature?
Ideationally produced throu%h scientific &ethod, this &athe&ati=ed (orld of natural
pheno&ena is an anticipatory pro1ection of a socio9historical life(orld constructed throu%h the
su1u%ation of society and surroundin% nature to the production of co&&odities for e'chan%e.
0he co%nitive construct ,&atter,/ contentless odies susistin% in ho&o%eneous space, is the,
aleit oli)ue, theoretical elaoration of ,ra( &aterial/ as it appears in co&&odity production,
endlessly &alleale natural o1ects ripped fro& deconte'tuali=ed surroundin%, visile nature.
Science pro1ects a nature that is flattened out and rendered a surveyale and &anipulale
o1ect+ Stripped of )ualitative deter&ination and reduced to a %ross astraction, it has eco&e
1
;or further elaoration, see the ;ourth Study, Part I, ,0heory of 0ruth,/ elo(.
an a priori )uantifiale series of points deter&ined e'haustively y positions %iven (ith
o1ective ti&e and e'tended space. It is an astraction (ithout purpose or internal lo%ic to its
&o&ents 4odies5 and (ithout inherent or definin% characteristics apart fro& those
&athe&atically pro1ected. ;ro& the side of de&ystified daily e'perience, ho(ever, scienceIs
nature can e est co&prehended as an ideational product &as)ueradin% as real. *t the
hands of 4capitalIs5 science, nature, appearin% in history at once as its %round and as a
product of a develop&ent inseparale fro& its interaction (ith social develop&ent, has
eco&e aestheticall% ugl% stuff. It is, in other (ords, a product of do&ination, of (hat science
and capital have &ade of it. This is nature as $atter, as ra $aterial for co$$odit%
production on a capitalist &asis+++
3eed it e said that the our%eoisie is the first class in history (here nature has this sense,
1
(here its relation to suordinate social %roups, strata, St@nde or classes is i&&ediately and
directly &ediated y nature do&ination, (here a theori=ation of this relation is not
,&ytholo%ical/ or reli%ious, ,ut/ rational 4as in the &odern sense of econo&ically rational5 and
this theori=ation itself has eco&e an issue2
Science, then, is not only our%eois in the narro( cultural sense. It is, historically, a theoretical
&ediation of the activity of capital in the utilitarian9pra%&atic reduction of nature to ra(
&aterial for capitalist production. 0his develop&ent (as i&&anent to science itself. ;or the
theoretical anticipation of this utilitarian9pra%&atic, i.e., technolo%ical, reduction of nature is
&odern science+ ,t is as science that the conceptual fra$eor! for this reduction is
constituted, and out of hich production of a capitalist orld can &e underta!en, a orld in
hich science is at ho$e and ithout hich it ould &e a stranger ithout a ho$e 0hence,
theoreticall% &arren5, i.e., (hich constitutes the societal presuppositions of scienceIs full
develop&ent and (ithout (hich it (ould e undevelopale<
$avin% provisionally fulfilled our second re)uire&ent 4s"etchin% out the i&&anent relation of
si%nificant aspects of the total conceptual structure of science to the our%eoisie as a class
considered historically5, thus havin% for&ulated the contours of our position, and reco%ni=in%
that this position is ,cu&ulative/ in the specific sense that at every &o&ent of our presentation
has its o(n previous develop&ent as its pre&ise 4i.e., each aspect, ,phase/ or section of the
follo(in% studies as it unfolds is internally connected and a necessary develop&ent of (hat
has co&e efore it5, (e can pursue our various in)uiries that, in e'pandin%, elaoratin% and
refinin% this position, concreti=e it, effectively evolvin% its validation and 1ustification.
1
See ,So&e Re&ar"s on the Role of the Wor"in% Class in $istory,/ Part I.
Note
The Classical 2valuation of 3a&or
0he classical evaluation of laor as it has co&e do(n to us throu%h the Renaissance
rediscovery and, in so&e cases, reconstitution of ancient sources should e treated carefully.
0his is not &erely a &atter of reco%ni=in% philolo%ical %losses are al(ays interpretations
ased on, in part, the reality of daily life and the socio9historical deter&inants that operate in
that life in (hich the philolo%ist or co&&entator is situated.
>ur point is &ore and other+ 0he classical evaluation of laor so9called is not a )uestion of
counterposin% a conte&plative life to an active one 4(hich is an *ristotelian, not even Platonic,
valuation that is not echoed in ut finds its elaorate develop&ent in Christian reli%ious
thin"ers, ascetics and, institutionally in, reli%ious orders5. Rather, the classical evaluation of
laor is an assess&ent fro& the point of vie( of those leisured %entle&en (ho, as
lando(ners, not only did not laor ut (ho viscerally elieved that, in principle, laorin%
should, for starters, dis)ualify one fro& the %ood life understood in ter&s of participation in
polis activity. Crafts&en, the uran &erchant and peasant s&allholders, not to &ention slaves
and (o&en, the &ass of those (ho did laor, did not share this vie(.
1
Entirely consistent (ith the anti9de&ocratic, oli%archical politics of classical civic hu&anis& or,
if you prefer, classical repulican theori=ation, it should co&e as no surprise, ho(ever, that the
vie(s of laor of ancient philosophers 4particularly, Plato, *ristotle and, lest (e for%et,
Socrates5 and Ro&an orators, states&en and even poets 4Cicero, Seneca, $orace, 8uvenal5
(ere sharply counterposed to those of the de$os.
2
0he ancient rulin% classes held concrete laor in conte&pt 4they did not "no( the astract
laor of capitalis&5. It (as the reason for their asence fro& their estates and the use of slave
overseers, slave cler"s in the e'ecutive offices of the Kstate,K a slave police force, etc. @ife for
free citi=ens (as co&&unity life that consisted in %overnin% their o(n affairs. 0his
presupposed an entirely different su1ective9class evaluation of the &eanin% and ends of life
fro& our o(n 4(ith its fren=ied desire for (ealth accu&ulation5, one (ith an o1ective9social
i&pact. ;or the ancients, especially the ?ree"s 4and here it is &oot (hether this
characteri=ation should e restricted to *thenians, thou%h in *thens at least it should also
include those laorin% classes ecause they roadly participated in popular asse&lies and
en%a%ed in 1ury delierations5, this evaluation (as political 4the one area fro& (hich slaves
and (o&en (ere (ithout e'ception e'cluded5 and centered on citi=en self9%overn&ent.
@aor, here, it is noted refers to those activities 4lar%ely a%ricultural in the ancient (orld5 that
socially reproduced the co&&unity as a (hole, oth directly 4hoein%, plantin%, harvestin% in
a%riculture y peasants and slaves, faricatin% (ood and &etals a&on% crafts&en5 and
indirectly 4&ar"et &ediated distriution involvin% s&all &erchants, do&estic tas"s and even
state ad&inistrative activities of slaves5.
If (e proe a little &ore deeply (e can elicit (hat (as at issue in the rulin% class attitude
to(ard laor.
It (as, first, a class ased hostility to(ard the ,&o,/ the lo(er orders, (ho, y (ay of their
insinuation 4i.e., their lon% historical stru%%le incorporatin% the&selves5 into the polis
co&&unity of self9%overnin% citi=ens (ith their incessant de&ands, after all, threatened
estalished (ealth if not al(ays po(er.
D
1
;or restriction of this conte&pt to the rulin% classes, Ellen 6ei"sins Wood, 4easant-Citi/en and Slave, 1DG91DF.
2
Wood, ,&id, 2292#, 1DG91#CE 6oses ;inley, 2cono$% and Societ% in 7ncient 8reece, 77, 1FG91FF, 17#.
D
0he ancient polis cannot e understood in the 6ar'ist sense as the do&ain, raised aove society, in (hich an
other(ise internally divided rulin% class achieves unity re)uisite to societal he%e&ony and, si&ultaneously, as the
institution consistin% of an array of repressive a%encies and or%ani=ations 4courts, 1udiciary, prosecutors, prisons,
cops, &ilitary, etc.5 that enforce class rule. 0he institutional separation that characteri=es capitalist &odernity in its
entirely, here the constitution of the state as specific sphere (ith its o(n distinctive shape on the asis of (hich
It (as, second, a perspective on the (orld, a vision in (hich the private and the pulic real&s,
those of the household and the fa&ily and that of the polity or, in ter&s that are &ore fa&iliar
to us, natural necessity and freedo&, (ere un)uestionaly assu&ed to e ontolo%ically
separate, and in thou%ht "eep distinct.
0he for&er, the private real& of the householder inclusive of the productive and do&estic
activities slaves and (o&en carried out, (as considered the order of natural necessity
devoted to the reproduction of hu&an life. $ere force and violence (ere per&issile, nay
re)uisite+ Slaves had to e driven to co&plete their tas"s 4for (hich an overseer (as hired5.
Slaves and (o&en (ere prepolitical creatures confined to prepolitical spheres of activity,
activity al(ays en%a%in% the& in the perfor&ance of necessary tas"s that hu&ans as natural
ein%s cannot escape. In this conte't, it (as the ri%ht and 1ustified, unthin"in%ly so, to e&ploy
violence to &aster necessity 4"eep slaves and (o&en in line, no(here did (o&en participate
in polis activities5+ It (as only throu%h prepolitical acts of violence that householders
e&ancipated the&selves fro& necessity and raised the&selves to the level (here they &i%ht
e'perience the freedo& of polis ased, co&&unity life. 0here all &en (ere ,e)uals/ 4the
ine)uality of affairs that tendin% to hu&an nature i&posed (ere transcended5, a do&ain in
(hich &en did not co&&and still other &en, ut rather one in (hich &en neither ruled nor
(ere ruled, neither led nor (ere ledE instead, there &en strove to distin%uish the&selves
throu%h action understood as %reat (ords and deeds. 4Speech &a"in%, elo)uence too, (as
indeed a vital aspect of polis activity, e'cessively so y the li%hts of capitalist &odernity (ith
its orientation to(ard practice understood pra%&atically and in utilitarian ter&s5. ;ounded and
sustained y those actions understood as %reat (ords and deeds, it is onl% in and throu%h the
political co&&unity, the polis, that &en constitute for the&selves an o1ectivity that endures,
the only "ind of staility and per&anence that hu&ans can, situated in the endless cyclical
eco&in% of nature, attain, for it is only in the polis, characteri=ed y this endurin% institutional
presence, that any specific &an achieves lastin% reco%nition in the &e&ory of his
conte&poraries and his and their descendants. 0here is a certain a&ount of individualis& 4not
our%eois e%ois&5 in this interpretation of polis life 4(hether it is retrospectively pro1ected is an
entirely different )uestion, thou%h it is consistent (ith (hat (e "no(n aout the archaic,
aristocratic and proto9statist co&&unities fro& (hich ?ree" polei developed5,
1
ut it %oes a
lon% (ay to e'plain (hy viscerally laor, the )uintessential activity that en%a%es the laorer in
sphere of natural necessity so9called, (as held in conte&pt y self9styled %reat &en.
3o(, it is not 1ust the classical evaluation of laor that is overthro(n in the 4self5 appreciation
of technical s"ills a&on% %reat artisans and the declassed hu&anist intelli%entsia. >verco&e
(ith it, and lo%ically presupposin% this topplin%, is the &eanin% and si%nificance of nature as it
is si&ply ta"en for %ranted, oth ,nature/ in the sense of the enco&passin% reality in (hich
hu&ans are situated and the state of nature in the strictly political sense.
0hou%h the t(o are intert(ined and inti&ately connected, the latter is not part of this
discussion.
2
But the for&er is at the core of it+ *s (e shall have occasion to point out in the
ody of this te't, *ristotelian cos&olo%y, startin% fro& a concept of fi'ed, unchan%in% and
)ualitatively distinct natural places, &ust e, si&ultaneously, overthro(n if the understandin%
of nature underlyin% &odern &echanics is to prevail. $ere, (e can cite a sin%le e'a&ple, one
society is &ediately or%ani=ed, si&ply did not otain in ancient 4?ree"5 society (here the polity re&ained e&edded
in social life and popular classes throu%h social stru%%le had achieved a &odicu& of participatory control in the
co&&unity, enou%h at least to a&eliorate the (orst aspects of the productive9ased e'ploitation of free &en.
1
0his is our readin% of $annah *rendt, The Hu$an Condition, F97,2G9D#, 17O9177E for archaic aristocratic
co&&unities, see ;inley, The "orld of 1d%sseus.
2
;or the transfor&ation of the culturally he%e&onic sense of the ,state of nature,/ lar%ely achieved y $oes, see
;.>. Wolf, Die Neu "issenschaft des Tho$as Ho&&es. 3ote especially the discussion at chapter 2.21, on the
distinction et(een ,nature/ and ,art/ in $oes. criti)ue of *ristotelian theory of the /oon ph%sei politi!on.
that &ay perhaps i&&ediately appear anecdotal, ut (hich in its perhaps tan%ential character,
&a"es precisely our point+ *s a youn% &an, ?alileo assi&ilated and espoused the i&petus
physics of ?iovanni Benedetti, an i&&ediate predecessor 4in lthe o%ically reconstructed, if not
an entirely historical sense5.
1
In contrast to *ristotelian natural philosophy as it (as
understood as the epoch of capitalIs for&al do&ination e%an to &ature 4circa 1C705, this
physics had a funda&ental &athe&atical co&ponent. It (as *rchi&edean. *rchi&edes (as
an artisan. *&on% ?alileo.s conte&poraries in the roadest sense, t(o of the& enunciated
ri%idly opposed valuations of *rchi&edes. 8ero&e Cardan, (ho, accordin% to *le'ander
LoyrU, (as disposed to ran" %reat &en 4&eanin% philosophers and thin"ers5, placed
,*rchi&edes aove Euclid, aove *ristotle, aove :uns Scotus and >cca&,/ placin% hi& y
hi&self in the hi%hest cate%ory.
2
3o(, 8ulii Cearii Scali%er vi%orously o1ected, and his
o1ection (as ased on the %rounds that *rchi&edes (as an artisan. Patently, such an
assess&ent 4Cardan.s5 turned the traditional valuation of laor upside do(n.
In li%ht of this and in closin% this note, t(o further points< oth su%%estin% the early &odern
ascendancy of the inversion of the classical vie( of laor< &i%ht e &ade+ ;irst, classical
cos&olo%y (as already e%innin% to %ive (ay to a ho&o%eni=ed decentered space in i&petus
physicsE
D
and, second as (e have already indicated,
#
it (as precisely artisan activity (hich
functioned, at least in one tradition of science 4Baconian5, as a &odel for the develop&ent of
e'peri&ental and technical "no(led%e that is characteristically rational, ecause
oservational, pulicly accessile and affords insi%ht into natural dyna&ics< 0his rin%s us to
?alileo.
1
Beneditti.s &ain (or" 4in @atin5 in this re%ard, Treatise on Diverse Mathe$atical and 4h%sical Speculations,
appeared in 1CFC.
2
8alileo Studies, DO.
D
,&id, DC.
#
See ,Social Bases of the ;or&ation of an >r%anic Intelli%entsia of the Bour%eoisie,/ aove.
Introduction
The !odern Science o "ature
Biblio#raphical Sources
*rendt, $annah. The Hu$an Condition+ Chica%o, 17C7
*u%ustine of $ippo. The Cit% of 8od+ Chica%o, 17C2
Bacon, ;rancis. The 8reat ,nstauration, in The 8reat ,nstauration and Ne 7tlantis+ *rlin%ton
$ei%hts 4I@5, 17F0 41O205
Barnes, Will. The Histor% of )lorence and the )lorentine Repu&lic fro$ the fro$ the 2ra of
)eudal Decadence 0**((-*'A(5 to in the 2ra of the Rise of 1ligarchical 4oer,
:ingl% 8overn$ent and ,ndividual T%rann% 0*BC(-*DCA5: ,nstantiating the Historical,
4roductive and Class Struggle Matrix of the 2pochal Rise of Capital#s )or$al
Do$ination, Boo" II of Revolutionar% 1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch of Capital#s
)or$al Do$ination of 3a&or in 4roduction+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWWW. ,So&e Re&ar"s on the Role of the Wor"in% Class in $istory/ in The Crisis in
Societ% and Nature and the "or!ing Class in Histor%, St. Paul, 2010
1
Bohr, 3iels. 7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an :noledge+ 3e( -or", 17CF
:escartes, RenU. Discourse on Method for Reasoning "ell and for See!ing Truth in the
Sciences 41ODG5+ *ccessed online at (((.records.viu.ca
Einstein, *lert. 2ssa%s on Science+ 3e( -or", 17D#
;inley, 6oses. The "orld of 1d%sseus+ 6iddlese' 4En%.5, 17G7
WWWWWWWWWWW. 2cono$% and Societ% in 7ncient 8reece+ @ondon, 17FD
?alileo ?alilei. Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s+ Ber"eley, 17OG 41OD25
LoyrU, *le'andre. 8alileo Studies. *tlantic $i%hlands 4385, 17GF 4;rench ori%inal, 17D75
6ar', Larl. :apital+ 2ine :riti! der 4oliltischen E!ono$ie+ Dritte Band, Buch ,,,: Der
8esa$$tpro/ess der !apitalistischen 4rodu!tion+ $eraus%e%een von ;riedrich
En%els. $a&ur%, 1F7#
Pa%els, Elaine. 7da$, 2ve, and the Serpent+ 3e( -or", 17FF
Redondi, Pietro. 8alileo, Heretic+ Princeton 4385, 17FG
Rossi, Paolo. 4hilosoph%, Technolog% and the 7rts in the 2arl% Modern 2ra+ 3e( -or", 17G0
Wood, Ellen 6ei"sins. 4easant-Citi/en and Slave, @ondon, 17F7
Wolf, ;.>. Die Neu "issenschaft des Tho$as Ho&&es+ Fu den 8rundlagen der poltischen
4hilosphie der Neu/eit+ Stutt%art, 17O7
Bilsel, Ed%ar. ,0he Sociolo%ical Roots of Science,/ Gournal of 7$erican Sociolog%, #G, 17#2
1
*ll (or"s cited under our na&e are availale at the (esite, (((.intcssc.(ordpress.co&, unless other(ise indicated
4as ,&anuscript/, ,unpulished/ or ,posthu&ous/5.
$irst Study
Science at its %rigins
The ro!le" of Motion: &alileo and 'ristotle
0he for%oin% preli&inary re&ar"s
1
start fro& a perspective for (hich it is i&possile to
intelli%ently and intelli%ily understand concepts, theories and visions of the (orld and,
$utatis $utandis, syste&atic conceptual constructs elaorated over %enerations such as the
&odern science of nature, to%ether (ith the %eneral for&s of a(areness that underlay the&
4i.e., the consciousness of social su1ects that oth articulate and e&ody the&5, as
,reflections/ of reality 4(orld5 that prove their truth in, say, ,correspondin%/ to the ,facts/ or that
are assi%ned a status as ,ideolo%ical/ refle'es of social %roups. While a for&al elaoration of
this position (ill have to (ait,
2
here (e shall si&ply note that a reflection theory of
consciousness and a correspondence theory of truth are untenale ecause, first, the
structure of each 4theory and (orld5 is essentially dissi&ilar and ecause,
D
second, oth the
a(areness of social %roups and the theories and visions %enerated y the& are active
&o&ents in the construction of the (orld itself 4culture of daily life, society, hu&ani=ed natural
landscapes all (ithin the conte't of earthly nature5.
*s active, theori=ations 4i.e., (e (ho theori=e5 en%a%e the (orld< a (orld that is not static
4ut first and fore&ost the social and historical (orld of daily e'perience, a life(orld5... see" to
uncover and disclose its structure and or%ani=ation, address and )uery it, ta"e up a dialo%ue
(ith those (ho have e'plicitly pursued the sa&e activity in the past. 0his reco%nition (ill
i&pose t(o re)uire&ents on us+ We are oli%ed, first, to riefly at least descrie the contours
of that social and historical (orld and, second, to situate the theorist and the traditions fro&
(ithin (hich he en%a%es that (orld. ;or it is only in inte%ratin% the theorist and his (orld<
e'hiitin% the &anner in (hich the latter shapes the concerns of the for&er, and the &anner in
(hich the activity of the for&er, as oth representative and a ,co&ponent/ of a social %roup
4and, in the case of particularly i&portant theorists and their (or", of a social class5, %oes
eyond its deter&inants y illu&inatin% it, and therey su%%estin% action in it or transfor&in%
it< that this life and the theoretical 4scientific, literary, philosophical, etc.5 (or" itself eco&es
intelli%ile.
#
In ta"in% up those re)uire&ents, (e shall s"etch out the relation et(een ?alileo and the
(orld, startin% fro& his (orld as he consciously interro%ated its traditions, the (orld in (hich
his ori%inal understandin% of it for&ed and his &otivation for enterin%... the need or interest
that co&pelled hi& to enter... into such a dialo%ue or, as in his case, pole&ic. In so doin%, (e
shall return to the the&es articulated aove, to ?alileo as one of the creators of the &odern
science of nature< thou%h, as (e &i%ht suspect, this science as such is not full% for$ulated
in 8alileo< to ?alileo as a our%eois, and to this science as the decisive &o&ent in the
constitution of the our%eoisie as a historical class.
1
I.e., the Introduction, aove.
2
See the ;ourth Study, Part III, ,0he 6aterialist :ialectic,/ elo(.
D
*ll theory is, and its structural co&ponents also 4concepts5 are, ,ideal/ and, at the ris" of ein% unduly repetitive,
conceptualE the (orld as itIs si&ply %iven 4and this is (hat is, so it is ar%ued, ,reflected/5 is ,real/ and sensuous9
&aterial. But to spea" &eanin%fully aout the (orld is already to apprehend it conceptually, so that the co&parison
that is ein% &ade is et(een a theory, or its structure, and the (orld rendered reflectively intelli%ile, i.e., in its
intelli%iility or as conceptually apprehended. 0his activity oviously, then, constitutes a co&parison of concepts to
concepts... (hich is le%iti&ate practice 4(e en%a%ed in it in discussin% the ho&olo%y et(een crucial conceptual
ele&ents of the &odern science of nature and the structure of the value for&5... ut this is not the type of co&parison
that is assu&ed and defended in a reflection theory of consciousness. See the ;ourth Study, Part III, ,0heory of
0ruth,/ elo(.
#
@ucien ?old&ann, The Hidden 8od, G.
Part I
*ristotle
The 7ncient Mediterranean "orld in the 7ge of 04lato and5 7ristotle
*
Be%in (ith a rief, synoptic vie( of the late ancient 6editerranean (orld.
Rnli"e other social for&s 4e.%., huntin% and %atherin%, free peasant co&&unities ased on
far&in% and ani&al do&estication or on shepherdin% and livestoc" cultivation5 e'istin% in the
interstices et(een the %reat social for&ations of the late 6editerranean (orld, triutary or
other(ise 4Persia, a %ro(in% Ro&an presence, Cartha%inia, an e&er%in% 6acedonia,
seafarin% Phoenicia5, the ?ree" cities of the *ttic peninsula (ere, in part, ano&alous<
0riutary for&ations are ased on villa%es co&&unities that practice sedentary far&in%,
pri&arily %rain and rice production, in (hich the peasant, if you (ill, (or"in% the land (or"s it
as a no&inally ,free/ tiller 4(hether co&&unally or as a fa&ily unit5 su1ect irre%ularly or
seasonally to corvUe laor. 0hese co&&unities "no( no concept of private property in
production ecause they do not practice it. !illa%es, co&&unities, &anorial estates, etc., are
spatially separate and unified y perhaps the earliest for& of the state, an overarchin%
"in%ship, often a divine persona%e and his entoura%e 4especially, in ancient triutary for&s5.
*ll land as a &atter of course elon%s to this, the %reatest lord. Lin%ship estalishes itself
douly, on the asis of the accu&ulated surpluses, appropriated as triute fro& the villa%es,
and on the asis of its ar&ed force to%ether (ith an ele&entary ureaucracy 4a tiny layer of
priests, ta' collectors, scholars of the %reat landed fa&ilies as in China, or any co&ination
thereof5. 0he state in triutary for&ations is not hi%hly centrali=ed 4such as is the &odern,
ureaucrati=ed capitalist state5, and the villa%e co&&unities are often autono&ous to the
e'tent that they do not have to ne%otiate relations (ith the ureaucrat 4or priest5 on a daily
ase, ut only at &o&ents of ta' collection or (hen laor covrUes are periodically enforced.
0riutary ,societies/ are over(hel&in% rural, thou%h they are fully co&patile (ith uran
enclaves that e'ist &ost often on their %eo%raphical peripheries, especially alon% or near
coast (ater(ay+ Particularly in their &odern shapes, triutary for&ations have rarely e'isted
(ithout these ,&etropolises/ that are oth centers of civil ad&inistration and restricted, i.e.,
lu'ury, production and consu&ption...
2
Within a triutary reality that nascently stretched as far ac" as G,000 years a%o, the ancient
(orld (as in the first place itself &assively a%rarian, not 1ust in the sense of a du& fact ut in
that, (here they appeared, cities the&selves (ere centers of consu&ption, often
ad&inistrative, and not centers of production e'hiitin% only the arest rudi&ents of an
,econo&y,/ unli"e those social for&ations that appear, say, fro& the ti&e of :ante for(ard at
least in the eastern 6editerranean and the @evant 4the >tto&ans5, and t(o to three centuries
later on the Euro*sian land &ass 4the 0sars5 and in 8apan 4the 0o"u%a(a5.
0hus, in the second place, (e do not spea" aout the ,econo&y/ as an institutionall% distinct
sphere. 4Such an institutional evolution is a function of capitalist develop&ent, of societies that
in history i&&ediately predate its appearance and as such, (here for&al &odes of capital.s
do&ination in laor have een institutedE of societies that are i&plicated in capitalist
develop&ent, even (here there is resistance, throu%h the spread of e'chan%e relations,
throu%h colonial and i&perialist plunderE and, of course, of capitalist societies the&selves.5
1
0he follo(in% re&ar"s rely on Perry *nderson, 4assages fro$ 7ntiquit% to )eudalis$, 1F92F and 3ineages of the
7&solutist State, 1C091CD y the sa&e authorE $annah *rendt, The Hu$an Condition, 2F9DG, 1729177E Ellen 6ei"sins
Wood, 4easant-Citi/en and Slave, 2292F, 1DG91#CE the Introduction to our Civil "ar and Revolution in 7$erica Hand,
especially, the discussion of non9capitalist for&s of hu&an sociation in Hierarch% and Social Division, Natural
Deter$inis$ and Modern Man appearin% in 1rigins and 2ndings++ EditorIs note.J
2
Inclusive of the concept of a for&al do&ination of capital over laor 4as it appears in the follo(in% para%raph in the
te't5, triutary for&ations are e'plored fro& a different perspective in the ;irst Interlude, ,;unda&ental ;or&s of
Sociation in $u&an $istory,/ elo(.
E'pansion in the ancient (orld (as not ,econo&icK ut %eo%raphicalE or, stated differently,
&ilitary con)uest, entailin% plunder, captives ta"en as, say, do&estic slaves and triute, (as
identical (ith e'pansion. In this re%ard, productive activity in the ?ree" (orld (as conducted
(ithin a self9contained unit, the household 4oi!os5, consistin% of the fields, ho&e and (hatever
other structures related to far&in% that &ay have e'isted. Production (as carried out for
internal consu&ption, not for a &ar"et.
In the third place, slavery and slave production (as far &ore i&portant to the cities9states of
ancient ?reece than to the lar%er triutary for&ations of the ancient (orld (here, (hile slavery
e'isted, for&s of no&inally free, aleit oppressed peasant tenancy su1ect to laor services
often predo&inated. 40hus, in contradistinction to ancient ?reece this did not preclude the
periodic deploy&ent of corvUe laor, and it did not entail private appropriation ased on
property in land.5 Productive activity (as ased on the oi!os, (hich (as a separate and
distinct unit of production. $ouseholds (ere separate units of slave production, producin% for
self9susistence first and then for a &ar"et thereafter. 0heir connection, then, (as for&ed
throu%h e'chan%e 4not production5, throu%h the uran &ar"etplace. Still even at this point they
did not constitute a ,society/ or co&&unity. 0his (as achieved, at least in ?reece, uni)uely
throu%h the polis, to (hich (e shall co&e ac" shortly. 0hus, unli"e in the rest of the ancient
(orld, in ancient ?reece slavery e'isted as a pri&arily for& of laor in far&in% as the asic
for& of production 4corn, oil and (ine ein% the three &ain products of the ancient ?ree"
(orld5, &eanin%, first, that private o(nership of the land prevailed, (hereas in the %reat
triutary for&ations the elon%in% of land to the %reat overlord prevailed, even as there &i%ht
have een &ore or less e'tensive that ,free/ peasant tenancy. It &eant, second, slavery in
the ancient ?ree" (orld arose on the asis of the victorious class stru%%le of the de$os and
ple&eians a%ainst lar%e lando(ners in the conte't of laor shorta%es. 0hat is, it rested on the
resultin% de&ocrati=ation of the polity and the popular e'pansion of citi=en ri%hts 4that
included a s&all class of uran artisans5, and the consequent inaility of landed elites to
co$pel free &en to laor for the&.
;inally, there (as that truly ano&alous develop&ent, the polis, far &ore aristocratic outside of
*thens. 0he ancient ?ree" rulin% classes as landlords (ho &astered &en 4slaves5 and
(o&en 4in the household5, held concrete laor, the activity of those (ho (or"ed 4and, note,
not the astract laor of capitalis&5, in conte&pt. It (as the reason for their asence fro& their
estates and the use of slave overseers in the fields.
@ife for free citi=ens, for the %reat lando(ners ut the pleeians also, (as uran, co&&unity
life that consisted in %overnin% their o(n affairs throu%h a political asse&ly, the polis 4a
sin%ular achieve&ent in the history of hu&an co&&unities to the e'tent that it (as an
institution that e'isted only in asse&ly, eyond the real& of violence, (here centrally speech,
ar%u&ent and persuasion held s(ay5< *s %reat cities, *thens, *le'andra, Cartha%e and
Ro&e (ere coastal or situated on neary inland rivers, not the least ecause trade, the one
autono&ous activity of uran centers in the ancient (orld, (as &ost easily, and fro& the
standpoint of &erchants less e'pensively, conducted y (ater, and even this ,fact/ is
si%nificant ecause the ancient ?ree" 4and Ro&an5 city itself (as atypical and
uncharacteristic, incarnatin% its o(n do&inance in an over(hel&in%ly rural, a%rarian (orld, a
do&inance &ade possile y the use of slave laor oth (ithin the household 4(o&en,
(ashin%, se(in%, preparin% food, cleanin%5 and in the fields freein% the %reat lando(ner for
uran life and, he and his sons for the elaoration of a uni)ue, even if aristocratic culture
1
< It
(as city life in (hich civic activity (as para&ount, ut the ancient ?ree" cities for&ed an
1
Rsed here in the $e%elian sense entailin%, institutionally and culturally, >1ective Spirit 4la(, statecraft, civil
ad&inistration5 and *solute Spirit 4poetry and dra&a, reli%ion, and philosophy5 all %rasped &aterialistically as hu&an
productions.
inte%rated unity, a free develop&ent (ithin ut enco&passed y the countryside, unli"e
4econo&ic5 develop&ent (hich at least since the ti&e of ?alileo counterposed the 4rural lords,
craft &asters and &erchant capitalists that do&inated the5 city to the 4tenants and rural
laorers of the5 countryside as the for&er e'ploited the latter for its a%ricultural produce,
tenant rents, and resources utili=ed to construct the sensuous9&aterial structures 4aove all,
the churches and palatial ho&es of the %reat &erchants, an"ers and &anufacturers5 that
co&prised the visile aspect of the uran (orld. Rnli"e our (orld, in (hich accu&ulation for
the sa"e of accu&ulation 4the &ove&ent of capital5 predo&inates, in (hich personal
a%%randi=e&ent rooted in our%eois e%ois& is &erely the other side of this o1ective lo%ic,
civic life as understood y the ancient ?ree"s presupposed an entirely different su1ective9
class evaluation of the &eanin% and telos of life %enerally. ;or the&, this evaluation (as
political 4the one area fro& (hich slaves (ere (ithout e'ception e'cluded5 and centered on
citi=en self9%overnance, in the sense of neither rulin% nor ruled, and neither &ana%in% and
ad&inisterin% nor &ana%ed and &inistered to. It (as on this asis that the enor&ous, )uic"
develop&ent of *solute Spirit in the $e%elian, yet &aterialist sense unfolded, short9lived to
e sure, ut all the &ore astoundin% for its rapid and transient efflorescence.
7ristotle
?iven that there is no really %ood io%raphy of *ristotle, let.s see (hat (e "no(.
*ristotle (as one of three children orn to a (ealthy, estalished Ionian fa&ily in DF# BCE.
*out the ti&e of his irth his father, 3ico&achus, eca&e a physician to *&yntas III, "in% of
6acedonia 4and father of Philip (ho (as father of *le'ander5, the &ost recent of a lon% line of
distin%uished physicians. $is &other, Phaestis, (as a (ealthy aristocrat (ith landholdin%s and
an estate ho&e at Chalcis 4Lhal"Xs5 on the island of Euoea 4Evvoia5, CC "ilo&eters north
north(est of *thens opposite the eastern ed%e of the *ttica peninsula dividin% the northern
and southern (ater(ays of the !oreios EvvoY"os. With 3ico&achus. ne( appoint&ent he
relocated his fa&ily to Pella 4actually, it is si&ply unclear (hether it (as he and *ristotle or the
entire fa&ily5, the ancient capital of 6acedonia (here *ristotle spent his earliest years. Both of
his parents (ere to die (hile he (as relatively youn%, his father no later than *ristotle.s
seventeenth year 4perhaps cau%ht in the crossfire of infi%htin% a&on% the royal 6acedonian
entoura%e5, and his &other shortly thereafter efore he turned ei%hteen. It presu&ed that
*ristotle spent his youth in Pella, perhaps, as (as custo&ary, studyin% and asorin% (hat he
could of his father.s &edical practice. 40here is internal evidence, that *ristotle did indeed live
in Pella, since he &a"es reference to his distaste for court life, even princes and even as a
later teacher of *le'ander.5 *t any rate, (ith his parents. death he eca&e a char%e of one
Pro'enus, the husand of his sister, *ri&neste.
*t the a%e of seventeen, *ristotle (as sent y Pro'enus or he set off hi&self< this too is not
clear< to study at Plato.s *cade&y in *thens. ;or the ne't t(enty years, this (as the conte't
of his intellectual for&ation, for he (as student, ,researcher/ and then, at the &o&ent of
Plato.s death in D#G BCE, a teacher at the *cade&y. It can e safely assu&ed that here
*ristotle studied politics and la(, &athe&atics and astrono&y, and of course pursued &ore
roadly philosophical in)uiries, as each and all (ere understood in the ancient, particularly the
*thenian, (orld. $e is reputed to have e'celled as a student, and (as referred to even y
Plato as the *cade&y.s ,intellect./ *s a teacher, he &ay have tau%ht rhetoric and dialo%ue.
3o( the *cade&y (as not the only school in *thens, Isocrates, a sophist ,ene&y/ of Plato, for
e'a&ple, ran another one 4as (ould *ristotle in his later years5. 0hese educative institutions
(ere aristocratic, desi%ned for the sons of the slaveholdin% lando(ners, intended to at once
i&part a culture distinctively characteri=in% and distin%uishin% this class as such and to
prepare the& for any roles they &i%ht assu&e as states&en or &ilitary leaders (ithin the
*thenian co&&unity.
*ristotle (as not destined to assu&e directorship of this institution upon Plato.s death. 4It is
su%%ested le%ally he (as not *thenian or $ellene. Since Philip sac"ed the ?ree" city state of
>lynrhus in D#F, there &ay (ell have een hostility to(ard hi&, as a ,forei%ner,/ 6acedonian
and so&eone (ho had spent a %ood part of his early life in Philip.s father.s court, to oot.5
Instead a nephe( of Plato, Speusippus, assu&ed this post. Perhaps as a conse)uence,
*ristotle left *thens (ith a co&panion, Venocrates, and, traveled to *sia 6inor, estalished a
ranch of the *cade&y in *ssos, today in north(est 0ur"ey. It is elieved this city (as
controlled y a tyrant, a ?ree" &ercenary na&ed $er&ias 4of *tarneus5 and an underlord to
the Persian "in%. $er&ias, havin% once een a &e&er of the *cade&y 4and infatuated (ith
Plato.s lectures5, struc" up and developed a close friendship (ith *ristotle. Shortly thereafter
*ristotle &arried $er&ias. adopted youthful dau%hter 4*ristotle (as no( DG5, Pythias. She
ore hi& a child 4or he adopted one of hers as his o(n5, a %irl, ut his (ife died so&eti&e
later. ;or (hatever reason $er&ias felt into disfavor (ith the Persians and *ssos (as su1ect
to attac". *out D## BCE, *ristotle left. $e 1ourneyed south(ard to the island of @esos to the
city of 6ytilene (here he estalished another acade&y. $ere he stayed for a couple years,
&a"in% study of a la%oon that is reputed to have contriuted to his iolo%ical theori=ations.
*ccordin% to standard accounts, in D#2 Philip as"ed *ristotle to co&e 4ac"5 to Pella in order
to tutor his son, *le'ander. 4*%ain, there are accounts that this is &ere le%end5. If (e.ve
ade)uately related *ristotle.s %eo%raphical tra1ectory and presented so&e sense of his
&otivation, it (ould e fair to as" 4as history records5 (hy he returned. Reasons ran%e fro& a
full consciousness of the Platonic in1unction concernin% the si%nificance of philosophers in
statecraft to a concern to assist his friend $er&ias in reachin% an a%ree&ent that (ould rin%
a 6acedonian e'pedition a%ainst Persia in *sia 6inor.
In the event, *ristotle crossed the proverial Ruicon 4so&e three centuries efore Caesar
actually crossed into ?aul5 and returned to Pella. In the event, the Bildung that he i&parted to
*le'ander over rou%hly seven years (as not philosophical ut rather &oral in the road
sense. It is elieved y io%raphers that *le'ander fully assi&ilated this eduction, that he
adopted the *chilles of $o&er.s ,liad as a life &odel that served hi& in his a&itious "in%ship,
livin%, li"e the ancient &ytholo%ical hero for honor and estee& and, of course, con)uest.
4*ristotle had %one to the len%th of preparin% a special edition of this (or" for *le'ander.5
By DD7, *ristotle had %ro(n (eary of life in Pella, a senti&ent li"ely deepened y the tas"s of
tutorin% other students at the 6acedonian court. $e left, retreated to his father ho&e of
Sta%ira, a s&all to(n north of *thens and rou%hly F0 "ilo&eters east of Pella, ut soon found
the locale asent all sti&ulation.
In DDC, he (as ac" in *thens, perhaps ecause Speusippus had died. 4$e (as succeeded
y *ristotleIs old ac)uaintance, Venocrates.5 If *ristotle had had any desi%ns on directin% the
*cade&y, he (as )uic"ly disaused+ *nti96acedonian senti&ent (as proaly stron%er at this
&o&ent than it had een thirteen years earlier (hen he had left *thens. $ere *ristotle, it is
elieved, relied on protection of an *thenian diplo&at and friend, *ntipater.
In *thens, *ristotle estalished his o(n school 4"no(n as the @yceu&5 &uch alon% the lines of
other co&petin% institutions. It (as ai&ed at the sa&e youthful audience, youn% aristocrats. It
had the sa&e road curriculu& and sa&e ai&s, na&ely, for&ation of nole character oth
(ith a vie( to (hat (as distinctive aout the %reat lando(ners as a social %roup and to
statecraft.
Hnli!e 8alileo, he had a strong $oral sense 0rooted a precognitive aristocratic ethos5 and full%
developed cognitive notion of the right order of things and, accordingl%, of their natural place+
0he @yceu& (as )uite successful+ So&e of *ristotle.s &ost i&portant (or"s date fro& this
period, that is do(n the year of *le'ander.s death in D2D. *t this &o&ent, an anti96acedonian
revolt too" *ntipater.s treachery 4i.e., his relations to the 6acedonian "in%ship5 as its o1ect
(hich, as an ,alien,/ also endan%ered *ristotle. $e fled.
7gain unli!e 8alileo, 7ristotle retained this strong sense of place throughout his life+ $e
returned to his &other.s estate in Chalcis. $ere, at the a%e of O2, he died in the autu&n of the
follo(in% year co&plainin% of a sto&ach ail&ent 4perhaps an ulcerous condition fro& (hich he
slo(ly led to death5.
Part II
?alileo and the World of Early Capitalis&
0here are three si%nificant traditions (ithin our%eois historio%raphy that provide accounts of
the ori%ins of the &odern science of nature. 0he first t(o are rooted in the crisis of physical
theory that eca&e full lo(n in the chronolo%ically late nineteenth century, and (ere
resolved, at least ade)uately enou%h to allo( scientific theori=in% to rene( itself and develop
ane(, (ith relativist and )uantu& for&ulations. 0hese traditions are counterposed, one, ased
lar%ely on the enor&ous literary output and insi%ht of Pierre :uhe&, holds that the really
i&portant prole&s confronted y the ne( science (ere ori%inally posed and received their
first critical treat&ent y &edieval cos&olo%istsE
1
the other, e%innin% fro& the (or" of
*le'andre LoyrU 4(ho (ritin% over t(enty years after :uhe&.s death, e'plicitly and re%ularly if
only in footnoted fashion critici=ed hi&5
2
holds the &odern science of nature si%nifies a rupture
(ith the (orld, prole&s, analyses and vie(s of the funda&entally *ristotelian Scholastics
and, later, Peripatetics, and, startin% fro& ?alileo, is in its %enuine for& *rchi&edean 4&ore
%enerally, &athe&atical5 and Platonist.
Best e'e&plified y the &ore recent (or" of Paolo Rossi,
D
the third tradition also sees in the
&odern science of nature a counterposition to ancient thou%ht, ut &ore thorou%h%oin%. 0he
for&er is opposed to the latter in its entirety, (hether the ancients are considered Platonic or
*ristotelian. In this respect, the &odern science of nature is conceived unitarily (ith different
co&ple&entary traditions 4(ith points of departure in ?alileo and Bacon5, and it is e'plicitly
%rasped and understood in relation to the practice of social %roups, pri&arily artisans, (hose
activity e&odied and (as %uided y the central ideational features that &ade this
counterposition to the ancients possile and actual.
>ur analyses o(e so&ethin% to each of these traditions.
In so&e respects, for&ally si&ilar to Rossi.s startin% point, (e shall try to tease out the
relation et(een the theori=ation of &odern science of nature as its appears in its &ost
conscious creator, ?alileo, and the (orld he (as rooted. 0his (orld (as radically different
fro& that of uran centers 4e.%., *thens, *le'andria5 that e'isted on the ed%es of the ancient
e&pires in the 6editerranean and *sia 6inor, and, increasin%ly superficial si&ilarities aside, it
differed &ar"edly in all decisive (ays fro& the (orld of &ore &odern social for&ations (hich
in the sa&e re%ions are often referred to as the ,feudal/ or ,&edieval/ ,West./ We shall
atte&pt to estalish that this ne( science ori%inated as a rarefied theoretical response to
prole&s that e&er%ed for the first ti&e in this, the (orld in (hich &en li"e ?alileo lived and
actedE to reveal that these prole&s (ere %enerated on the asis a societal pro1ect the for&ed
out of the life practices of a specific social class of (hich &en li"e ?alileo (ere relationally
partE and that, as such, the type of "no(led%e achieved< and here, and in other (ays that (ill
eco&e clear as this (or" unfolds, (e radically depart fro& the various traditions that &a"e
up our%eois historio%raphy... (as and is not a universal achieve&ent of hu&anity< a
hu&anity that at any rate has yet to co&e into ein% in anythin% other than in a for&al
sense< ut doctrine, "no(led%e and understandin% that is deter&inate, socially and
historically specific and relative to the class and society in (hich that class for&ed and the
civili=ation it has created. ;or even as this science under(ent elaoration and lost any relation
1
0he first four volu&es of :uhe&Is S%stI$e du $onde appeared in 171O, the fifth posthu&ously in 171G, and ased
on &anuscripts, the si'th did not appear until 17C# and the four re&ainin% volu&es (ere pulished et(een 17CO
and 17C7. We use an En%lish lan%ua%e selection 4Medieval Cos$olog%5 lar%ely ased on the later &anuscript
volu&es that deals pri&arily (ith the theoretical asis of &edieval cos&olo%y.
2
LoyrU &ost i&portant (or"s in this re%ard (as his 8alileo Studies (ith the ;rench ori%inal 4Jtudes 8alilIennes5
appearin% in 17D7.
D
Su&&ari=ed, aove all, in 4hilosoph%, Technolog% and the 7rts in the 2arl% Modern 2ra+
to these ori%ins, it has retained and retains, hidden and tacit (ithin its conceptual structure,
the telos that ori%inally ani&ated it
;irst, ho(ever, (e need to start (ith ?alileo and his (orld.
8alileo, ,
"ho as 8alileo 8alileiK
Son of !incen=o ?alilei, ?alileo ?alilei (as orn in Pisa in ;eruary 1CO#, the oldest of seven
children. $is father (as a &usician and (ool trader. 3o( !incen=o had een orn in ;lorence
in 1C20. 4$is &other, ?uilia *&&annati (as orn in Pescia in central 0uscany aout OC
"ilo&eters north(est of ;lorence.5
3ote the date.
Tent%-six 42O5 %ears &efore Lincen/o as &orn Piero de.6edici (as e'pelled fro& ;lorence
and the Repulic (as reestalished on the asis of ;rench ayonets 4:ece&er 1#7#5E
eleven 4115 %ears &efore his &irth Pisans finally su&itted follo(in% upon three lon% years of
fi%htin% to incorporation into Repulican ;lorence.s i&perial do&ains 41C075E eight 4F5 %ears
&efore !incen=o (as orn the ;lorentine Repulic collapsed 4a%ain5. 0his ti&e, the 6edici
(ere restored follo(in% defeat of 6achievallli.s and Soderini.s ,citi=en/ ar&ies y the Spanish
at Prato 41C125. )ive 4C5 %ears after his &irth the Repulic, led y aristocrats of the %reat
fa&ilies such as 8acoo Salviati, 3iccolo Capponi and @ui%i ?uicciardini, (as restored 41O
6ay 1C2O5. Restoration i&&ediately follo(in% upon the pilla%e and sac" of Ro&e 4O 6ay
1C2O5 y ?er&an, Italian and Spanish I&perials (ho had (or"ed their (ay do(n the
Peninsula follo(in% upon their defeat of the ;rench ar&ies 4to (hich Pope Cle&ent !II, ?uilio
de. 6edici, (as allied5 at the attle of Pavia 42# ;eruary 1C2C5. 0he $apsur% i&perials of
Charles ! 4*ustrian e&peror and "in% of Spain5 had crushed the ;rench (ith their ;lorentine
allies. *nd, ten 4105 %ears after Lincen/o as &orn the final destruction of the Repulic (as
acco&plished 412 *u%ust 1CD05. 0his historically finality occurred ten days after the defeat of a
;lorentine partisan force led ;rancesco ;errucci in hard fi%htin% (ith over(hel&in%ly
nu&erically superior Spanish I&perial forces under the Prince of >ran%e en%a%ed in a sie%e
of city. 6ercenaries as the ostensile defenders of the city had under their captain, 6alatesta
Ba%lione, aandoned the fortified e'ternal ;lorentine peri&eter. ?uido de. 6edici, (ho as
Pope had no troule findin% the (here(ithal to do a deal 4*pril 1C275 (ith Charles ! 4codified
in the 0reaty of Barcelona5, restored the 6edici line as the ri%htful overlords of the %reat city
and its territories.
1
0he 6edici (ould rule ;lorence as a Spanish duchy until its anne'ation y
*ustria in 1GDG.
0he restoration of the 6edici in ;lorence in 1CD0 rou%ht to a close, see&in%ly, nearly forty
years of fi%htin% on the Italian Peninsula as the t(o %reat po(ers e&odyin% the old order,
;rance and a risin% Castilian Spain fou%ht over and a%ain to decide (ho (ould rule. 0he
Spanish had proven the&selves &asters of the Peninsula and this (as confir&ed in the
0reaty of Ca&rai. But, as if to re&ind !incen=o, :u"e Cosi&o of 0uscany 4under (atchful
Spanish eyes5 rou%ht troops to ear on Siena for over three years 41CC291CCC5, finally
anne'in% it in 1CCG. ;rench incursions to the north in Savoy 4&ost of the &odern day
Pied&ont5 periodically recurred fro& 1CDO to 1CDF, a%ain fro& 1C#2 to 1C##, the outco&e of
this stru%%le not ein% decided until after the Spanish victory at the attle of St. Suentin
41CCG5. @osses of the !enetians overseas tradin% e&pire to >tto&an e'pansion (est(ard in
the 6editerranean (ould, if this (as not enou%h, re&ind hi& all over a%ain.
2
>f (hat (as
!incen=o re&inded2 The orld is not a safe place.
1
See the ninth the&atic discussion, The Histor% of )lorence+ HEditorIs note.J
2
In 1C07, the !enetian Repulic surrendered all of its non9*driatic frontin% &ainland possessions, follo(ed y the
*e%ean islands north of Crete in 1C#0, Cyprus in 1CG1, and Crete itself in 1OO7.
0he (orld is not a safe place, and !incen=o "ne(. *s a youn% &an, he left ;lorence and
settled in Pisa, thou%h no( under Spanish su=erainty nonetheless far fro& the ;lorentine
&aelstro& of events, (here he &arried ?uilia in 1COD and (here ?alileo (as orn a year
later. 40o the dan%ers of (ar (e &i%ht also add that of fa&ine, (hich (ere ende&ic. ;ro& the
ti&e of the rise of the Cio&pi to the rise of another revolutionary %roup, the 8acoins, ;lorence
(ould e'perience 111 fa&ines. In 1C2F, (hile !incen=o (as a child, ;lorence (as struc" y
fa&ine, (hich (ould recur in 1C#0, and in oth cases, the city closed its %ates to the
surroundin% contado leavin% the 0uscan peasantry to its fate.
1
Pisa (as no different e'cept in
one re%ard+ It (as a port city (here ships carryin% %rain unloaded, and in the chain of
recipients it stood in front of ;lorence.5
* lon% line of the ?alileis, !incen=o.s fa&ily, had een &ade their livelihoods as (ool
&erchants, thou%h they (ere relationally part of the popolo grasso 4neither the %reat
&erchants nor the 3ana &anufacturers, oth of (ho had played central roles in the
accu&ulation of ;lorentine (ealth since the end of the thirteen century5, ut far closer to the
arte $inori, the s&all %uilds&en, shop"eepers and traders, and a&on% these a fa&ily that did
)uite (ell. 3o(, the (ealth, splendor and po(er that accrued to ;lorence at the outset of the
era of capital.s for&al do&ination 4chronolo%ically, the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries5 did
not pri&arily rest on an"in% and trade, ut on the profitaility of its cloth industry 4and this, in
turn, depended upon unchallen%ed control of the &anufacturer9&erchants over the total
process of cloth, i.e., (oolen, production5.
2
In that &aelstro& of events, (ar, sie%es, ranso&s
paid to &ercenaries and re%ular ar&ies to free individual &en and (hole cities fro& &ilitary
occupation (hich had characteri=ed !incen=o.s youth 4not to &ention the three decades prior
to his irth5, (oolen &erchant fortunes had een undone over and a%ain.
!incen=o had understood this perhaps efore he could even articulate it. $e lon%ed for a )uiet
life, and over %enerations his fa&ily had not only een spared the trau&a of loss of fortune ut
had done (ell enou%h for hi& to detach hi&self fro& &erchant activity. $e had studied &usic
in his youth in !enice, had developed real s"ill as a lute player and efore ?alileo.s irth he
supported hi&self and his ne( (ife as a &usic teacher. $e had even perfor&ed certain
e'peri&ents on strin%s to evince his &usical theories, a&on% (hich can e nu&ered his
treat&ent of dissonance for (hich he is re&e&ered today.
!incen=o.s sense of place never deserted hi&. In 1CG2, he, his (ife and his children 4less
?alileo5 returned ho&e to ;lorence. But, as &uch ;lorentine %lory lay in the past, the city he
returned to (as not the city he had left.
Suordinated to the Castilian $apsur% E&pire, the do&inant &erchant &anufacturin%,
&erchant tradin% and an"in% social %roups in central Italy, not 1ust ;lorence, had for nearly a
half century een functionin% as a center of financial support for Spanish i&perial a&itions
and activities, (hich parasitically drained off the (ealth %enerated in the re%ion.
0his re)uires separate treat&ent since it ears directly on (ho ?alileo ?alilei (as and in a
co&ple'ly &ediated fashion on the &odern science of nature.
1
;a&ine (as, as (e said, ende&ic, a typical feature of to(ns and cities that characteri=ed this entire epoch of divided
societies do(n to the end of the 1FD0s, at least in the center of %reatest capitalist develop&ent in the West. See the
0hird Essay, Part I, ,$istory and 6althus,/ elo(.
What (as unusual (as that in 1C2F and 1C#0, fa&ine struc" not only ;lorence ut the countryside, evincin% its utter
severity. ;ernand Braudel, The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean "orld in the 7ge of 4hilip ,,, !ol. I, D2F9D27
4(here this atypical event is noted and fro& (hich (e derive the fi%ures and dates (hich (e shall have occasion to
site a%ain5.
2
See the fifth the&atic discussion, the note on ,Cloth Wor"er E'ploitation and the ;oundations of ;lorentine Wealth
and Po(er,/ The Histor% of )lorence+ HEditorIs note.J
Castilian 2$pire in 2arl% Modern 2urope, Capitalis$ and )or$al Do$ination
1
;ro& the &o&ent of the union of Isaelle and ;erdinand at (hich ti&e Castile consolidated
previous e'pansion south(ard on the Ierian Peninsula, throu%h Charles I 4Charles !, $oly
Ro&an E&peror5 (hen he first assu&ed the Castilian cro(n 41C1O5 until the conclusion of the
War of :utch Independence in 1OC7 4y (hich ti&e the Spanish treasury had een an"rupt
for decades5, for nel% to hundred %ears, Catholic, then $apsur% Castile, no( lon% past its
=enith, en%a%ed in nearly continuous (arfare. Innu&erale s&aller (ars of con)uest that
involved dynastic clai&s or o1ectives, i&perial a&itions in the 6editerranean, the
su1u%ation of northern 4and at its periphery central5 Italy, the occupation of the @o(
Countries, the diversion of &en and &atUriel fro& the Spanish 3etherlands so9called to
@an%uedoc, Brittany and ;ranche9Co&tU, provision for Christian Europe of a defensive
ul(ar" a%ainst the >tto&an 0ur"s< a defense that involved a reli%ious9ideolo%ical po%ro&
a%ainst 6usli&s and 8e(s and can e traced ac" to the &artial alliance of those t(o
reli%iously fanatical =ealots in 1#O7 4the Castilian )ueen and the *ra%onese "in%5, and their
develop&ent and e&ploy of that lac" instru&ent of Christiani=in% terror, the In)uisition
2
<
(ere all essentially supported y the revenues derived, first, fro& e'ploitation of the
peasantries of Ieria, second, fro& the &adly a&itious plunder of and triute e'traction fro&
the peoples of the *&ericas, and third, fro& the lac"&ail, lootin%, pilla%in% and political
suordination of the &erchants and cities of Europe under its control. ?old and silver, and
after 1CC0 e'clusively silver, fed the &achines 4ar&ies5 that (ere the instru&ents of its
a%%randi=e&ent+
D
Product of one of history.s &ost infa&ous and sustained policies of
%enocide, the silver that poured in fro& the *&ericas allo(ed Castilian "in%s to e overco&e
y their o(n &e%alo&aniac a&itions. *t the e%innin% of the century 41C2C91CD05, Charles I
stran%led the co&&ercial centers of northern Italy, &ost notaly ?enoa and ;lorence. 40he
Spanish &aintained five strate%ically i&portant seaports, the Stato dei 4residi, the ,State of
the ?arrisons,/ (hich (as ad&inistered fro& Spanish 3aples and (hich increased the drain
on ;lorentine90uscan resources and (hich (ere the points of departure for trained Spanish
soldiery to fi%htin% on various fronts, especially the @o( Countries.
#
5
Rulin% fro& 1CCO to 1C7F ;elipe 4Philip5 II, havin% ori%inally involved Castile in, y the end of
the century (as still en%a%ed in the &idst of, an ei%hty year9lon% atte&pt to suppress reellion
in the @o( Countries,
C
an effort durin% (hich Spanish and forei%n &ercenaries in the pay of
1
;or Castile as discussed here, see Catalan and Castilian 7ntagonis$ in ,&erian Histor%+ Rise and )all of Catalonia
as a Sea&orne Mercantile 4oer: ,sa&elle, )ernando and the 7scendanc% and Decline of CounterRevolutionar%
Castile HEditorIs note.J
2
0his (as the Spanish In)uisition, precedin% the Ro&an In)uisition y nearly three )uarters of a century, the latter
estalished y Paul III in 1C#2 to turn ac" Calvin, @uther, their offshoots and the Protestant Refor&ation.
D
Braudel, ,&id, !ol. 1, #GO.
In Bolivia, in the foothills of the *ndes the city of PotosX, founded in 1C#O one year after the discovery of silver in the
re%ion, (as center of silver production eco&in% the lar%est sin%le silver &ine in the (orld y 1O11.
Braudel chastises the Spanish for failin% to ,set up ne( and profitale enterprises/ ,at ho&e/ 4,&id, I, #GF5, ut that
(as precisely the point+ 0he non9our%eois, non9capitalist Castilian cro(n (as en%a%ed in defense of the old social
order a%ainst e&er%in% capitalist social %roups and institutions, and it spent this, a fortune achieved entirely y non9
capitalist &eans, plunderin% and ranso&, triute e'traction and effectively enslave&ent, to support its &ilitary
&achine. Braudel ac"handedly ad&its in citin% 4for us &erely an instance e'e&plifyin% (hat (as at issue5 a
conte&porary source 4a !enetian a&assador5 (ho reported the F00,000 ducats. (orth of Peruvian silver (as
transported to the 3etherlands (here it (as &inted in e'chan%e for artillery and po(der, and, of course, (ith a
&erchants. fee to arran%e the transaction ,&id, I, #F0.
#
?eoffrey Par"er, The 7r$% of )landers and the Spanish Road, D29DD.
C
Par"er 4,&id5.
With periods of truce and fi%htin% lulls, (ar in the @o( Countries 4today includin% re%ions of ;rance, Bel%iu& and the
3etherlands5 can e dated fro& 1CO7 (hen :utch resistance first ro"e out, or fro& 1CG2 (hen additional Spanish
forces (ere deployed to suppress that resistance, until 1O#7 (ith the treaties the &ade up the Peace of Westphalia
(ere si%ned 4thou%h a treaty (ith the ;rench (as not in"ed until 1OC75. It (as the nu&erous to(ns the *r&y of
the Castilian cro(n repeatedly destroyed the flourishin% to(ns of the 3orth(est+ 0he %reat
te'tile cities of the 6editerranean and 3orthern Europe, and as (ell their surroundin%
countryside on (hich they depended for food, (ere occupied, pilla%ed and, (hen ar&ies (ere
&ovin%, fora%ed off. 0a"en as hosta%es, (ealthy &erchants, traders, and an"ers (ere held
to ranso&. Whole cities too (ere held to ranso& or sac"ed 4or oth5. !illa%es and countryside
(ere criss9crossed, plundered and pilla%ed a%ain.
0he (ealth of uran centers and their hinterlands in the era in (hich capitalIs for&al
do&ination &atured 4to(ns such as Ber%en op Boo&, Roosendaal, Breda,
?eetriudenur%and and &any &ore and the %reat cities as (ell, *nt(erp, ut also ?enoa,
;lorence and rural 0uscany i&&ediately attached to it, and others5 (as dra(n off to fed the
Castilian (ar &achines 4its ar&ies5, and occupied or (rec"ed 4or oth5, and their co&&ercial
vitality (as stifled. 0heir vitality (as further suppressed and repressed y i&position of rule
fro& 6adrid 4eli&inatin% autono&ous repulican institutions, the life lood of these
oli%archical, co&&ercial centers5. Castilian "in%s therey destroyed the loci of the (ool9te'tile
econo&y of the 6editerranean9European 3orth, and thus allo(ed a ne( locus to develop in
En%land. 4;lorence, in 1CO0 a center of (oolen production in the 6editerranean, purchased
t(o thirds of its ra( (ool fro& Castilian Spain, and in turn nu&ered Spain, (ith ;rance, as
one of its &ost i&portant centers of e'port of finished (oolen cloth. By 1OD0, li"e fallen Spain,
its (oolen production had plu&&eted to 2Z of the 1CO0 a&ount.5
1

In so doin%, ironically Castilian "in%ship under&ined the net(or" of co&&ercial relations in
(hich the %reat (ool producers of central Spain south to *ndalusia, the aristocratic lords
constitutin% the Castilian rulin% class, (ere e&edded, and (ith it the he%e&onic position of
Castile in Europe. Call this in the o&9ectivel% historical sense the openl% $ilitar% aspect of an
assault &% 2urope.s $ost poerful, ancient regi$e social for$ation on those social groups
ho ere express &earers of a nascent capitalis$+ ,n this assault, a&ove all, Castile defended
the unit% of landed ealth and aristocraticall% grounded, a&solutist !ingship sanctioned &% the
Ro$an Church, and on this &asis the Catholic construction of the nor$s of social life< it
defended e$pire and legal concepts appropriate to it< and it affir$ed direct, un$ediated for$s
of exploitation and tri&ute in appropriating the ealth of actual producers+ ,t defended these in
opposition to the pri$ac% of ur&an ealth and 4rotestant religiosit%< to the sovereignt% of
states as national states and the principle of non-interference in those states affairs< to
oligarchical and &ourgeois 4oer &ased on $erchant and $unicipal li&ert% 0reali/ed through
representative political for$s of governance5 and the pri$ac% of individual conscience in
assessing social nor$s< and it denied the $oral superiorit% of strictl% econo$ic for$s of
exploitation in ostensi&l% contractuall%-&ased appropriation of the ealth of producers+ Neither
feudal nor tri&utar%, in all respects Castile defended, then, hat constituted the old order
ithin the no ascendant and epochal, for$al do$ination of capital over la&or in production
on hich the continental econo$% rested+ Met the old order had reached an i$passe, as its
$odes of ealth extraction could not sustain the achieved level of capital#s for$al do$ination,
not to spea! of its further, future develop$ent: Manifested in $ilitar% defeat and financial
&an!ruptc%, Castile#s failure as an open expression of the exhaustion of the old order
for$ations of estern 2urope, the endpoint of their a&ilit% to organi/e social life 4a process
that clearly (as already under(ay y the &idpoint of the 0hirty -ears War, evinced in the
epide&ics and fa&ine that s(ept Europe in the 1OD0s and in &isery, destruction and
depopulation created y (ar and disease5. ;a&ine itself (as douly %rounded, in (ar9(rou%ht
ruin of crops and severe cold rou%ht on y cli&ate fluctuations and coolin% 9 the @ittle Ice *%e
;landers co&&and (as co&pelled to reduce to suordinate the Spanish 3etherlands to%ether (ith protracted sie%es
in the face of architecturally innovative, novel fortifications constructions alon% the e'tensive fi%htin% front.
1
Paolo 6alani&a, ,*n E'a&ple of Industrial Reconversion+ 0uscany,/ O#9OC, OG.
so9called 4circa 1DC0 to 1FO05 9 (hich effected te&perate =one crops glo&all%, not 1ust in
En%land and across Europe ut in China, in Shaan'i Province. )or ithout increasing
agricultural productivit% secured &% the triu$ph of capitalis$ 0i+e+, the institutional political
sta&ili/ation of for$al do$ination5 in the 3o Countries and 2ngland s%$&oli/ed, a&ove all,
&% the victories of the Dutch and 4uritan &ourgeoisies in ar and revolutionar% civil ar, and
then &% the ne science of nature at nodal sites in 2urope, the achieved levels of culture,
socialit% and production ould have fallen &ac! to those levels that characteri/ed N2urope,>
that is, the Mediterranean hinterlands of Ro$e, 9ust prior to the e$ergence of Merovingian
!ingship, in hich state, extended fa$il% and village co$$unit% could no longer sustain a civil
socialit%.
1
0he foundations of Castilian po(er and her e&er%ence as a %reat European po(er rested, in
fact, on an earlier phase of con)uest, the unification of the Ierian Peninsula, (hich ;ernando
rou%ht to a close.
2
0hese con)uests roed the civili=ation of the 6oors 43asrid *ras5 of its
sustance, added untold %reat (ealth to Castilian coffers and provided &assive nu&ers of
slaves and 6oors (ho (ere enslaved 4oth often sold addin% to (ealth in coin for&5, and it
added enor&ous tracts of land in al9*ndalus to the patri&onies of Castile, in particular, to her
%reat noles, &ost of (hich had (on their status in connection (ith the Crusades in (hich the
(arrior aristocratic &ilitary orders, foundation of nole po(er and earers of the ideational
orientation to(ard con)uest, ca&e into ein%.
0he vast tracts of land appropriated y the %reat noles durin% the Spanish Reconquista
provided the asis for a &ove&ent fro& cereal a%riculture in old Castile to transhu&ant sheep
far&in% on and et(een these %reat estates as herds in the hundreds of thousands passed
seasonally fro& the central Castilian plateau' to Estre&adura and northern *ndalusia. *n
intricate co&&ercial net(or" survived Catalan collapse and tied these (ool9producin% estates
to the %reat te'tile centers 4Bru%es, ?hent5 of the @o( Countries
D
and those across the
1
;or periods of severe cold 4especially, the 1OD0s5 and its relation to crop failure, see Brian ;a%an, The 3ong
Su$$er, 2#F92C0, 8an de !ries, 2cono$% of 2urope in an 7ge of Crisis, 11912, Christian Pfister, ,Ci&atic E'tre&es,
Recurrent Crises and Witch $unts,/ #D, ## 4chart5, #C, and 6ar" 0au%er, 7griculture in "orld Histor%, O0 4China5. In
oth Shaan'i and south and southeast En%land, crop failure then fa&ine (ere &otivationally si%nificant in rollin%
peasant revolt. ;or China, 0au%er, ,&id Hand for En%land, The 2nglish Civil "ars, Part II, ,Risin% Popular Reellion
and Class Conflict in ;ront of the ;irst Civil War./ Editor.J
6entioned in a precedin% footnote, the Peace of Westphalia confir&ed the our%eoisie triu&ph in (ar and civil (ar+
0he Peace reco%ni=ed the pri&ary reality of national states and repudiated forei%n intervention in their internal affairs.
;or this, see the si&ilarly footnoted discussion in Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ 0Hrgeschichte5, the Perspective, Part III,
,0he Colonial Era,/ n. 1E for state sanction 4political staili=ation5 of capitalIs for&al do&ination, see the Conclusion,
,0he 0riu&ph of the Bour%eoisie and Staili=ation of Capitalist Social Relations (ithin the Social ;or&ations of
Europe,/ to The 2nglish Civil "ars and the Birth of )reedo$+ HEditorIs note.J
;or the 6erovin%ian collapse, see e.%., 6arc Bloch, )eudal Societ%, Lol+ *, 1#G91#7, or *nderson, 4assages fro$
)ro$ 7ntiquit% to )eudalis$, 122f.
0(o aleit li&ited, statistical indicators of CastileIs e'haustion can e found in the virtual collapse in silver 4its
&onetary valuation5 i&ported at Seville et(een 1C7C and 1OO0, and the decline in 3e( World shippin% enterin% and
departin% fro& Seville et(een 1C70 and 1OCC. 8an de !ries, The 2cono$% of 2urope in an 7ge of Crisis, 1#91C
4chart5.
Castilian decline, decadence and then collapse can e traced out in the history of the for&s of recruit&ent to its
ar&ies. *t the outset of the :utch reellion 41CG25 soldiers (ere recruited as volunteers, often aroad, y captains
operatin% on co&&ission of the Castilian "in%E efore 1O00, as contract syste& (as in e'tensive usa%e in (hich
recruiters (ere paid to raise lar%ely forei%n troopsE after 1O20, co&pulsion (as used, often na"ed force, to i&press
ale odied, lar%ely une&ployed &en, andits and va%aonds haulin% the& off &anacled in cartsE y the 1OD0s,
&ercenary Protestant, so&eti&es Calvinist, soldiers (ere recruitedE and, y 1O#7, havin% si%ned a peace (ith the
States ?eneral desperate Castile atte&pted to levy a re%i&ent in the Rnited Provinces to fi%ht a%ainst the ;rench.
Par"er, ,&id, DO9DF, #09#1, ##, #C, #O9#G.
2
In 1#FC Ronda, in 1#FG 6[la%a, in 1#70 *l&eria, and in 1#72 the city of ?ranada fell to ;ernando.s ar&ies.
D
:epopulated y pla%ue 4the preour%eois Catalan nation.s de&o%raphically density had collapsed, fro& so&e
O00,000 in 1DC0 to 2GF,000 in 1#7G5, torn y rural civil (ar and social stru%%le (ithin Barcelona, the latter rou%ht on
Channel in the En%lish southeast. Castilian to(ns and, in far northern Ieria, Biscayan
shippers %re( and a fe( %reat nole fa&ilies transfor&ed s&all fortunes into vast (ealth. 0hat
concentration of (ealth (as enor&ous+ 0(o to three percent 429DZ5 of the noles controlled
herds of sheep on occasion in the &illions, o(ed 7GZ of the land, (hile half of this land (as
the patri&ony of 1ust a fe( %reat fa&ilies (ho stood head and shoulders aove the s&aller
%entry 4hidalgo5. 4*t the sa&e ti&e as the Catalan population had declined to aout 2GF,000
in 1#7G, Castile oasted C9G &illion.5 6ost hidalgo (ere i&poverished and land hun%ry, and
for&ed the social asis for ar&ies of con)uest. Co&&odity production is at est &erely
secondary to a rural aristocracy of this sort, and as such it is only a &eans to (ealth, its
display, and in particular to po(er as the undisputed, asolute control over and disposition of
&en, resources, and thin%s. "ithin the intricate, intertined netor!s of capital#s $ove$ent
0for$al do$ination5, Castilian Spain, an ancient regi$e social for$ation &ased on
sheepherding 4not a%riculture5 and conquest, as e$phaticall% not &ourgeois:
1
What capitalist
activity in Spain outside the uran enclaves of C\rdoa and Se%ovia (here the do&estic
4puttin% out5 syste& had ta"en hold, and on the *tlantic 3orth 4Bilao5 and the 6editerranean
4Barcelona as it revived5, i.e., (here the (a%ed laor social relation prevailed, (as not
dyna&ic and (as not ascendant until (ell into the ei%hteenth century. In fact, throu%h
centuries of Krecon)uest/ and thereafter, the assault on 6oors and Spanish 8e(ry, the
counterattac" a%ainst Protestant Refor&ation, and the offensive a%ainst the Enli%hten&ent
that first e&anated fro& ;rance, in each of these cases spearheaded y first the 8esuit then
:o&inican In)uisition, the Spanish Church and Cro(n, purveyor of odily torture and depth9
psycholo%ical e&otional ause, (as the &ain ra&part a%ainst the insinuation of capitalist
&ethods into productive activity in Europe. Since the Church and the royal Castilian entoura%e
around Spanish "in%ship (ere intert(ined and inseparale, (e can state that in spea"in%
aout the for&er (e are si&ultaneously spea"in% aout the latter, so that in notin% Protestant
refor& (as ine'tricaly ound up (ith the e&er%ence of co&&ercial and uran artisan
classes, uran and secular develop&ents, and so&e(hat later the %ro(th and e'pansion of
capitalist social relations particularly in a%riculture, the Ro&an Church, the In)uisition, and the
8esuits in Spain spearheaded counterrevolutionar% efforts to reverse the nascent for&ation of
our%eois society in Europe, (e are referrin% to the entire phalan' of persona%es, institutions
and social relations rou%ht to%ether y Castilian "in%ship. E'istin% and e'istentially
dependent upon the sa&e circuits of capitalIs for&al &ove&ent, of course Castilian efforts
(ere contradictory...
0he accusation of heresy thrust at ?alileo (as itself deter&ined y this entire constellation of
events and conditions+ *li%ned (ith the ;rench (hose forei%n policy (as effectively in the
hands of Richelieu, as soon as S(edish forces under ?ustavus *dolphus s(ept do(n over
central Europe 4enterin% the 0hirty -ears War in late (inter 1OD15 the Barerini pontificate
4Rran !III5 (as forced to aandon the intellectual lierality of its early years 41O20s5 and
a%%ressively underta"e a pro9Spanish policy, at any rate de&anded y the 8esuit faction
(ithin the Curia, and pursue a correspondin%ly vicious, intransi%ent persecutory ca&pai%n
a%ainst heretics so9called and unorthodo' innovators 4a&on% (ho& stood ?alileo5, a
in lar%e part y (aves of pla%ue that &ade uran social life i&possile, and (ith the institutional structures that
sustained Catalan co&&erce rendered ineffectual y Castilian overlordship, the Catalan tradin% e&pire that had een
uilt up over centuries and that had co&&ercially &ediated the (ool trade in the (estern 6editerranean and in
(estern Europe had virtually disappeared y 1C00.
1
In the South 4*ndalusia5 and the east 4!alencia5, latifundia a%riculture ased on serf tenancy had e'isted since the
thirteenth century. In the 3orth 4?alicia, 3avarre, Bas)ue country, as (ell as *sturias5, s&all peasant freeholds (ere
predo&inant, in Catalonia and *ra%on, a type of sharecroppin% tenancy had e'isted for centuries. But sheepherdin%
does not entail tillin% the soil, plantin% and harvestin%E it is not a%riculture, and the %reat Castilian lords (ere utterly
conte&ptuous of the latter.
ca&pai%n decided on the narro(est of ideolo%ically ri%id criteria 4especially (ith re%ard to the
doctrine of the Eucharist and transustantiation5<
1
Still, even prior to and then a%ainst Castilian overlordship and sporadic occupation, incipiently,
the &ove&ent of capital slo(ly penetrated production itself 4i.e., not 1ust in for&al (ays in
co&&erce as in an"in% (ith its doule entry oo"in% and ills of e'chan%e, or distriution as
in the creation of &ar"ets for the sale of co&&odities5 in its various for&s e%innin% late in the
historical period of the initial consolidation of state centralis& over the carcass of repulican
institutions 41DF091#FC5 on the Italian Peninsula.
2
;irst, there (ere the @ana &erchant &anufacturers (ho y no( fir&ly estalished the&selves
in production as a per&anent fi'ture in, e.%., the ;lorentine landscape. Second, there (as the
sottiposti, (a%ed laorin% proletariat in the (oolen industries of central Italy, the other side of
the sa&e social relation that en%a%ed the @ana our%eoisie.
0hird, in the central Italian countryside and in the 3orth, serfdo& had een aolished as early
as the end of the thirteenth century 412725. In 0uscany relations of sharecroppin% tenancy
4$e//adria5 prevailed, (hile in @o&ardy 4"no(n here as $essaria5 the sa&e relations could
e found, alon% (ith si&ply far& leasin% and rural (a%ed laor even, as a shift to do&estic
ho&e production alon% &ore for&ally capitalist lines (as already under(ay. 4In fact, o1ects of
that shift, pauperi=ed tenants provided laor for these rural, do&estic ,proto9industries/5.
D
While appearin% as a type of petty co&&odity production for&ed throu%h the activity of s&all
olive oil and (ine producers, and &ulerry tree %ro(ers and cultivators after 1D00 4the leaves
of &ulerry trees provided a do&estic source of food for sil"(or&s, for sil"(or& reedin% and
on this asis for production of sil" yarn5, sharecroppers (ere i&poverished, indeted, and the
prices they received for their produce (ere not deter&ined &% the$ (ith a vie( to &ar"et
conditions ut y the landlords 4(ith a vie( to the &ar"et and the various (ays they could
further e'tract surpluses, &ost often a &atter of fi'in% their accountin% oo"s5 fro& (ho& they
rented their tiny plots+ 0hese peasants so9called (ere not independent co&&odity producers,
ut a rural proletariat dis%uised as sharecroppin% tenants (ho, to e sure, had our%eois
aspirations.
#
0he entire countryside of central Italy rested on this asis, on landless laorers
(ho did (or" for (a%es ta"en to%ether (ith the vine tenantcy, (hile in @o&ardy peasants
(ere dispossessed and (or"ed as do&estic laorers ,puttin% out/ cloth products under the
auspices of a hierarchy of &erchants startin% fro& the villa%es, throu%h the s&all to(ns to the
%reat city 46ilan5.
C
0he situation (as si&ilar in ?enoa, and (ith !enice and its countryside
4thou%h not as (ell developed5, as that in @o&ardy.
O
Productive activity contracted all over a%ain a second ti&e durin% a %ood part, especially the
early decades, of the chronolo%ical si'teenth century as a conse)uence of (ars, of &archin%,
enca&pin% and &araudin% ar&ies... (oolen production nearly collapsed and, here, as
else(here, %ave (ay 4ut only in part5 to sil" &anufacture.
G
*nd it did once &ore after 1CFC,
e%innin% (ith poor crops and fa&ine that lasted until the end of the century. Within ?alileo.s
1
Pietro Redondi, 8alileo, Heretic, 22F92D0.
2
;or the periodi=ation, see the ;irst Interlude, ,Chronolo%y and $istory,/ elo(.
D
;or @o&ardy in this re%ard, *n%elo 6oioli, ,:e9Industriali=ation in @o&ardy,/ 100.
#
;or this entire situation a far &ore detailed and nuanced analysis is offered in The Histor% of )lorence, ,0he Contado
4Countryside5, 0enancy and the Me//adria.> HEditorIs note.J
C
If it can e sho(n that the develop&ent of the ,puttin% out/ or do&estic syste& of production in rural @o&ardy in the
si'teenth century did not arise ,spontaneously/ or ,naturally/ in the specifically social sense, ut instead (as a
develop&ent spurred on consciously, as the conse)uence of delierate intent of &erchant (ho effectively
reor%ani=ed production y %eo%raphically chan%in% its spatial locus, the concept of the ,for&al do&ination of laor
over capital/ &ust e &odified and the periodi=in% relation et(een for&al and real do&ination (ill re)uire further
revision. It is not at all clear that this can e sho(n, as evidenced y, e.%., the research pro%ra& for&ulated in 6oioli,
,Iid,/ passi&. See the ;irst Interlude in its entirety, elo(.
O
Braudel, ,&id, !ol. 1, #D09#D2.
lifeti&e, in his &ature years, ne( (aves of pla%ue reappeared in oth northern and southern
Italy, and in 0uscany 41OD091OD15. @ar%e cities such as ?enoa, 6ilan, and 3aples in the
south, lost as &uch as half their populations, (ith loses of a )uarter of the populations in
;lorence and its contado.
1
0he 0hirty -ears War 41O1F91O#F5, (hich a%ain involved Spain 4in
fi%htin% in the ?er&an9*ustrian principalities, a%ainst ;rance and S(eden5, drained off still
further financial resources aove and eyond the triutes e'tracted to support an ar&y of
occupation in the 3etherlandsE and, in the east, (ar et(een the >tto&ans and the Iranians
fro& 1O2DN1OD7 disrupted e'port &ar"ets i&portant to the Peninsula.s %reat cities, especially
!enice... *s (e have indicated aove, fa&ine itself %rounded in a coolin% cli&ate also played
a &a1or role in this uildin% crisis... 0he crisis eca&e open as the locus of for&al capitalist
develop&ent, havin% already shifted fro& the 6editerranean to the @ondon9Bru%es9?hent
ne'us, e%an to shift once &ore fro& the here to(ard the *tlantic 4i.e., *nt(erp9@ondon9
!ir%inia5 in the second decade of the seventeenth century, and did not reach a nadir until the
&idpoint of this inner historical period of that develop&ent 4circa 1O#091OC05. 0he Spanish
presence, of course, encoura%ed and reinforced a &assive retrench&ent, in particular the
final destruction 4(hich (as (ell under(ay tendentially fro& the e%innin% of the chronolo%ical
fifteenth century in cities no less than ;lorence5 of Repulican institutions, the po(er of the
1tti$ati, the oli%archies of %reat fa&ilies ased in &erchant, an"in% and &anufacturin%, in
favor of a deepenin% centrali=ation alon% the lines of "in%ly %overn&ent<
3o( state centralis& surely is not a product of capitalist develop&ent, or is such in only one of
its 4the &ost accentuated of its5 for&s. In certain triutary for&ations, in ancient China for
e'a&ple, centralis& appears as a nascent ureaucrati=ation and is orne y a class of
landlords9eco&e9intellectuals, a scholar9%entry. In &odern ;rance (ith aristocratic po(er
and "in%ly %overnance that held on as Castile collapsed, in the ti&e of the first convocation of
the Estates ?eneral on(ard, a si%nificant statification developed and (ith it a centrali=ed
ureaucracy. So&ethin% very si&ilar could e said aout the >tto&ans throu%hout the entire
period currently under consideration. -et in each of these cases and others, state centralis& is
called forth y the re)uire&ents of rulin% an e&pire, (hether landed and conti%uous or
overseas or oth.
0he distinctive contriution of capitalis& to state centralis& concerns structure and policy
4practices5. 0he for&er is not at issue for us. We shall rele%ate it to a footnote.
2
Policy is
G
0hat ,else(here/ on the Italian Peninsula included !enice, ?enoa, @ucca, and ,throu%hout Europe./ Salvatore
Ciriacono, ,6ass Consu&ption ?oods and @u'ury ?oods,/ #O.
0he first period of contraction (hich (as deter&inant for the structure and tra1ectory of the entire continental econo&y
referred to here (as, of course, the period follo(in% the outrea" of Blac" :eath 41D#F5 (ith its lar%e9scale
destruction of e'istin% hu&an population densities. See the ;irst Interlude, ,;or&al :o&ination 4@inea&ents5, II+
Contraction and :epression in the Era of the Blac" :eath/ 4t(o sections5, elo(.
1
Braudel, ,&id, !ol. 1, DD2.
2
In the centralis&s &entioned aove, the state is indistinguisha&le fro& the persons and entoura%es of the ruler. Even
(here the rulerIs ar&ed force consists in an ar&y, his nascent ureaucracy in priests or ta' collectors, this ar&ed
force and these &inions, thou%h e&ployed in enforcin% do&ination over the rest of the co&&unity, are not
institutionall% separale fro& the ruler ut instead for& his personal entoura%e or his household. 0he &odern state of
capital is uni)ue in its institutional and separate character, its appearance as a KpulicK force clothed in a sha$
o&9ectivit% that sets it apart fro& and over and a%ainst individuals, classes and society. 4Its alien otherness &as"s its
reality as a co&ple' net(or" of hardened social relations %overned y the class teleolo%y of the our%eoisie and
actually orne y individuals, the&selves our%eois, (hose daily activities reproduce it as such.5 While any &odern,
our%eois state &ay co&e in the short run to e identified (ith a specific historical persona%e, (hat distin%uishes it
fro& states that appear in other past epochs is a see$ing efficacy, per&anence and reality that render it at once
o1ectively independent in relation to society and independent of any specific ruler. It is only in this conte't that
ureaucracy can appear ,rational,/ and that it develops in the for& of see&in%ly endlessly proliferatin% a%encies,
ureaus, depart&ents, etc., that are pyra&idically unified y the institutional E'ecutive. 0his "ind of state only e%ins
to appear in history in the (a"e of the first our%eois revolutions, in En%land and in ;rance. See Co$$unit% and
Capital, ]1O2.
4practices are5 different. ;our si%nificant practices (ere pursued y &odern states that (ere
central to early capitalist develop&ent. 0hey (ere &ercantilist trade policies, infrastructural
develop&ent, &easures to protect do&estic industries, and eli&ination of internal custo&s
and trade arriers.
6ercantilist trade policies are est e'e&plified y the En%lish 3avi%ation *cts 41OC1, 1OOD,
1OGD5, le%islative enact&ents ai&ed at securin% for En%lish &erchants and the En%lish state
the enefits of the co&&ercial activities of En%lish colonies in the *&ericas and the West
Indies y li&itin% :utch trade (ith the&.
1
Infrastructural develop&ent such as construction of
roads, canals and rid%es, and doc"s and ports (ere %enerally underta"en y the state
ecause its resources, i.e., ta' revenues, %ive it access to &oney capital in a (ay (hich no
sin%le producer or a%%re%ate of &erchantsI fir&s could &arshal. 0hese revenues per&itted it,
and it alone, to create the &aterial pre&ises (ithout (hich develop&ent (ould not have
occurred. 40his assess&ent is valid today as it (as four hundred years a%o5. 0he eli&ination
of internal custo&s and trade arriers such as tolls encountered in passin% fro& one re%ion to
another for& the asis for develop&ent of an internal do&estic national &ar"et... a our%eois
nation in the very process of for&ation... (hich, to e sure, over the course of ti&e eli&inated
the less efficient and stren%thened 4y e'pandin% their reach5 the &ore efficient producers.
0his &easure (as usually co&ple&ented y protectionist &easures, desi%ned to prevent non9
national producers fro& &a"in% too %reat an in%ress into do&estic &ar"ets at the e'pense of
do&estic producers. Protectionist &easures had a direct earin% on the situation on the Italian
Peninsula. 0o the e'tent that co&&odity circulation (as not si&ply ased on captive &ar"ets
and ,urdened/ (ith e'tensive re%ulation 4say, y %uilds5, and production (as not solely for
lu'ury %oods, &erchants, traders and &anufacturers rou%ht pressure to ear on the
persona%e of the soverei%n to rea" do(n arriers to trade such as custo&s, i&posts, product
re)uire&ents, etc. 4(hile de&andin% protections for their o(n products e set up5,
2
and
effectively created a certain unifor&ity (ithin the space4s5 in (hich capital &oved. 0his
pressure itself e&anated, (e are te&pted to say as a ,refle',/ fro& co&petition a&on% and
et(een co&petin% capitalists. Central Italian 3ana &anufacturers in the late fifteenth and the
first half of the sa&e si'teenth century (ere under enor&ous pressure fro& si&ilar producers
in Bru%es and @ondon. 4In fact, this co&petition destroyed the&.5 While this is a &uch later
develop&ent thou%h it (as tacit at the &o&ent at (hich ?alileo lived, the state then and later
(as re)uired to le%islatively and y fiat 4di!tat5 estalish a unifor$ &ar"et, one (hich in
historical ti&e e'panded fro& nations to enco&pass the (orld<
In all this 4i.e., the Castilian presence, &ar%inally centrali=ed "in%ly %overn&ent developin%
over the carcass of Repulican institutions heraldin% the see&in% ,re9feudali=ation/ of the
chronolo%ical si'teenth century5, &ercantile capitalist northern and central Italy (as the other
side of a dyna&is& of capitalist develop&ent of the sa&e, roadly spea"in%, cloth
&anufacture in the @o( Countries 4(hile it is also clear that pla%ue, s&allpo' and fa&ine all
played a role in this re9feudali=ation so called, (hich, at any rate, (as li&ited to the Papal
States and the 3eapolitan re%ions, for in the 0uscan center, on the northern @o&ard plain
and the inland reaches of northeastern !enetian &ainland, a )uasi9industrial develop&ent
ased on for&al do&ination follo(in% on a shift of production fro& the %reat cities to a s&aller
to(ns and the countryside occurred steadily after the 1OD091OD1 pla%ue5E
D
and the e'plosive
develop&ent of capitalist far&in% in rural En%land and effectively proletariani=ed artisan cloth
1
See the Preface to Civil "ar and Revolution in 7$erica, the section entitled ,* 3ote on the Politically :eter&ined
Basis of 6onopolistic Control the En%lish 3avi%ation @a(s./
2
Ciriacono, ,Iid,/ #O9#G, #F9#7.
D
6oioli, ,:e9Industriali=ation in @o&ardy,/ FF9F7, F7970, 77, 100, 101, 102E ?iuseppe ;elloni, ,Structural Chan%es in
Rran Industry in Italy,/ 1CO91CG, 1C7, 1O0.
production 4(oolens5 (hich, ased on the do&estic or puttin% out syste&, provided @ondon
&erchants (ith a lar%e co&petitive advanta%e over craft %uild and artisan (or"shops of the
Italian cities that resisted technolo%ical and or%ani=ational chan%e, i.e., further control over
4thou%h not intrusion into5 production y the %reat &erchants+ ;acin% stiff price co&petition
fro& En%land and the slo( e&er%ence of a trans*tlantic trian%ular trade 4@ondon, the !ir%inia
planter colony and coastal (est *frica5, (oolen production once at the heart of the %reat uran
enclaves of the Italian Peninsula nearly disappeared 4over ti&e effectively replaced y sil"
&anufacture (hich, ai&ed at traditional hi%her end &ar"ets, did )uite (ell5, an"in% continued
to contract, as the %reat ur%hers often retreated to the country estates, and pursued
invest&ent in landed property and in cash crops such as olive oil and (ine.
*s a specific for& of capitalist co&petition and develop&ent, (e shall tentatively periodi=e the
for%oin% in ter&s of the era of capital.s for&al do&ination over laor, that is, in ter&s of the
predo&inance of the &erchant in production, a social fi%ure (ho, directly as a landlord 4ta"in%
surpluses in "ind5 or throu%h the &ediation of &oney, siphons off surpluses in e'ploitin% laor
and does so (ithout either reor%ani=in% those productive activities or %eneratin% ne( technical
inputs to the&, (hich in the event in oth cases dra&atically increase the productivity of laor
4at this &o&ent &easured in ter&s of output5. *ppearin%, as (e have su%%ested, as a ,re9
feudali=ation,/
1
and as such contradictory, this develop&ent.s &ost forceful out(ard for& (as
at a specific level of the polity, in the ascendancy of %reat lords over duchies, over once free
1
0his (as not feudalis&.
;eudal social relations had their %eo%raphical heartland in (estern Europe fro& the @oire to the Rhine in the period
F0091200.
0hey (ere characteri=ed y a su1ect peasantryE (idespread use of service tene&ent 4i.e., the fief5 instead of (a%esE
supre&acy of a social class of speciali=ed (arriorsE ties of oedience and protection indin% &en to &en, and, (hich,
(ithin the (arrior class, assu&ed a distinctive for& called vassala%eE and fra%&entation of authority leadin% to
disorder.
In the West, feudalis& (as a historical product of a violent dissolution of older social for&ations ased on "in%ship
4e.%., 6erovin%ian ?aul5. It (as a for& of social order (hich (as neither centrally held to%ether y "inship nor state
centralis&, ut in the asence of these, y ties of personal dependence. 40his is not to say, feudal societies are
(ithout a state, often %reat lords and the territories they hold are statelets in the&selves. What it does &ean is (here
a state is present, it cannot consistently and re%ularly enforce its ,prero%atives,/ especially revenue e'traction. 0he
,feudal state/ is li&ited to the royal household (ith, at very est, a hi%hly li&ited civil ad&inistration. It is lar%ely
cere&onial.5 0hese ties constituted the core social relation, one (hich (as in principle personal, &inding $en to $en
unconnected ith possession of the soil or place of a&ode. 0his &uch said in the West, as else(here, feudalis& (as
a rural pheno&enon. ;eudal social relations ound an oli%archy of (arriors 4and a caste of priests5 to a su1ect
peasantry, an e'ploitative ond (hich %ave the for&er ri%hts to land revenues and, ine'tricaly, politico91uridical
authority, and the latter protection and defense.
We can distin%uish t(o other &a1or for&s of sociation in the vast social for&ation that en%ulfed &ost of (estern
Europe, e%innin% around F00 in the co&&on era. 0a"en to%ether (ith the aove delineated feudal for& and the
re%ion it shaped, these t(o other for&s of social or%ani=ation that appeared and developed (ithin the social for&ation
in (estern Europe fro& aout 1000 do(n to 1GC0 (ere petty co&&odity production found in uran enclaves usually
alon% the %eo%raphical ed%es of this social for&ation and sedentary9pastoral activity (hich could e found in certain
spaces (ithin its interior. 0he for&er developed lar%ely in the 6editerranean in lands stretchin% (est fro& north
central Italy to Catalonia, and, of course, included the central Italian =one south to the Papal States.
In the petty co&&odity producin% =one, social or%ani=ation consisted in %roups of individual producers livin% and
(or"in% in co&&unities, (hether rural or uran. These groups, their activit% and this region as the point of departure
for the develop$ent &oth in space and ti$e of capital#s for$al do$ination over la&or in production+ 0hese individual
producers held private property in land or in &oile property. Production (as ai&ed at e'chan%e on a &ar"et and
only secondarily for the producersI o(n consu&ption. @on% distance trade (as, it should e noted, a necessary
condition for and an activity en%a%ed in y social %roups constitutive of this for& of social or%ani=ation, and thus, its
si%nificance for !enice, ;lorence, ?enoa and Catalan Barcelona. Characteristically class divided societies, petty
co&&odity for&s (ere do&inated y &erchants, (ho controlled other uran and rural classes 4i.e., artisan,
shop"eeper, and their dependents on the one side, and nole feudatories, sharecroppin% peasants and increasin% a
landless rural proletariat on the other5 throu%h oli%archically structured do&ination of political and econo&ical for&s of
or%ani=ed social life. H;or a &ore co&plete state&ent of, and in certain respects a corrective to, this position, see the
revised ;irst Interlude, ,;or&al :o&ination, II 4@inea&ents5/ in its entirety, elo(. EditorIs note.J
cities and their territories ruled y uran patriciates risin% fro& %reat fa&ilies ased on
an"in%, trade and (oolen production. If these duchies had &any of the trappin%s of the old
order, royal courts and close alliances (ith the Church, at the sa&e ti&e it (as a&on% the
underlords to these du"es 4such as Cosi&o I de. 6edici in ;lorence5, in their o(n shifts to(ard
e'ploitation of rural tenant and (a%ed laor, that the foundations of a ac"(ard capitalis&
(as laid, especially in a%riculture. ,t as in this orld that 8alileo $oved+
8alileo, ,,
@et.s follo( ?alileo.s &aturation and his intellectual develop&ent.
?alileo (as ei%ht years old (hen !incen=o and his fa&ily returned to ;lorence in 1CG2.
$o(ever, he re&ained ehind in Pisa and lived for t(o years (ith 6u=io 0edaldi, related to his
&other y &arria%e. When he reached the a%e of ten, ?alileo left Pisa to 1oin his fa&ily in
;lorence. $is fa&ily had the financial (here(ithal, and ?alileo (as privately tutored y
8acopo Bor%hini. 0hereafter !incen=o continued the youn% ?alileo.s education at the
Ca&aldolese 6onastery at !allo&rosa thirty9t(o "ilo&eters southeast of ;lorence.
Pause here and e'a&ine the Ca&aldoli, for they neatly incarnated the contradictions that
?alileo lived (ithout fully understandin%, that characteri=ed the (orld to (hich he (as orn,
and in (hich he lived and acted.
Ca&aldolese (ere in the loose infor&al sense an out%ro(th of the Benedictine practices
estalished y one St. Ro&uald at the e%innin% of the eleventh century. ;or a century or
&ore the Ca&aldoli had practiced the strict discipline of &onastic &on" life, stren%thened y a
solitary co&port&ent that approached that of the her&itic ascetics of the early Church. *t the
sa&e ti&e, they also had developed a ri%id internal social hierarchy, (hich (ould play a &a1or
role in the properties they ac)uired lar%ely throu%h %ifts of eneficence 4as a trustee of these
possessions5 and as the po(er of the %reat ?uidi noles (as ro"en, as the )uasi9feudal
$agnati of the 0uscan countryside (ere eaten do(n in confrontations (ith the &ilitias of the
%reat ur%hers of ;lorence in the t(elfth and thirteen centuries.H
1
J 0a"in% hold of vast property
in land, the Ca&aldoli poured the&selves into this void for&ed y the historical departure of
the ?uidi noles, eco&in% %reat landlords. By 111C, the Ca&aldoli e'erted control over three
her&ita%es, t(enty9five &onasteries, and a ;lorentine nunnery. By 12C0, the order could
account to its na&e over D00 &on"s and ad&inistrators. Before 1CC0, the Ca&aldoli of central
Italy had seventeen &onasteries, four nunneries and priors tendin% to ,con%re%ations/ in
6urano in the !enetian Repulic, in 0urin and at San Silvestro on 6onte Soracte near Ro&e.
0he land the Ca&aldoli held did not lie fallo(, ut (as or%ani=ed into s&all far&s often as
tenancies, on (hich %rain and (ine (ere planted, tended and harvested. Where land (as not
or%ani=ale a%riculturally trees (ere felled and (ood entered %eneral co&&erce, and once
1
;ully ninety percent of The Critique of Science (as researched and (ritten 4its structure and or%ani=ation developed
only in that (ritin%5 in a fren=ied si'teen &onth period of activity. Will should have "no(n etter, he should have %one
ac" and chec"ed his sources. 0his (ould have included his o(n (or"+
,?uidi/ is a &isno&er. 0he reference is to ?hiellines, an aristocracy indi%enous to ;lorence, not its hinterland.
?hielline desi%nated a pro9i&perialist party that supported the "in%ship 4$oly Ro&an E&peror5 of the ?er&an
statelets and principalities. ?hiellines (ere loc"ed in a life and death stru%%le (ith the 4arte 8uelfa, supporter of the
;rench &onarchy and after 12C0 the popular party of ;lorence. Magnati (as not a reference to ,%reat &en,/ ut a
ter& of le%al and political proscription. 0he political party of ?uelfists overlapped (ith the social %roup of the popolo
grasso+ 0he latter &oili=ed the to(ns people, s&all &erchants and artisans, throu%h their %uild or%ani=ations a%ainst
these old, nole ;lorentine fa&ilies, lar%ely landholders ut a fe( of (ho& also en%a%ed in popolo pursuits such as
an"in%. *t issue in particular (as their violence 4rape, in1ury and &urder, destruction of property5 ased on the
pursuit of ven%eance. 0hrou%h forty years of stru%%le and &oili=ation, the initial institutions 4Council of the People,
Captaincy, Priorite5 of the Co&&une (ere created. It (as in annin% the ?hielline noles fro& participation in these
institutions that the le%al cate%ory, $agnati, (as created. See ,?uelphs, ?hiellines and ?uilds/ in the first the&atic
discussion of The Histor% of )lorence. HEditorIs note.J
forests no( pasture land for herdin% sheep and raisin% cattle 4also e'tensive Ca&aldolese
activities y the fourteen century5 (as created+ *&on% those previously &entioned
ad&inistrators a %ood deal (ere lay, for the Ca&aldoli e&ployed a host of &erchant
&iddle&en 4factors5 to uy and sell those a%ricultural and livestoc" products. 0he Ca&aldoli
(ere one of the &any ,venues/ throu%h (hich capitalist social relations too" hold in a%riculture
on the Italian Peninsula, as, ironically, all the (hile the Church fou%ht a%ainst the penetration
and develop&ent of those relations.
3o( all this (as ut a (hisper to ?alileo, (ho, thou%h, &anifestly (as a(are of the &anner in
(hich this contradiction played out+ ;or a&on% these &on"s, this secular appetite created
internal social conflict that (as e'pressed in periodic outurst, stru%%les over the direction of
the Ca&aldoli, (hether to(ard en%a%e&ent in cenoitic, i.e., &onastic and co&&unal,
institutions 4effectively en%a%ed in a%riculture5 or as ere&itic, i.e., her&etic, ascetic and
i&poverished individual activity oriented to ?odly transcendence and independent of secular
and ecclesiastical po(er. *nd ?alileo effectively too" a position on this issue, (ithout ein%
politically alive to &eanin% of Ca&aldoli activity in ter&s of Church response< itself
contradictory since it opposed the social and cultural for&s to (hich the very activity of its
institutions (as %ivin% rise< to the novel social relations in production, e&er%in% class
confi%urations, the ne( doctrines that had e%un to appear in natural philosophy and, &ost of
all, the apostate doctrines< not those e&anatin% fro& the various heretical sects, the Church
had successfully dealt (ith the& for over t(o hundred years< that (ere ta"in% institutional
shape in various Protestant deno&inations+ 8alileo found life a$ong the Ca$aldolese
appealing+ $e intended to 1oin the >rder, eco&in% a novice. !incen=o, relatin% to the
e'perience of the ?alilei fa&ily history 4one of his ancestors had een a distin%uished
physician in fifteenth century ;lorence5 and reco%ni=in% the inco&e and security of a &edical
practice, had lon% desired that his eldest should eco&e a &edical doctor. $e pulled ?alileo
out of the &onastery, continued his schoolin% in ;lorence 4a&on% Ca&aldolese &on"s as a
concession to his son, ut (here he could "eep an eye on his develop&ent5, (aited until he
(as of the ri%ht a%e, sent hi& ac" to Pisa to live (ith 0edaldi and enrolled hi& at the
Rniversity of Pisa in study devoted to &edicine. 0his (as 1CF1.
?alileo had no interest in his &edical studies, &ut he (as fascinated y &athe&atics and
natural philosophy, and it (as in these studies that he attended lectures and courses<
*t ei%hteen years, ?alileo.s life had reached a decisive turnin% point.
Well educated (ith a consu&in% interest in &athe&atics as it related to natural philosophy,
)uite rilliant, a stron% preference for isolation indicatin% oth self9discipline and (illfulness,
and ha&pered y politically fla(ed 1ud%&ent 4one that (ould haunt ?alileo throu%hout his life,
thou%h, as (e shall su%%est, narro( 8esuit9li"e intri%ue and %uile (as so&ethin% he did
assi&ilate5, he (as prepared to &a"e co&&it&ents that (ould %overn the rest of his life<
*t Pisa, ?alileo appeared &ost fre)uently in the courses of ;ilippo ;antoni, (ho held the
university.s chair in &athe&atics< ;antoni (as a Ca&aldolese &on", the courses (ere y
school statute heavy on Euclid and Ptole&y lar%ely desi%ned for &edical student instruction,
1
ut actually oriented to occultist &athe&atics in the si'teenth century sense 4cos&o%raphy
and astrono&y as the non9discursive, non9de&onstrative study of the esoteric )ualities of
nu&er as they reveal the really real5< In the course year 1CF291CFD, he attended lectures of
>stilio Ricci, &athe&atician to the 0uscan Court and, of real i&port, a for&er pupil of
0arta%lia. 40he course (as on Euclid.s 2le$ents+5< 3iccol\ 0arta%lia had translated, then
pulished in @atin previously un"no(n (or"s of *rchi&edes, as (ell as prepared an Italian
1
Charles B. Sch&itt, ,;ilippo ;antoni, ?alileo.s Predecessor as 6athe&atics Professor at Pisa/ in Studies in
Renaissance 4hilosoph% and Science, V, C#, CC, CG, CF, C7.
version (ith co&&entary of an *rchi&edean (or" on hydrostatics<
1
In the su&&er &onths,
?alileo returned to ;lorence and continued his &athe&atical studies. In that third su&&er
(hile still enrolled at Pisa, ?alileo invited Ricci to visit his fa&ily (ith the intent< Ricci (as in
full a%ree&ent< of convincin% his father to relent in his insistence on &edical studies.
!incen=o did not aandon his hopes, ut per&itted the open pursuit of &athe&atics
4*rchi&edes in particular5 in the ?alilei ho&e durin% su&&er &onths. In 1CFC, ?alileo
aandoned &edical studies alto%ether, left the Rniversity of Pisa, and left (ithout co&pletin%
de%ree (or"< 3o( Ricci is &ore i&portant than (e &i%ht at first %lance suspect. $is sole
(or", or at least the one (or" that has survived is housed in the Italian 3ational @irary and
ears the title 4ro&le$i di 8eo$etria 4ratica: 3.uso dell.7rchi$etro 04ro&le$s of 4ractical
8eo$etr%: The Hses of 7rchi$edes5+ $is i&portance lies in reinforcin% for ?alileo the
doctrines of *rchi&edes, (hich, at any rate, ?alileo very &uch assi&ilated durin% this period
of his life. We shall return to this in connection (ith his father, !incen=o<
2
?alileo e%an to privately tutor in &athe&atics in ;lorence, and (as pulicly appointed to
teach in Siena in 1CFC91CFO. In su&&er 1CFO, he tau%ht at !allo&rosa, and in the sa&e
year (rote his first (or" that rou%ht to%ether his &athe&atical studies in relation to natural
philosophy+ 3a Balancitta, The 3ittle Balance, (as a lar%ely descriptive account of
*rchi&edesI &ethod of discoverin% the relative densities, or specific ,%ravities,/ of odies
e&ployin% a alance.
In 1CFG, he &ade a 1ourney to Ro&e to visit Christopher Clavius, a priest, astrono&er and
professor of &athe&atics at the 8esuit Colle%io Ro&ano. 3o( centers of %ravity (as a su1ect
&uch discussed y 8esuit &athe&aticians at this 1uncture, and ?alileo, fully a(are, rou%ht
alon% notes he had &ade (ith a vie( to findin%s in his study of *rchi&edesI &ethod in the use
of the alance. Clavius (as, needless to say, i&pressed.
?alileo (as developin% a reputation as a very %ifted, sound &athe&atician in central Italy.
4With re%ard to that reputation, for e'a&ple, datin% fro& this sa&e year, he has left us a
correspondence (ith oth Clavius and ?uidoaldo del 6onte. ?uidoaldo (as an older
conte&porary and a %enuine intellectual educated (ithout de%ree at Padua, (ith interests and
(ritin%s in astrono&y, &echanics, and &athe&atics a la *rchi&edes.5 In the follo(in% year
41CFF5 he received an invitation, ecause of the institution )uite i&pressive, to lecture on the
di&ensions and location of hell in :anteIs ,nferno at the *cade&y in ;lorence. *nd here he
(as i&pressive.
In 1CF7, he (as no&inally appointed as ;antoni.s successor at the Rniversity of Pisa. 40he
appoint&ent essentially provided ?alileo an inco&e.5 $e held this post for three years, durin%
(hich he (rote Du Moto 41C705. But in 1C71 !incen=o died, and ?alileo, as eldest son
oli%ated to support his &other and silin%s 4entailin%, additionally, provision for do(ries for
his t(o youn%er sisters5, (as co&pelled to find &ore financially re(ardin% (or". $is no( )uite
e'cellent reputation and his correspondents 4?uidoaldo dal 6onte in particular5 &ade it
possile for hi& to ta"e a far &ore lucrative position (ith the Rniversity of Padua (hich he
assu&ed in late 1C72. ?alileo (as to spend ei%hteen years there.
D
1
Still&an :ra"e, ,Introduction/ to ?alileo.s Discourses on Bodies in "ater, '.
2
See this Study, this section, elo(.
D
If his 3etter to the 8rand Duchess 4Christiana of @orraine5 in 1O1O put his lac" of political acuity on display 4the 3etter
(as hi%hly pole&ical, attac"in% Peripatetics< conte&porary *ristotelians< and revealed his previously privately held
co&&it&ent to Copernicanis&, not 1ust as a &athe&atical calculation desi%ned to assist locatin% the position of
heavenly odies ut as an ontolo%ical account of the relation of these planets, &oons and the sun to a cos&olo%ically
de-centered Earth, hence offerin% the Church an opportunity to co&pel a leadin% our%eois and scientific intellectual
to recant, initiatin% the len%thy period of suspicion and investi%ation that cul&inated in his infa&ous trial5, the occasion
of his departure in 1O10 4(hereupon he too" up duties as ,chief/ &athe&atician at Pisa, i.e., he had not teachin%
responsiilities, and the post of ,6athe&atician and Philosopher/ to the 0uscan ?rand :u"e5 e'hiited his a 8esuitical
%uile+
@et.s pause here and reflectively ascertain (here (e are at.
?alileo.s fa&ily, for&ation and e'perience provided hi& (ith t(o unsha"ale insi%hts that
&a"e sense of all that e'perience.
?alileo had lived in Pisa, ;lorence, !allo&rosa, ;lorence, Pisa, Pisa and ;lorence, Padua,
and ;lorence (ith fre)uent 1ourneys durin% the course of a lifeti&e to Ro&e and !enice. ;or
hi&, first, there is little sense of place, no ho&e to (hich one can return.
1
:id he transpose this2 Was the affective sense for&ulated in e'perience &erely co%nitively
transposed into the perspective in (hich the (orld 4cos&os, universe5 is (ithout center2
$ardly. But, if this sense that rendered his personal e'perience intelli%ile did not for& the
hori=on in (hich all understandin% transpired, it nonetheless predisposed hi& to(ard
suspicion re%ardin% clai&s aout naturalness in the (orld, it provided hi& (ith a direction, it,
in other (ords, alerted hi& that so&ethin% paradin% as natural &ay e far fro& ,co&plete/ or
,perfect/ in the co%nitive sense, i.e., the theoretical doctrine in (hich this naturalness arose
&ay not have the coherency that is %enerally attriuted to it.
Second, reality is not as it see&s. $is e'perience a&on% the Ca&aldoli told ?alileo this &uch.
-et all his trainin% also told hi& that (ith ri%ht "ey, reality is intelli%ile, and all his e'perience
told hi& that it is not as it is i&&ediately oserved, (itnessed and appears to e. 0he "ey (as
&athe&atical. !incen=o &ay hi&self nourished this insi%ht+ In his treat&ent of dissonance, he
developed a nonlinear &athe&atical description of &usical for& that rooted in Pytha%orean
tradition (ent eyond it. *s ?alileo (as later to tell us in a fa&ous passa%e fro& his The
7ssa%er 41O1D5+ ,Philosophy is (ritten in this %rand oo", the universe, (hich stands
continually open to our %a=e. But the oo" cannot e understood unless one first learns to
co&prehend the lan%ua%e and read the letters in (hich it is co&posed. It is (ritten in the
lan%ua%e of &athe&atics, and its characters are trian%les, circles, and other %eo&etric fi%ures
(ithout (hich it is hu&anly i&possile to understand a sin%le (ord of itE (ithout these, one is
(anderin% in a dar" layrinth/
2
<
If one does not reco%ni=e in ?alileo a our%eois, it is ecause the features that are %enerally
held to characteri=e this social type are derived fro& a sociolo%y of the era of the real
do&ination of capital over laor, the co&pulsive accu&ulation of savin%s i&&ortali=ed in 6a'
Weer.s 4rotestant 2thic and the Spirit of Capitalis$, for hi& personified in the fi%ure of
Ben1a&in ;ran"lin. 7s social t%pes 4i.e., as ideali=ations that a&stractl% relate a for& of
Palao Sarpi, friend, correspondent and state theolo%ian of the !enetian Repulic, (rote hi& in *pril 1O07 to descrie
to hi& the construction of a telescope, a ,spy%lass,/ in the ;le&ish 3etherlands. *s a &athe&atician (ith real craft
s"ills, ?alileo hi&self e%an to construct telescopes, a nu&er of the&, (ith the ai& of enhancin% their optical
functionin%. 0his he did, i&provin% &a%nification fro& aout # ti&es to over thirty ti&es on his o(n account 4The
Starr% Messenger, 275.
>pportunistic ?alileo. $e at once %rasped the &ilitary and co&&ercial utility of the telescope 4called a perspicillu&5
for seafarin% ships. $e "ept Sarpi updated, and the latter &ade arran%e&ents for a sho( in front of the !enetian
Senate.
6achinatin% ?alileo. 0he Senate (as, (hat shall (e say, if not a&a=ed or astonished, very, very i&pressed. $e (as
offered a lar%e salary increase in return for sole ri%hts to faricate the telescope.
Sly ?alileo. $avin% already 41O0G5 pulicly co&pleted action a%ainst one Baldassar Capra for pla%iari=in% his
co&pass, three years later he en%a%ed in a virtually identical action 4identical to Capra5+ $e sei=ed on the opportunity
presented y Sarpi, failin% to &ention that the telescope (as not his invention, that any patent he provided (as
&eanin%less. 4$is salary (as fro=en (hen the Senate discovered it had een hood(in"ed. ?alileo resi%ned and too"
up the posts in 0uscany.5
?alileo (as a &ourgeois opportunist, vain and proud and arro%ant, (ho &ost i&portant political 1ud%&ents (ere
typically, if not rash, ased on a &isapprehension of constellation of forces in play 4ecause the (ei%ht of his entire
for&ation, isolation, intellectualis&, su1ective certainty< rendered hi& incapale of situatin% hi&self conte'tually5.
1
WeIll only note in passin% that this interpretation departs fro& the conventional interpretation for (hich ?alileo pined
to return to the land of 0uscany. 4See, e.%., :ra"eIs introductory re&ar"s to ,@etters on Sunspots/ in Discovering and
1pinions of 8alileo, O7.5
2
The 7ssa%er 41O2D5, 2DG92DF.
personality to the roadest deter&inants of the social totality5, (e can as" (hether, toda%, (e
reco%ni=e in the endlessly indul%ed, narcissistic personality en%a%ed in profli%ate ehaviors of
all sorts a our%eois2 If this social type appears as such no(, in the era of the totali=in%
do&ination of capital over society, it is ar%uale that ?alileo (as a our%eois as this social
type first appeared in the early history of capitalis&, as it slo(ly for&ed inside the
6editerranean social for&ations durin% the epoch of the for&al do&ination of capital over
laor.
We can, for no(, for%o such the sche&ati=ation, and (ith it a tentative and perhaps
reductionist for&ulation. What sense, then, does it &a"e to su%%est that ?alileo (as a
our%eois, and his thou%ht articulated so&e of the &ost i&portant contours of a (orld vision
that appeared only (ith the develop&ent of capitalis&, and that, &ore i&portantly, &ediated
the understandin% of the (orld in order that his class &ay act effectively in and on it2
;irst, there is the issue of this vision itself. Retrospectively it is clear that ?alileo did for&ulate
so&e of the central concepts< includin% its asic la(, that of fallin% odies< of the &odern
science of nature. *nd, (hile this presupposes our entire theori=ation, the linea&ents of (hich
have een laid out in the Introduction aove, it is precisely science understood in ter&s of the
vision of the (orld that underlay it and (hich it confir&s, that unifies the various outstandin%
for&s of the e'istence of the our%eoisie as a class in history.
Second, ?alileo (as nothin% li"e his father. $e (as sly, sche&in%, opportunist and practiced
%uile. 0o oot, there (as no place to (hich he desired to return. ?alileo (as in certain real
sense rootless 4thou%h, if unfairly co&pared (ith the nineteenth and t(entieth century
situations of intellectuals, this reality (ithers5, an intellectual 4and cos&opolitan efore the
ter& had eco&e fashionale5 in the strictly &odern sense, or, a &ourgeois. $e did not "no(
and understand the &eanin% of 4he surely did not live and e'perience those institutional
realities that such an understandin% (as for&ed (ithin5 civic patriotis& and repulican loyalty,
since these features that had characteri=ed ;lorentine social life for three centuries and (ere
the loadstars of ;lorentine intellectuals had lon% since si&ply disappeared.
1
4In this respect,
?alileo felt e'istentially co&fortale in a politically despotic situation, (ithin (hich he,
assertin% his superior &erits< (hich itself spea"s to our%eois illusions aout individual
(orth< could curry favor and &i%ht e reco%ni=ed as such.5
0hird, there (as ?alileo hi&self. Stuornly deter&ined and (illful. In (hat fa&ilial for& in
history, clannish, e'tended, nuclear, etc., does one for the first ti$e in that histor% find a son
(ho can successfully counterpose his (ill and pro1ect to his fa&ily, especially (ea" or stron%
patriarchally for&ed fa&ilies2 It (as only in the our%eois fa&ily (here this reality first
appeared.
2
;ourth, there (as a%ain ?alileo hi&self, i.e., his practice. In 1C7G, he invented (hat he called
a ,%eo&etric and &ilitary co&pass,/ not a directional co&pass as (e &i%ht understand ut an
instru&ent on the order of a sector. 4* sector is a &athe&atical instru&ent &ade asically of a
couple rulers attached one to the other at one end y a 1oint and scored (ith several scales.5
?alileo had enou%h de&and< it (as si%nificantly i&proved version of an instru&ent in
%eneral use y &ilitary officers and en%ineers< to e&ploy a crafts&an to &a"e the
co&passes to &eet this de&and and for future sale.
D
In the previously &entioned 1O10 letter
to the ;lorentine secretary of state, !inta, he spo"e of havin% ,&anufactured thousands./
#
In
the sa&e letter, he &entions the de&and for his hi%hly i&proved telescope, (hich, it is not
1
$ere one thin"s of @eonardo Bruni and his De Militia 41#225, the paradi%&atic docu&ent of the civil hu&anist
tradition. See C.C. Bailey, "ar and Societ% in Renaissance )lorence, and DO0f (here a critical edition of the @atin
ori%inal of the De Militia is provided.
2
See the Introduction to The 2nglish Civil "ars and the Birth of )reedo$ +
D
See :ra"e.s re&ar"s, 1pinions and Discovered of 8alileo, 1O.
#
,&id, O#.
unreasonaly assu&ed, he (as also havin% produced. In oth cases, the relation et(een the
crafts&an he e&ployed and hi&self (as defined y a (a%e, &a"in% ?alileo not 1ust a
our%eois ut a 4&erchant5 capitalist.
;ifth, there (as, once &ore, ?alileo hi&self. ;or the sa"e of &o&entary &onetary advanta%e,
(ho ut a our%eois and an incorri%ile individualist (ould atte&pt a transparent s(indle
ai&ed at !enetian Repulic, the one polity that had a history of protectin% its citi=ens a%ainst
the In)uisition, and therey aandon that repulic 4the %reatest &ista"e of his life5 and place
his fate in the hands of a despot 4i.e., a political fi%ure lac"in% all institutional restraints on his
ehavior, (ithout any politically 1ustified co&&it&ent to free in)uiry5, he, his entire entoura%e
and the intellectual9literary co&&unity of ;lorence su1ect to the uffetin% (inds ori%inatin% in
Ro&e, at the ti&e in (hich he, ?alileo, (as pulicly elaoratin% a heretical theori=ation, one
that too" direct ai& at the philosophical underpinnin%s of Church sanctioned do%&a2
Si'th, there is one other feature of ?alileo.s personal develop&ent, and ecause of it, there is
so&ethin% asent in hi& co%nitively. Whether or not (e hold that one can do so&ethin% li"e a
detached history of ideas, an intellectual history in (hich and for (hich ,the West/ is an o1ect
of study, perhaps even a &ystifyin%ly sustantial entity, ?alileo did en%a%e a tradition of
thou%ht that is philosophical and includes the study of nature understood as natural
philosophy as one of its central aspects. In the tradition as it (as revived durin% the lon% era in
(hich the petty co&&odity producin%, uran enclaves of the feudal social for&ation to%ether
(ith other less definale for&s of sociation that covered Europe e%innin% ei%ht hundred
years a%o, especially durin% the initial period 41DG091#FC5 of state centrali=ation 4con%ruent
(ith and effectively arisin% fro& the develop&ent of the first (oolen &anufacturers, an"ers
and trades5 and the follo(in% era lar%ely defined y the rise of Castile 41#O791C705 in
opposition to this very develop&ent in (hich this revival (as consciously carried out,
philosophical thou%ht e%an and ended y posin% )uestions and ans(ers aout the for& of
co&&unity in (hich the %ood life is achieved. In this tradition its achieve&ent is co&&unal
and political 4in the ancient ?ree" sense5. 3o(here, (e elieve, (ill (e find such )ueries in
?alileo+ )or hi$, the good life is a strictl% private affair+ ,n this sense, he is undenia&l% a
&ourgeois+
Why is it i&portant to estalish that ?alileo (as a our%eois, oth socially and in ter&s of
o1ective su1ectivity 4i.e., out(ardly, in ter&s of his ehavior52
0he ans(er has already een %iven aove+
1
0here (e ar%ued the concept of the our%eoisie
is unitary 4i.e. %oes eyond and is not deter&ined y provincial, re%ional and ne( national
oundaries in the process of for&ation5, does not ase itself on ideal typification, ut refers to
the &ost enli%htened individuals, and to the social %roups in (hich they (ere situated 4(hich,
in ?alileo.s case, (e shall elo( specify in ter&s of a socially deter&inate ,audience/ he
addressed in his (ritin% in the vernacular5 and (hich provided &en li"e ?alileo (ith reality and
their identities 4as the or%anic intelli%entsia of the our%eoisie as a class5, and (ho,
the&selves our%eois, (ere at once creators and earers of the &odern science of nature.
0he connection et(een the our%eoisie and science, as (e also noted, does not 1ust
transpire at the level of social class, for it is the opposition to the old order that in part defines
these &en, and the historical si%nificance of this science itself< as the (orld9visional
infrastructure historically unifyin% this class itself< that is of transcendent i&port.
1
See the Introduction, ,;or&ation of the Social Basis of an >r%anic Intelli%entsia of the Bour%eoisie./
Part III
?alileo and *ristotle
0he relation of thou%ht, theories, for&s of "no(led%e 4here science5 and visions of the (orld
to that (orld 4other thou%ht, theories and for&s of "no(led%e inclusive of co&&on senseE uilt
environ&ent and hu&anly transfor&ed natural landscapesE earthly nature in (hich the
fore%oin% are directly e&eddedE and nature in the enco&passin% sense, as a totality, the
universe5 cannot e deter&ined fro& a division of laor that &erely duplicates capital.s
develop&ent in thou%ht, to one side, ,the purely &athe&atical and lo%ical aspects/
1
and, to
the other, ,the sociolo%ical aspects,/ so that ,the &echanistic concept of the (orld/ starts fro&
,the &echanical principles and concepts (hich/ derive ,the e'planation of physics and the
universe fro& the analysis of &achines./
2
0his &anner of understandin% the relation of
ideational constructs to the (orld is a develop&ent ithin capitalis& 4and li"e 6annhei&.s
,deolog% and Htopia, a sociolo%y of "no(led%e5 in the &ost thorou%h%oin% sense 4i.e., it
affir&s capitalis&5 ... not to &ention as a species of a reflection theory it is incoherent... and it
alto%ether fails to understand ho( socio9historical reality, and on this asis, a vision of (orld,
is for&ed.
D
*n analysis of the ,&echanistic concept of the (orld/ does not start an analysis of the relation
of ?alileo.s 1n Mechanics to his study of si&ple &achines 4ai&ed at understandin% the
%eneral uses and principles %overnin% deploy&ent of such devices5,
#
any &ore than it does
fro& Clausius. study of stea& en%ines 4%ivin% rise to the second la( of ther&odyna&ics5 t(o
and a half centuries later. It e%ins fro& the i&&ediate appearance of the real itself, fro& the
%enesis, for&ation and develop&ent of an econo&y, i.e., a see&in%ly autono&ous re%ulator
of social life 4a &ystified and reifyin%ly apprehended sphere of co&&unity as society (hich
appears5
C
as an o1ectified &echanistic structure into (hose division of laor individuals are
ostensily inserted li"e co%s in a &achine.
Before it eco&es possile to anticipatory reproduce in thou%ht the tendentially developin%
intelli%ile structure of the (orld, hidden to us and thus &ystifyin%ly restin% on and arisin% fro&
transfor&ation of one of its aspects 4lar%ely in production at the heart of daily activity5, it is
necessary for that structure, and accordin%ly, reality itself to e%in to under%o chan%e, for
novel aspects that are pro1ectively captured and fi'ed in thou%ht to appear<
0here (ere four develop&ents (ithin ?alileo.s life(orld that &ade the o1ective appearance
of ho&o%enous space possile. *ll of these develop&ents (ill occur (ithin a retrospectively
reconstructed phase in the &ove&ent of capital (ithin the societies of Europe in (hich a
confrontation et(een counterrevolutionary Castile and a risin% &erchant and nascent
&ercantile our%eoisie asin% itself on for&al do&ination of capital in production unfolded.
O
Consider, then, these develop&ents+ ;irst, there (as the ocean%oin% e'ploration of forei%n
lands and the situatin% (ithin those lands of locales and places that (ere &ar"ed for special
e'ploitation 4of resources such as ti&er and %old, of peoples5. 0his re)uired detailed
&ap&a"in% and %eo&etric 4Euclidean5 pro1ection provided the &ost advanced techni)ue in
this re%ard. Second, there (as the &ove&ent of lar%e ar&ies in the field and in occupation
(ith their attendant lo%istical and co&&unications prole&s. *%ain, a %eo&etrical pro1ection
of spaces, space and uilt environ&ent to e traversed, assaulted or occupied as the case
&ay have een (as, for field co&&anders at least, a desideratu& and a&on% those forces
1
$enry" ?ross&ann, ,:escartes and the Social >ri%ins of the 6echanistic Concept of the World,/ 1CG.
2
,Iid./
D
;or elaoration, see the ;ourth Study, Part III, ,0heory of 0ruth/ and the sources cited therein, elo(.
#
1n Mechanics, 1#G91C0. 4Pulished in Paris in 1OD#, this (or" had lon% circulated in &anuscript for&, perhaps fro&
as early as 1O00.5 0he &achines ?alileo e'a&ined are the lever, alance, (indlass, capstan, pulley and scre(.
C
Co$$unit% and Capital, ]709]7O.
O
See the discussion of for&al do&ination, ,Chronolo%y and $istory,/ in the ;irst Interlude, elo(.
and co&&anders that pri=ed &ilitary efficiency, alacrity and offensive operations it (as a
necessity. 0hird, there (as the develop&ent of sie%e (arfare, the reduction of fortified cities
and the use of cannon and pro1ectiles to rea"do(n (alls, ra&parts, and i%nite other
structures. $ere, )uestions of the accuracy of &ovin% pro1ectiles eco&e para&ount, and y
treatin% the air at %round level 4i.e., (hat (e (ould today call the lo(er at&osphere5 as
ho&o%eneous space and cannon alls, s&all oulders, i%nited sustances, etc., purely as
odies in &otion, a &echanics ased on %eo&etri=ation of space (ould e superior. ;ourth,
the creation in production of a (orld of co&&odities, includin% ra( &aterials 4e.%., (ools, sil",
uildin% &aterials5 as co&&odities for production of &ore co&&odities as finished %oods, and
eyond this, their &ediation y &oney 4as in uyin% and sellin%5 as transpired daily in local
&ar"etplaces and other venues of consu&ption, and, especially, the &ove&ent of price as it
(as follo(ed in an"in%, trade and &anufacturer actually %enerates the o1ective appearance
of ho&o%eneous space in (hich, in particular, &oney and co&&odities &ove.
*ny theori=ation that atte&pted to syste&atically treat the o1ects of nature 4and those of
society and hu&anity si&ply assu&ed to e natural5 (hich appeared in this life(orld and
(hich itself (as assu&ed to e natural (ould start fro& a conception of ho&o%eneous
space.
1
0o the e'tent such a theori=ation too" an account of odies in &otion< not 1ust
pro1ectiles, and proaly not all (ith an explicit vie( to the &ove&ent of price< as its &ain
o1ective, and the anal%sis of pro9ectile $otion as the ea!est ele$ent in 7ristotelian
ph%sics, the o&vious point of attac! for an%one ai$ing at a thoroughgoing critique, it, this
&echanics, (ould necessarily atte&pt a &athe&ati=ation 4%eo&etri=ation5 of nature startin%
fro& a treat&ent of odies solely in their )uantifiale, &easurale aspect.
8alileo and 7ristotle, ,
The Ouestion of 4ro9ectile Motion and Natural 4lace
Rnder the for%oin% conditions, the (orld in its i&&ediacy &ay or &ay not appear e&inently,
ut is ar%ualy i&&anently and &ediately 4i.e., is in its intelli%iility5, &athe&atical. ;or
?alileo, this (as not only li"ely, it (as hard to i&a%ine ho( it &i%ht have een other(ise< $e
needed only to de&onstrate it< 0he evidence is, in our vie(, conclusive+ $is intellectual
trainin% fro& an early a%e, his early fascination (ith &athe&atics 4includin% his studies of
Euclid and *rchi&edes directed y Ricci5
2
and his do%%ed pursuit of &athe&atical study as
the center around (hich all his other studies revolved, and, then, his relation to his father,
discussions he had and (or" he did (ith !incen=o, all point in this direction and only this
direction. Elaoration of the last point 4?alileo.s relation (ith his father5 &ay assist in
renderin% this clai& patent and &anifest.
Still&an :ra"e, a leadin% t(entieth century, En%lish lan%ua%e authority on ?alileo and one of
his io%raphers, has ar%ued that ste&&in% fro& his father.s practice ?alileoIs &usical
"no(led%e &ay have helped hi& desi%n e'peri&ents. :ra"e su%%ests that (hile !incen=o
perfor&ed these e'peri&ents in 1CFF, ?alileo, livin% at ho&e, (as present and li"ely helped in
the e'peri&ent.
D
While It &i%ht e noted that ?alileo.s account on *rchi&edes. use of a
alance to arrive at relative densities already involved e'peri&ental reproduction of this
1
@est it e for%otten, datin% ,ti&e/ in years, &onths and days fro& the irth of Christ, and ,tellin% ti&e/ in ter&s of
hours and &inutes 4(ithout re%ard to (hether one e&ploys the 8ulian or ?re%orian calendar5, already actuall% and in
fact reconstructs reality and the e'perience of reality on the asis of an e&pty, linear te&porality, (hich is the
counterpart to ho&o%enous space.
2
We should e careful here. >rsilio Ricci, it appears, &ay have e'plicitly thou%ht &athe&atics (as not a distinctive
ody of "no(led%e, ut a specific, aleit hi%hly developed &ediation of prole&s that e&er%e in en%ineerin% and
&echanics. ?alileo, (e shall ar%ue, not only sa( &athe&atics as distinctive, not only as a uni)ue "ey that discloses
for us the structure of the real, (hich is other(ise sensily inaccessile, ut he assi&ilated the one to the other, in the
lan%ua%e of &echanics, &athe&atical o1ects to real odies and vice versa.
D
,0he Role of 6usic in ?alileoIs E'peri&ents,K 7F910#.
activity, and this (as underta"en t(o years earlier, (hat is really si%nificant here 4:ra"e does
not say or appear to reali=e this5 is the follo(in%+ *ny relation to his father of this sort over the
course of his youth, effectively pointed ?alileo the (ay to(ard not 1ust to(ard e'peri&entation
ut to its &anner, i.e., it e'hiits for us the %uidin% ideational &ediation 4&athe&atically
*rchi&edean5 of ?alileo.s studies, and 4his and5 their (hole tra1ectory after fro& the ti&e he
enrolled in the Rniversity of Pisa for(ard.
Reality in its intelli%iility is &athe&atical. 0his (as ?alileo.s funda&ental insi%ht. But
de&onstratin% it, a%ainst *ristotle sho(in% that the i&&anent lo%ic descriin% nature is
essential &athe&atical, (as not so easy. ;or, li"e all his conte&poraries, ?alileo thou%ht in
received cate%ories, conceptually apprehended nature in ter&s that (ere asically
*ristotelian< @et us, then, ta"e the follo(in% proposition 4and in this (e are in co&plete
accord (ith LoyrU5
1
that as a physicist, ?alileoIs orientation fro& the outset (as to(ard
&athe&ati=in% nature, that is, he stru%%led to create a lan%ua%e to theoretically for&ulate
(hat he &erely understood so that it could e "no(n as such. In advance of any specific
e'peri&ents, reflections or la(ful for&ulations ?alileo undertoo" or achieved, he tenaciously
held onto this o1ective. Be%innin% (ith his first syste&atic effort 4De Motu5 datin% fro& 1C70
to the end of his scientific life 4To Ne Sciences pulished in 1ODF5 he pursued the
elaoration of this asic insi%ht, call it his 8rundpro9e!t+++ ut onl% as Copernican and, a&ove
all else, as tenaciousl% and funda$entall% anti-7ristotelian.
Pursuin% this ai&, in De Motu 41n Motion5 ?alileo sou%ht to elucidate, syste&ati=e and
crystalli=e the traditional, lar%ely (ell9estalished ar%u&ents of an i&petus physics, (hich
essentially is a &echanics of pro1ectiles+ ;or recall, as (e have already noted, the account of
pro1ectile &otion is the &ost vulnerale point in *ristotelian natural philosophy.
*ristotle.s understandin% of &otion (as not restricted to odies, (hose &otion is, for hi&, a
type or "ind of &otion, (hich is %enerally deter&ined as the fulfill&ent of (hat is potential as
potential or insofar as it e'ists potentially.
2
40hus, the heatin% of a cold ody is also a type of
&otion, a passa%e fro& cold to hot.5 It is, in other (ords, a &ove&ent fro& potentiality to
actuality. But to the e'tent (e are concerned (ith odies, &otion is the change of place of
natural odies, that is, of the sensuous or perceptually presented real for&s of daily life.
;or *ristotle, that a heavy stone, (ere it, for e'a&ple, to e held at head hei%ht and released,
falls to the %round is a case of natural &otion. Such &otion is natural 4as opposed to KviolentK
&otion that (ould force it fro& its do(n(ard course5 ecause it is ,heavy/ 4as opposed, e.%.,
to fire (hich is ,li%ht/5.
D
*s heavy, it &oves do(n(ard to(ard the Earth, and that is its Knature.K
0he stone, an ele&ent in a structured, Earth centered and ordered (orld 0cos$os5? this
account at once presupposed and de&onstrated a roader cos&olo%y, and this is i&portant
ecause ?alileo (ill conceive &otion only as local &otion and critici=e *ristotle on that
asis< li"e every other ein% or o1ect in the cos&os, tends to(ard that place (here it
elon%s. 0he cos&os is a (ell9articulated and hi%hly structured (orld, one (here all o1ects
have their natural place accordin% to their "ind, that is, a place (here each properly elon%s.
0hus, odies are neither indifferent to (hether they are here, there or there, nor are they
)uantitatively assi&ilale one to another. Such, (e &i%ht say, is the for& necessity ta"es in an
*ristotelian cos&olo%y. In our e'a&ple the stone, havin% KfoundK its place, co&es to rest, its
natural state (herein it is fully itself, co&plete and, hence, perfect< Such theoretical
conservatis&, perhaps intellectually satisfyin% to those (ho have achieved &astery of others
1
LoyrU.s for&ulation is (ron%< he says ?alileo strove to &athe&ati=e ph%sics 0and not nature5, ut his 4LoyrU.s5
intent is the sa&e. See 8alileo Studies, 2F, DG, DF, OG9OF, G#.
2
4h%sics, iii, 1, 201a10, 201C.
D
De Caelo, iii, 2, D01a21ff. 0his is a )ualitative, not a )uantitative, deter&ination, i.e., *ristotle is not spea"in% aout
(ei%ht in our sense.
4%reat householders o(nin% slaves5 in the (orld (here social relations of &astery and
do&ination have the appearance of naturalness, &i%ht thou%h e incon%ruous and less than
fully intelli%ile and in this sense less or other than natural (here little appears stale, that is,
in the rapidly chan%in% landscape of the uran centers of the early &odern (orld 4and it alone
(ould not suit a revolutionary te&pera&ent, as, (e shall su%%est, (as ?alileo.s5. ;or us,
certainly it %rates on our co&&on senseE ut, then, at its ori%ins $odern science, (hich has
eco&e a thorou%hly theoreticall% $ediated deter&inin% &o&ent of our co&&on sense
4scientific inputs for& decisive &o&ents in actual production of &aterial for&s, for&s (hich
constitute the everyday sensile data of our e'perience5, (as also counterintuitive even for
de&o%raphically thin, our%eois strata en%a%ed i&&ediately in co&&odity production and its
financial &ediations<
3o(, as (e have already su%%ested, *ristotle distin%uished et(een natural and unnatural,
constrained or violent &otions,
1
the pro1ectile ein% a paradi%&atic instance of the latter. 0his
is prole&atic for *ristotle. 3atural &otion has its cause (ithin itself, and is antecedent, ut
violent or constrained &otion has its cause outside of itself and really 4as opposed to lo%ically5
succeeds 4*ristotle says it is posterior to5
2
that (hich is y nature. 0hus, there can e no
constrained &otion (ithout prior natural &otion.
D
6oreover, for hi&, there can e no &otion
(ithout contact.
#
So, in the case of the stone that is thro(n, (hat causes its &otion once it
has left &y hand, i.e., once it is asent contact2
0he cause of the &otion is in the &ediu&, the air, throu%h (hich the pro1ectile, e.%., the stone
once it has left &y hand, &oves. 0he air pushes the pro1ectile alon% (ith a &ove&ent that is
faster than that of the natural loco&otion of the pro1ectile.
C
0his &ediu& or, rather, its &otion is
not conceived unitarily ut as a consecutive series of &otions each of (hich pushes the ne't
alon%, (hich at a certain point eco&es less, and ceases (hen one &otion in the
series, or one of the different parts of the air that are &oved one upon the other, no lon%er
causes the ne't to &ove. *ir, li"e (ater, is naturally adaptin% and sufferin% &otion in this
&anner...
O
?alileo.s central criticis& re%ards the relations et(een the &over, pro1ectile and &ediu&. It
a&ounts to a counter clai&, na&ely, the &over i&partin% &otion to the pro1ectile cannot e in
contact (ith it, if the surroundin% &ediu& &oves it. $e proceeds y &a"in% t(o types of
ar%u&ents. 0he first is instantiation. ?alileo cites e'a&ples that run in direction opposite to
*ristotle.s position re%ardin% pro1ectile &otion. 0he second is ar%u&entation in the strict
sense+ $e su%%ests fla(s in *ristotle.s reasonin%.
G
$e poses several )uestions. $e as"s ho( can a &ediu& e elicited to e'plain, in (hat (ay is
it causative, of the continuin% &otion of a spinnin% top or a (heel or o1ect, say a sphere set
atop and rotatin% on an a'is2
F
$e as"s aout len%thy odies 4i.e., those that are neither
spherical nor irre%ularly shaped5, such as an arro(, (hose &otion traverses %reat distances
even as the arro( &oves throu%h a resistant &ediu&, the air, (hen fired into a head(ind.
7
$e
)ueries ho( it is that of t(o o1ects of the sa&e si=e, one heavier than the other 4say, &ade of
lead5 and fired fro& a cannon, the heavier one &i%ht e shot farther.
10
3o(, in point of fact, all
1
,&id, D011FffE 4h%sics, iv, F, 21Ca1.
2
,&id, 21Ca#.
D
,&id, 21CaC.
#
,We can defined &otion as the fulfill$ent of the $ova&le )ua $ova&le, the cause of the attri&ute &eing contact ith
hat can $ove./ ,&id, iii, 2, 202aG. E&phasis in ori%inal.
C
,&id, iv, F, 21Ca1Cff.
O
,&id, viii, 10, 2OGaDff, 2OG1#.
G
1n Motion, GO, GF.
F
,&id, GC.
7
,&id, GG.
10
,&id, GG9GF.
the criticis&s i&plied in these )uestions do raise prole&s for an *ristotelian account of the
&otion of pro1ectiles, ut they are not criticis&s of *ristotle< (ho did little &ore than state a
position< ut of elaorations of his position lar%ely y ancient, *ra, Scholastic and
Peripatetic co&&entators and philosophers, and, it should e added, that these elaorations
(ere often ased on Church doctrine that e'plicitly contravened *ristotle.s 4h%sics?
1
It is
already possile here to %li&pse the stru%%le that (ould rea" out into the open three
decades later in the attle et(een the ,t(o chief (orld syste&s/ of the ,ancients/ and the
,&oderns,/ i.e., et(een theoretical e'pressions of the for&s of or%ani=in% social life, et(een
the our%eoisie and the phalan' of feudal lord, Church and cler%y... 0hese conceptual
&ediations are crucial &o&ents in the or%ani=ation of differin% for&s of social life. 0hus they,
the for&er, are not reducile to the latter, i.e., they co&prehend, e'plain and orient our
practice in social life... ;or, in nuce, at that &o&ent this stru%%le is est theoretically
for&ulated in ter&s of the )uestion, ,Is real ein% identical (ith &athe&atical ein%2/ and is,
&ethodolo%ically posed in ter&s of an account of &otion, especially of that of a pro1ectile<
?alileo pushed for(ard. If the air &oves a pro1ectile y a series of consecutive &otions, (hat
prevents this effect fro& recurrin% indefinitely2 4Why, (e &i%ht as", &ust one of this series at
a certain point eco&e less25 Why &i%ht each displace&ent %ive rise to another indefinitely2
?alileo su%%ests there &i%ht even een acceleration.
2
Without reason, this cannot %ranted
ecause it contradicts the *ristotelian characteri=ation of all 4sulunary5 &otion as li&ited and
finite.
D
Su&&arily, *ristotle has &erely displaced the prole& fro& the &over that upon
contact causes &otion, and here (e are tal"in% aout the constrained or violent &otion of
pro1ectiles, to the &ediu&, the air, (hich tacitly assu&es the latter itself is ,possessed/ 4our
ter&5 of a virtus $otiva i$pressa, a virtue 4)uality5 that i&presses &otion.
#
Why does this
&ediu&, air, have a special status2 If (e are %oin% to presu&e an i&pressile )uality, (hy not
dispense (ith the co&ple', convoluted account and opt for si&ple one, i.e., the &over itself
i&parts to or i&presses on the )uality of &otion on the &oved2
C
0his strai%hta(ay led to ?alileo.s effort to refine an i&petus physics. Initially and tepidly
e'plored in the fourteenth century y Parisian no&inalists 48ean Buridan, 3icole >res&e and
especially *lert of Sa'ony5
O
in response to Church pronounce&ents on (hat is and (hat is
not orthodo' doctrine. 0hese responses (ere for%otten, then resurrected and syste&ati=ed in
the latter half of the si'teenth century 4in an effort to %rapple (ith the i&plications for
understandin% of reality of ne( &ilitary technolo%ies as they, y (ay of the ar&ies earin%
the&, &assively intruded into daily life5. 0he characteristic features of this doctrine can e
stated riefly.
Whether set in &otion naturally or unnaturally 4violently5, every heavy ody is &oved y an
i&pression that is ,sta&ped/ 4our ter&5, i.e., ,i&pressed,/ upon it and thus is ad1oined to the
1
:uhe&, Medieval Cos$olog% 4DO75, (rites, ,In 12GG, Etienne 0e&pier, ishop of Paris, conde&ned the follo(in% t(o
errors< 0he ;irst Cause cannot &a"e &ore than one (orld< ?od cannot &ove the heavens in a strai%ht line, the
reason ein% that $e (ould then leave a void<. Everythin% that *ristotle.s Physics asserted aout infinity, place, and
ti&e shattered (hen it (as confronted y the po(er of the conde&nations of Paris./
2
1n Motion, GO9GG.
D
4h%sics, vi, G.
#
1n Motion, GF.
C
LoyrU, ,&id, CC n. 101, states this o1ection is ,unfair,/ since ,air is a &ediu& (hich is especially liale to &otion./ In
fact, *ristotle does say that ,air or (ater HareJ< naturall% adapted for i&partin% and under%oin% &otion/ 44h%sics, viii,
10, 2OGaC, e&phasis added5, ut this is &ere assertion, it has a fiat character, in strictly lo%ical ter&s it is ad hoc or a
re)uire&ent of his theori=ation, it is not 1ustified, i.e., it is neither an inference that the discussion at this point co&pels
nor does *ristotle even offer an instantiation that (ould render it intuitively ovious. *ristotle si&ply asserts it, the
,nature/ of air is to e so ,adapted./ It is, of course, precisely ,natures,/ i.e., the )ualitative deter&ination of &otion,
that ?alileo is stru%%lin% a%ainst (hich, still operative in 1n Motion, (ill lead to his failure to successful &athe&ati=e
nature on the asis of his i&petus physics.
O
E&ile 6eyerson, ,dentit% and Difference, 11G.
&ovin% ody, and, even if dis1oined or separated fro& the &ovin% ody, (ill per&it it to &ove
y itself for so&e ti&e. 0hat (hich sets the &ovin% ody in &otion is the i$petus+ 0his &otive
force, if you (ill 4i.e., disavo(in% the latter, technical scientific concept of force, especially as it
appears in 3e(ton, in favor of the intended, )ualitative and, )uite fran"ly, indeter&inate
conception that characteri=ed this partial rea" (ith *ristotle5, is not a &ediu& in the e'plicitly
*ristotelian sense such as (ater or air. It also is not a )uality characteristic of the &ovin% ody
itself 4i.e., prior to ein% set in &otion5, thou%h (e &i%ht say that, in i&pressin% it, the i&petus
penetrates or i&pre%nates 4our tacit se'ual connotation is delierate5 as a result of its initial
contact (ith the &ovin% ody.
0his is the asic conception, and there are &any variations on it once its relation to specific
prole&s of pro1ectile &otion are dra(n out. LoyrU su%%ests that it is a ,condensation of our
e'periences of Ilan? and &uscular effort/ and as a coherent e'planation of these
e'periences 4he cites the e'a&ple of %ettin% a runnin% start in order to &a"e a 1u&p5, as such
for&ed the ,e'peri&ental asis of $edieval dyna&ics/
1
< 0he e'a&ple is, thou%h, &isleadin%
to this e'tent+ ?alileo still considers unnatural &otion (ithin an *ristotelian fra&e(or" of up
and do(n, that is, as privile%ed directions 4thou%h there is no %oal at (hich they ai&, i.e., a
natural place5< We (ould point out that it is only ,&edieval/ if one dra(s a line et(een (hat
ca&e efore and after ?alileo 4duly notin% his predecessors, Copernicus, Bruno, 0ycho
Brahe, and his older conte&porary Lepler5, and only if one refuses to reco%ni=e the internal,
inti&ate tissue that ind daily life, and especially its social and historical structure and
or%ani=ation 4for it is hear that the line is first dra(n5, and 8eist+
But not to )uile. Rather, (e shall &erely state ho( it afforded those (ho theori=ed it 4ho( it
afforded ?alileo5 the opportunity of solvin% the prole& of the *ristotelian account of pro1ectile
&otion, and to su%%est the li&itations of this theori=ation, a%ain for ?alileo. 0he asic difficulty
lay in indicatin% ho( the &ovin% ody continues its &otion after it is no lon%er in contact,
particularly in the case of unnatural or violent &otion, (ith that (hich set it in &otion and
i&parts to it its i&petus. Beyond statin% the position of i&petus physics, this is lar%ely done
e'e&plarily (hile the specific instance ?alileo invo"es is the sound of a rin%in% ell.
2
What are the li&itations to this theori=ation2 *nd ho( did ?alileo reco%ni=e the&2
;irst, ut retrospectively 4i.e., for us, ut not i&&ediately for ?alileo5, ?alileo.s i&petus
physics (ill not %ive us the la( of inertia, ecause, for hi&, the i&petus is consu&ed in the
&otion of the &oved ody, (hich &eans the ody (ill slo( do(n, eventually co&in% to a
stop,
D
(hich, in turn, &eans that endless &otion is not possile. 4Recall, the la( of inertia
states that a ,ody in (hatever state it is in, rest or &otion, (ill continue in that state
indefinitely if nothin% &ediates that state, if nothin% interferes (ith it or intervenes to chan%e
it./5
#
In other (ords, the i&petus is consu&ed in the &otion that is i&parted to the &ovin%
ody. ?alileo eventually aandoned this vie( 4i.e., he forsoo" the i&petus physics fro& (hich
it follo(ed5, ut, as (e said, he did not i&&ediately reco%ni=e this.
What (as &ore i&portant is that ?alileo denied that there could e acceleration of a &ovin%
ody. 0his is internally consistent. It is a necessary conse)uence of the consu&ption of the
1
LoyrU, ,&id, 22. E&phasis added.
2
1n Motion, G79F0.
D
,&id, F#.
We could split hairs here 4it (as done fre)uently5 y sayin% the &ovin% ody (ould slo( do(n indefinitely. In this
early (or" of ?alileo, this (as not his position.
#
0his is our for&ulation, thou%h retrospectively (e can reco%ni=e this is one of ?alileo.s funda&ental contriutions, for
it is no less than 3e(ton.s first la( of &otion. @ater 4in 1O125, In ?alileoIs o(n (ords, he (ill state a ody ,(ill
&aintain itself in that state in (hich it has once een placedE that is, if placed in a state of rest, it (ill conserve thatE
and if placed in &ove&ent to(ard the (est 4for e'a&ple5, it (ill &aintain itself in that &ove&ent./ 3etters on Sunspots
4second letter5, 11D.
i&petus i&parted to a &ovin% ody as havin% een &oved. Put in &otion, a ody.s
&ove&ent, i.e., its fall, is due to its (ei%ht. 4*lready note here that unli"e *ristotle, (ei%ht is
not heaviness, i.e., not )ualitative, or to state the &atter &ore precisely, heaviness and
li%htness as )ualities have no( ac)uired a further relational if not entirely )uantitative sense5.
Its (ei%ht does not chan%eE 1ust the opposite, it is constant. * constant (ei%ht (ill only
produce a constant speedE hence, there is no acceleration.
1
*ccordin%ly, speed is relative to
(ei%ht. 0(o odies of the sa&e (ei%ht (ill fall at the sa&e speed, a heavier one (ill fall faster
and a li%hter one slo(er. 0his, thou%h, is not acceleration.
2
Rnli"e in *ristotle, heaviness 4or li%htness5 is not an asolute, fi'ed )uality, ut is relational. *
piece of (ood that falls (hen dropped fro& a (indo( of a uildin% rises (hen su&er%ed in
(ater. 0hat is, it is not 4yet5 (ei%ht in the sense (e thin" of it, ut (ei%ht 4heaviness or
li%htness5 relative to its &ediu& and the circu&stances of &otion. 0hus, specifyin% the
circu&stance, if a ody is heavy in the &ediu& it is in, it (ill fall. >ther(ise, it (ill rise. 0he
speed (ith (hich it rises or falls is &easured y the difference et(een the ody.s o(n
4specific5 (ei%ht and (ei%ht of the volu&e it displaces in the &ediu& in (hich it is in.
D
So that
if it is heavier 4)uantitatively5, it %oes do(n, if li%hter it %oes up. 0his ?alileo understood as a
correction of *ristotle.
3o(, there are t(o features or conse)uences of this doctrine. ;irst, the strictly )ualitative
deter&ination of )ualities of a &ovin% ody as they appear in *ristotle has een replaced y a
)uantitative, relational one (hich per&its, in principle, their &athe&atical treat&ent. Second, it
leads strai%hta(ay, contra *ristotle, to the assertion of the void+ Bodies (ill &ove at proper
speeds, i.e., speeds deter&ined solely y their 4true or asolute in the *ristotelian sense5
(ei%hts in a vacuu&.
#
0his &eans not only that &otion in a vacuu& is lo%ically possile
4eventually openin% the door to the la( of inertia and, &ore i&portantly, that of fallin% odies5,
ut (e can conceive, a%ain in principle, of a ody &ovin% in isolation fro& the rest of ein%,
i.e., (ithout reference to the cos&os in the *ristotelian sense. It is the i&plications of these
insi%hts (hich, in our vie(, de&onstrated to ?alileo the li&itations of his theori=ation, rou%ht
to a(areness at least in principle the conflict et(een it and (hat he ai&ed at, the pro1ect of
&athe&ati=in% nature, per&ittin% hi& to see in the very )ualitative concept of i&petus
4definitionally va%ue ut &odeled nonetheless on the *ristotelian concept of for&5 its o(n
(ea"ness and shortco&in%.
$ere (e can %li&pse the tendential direction of ?alileo.s thou%ht, the position he (as ein%
driven to(ard+ In his early years at Padua, he (ould co&e to reali=e that the full i&plications
of the position he had developed in his i&petus physics. In his opposition to *ristotle, he
(ould e co&pelled to overthro( Peripatetic natural philosophy at its foundations.
C
$e (ould
see and understand nature %eo&etrically 4and to this e'tent &athe&atically, ut not
arith&etically, in ter&s of fi%ures rather than nu&ers or &a%nitude5 and conceive the
universe, no lon%er a cos&os, as unounded (ithout center< unli"e those (ho follo(in%
*ristotle %rounded natural philosophy startin% fro& the (orld as an orderly structure (hole,
treated &ovin% odies as teleolo%ically i&pelled to their natural place, see"in% validations on
1
,&id,1009101.
2
?alileo (as, in fact, co&pelled to deal (ith the e'periential fact of acceleration. While already su%%estin% his
theori=ation is constructed &athe&atically 4concerns ideal shapes in %eo&etrical space and not real odies in the
space that is perceptually %iven to us as a relational conte't in (hich those odies &ove5, this e'planation is
convoluted+ It involves a retreat to the *ristotelian concepts of heaviness and li%htness i&pressed on the &ovin% ody
and their interaction durin% its &otion. See, ,&id, FF9F7, 7D97#. We shall not pursue this further in the te't aove.
D
,&id, DF9D7.
#
,&id, #D9#O, esp. ##9#C.
C
We should e clear on this+ ?alileo.s evaluation of *ristotle (as )uite distinct fro& that of *ristotle.s conte&porary
follo(ers. In a rather crude, very &odern characteri=ation they &i%ht e called ,ideolo%ues/ of the Church,
sycophants of Po(er. ;or ?alileoIs vie(, Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s 4second day5, 1109111.
the asis of perceptuall% confir$a&le e'peri&ents and oservations< in order to resolve the
issue in his favor y provin% the &otion of fallin% odies is su1ect to la(s %overned y
%eo&etric conventions, unli"e *ristotle and his follo(ers (ho on different assu&ptions "ne(
&otion could not e understood in this &anner.
Reality 4nature5 in its intelli%iility is &athe&atical. 0his is (hat ?alileo (anted to de&onstrate
ut couldn.t as lon% as he operated (ith the )ualitative concept of i&petus, for i&petus
physics re&ained Kpre9?alileanK or pre9&odern, that is, deter&ined fro& concepts of
*ristotle.s physics. De Motu (as aandoned and never finished.
By the ti&e ?alileo left Padua 41O105, he could fully account for the &otion of odies in a
,)uantitative/ &anner 4i.e., as )uantitative qualities5. *ttached to the 0uscan Court as, if you
(ill, official &athe&atician and philosopher, in 1O11 he (as dra(n into an open dispute (ith a
;lorentine archivist, an *ristotelian philosopher na&ed @odovico delle Colo&e, over the
causation of the rise and fall 4sin"in%5 of odies in (ater. Instead of settlin% the dispute
dialo%ically and in person, ?alileo left us a (ritten account of his position. 4$e, upon reu"e y
the %rand du"e, Cosi&o, for (hat &i%ht de%enerate into pedantic display, clai&ed a cal&,
reasoned (ritten presentation (ould avoid a heated discussion in (hich di%ressions,
&isunderstandin%s, and ,ostentations/ (ere the &ore li"ely outco&e5.
1
In this account ?alileo
clearly e'hiited the insi%ht and understandin% he had achieved.
Colo&e had asserted that cold acts on a sustance y condensin% it, citin% ice as an
e'periential instance 4that is, ice is condensed (ater5. ?alileo stated, to the contrary, that cold
rarefies, reasonin% that condensation di&inished &ass 4understood y ?alileo as volu$e, and
not as it is understood in &odern physics, as a )uantity of &atter as it appears in 3e(ton.s
second la( of &otion5 and increases %ravity 4also understood )uite differently, &erely as
,heaviness,/ as (ei%ht5, (hile rarefication renders a sustance li%hter and au%&ents its &ass.
In free=in%, (ater (ould increase its volu&e 4&ass5 and at the sa&e ti&e (ould e li%hter
than that (ater. $ence, it (ould float.
2
3o( (hat (as interestin% (ere the responses of each party 4as ?alileo relates it5 at the ti&e
the ori%inal dispute opened+ Colo&e stated the ice floated not ecause it (as li%hter, ut
ecause of its shape, (hich as lar%e and flat (ould not penetrate the (ater due to the latter.s
resistance. ?alileo responded that shape, here flatness and %reat reath, (as irrelevant, and
that as proof pushin% the ice do(n and su&er%in% it (ould result in the piece of ice oin%
up and returnin% to the surface. 0hus, the floatation or su&ersion of odies is a conse)uence
of lesser or %reater %ravity 4(ei%ht5 in relation to (ater.
D
It is clear that Colo&e, a Peripatetic philosopher, understood the relations that are
constituted et(een a ody and the (ater on (hich it sits 4or in (hich it is su&ersed5
)ualitatively, that all e'planations of causation are in ter&s of shape, for&E (hile ?alileo,
perhaps reco%ni=in% )uantity is itself a )uality, understood that causation )uantitatively in
ter&s of a relation of relative (ei%hts, i.e., in a &anner in (hich the deter&ination 4causation5
can e set forth nu&erically, can &e $easured, one sustance, a ody in (ater, either floatin%
or sin"in%, ecause it (ei%hs &ore or less than the other, the (ater itself. But ?alileo (ent
further.
In the days that follo(ed this discussion, it (as, accordin% to ?alileo, &uted 4e'peri&ents
(ere also &ade5 (hether various for&s 4(hich he also identifies as ,fi%ures,/ i.e.,
%eo&etrically5 did not alter their velocity accordin% to their shape, as ,road and thin/ and thus
sin"in% far &ore slo(in% into (ater than shapes that are co&pact 4to the point that in principle
a shape &i%ht e so flattened that its do(n(ard &otion in (ater &i%ht alto%ether cease5.
1
Discourse on Bodies in "ater, 29D.
2
,&id, D.
D
,&id, #.
?alileo denied this (as possile.
1
$avin% related this all in a preli&inary, conte'tuali=in%
fashion, he (ent further 4statin% his real point of departure5 y offerin% in his Discourse an
a'io&atic syste&ati=ation of principles on the asis of (hich the &otion 4floatin% or sin"in%5 of
odies in (ater is thou%ht in ter&s of relational )uantities, principles or a'io&s 4or ,definitions/
as one utili=es in %eo&etry5 fro& (hich all the relations of odies to (ater can e deduced
and are in principle susceptile to &easure&ent.
2
0he relation of a ody to a &ediu& &ay or &ay not e the sa&e for different &ediu&s, i.e.,
(ater and air. 0here is si&ilarity in that oth &ediu&s present resistance to &otionE
D
ho(ever,
there is also one difference+ *n account in ter&s of specific and asolute %ravities (ill not %ive
and, for the &otion of odies in (ater, cannot %ive us the la( of inertia+ Even in the lo%ical,
li&it case, one does not spea" of a vacuu& (hen spea"in% of (ater. 4?alileo never arrived at
a universal la( of %ravitation, for, unli"e 3e(ton, he did not have a concept of %ravity, of
attraction at a distance5. 0he entire discussion of the Discourse on Bodies in "ater is
deter&ined y the dispute (ith Colo&e as evidenced y far the lon%est section of the (or",
#
in (hich ?alileo atte&pted his de&onstration of the proposition 4the shape of ody, shape
itself, cannot causally deter&ine its sin"in% or floatin%5 that crystalli=ed his opposition to
Colo&e in the first place. We shall co&e ac" to inertia, ut here and no( (e &ust stay (ith
the peculiar nature of the "ind of "no(led%e that ?alileo.s thou%ht and activity devolved on,
na&ely, science in the entirely &odern sense itself.
*t the sa&e ti&e, (hile reco%ni=in% that ?alileo first estalished the &odern sense of science,
it is also necessary to note in (hat (ay his differed fro& the &anner in (hich the &odern
science of nature developed+ ;or ?alileo, the e'peri&ent4s5 that &i%ht yield &easured results
and that (ould function as a test of theore&s or hypotheses derived 4deduced5 fro& his
definitions 4and thus at a re&ove &i%ht validate those definitions or a'io&s the&selves5, are,
unli"e the &odern science of nature as it develops after hi&, alto%ether secondary or, stated
&ore ade)uately, the e'peri&ent &ecause it $oves in the ele$ent of the sensuous and
there&% constitutes for us perceptual evidence confir&s for hi& (hat he already "ne(, (hat
he had arrived at co%nitively, and in this a%ree&ent 4et(een the ,senses/ and the ,intellect,/
1
,&id+ Whether his denial (as &ade in the ori%inal discussion or only in recountin% it is not clear fro& the te't.
2
0he definitions are really )uite si&ple and include 415 e)ual specific %ravity 4%rave in specie5 (hich is achieved in a
relation (here t(o different 4(a' and (ood5 odies are e)ual in &ass 4volu&e5 and in %ravity 4(ei%ht5E 425 e)ual
asolute %ravity 4e)ual %rave in asolute %ravity5 (hich is achieved (here t(o different odies 4lead and (ood5 are of
e)ual %ravity 4(ei%ht5 and different in &ass 4volu&e5, the (ood havin% &ore &assE 4D5 %reater specific %ravity 4&ore
%rave in specie5 (hich is achieved (here t(o different odies 4lead and tin5 are e)ual in volu&e 4&ass5 and different
in %ravity 4(ei%ht5, lead (ei%hin% &oreE 4#5 %reater asolute %ravity 4&ore %rave asolutely5 (hich is achieved (here
t(o different odies 4(ood and lead5 are different in %ravity 4(ei%ht5 (ithout re%ard to &ass 4volu&e5E 4C5 &ove&ent is
defined as the virtue 4usin% the *ristotelian ter&5, force or efficacy (ith (hich the &over &oves and the &oved
resists. ,&id, C9O.
;ro& these deter&inations, ?alileo deduced asic /a'io&s/ such as (ei%hts that are asolutely e)ual, and that are
&oved (ith e)ual velocity, are of e)ual force and &o&ent in their operationE the &o&ent or force of (ei%ht is
increased y velocity of a &ovin% o1ect 4the t(o a'io&s of (hich co&e very close to a state&ent of 3e(ton.s second
la(, that of constant acceleration5E (ei%hts that are asolutely une)ual, alternately, counterpose and eco&e of e)ual
&o&ent as their (ei%hts 4in contrary proportion5 ,ans(er/ to the velocity of their &otions 4&eanin% the a&ount that
one ody (ei%hs less than the other deter&ines the speed, faster, that it &oves than the other5. >n this asis, ?alileo
then advanced to his discussion of (hich odies descend, su&er%e, in (ater tendin% to the otto& and those that
float. ,&id, O9F.
0he funda&ental theori=ation, as (e (ould say, estalishes the fra&e(or" in (hich the discussion of the pheno&ena,
no( )uantitatively deter&ined, can e at all underta"en.
D
Water &ore than air, ut only in the conte't of the relation of the %ravities 4(ei%hts5 of odies to that of the &ediu&
4its density or rarity5, ,&id, OG.
#
,&id, 2O9#C.
By and lar%e, ?alileo does not even spea" of odies in this te't. Rather, he used the %eo&etrical ter&, shapes, (hich
already su%%est his &ode of de&onstration that (e shall co&e to in the section that follo(s.
as he says5
1
co&pletes the de&onstration, i.e., renders it sufficient and fully reasonale. @et.s
see if (e can dra( this out &ore fully.
8alileo and 7ristotle, ,,
The 4eripatetics 07ristotelians5, NMethod> and the Ne Science
3a&ed Professor of 6athe&atics in 1C72, for the ne't ei%hteen years ?alileo tau%ht and
conducted his research at the Rniversity of Padua. $e pulished little+ In 1O0O, he rou%ht out
his first oo" on a co&pass he inventedE he en%a%ed in len%thy correspondences (ith, a&on%
others, del 6onte, Clavius, Lepler and Sarpi 4(ho introduced hi& to the telescope and to
(ho&, durin% 1O0791O10, he ade)uately for&ulated the la( of inertia5E in sprin% 1O10 1ust
prior to his resi%nation at Padua, he pulished the Starr% Messenger in (hich he catalo%ed
the pheno&ena he had (itnessed throu%h his vastly i&proved telescope.
What ?alileo appeared to pursue &ost a%%ressively durin% this period of his life (as an
a%enda of e'peri&entation, not in our sense ut in the sense of his ne( science. $e e%an
e'peri&ents on &a%netis& in 1O02 4(hich he (ould a%ain ta"e up ane( in 1O2O5E y 1O0#,
his research has %iven hi& a4n5 4inade)uately for&ulated5 la( of fallin% odies 4the la( of
constant acceleration, 3e(ton.s second la(5E in 1O0O, on%oin% (or" cul&inated in invention of
his co&passE in su&&er 1O07, his efforts to redesi%n the telescope produced an
astrono&ically ade)uate instru&ent oth (ith co&&ercial and &ilitary value he (as )uic" to
e'ploit and, of overridin% i&port, the aility to en%a%e in a thorou%h de&onstration, that is,
science as he understood itE finally, rin%in% this period to close, his e'peri&ents and
reflections on odies that float upon (ater e%et a pulication of si&ilar title in 1O12.
2
What is i&portant at this len%thy &o&ent in ?alileo.s develop&ent, as (e are su%%estin%, (as
not the research, e'peri&entation or reflections ta"en separately, ut the &anner in (hich
they for&ed for hi& a unitary practice. While he did not en%a%e in a discussion oriented
e'clusively to &ethodolo%y in the &odern sense, in that very sense his science (as
&ethodolo%ically deter&inist. 0hus, he e'pressly spo"e of the centrality of ,%rounds,
procedures, and de&onstrations/ for understandin% ,the Copernican doctrine,/
D
and the
,positive assurances/ that ,e'peri&ents, lon% oservation, and ri%orous de&onstration/
provide in validatin% astrono&ical ,propositions./
#
;or, it (as here at this &o&ent and it (as
?alileo (ho for the first ti&e, first, produced the relations a&on% theory, hypothesis,
e'peri&ent and fact characteri=in% the &odern science of natureE second, consciousl%
produced the co&ple' of these relations, thus %eneratin% its for&, (hich has een reproduced
endlessly y scientists 4(ith ovious &odification as to ,testin%/5 as a &ethodolo%ically
distinctive orientation to pheno&enaE and, third, laid out the &eanin% and si%nificance of each
of these ter&s 4theory, hypothesis, etc.5 (ithin the (hole of this relation. 0his is ?alileo.s
achieve&ent, for all of these prevail in and essentially characteri=e the &odern science of
nature in contrast to Peripatetic 4*ristotelian5 natural philosophy and, eyond it, other
culturally %enerali=ed for&s of "no(led%e as they have appeared throu%hout hu&an history<
We &ust dra( out this achieve&ent, e'plicatively e'a&ine and rehearse it, since ?alileo
1
3etters on Sunspots 4third letter5, 1#D.
2
$e (ould for&ulate the la( of fallin% odies in his final (or", Discourses and De$onstrations, thusly, ,a heavy ody
has an inherent tendency to &ove (ith a constantly and unifor&ly accelerated &otion</ 0he En%lish translation of
this (or" is &istitled Dialogues Concerning To Ne Sciences+ ;or the citation, ,&id, G#
* ,corollary,/ if you (ill, of this ,la(,/ is, ,in a &ediu& totally devoid of resistance all odies (ould fall (ith the sa&e
speed/ 4,&id, G2, (hich, curiously, havin% een arrived e'perientially and oservationally, (as ,hi%hly proale/+ It (as
to this ?alileo ,concludedK after oservin% the variations of the speed of odies, specifically &etals as they descend
or arise in )uic"silver and this in co$parison to the sa&e &etals as they fall (hen dropped in nor&al at&osphere.5
0he ,la(/ finds %eo&etrically de&onstrated, ,precise/ &athe&atical treat&ent in ,&id, 1G#, 21C.
D
3etter to the 8rand Duchess Christina, 17C.
#
,&id, 17G.
hi&self< this is not unusual in a revolutionary thin"er< &ay not have een fully conscious of
precisely (hat he had acco&plished<
1
0he co&ple' of these relations as (e have characteri=ed it can e e'tracted fro& re&ar"s
and accounts of the pulished (or"s of this period 4Starr% Messenger, 3etters on Sunspots,
Discourse on Bodies in "ater5 on (hich (e have already &ade a start, ut it should also e
noted that to e'hiit these relations, their unity and their si%nificance, i.e., the co&ple' (e call
science, (ill, ecause ?alileo did not syste&atically discuss the& until his late in his life,
co&pel us to reach for(ard to that later period in order to docu&ent his position.
2
3ote, first, the centrality of the construction of the instru&ent. ?alileo offers a lucid, detailed
e'planation of ho( he produced his telescope 4inclusive of accounts of the &anner of
deter&inin% &a%nification and &easurin% distances et(een stars5.
D
In part, the e'planation
&ay or &ay not e &otivated y a le%iti&ate pride in his achieve&ent, ut that is eside the
point, for (hat ?alileo intends in his &eticulous description is to &a"e its construction plain so
that anyone can in principle produce a telescope, as a condition of reproducin% his
oservational results. So (hat is really at issue here for hi& in this account is a characteristic
feature of his science, na&ely, the pulic accessiility of his &ethod of (or"
#
4say, in contrast
to esoteric scriptural interpretation a&on% prelates operatin% ehind closed doors as the
foundations of Church do%&a5. 0he parenthetical re&ar" is not an afterthou%ht. Pulicly
accessile results, ecause they can e reproduced y anyone utili=in% the sa&e instru&ents
and sa&e procedures, are of the essence of ?alileo.s ne( science, a science he e'plicitly
counterposed to the &indless re%ur%itation of *ristotle, the co&&entators and
pronounce&ents of the Church ;athers+ ,<there (ould e %ood reason to re1ect this,/ na&ely,
,prevailin% opinion,/ for ,in the sciences the authority of thousands of opinions is not (orth as
&uch as one tiny spar" of reason in an individual &an./
C
<6anifest on every pa%e, the Starr% Messenger (as a %enuinely revolutionary (or" 4?alileo
"ne( it5, and had to have een an e'traordinarily e'citin% te't for those to (ho& it (as
directed, a coalescin% scientific intelli%entsia of the our%eoisie. 40hus, addressed to the
individuals relationally constitutin% this social layer, it (as (ritten in @atin.5
O
0a"in% a ne(ly
1
See Dialogues Concerning To Ne Sciences, O, (here Salviati, one of the interlocutors (ho conducts the
discussion, states in reference to the ,*cade&ician/ 4i.e., ?alileo5 that ,accordin% to his custo& HheJ< de&onstrated
everythin% y %eo&etrical &ethods so that one &i%ht fairly call this a ne( science./ 0his is a self9&isunderstandin% of
the e'tent and develop&ent of &ethod in ?alileo.
2
Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s 41OD25 and Dialogues Concerning To Ne Sciences
4Discourses and De$onstrations, s&u%%led out of Italy and pulished in @eiden, 1ODF5.
D
Starr% Messenger, 279D1.
#
0his is clear throu%hout the three te'ts in )uestion, ut a particularly %ood for&ulation can e found 4thou%h not
e'pressed in our ter&s5 in the 3etters on Sunspots 4third letter5, 1DO.
C
3etters on Sunspots 4third letter5, 1D#. ,*s to the &ere authority of ancient and &odern philosophers and
&athe&aticians, I say that has no po(er at all to estalish a "no(led%e of any physical proposition./ ,&id, 1D2.
0hese ,&odern/ %entle&en (ere Peripatetics. In a letter (ritten (ith the e'plicit intend of &ollifyin% opinion (ithin the
$oly See, they constituted a stand9in for Church theolo%ians, raidly, scripturally literalist preachers and the
practitioners (ho ran the In)uisitional 0error.
O
,Serious scientific and intellectual (or" of international i&portance (as (ritten in @atin, for this (as the lan%ua%e
understood y the scientific co&&unity./ Charles Sch&itt, ,* ;resh @oo" at 6echanics in 1O
th
Century Italy/ in Studies
in Renaissance 4hilosoph% and Science, 1OG.
?alileo noted he had &ade his oservations for a period of t(o &onths 4Starr% Messenger, D1, C15. Why this period2
Why not &uch lon%er 4li"e the astrono&ical oservations of 0ycho Brahe52 0hirty days deter&ines the co&plete cycle
of all phases of the &oon.s ,&ove&ent/< EarthIs &oon, not the 6edicean 48upiter.s5 &oons, (as decisive for
?alileo.s pro1ect, since it estalished, even (ithout sayin% so, a de9centered Earth< 0he first &onth 4cycle5 per&its
?alileo to &a"e all his oservations, the second to chec", co&pare and confir& the&. 0(o &onths, then, (as the
&ini&ally re)uisite ti&e he needed to co&plete this tas".
*s (e said, the (or" (as self9consciously revolutionary, thus the @atin, the rush to %et it into print, to put it in the
hands of others li"e hi&self.
invented instru&ent, he )ualitatively i&proved it and then did (hat no one else had ever done,
put it at the very center of that de&onstration 4(hich in its &ost ri%orous for&, he considers
&athe&atical, i.e. %eo&etrical55 rin%in% his theori=ation, oservations, their description and
his conclusions to%ether in a unity (hole.
While (hat he sa( &ay to us appear )uite transparent, after all, the telescope qua instru&ent
%ives us pheno&ena strai%htfor(ardly, i.e., everyone can see the o1ects that appear throu%h
its lenses 4(ell, not everyone, there (ere those conte&poraries of ?alileo (ho )uestioned
(hether the telescope itself did not produces illusions5, this is not so.
1
@ater on, once the
instru&ent eco&es &ore co&ple', i.e., eco&es a %roupin% of instru&ents housed in the
sa&e settin% or a laoratory in conte&porary sense, (hich as a social develop&ent already
presupposes syste&ati=ation of scientific and technical inputs into production, and situations
are e'peri&entally produced 4lar%ely in laoratories5 that do not occur in nature, the decisive
character of instru&ental &ediation can e fully seen for (hat it is, and the si%nificant of
e'peri&ent in science, in &ediatin% relations et(een science and technolo%y, can e
revealed. 4But y that ti&e, this &ediation is difficult to apprehend for different reasons+ 0he
&aterial for&s %enerated as scientific inputs to production eco&e syste&atic and continuous
&as" the role of the instru&ental &ediation precisely ecause those for&s have eco&e
ta"en9for9%ranted ele&ents, co&ponents and aspects of the construction of our daily
life(orld.5
*%ain, the pheno&ena present are not %iven strai%htfor(ardly. Instead, they are constructed
4in conte&porary science particularly5 on the asis of the e'peri&ent+ 0he si%nification they
achieve &egins fro$ a pro9ection of a $athe$atical orld-in-itself, an asse$&lage of &odies in
$otion calcula&le in advance< or, in very conte&porary rendition, theory 4as an a%%re%ate
totality of postulates or a'io&s, &athe&atical in for&, at least in one tradition of science and
the do&inant one today5 for the first ti&e appeared in the distinctively scientific sense, that is,
in the for& of an a'io&atic syste&ati=ation.
2
4Even in production and ali%n&ent of ?alileo.s
telescope, especially in the &easure&ent of distances et(een stars, there is already
presupposed a &athe&atical appropriation of the (orld, a certain level of co&petency in
utili=in% %eo&etrical concepts.5 *nd this deploy&ent of the instru&ent< as consciously
constitutive of the "no(led%e achieved< is different, and novel, for even a&on% those
*ristotelian philosophers and astrono&ers (ho the&selves &ade telescopic oservations 4the
&ost fa&ous case ein% that of the 8esuit >ra=io ?rassi5, this ne( insi%ht and understandin%
did not enter into and shape the underlyin% theory 4(hich, in ?rassi.s case, as (ith all
defenders of the old order oth in thou%ht and social practice, re&ained asically unchan%ed,
and5 (hich at est co&pelled the addition of ad1unct hypotheses to the ori%inal theory. But let
?alileo spea" for hi&self<
So, second, in his account of the surface of the Earth.s &oon he stated, ,<the oundary that
divides the dar" part fro& the li%ht does not extend unifor$l% in an oval line as (ould happen
on a perfectl% spherical solid/E
D
,into the lu&inous part e'tended a %reat dar" %ulf< HintoJ
1
Sensuous perception is not si&ply %iven (ith hu&anity. *s 6ar' once said 4perhaps in the 1F## Manuscripts5, the
senses the&selves are socio9historical products+ Seein% is al(ays learned, &anifested in different for&s, a cultural
achieve&ent. H0hus, as Will noted else(here, a 3e( ?uinea people, the *ela&, had e'tre&e difficulty in ,seein%,/
i.e., i&&ediately apprehendin% the i&a%e that is reproduced in, photo%raphs. If sho(n a picture of a person (ho has
een captured in a ri%idly strai%ht ahead position, an *elal& can see the i&a%e. But if the person is captured in
action, or for that &atter, not loo"in% ri%ht at the ca&era, the *ela& is at a loss at to (hat is vie(ed. See the len%thy
footnoted discussion in "h% the Stud% of Hu$an 1rigins is Necessar% and "h% it is 2ssential to an 2$ancipator%
4ro9ect, Part !I, ,E'panded Concept of Consciousness/ appearin% in 1rigins and 2ndings+ Editor.J Should (e
surprised that a&on% ?alileoIs conte&poraries the Peripatetics (ere unale to see (hat he sa(2
2
*s in, e.%., Larl Popper and the conte&porary philosophy of science. See the ;ourth Study, Part II, ,Science as
6ethod,/ elo(.
D
Starr% Messenger, D2. E&phases added.
(hich a ri%ht pea" e%an to e&er%e, a little elo( its center< ?radually %ro(in%, this
presented itself in a triangular shape/E
1
in co&parison, ,on earth the su&&its of several
&ountains close to%ether appear to e situated in one plane if the spectator is a lon% (ay off
and is placed at an equal elevation,/ (hile on the &oon, ,re%ardin% these fro& a %reat
distance, H&ountains lieJ nearly in the plane of their su$$its/ and ,appear as arran%ed in a
regular and un&ro!en line./
2
In all these e'cerpts ?alileo vie(ed the &oon in its different
phases in and around da(n and dus" as the sun rises or sets on it. 0hus, the play of li%ht and
shado(s 4present in all his oservations, ut reco%ni=ale only in the first t(o of these
e'cerpts5 reveal &ountains, rid%es, craters, etc., i.e., reveal, &uch li"e Earth, an irre%ular,
ru%%ed and uneven surface. We shall return to the astrono&ical si%nificance of this shortly,
ut here (e stress the &athe&atical pro1ection that underlay ?alileo.s account. 4In point of
fact, an attentive readin% of the te't reveals that ?alileo.s is (hat (e.ll call the e'tre&e
situation, one that is rarely the case a&on% social %roups and in a culture (here this
&athe&atical pro1ection is present, for hat he actuall% i$$ediatel% apprehends, hat he
sees, hat is present to hi$ intuitivel% in perception, are %eo&etrical shapes, lines, trian%les,
spheres (ithin the conte't of the play of li%ht and dar".5
D
It is onl% on the &asis of this
pro9ection, and in a co&parison (ith si&ilar features as seen on Earth, that he relates that this
patch of dar"ness is a crevice, ravine, valley or 4to use our ter&5 crater, that this shado( is the
ac"side of a &ountain and that li%ht is a pea". 4What is sensuously %iven in i&&ediate
e'perience for you or I, is, for hi&, constructed.5
0he prior theoretical or%ani=ation of e'perience in ?alileo.s e'peri&ents is even &ore evident
in his discussion of sunspots 43etters on Sunspots5, (here he is presented (ith pheno&ena
that are not i&&ediately intelli%ile 4and to (hich there is nothin% co&parale on Earth5. ;or
here he e'plicitly lays out the theoretical assu&ptions that are operative in understandin% and
e'plains their instru&entally &ediated sensuous appearance.
In this re%ard, he states, ,0he different densities and de%rees of dar"ness of the spots, their
chan%es of shape, and their collectin% and separatin% are evident directly to our si%ht./
#
But
the position and &otion of sunspots are not. *ccordin%ly, in order to sho( ,that the spots are
conti%uous to the sun and are carried around it y its rotation/ re)uires that they e ,deduced
and concluded fro& certain particular events (hich our oservations yield./
C
0hose events2 It is seein% ,t(enty or thirty spots at a ti&e &ove (ith one co&&on
&ove&ent./ But there is a prole& here, for seein% the& ,is a stron% reason for elievin% that
each does not %o (anderin% aout y itself, in the &anner of the planets around the sun./
O
So
in point of fact they are not deduced fro& those events, (hich, ecause the events pertain to
the sunspots and their &otion, cannot %enerate a deter&ination of their &otion, a point (hich,
in another )uite si&ilar conte't ?alileo fully reco%ni=ed.
G
*t any rate, i&&ediately follo(in%
1
,&id, DD. E&phases added.
2
,&id, DF9D7. E&phases added.
D
0his is, (e su%%est, only possile for ?alileo to the e'tent that the pheno&ena he i&&ediately apprehended (ere
those that appear fa$iliarl% in his life(orld. If they (ere stran%e, forei%n or entirely unfa&iliar to hi&, they (ould not
have appeared as i&&anently %eo&etrically &eanin%ful and he (ould have een re)uired to &a"e the &athe&atico9
theoretical fra&e(or" operative in his e'perience e'plicit in order to render such pheno&ena intelli%ile.
#
3etters on Sunspots 4second letter5, 10O910G.
C
,&id, 10G.
O
,&id+
G
0he insi%ht can e found in a series of unpulished notes appearin% in the critical edition of his "or!s, 41pere, v,
DOG9DG05, prepared perhaps for a response he intended to send to the Car&elite priest, Paolo *ntonio ;oscarini.
;oscariniIs (or", 3etter Concerning the 1pinion of the 4%thagoreans and Copernicus 03ettera sopra l.opione dei
4itagorici e del Copernico5, had appeared shortly after at the 3etters on Sunspots appeared 4sprin% 1O1D5. $e
defended ?alileo.s discoveries and, in particular, the Copernican syste& fro& char%es of heretical deviation fro&
scriptural interpretations 4see :ra"e.s su&&ary, 1pinions and Discoveries of 8alileo, 1O05, in particular earthly
&otion.
this passa%e ?alileo undertoo" to elaorate for us 4his readers5 this theori=ation on the asis
of (hich the deduction (as &ade. $e tells us, ,In order to e'plain this, let us define the poles
in the solar %loe and its circles of lon%itude and latitude as (e do in the celestial sphere. If
the sun is spherical and rotates, there (ill e t(o points of rest called the poles, and all other
points on its surface (ill descrie parallel circles (hich are lar%er or s&aller accordin% to their
distance fro& the poles. 0he lar%est of all (ill e the central circle, e)ually distant fro& the t(o
poles. 0he di&ension of the spots alon% the circles (ill e called their readth, and y their
len%th (e shall &ean their di&ension e'tendin% to(ard the poles and deter&ined y a line
perpendicular to that (hich deter&ines their reath./
1
0he theory is a specification of the &athe&atical pro1ection or, if you prefer, the a'io&atic
syste&ati=ation to (hich (e referred aove.
0hird, there is len%thy deduction itself. 4We shall not rehearse it here.5
2
Proceedin%, i.e.,
developin% his deduction, and alon% the (ay a criti)ue of the inconsistency of other
,i&a%inale hypotheses,/
D
?alileo concluded it thusly+ ,<sunspots are situated upon or very
close to the ody of the sunE <they are of &aterial (hich is not per&anent and fi'ed, ut
variale in shape and si=eE < they are &ovale to so&e e'tent y little irre%ular &otions<
they are all %enerated and dissolved, so&e in lon%er and so&e in shorter ti&es< HandJ their
rotation is aout the sun./
#
*ll of these for& a set of coherent, lo%ical conclusions he dre(
fro& (hat he sa( through the telescope and on the &asis of his &asic axio$atic assu$ptions+
;ourth, these assu&ptions are of a &ethodolo%ically specified character. 0hey are co&pact,
entailin% the &ini&al nu&er coherently possile+
C
,<dealin% (ith science as a &ethod of
de&onstration and reasonin% capale of hu&an pursuit, I hold that the &ore this parta"es of
perfection the s&aller the nu&er of propositions it (ill pro&ise to teach, and fe(er yet (ill it
conclusively prove./
O
3o( the theori=ation 4&athe&atical pro1ection5 fro& (hich these propositions are coherently
deduced is the perspective of the Copernican syste&, i.e., the heliocentric perspective of the
4local5 universe for (hich the planets< includin% the Earth< rotate around the sun,
G
and for
(hich these odies all of (hich including the 2arth appear in the s"y, are essentiall% no
different one fro$ the other, i+e+, the% are an asse$&lage of &odies in $otion, and as odies
are indistin%uishale fro& one another Hand this re%ardless that so&e are terrestrial and
others %aseous, a distinction (hich ?alileo hasn.t the technical (here(ithal to reco%ni=e,
thou%h, to e sure, it (ould not e inconsistent (ith his funda&ental assu&ptionJ. 0his asic
theori=ation stood, of course, in sharp opposition to the Ptole&aic syste& in (hich the sun
0he insi%ht itself involves the &ove&ent of a each seen fro& a ship at sea relative to the &ove&ent of the latter
seen fro& the for&er, the point ein% if one sa( the one or the other onl% and ala%s fro& the other or the one,
(hether each or ship, the one or the other (ould appear to e in &otion (hen vie(ed fro& the other or the one. 0his
(as a counter criti)ue of Roerto Bellar&ino, "no(n as the ,ha&&er of the heretics/ 4Pietro Redondi, ,&id, C, D75, one
of the in)uisitors of the Con%re%ation of the $oly >ffice 4alternately, the Ro&an In)uisition and the $oly >ff ice or the
Con%re%ation of the Supre&e and Rniversal In)uisition5, and the leadin% authority in the Ro&an Church on doctrinal
&atters fro& circa 1C70 until his death in 1O21. Bellar&inoIs perspective< for&ulated to de&onstrate the asurdity of
the Earth &ovin% around the sun< (as that of the ship vie(in% the each only. 1pinions and Discoveries of 8alileo,
1OF.
1
,&id+
2
?alileo, 3etters on Sunspots 4second letter5, 10G9111.
D
,&id, 111.
#
,&id, 112.
C
Si&ilarly, conte&porary philosophers of science, for e'a&ple, Larl Popper. See the ;ourth Study, Part II, ,Science as
6ethod,/ elo(.
O
The 7ssa%er, 2D792#0.
G
0hus, on this asis ?alileo (as ale to reco%ni=e the stars are countless ri%ht odies %rouped to%ether in clusters
at %reat distances fro& the Earth. 4,0he %ala'y is, in fact, nothin% ut a con%eries of innu&erale stars %rouped
to%ether in clusters./ Starr% Messenger, #7.5
and other planets revolve around the Earth 4in convoluted orits, i.e., epicycles on circular
&otions5 and the stars are fi'ed, per&anent and perfect odies attached to a celestial
fir&a&ent. 0hus, on these assu&ptions ?alileo could in the Starr% Messenger syste&atically
co&pare the Earth and &oon (ith a vie( to these si&ilarities+ ,<the oundary (hich divides
the dar" part fro& the li%ht Hon a (anin% &oonJ does not e'tend unifor&ly in an oval line as
(ould happen on a perfectly spherical solid, ut traces out an uneven, rou%h, and very (avy
line/E ,there is a si&ilar si%ht on earth aout sunrise/E ,&ean(hile &ore and &ore pea"s shoot
up as if sproutin% no( here, no( there, li%ht up (ithin the shado(ed portion< *nd on the
earth, efore the risin% of the sun, are not the hi%hest pea"s of the &ountains illu&inated y
the sun.s rays (hile the plains re&ain in shado(2/ 0he si&ilarities are, in other (ords,
un&ista"ale. 0o say this (as itself a revolutionar% underta!ing+ ?alileo had co&pletely
aandoned the old 4*ristotelian and Scholastic5 &etaphysics. $e did not consider the
sulunary and celestial spheres )ualitatively dissi&ilar and ontolo%ically distinct ,<the surface
of the &oon is not s&ooth, unifor&, and precisely spherical as a %roup of philosophers elieve
it 4and the other heavenly odies5 to e, ut is uneven, rou%h, and full of cavities and
pro&inences, ein% not unli"e the face of the earth, relieved y chain of &ountains and deep
valleys./
1
0hou%h this is not ?alileo.s ter&, call these hypotheses<
8alileo and 7ristotle, ,,,
3a, the Ne Science, 7nti-7ristotle
0he theori=ation itself has certain i&portant, lo%ically ,secondary/ features, first ,corollaries,/
call the& ,la(s,/ (hich li"e the core of the theory itself are not su1ect to i&&ediate and direct
verification 4(hich is to say that hypotheses, li"e the ones 1ust recounted, are5. 0hese la(s are
also present in ?alileo, the &ost pro&inent ein% the la( of inertia, (hich not y coincidence
4if not (ell inte%rated (ith the rest of the te't5 found its first pulished for&ulation in the
3etters on Sunspots. Spea"in% aout the &ove&ents of spots relative to the sun, then in a
%eneral (ay aout the possile types of &otion of odies, and in a la(ful (ay aout these
&otions, he states, ,*nd it Ha odyJ (ill &aintain itself in that state in (hich it has once een
placedE that is, if placed in a state of rest, it (ill conserve thatE and if placed in &ove&ent< it
(ill &aintain itself in that &ove&ent./
2
0hou%h folloing upon hi$ it is no lon%er specific to
?alileo,
D
there is so&ethin% here that is uni)ue in his thin"in%E that is, it occurred for the first
ti&e (ith hi&. It is &anner in (hich the la( is arrived at. 0his is thou%ht e'peri&ent
48edan!enexperi$ent5, or (hat (e &i%ht &ore ade)uately refer to as the i$aginar%
for$ulation of las %overnin% natural pheno&ena, their &ove&ent, interactions, etc.,
understood &erely as odies. ;or in (hat conditions, pray tell, do (e find that a ody ,(ill
&aintain itself in that state in (hich it has once een placed/ indefinitely, (hether in &otion or
at rest, unless it is acted upon y so&e force, thus dis9placed2 0he situation can only e
found in vacuu&, (hich is, accordin% to ?alileo, found in nature ut only in nature to the
e'tent that nature is identified (ith %eo&etrical space.
0he second feature is so&ethin% else that is uni)ue in ?alileo. Perhaps ,uni)ue/ is the (ron%
ter&, or the ri%ht ter& only (ith a vie( to the entire history of the develop&ent of the &odern
science of nature, for (hat is distinctive and sin%ular in this re%ard is such ecause it has
een lost in that develop&ent, especially in the ui)uitous ph%sicalist for&ulations of this
1
,&id, D1 4citation5 and passi&.
2
3etters on Sunspots 4second letter5, 11D.
* co&plete for&ulation of the la( of inertia is found in the Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s
4second day5, 1#G.
D
See the 0hird Study, the various discussions of Einstein and $eisener%, elo(.
science.
1
It is the episte&olo%ical connection et(een ,intellect/ and our ,senses/ the
a%ree&ent et(een (hich constitutes the endpoint of a de$onstration.
2
It is, and this is of
para&ount si%nificance, an a%ree&ent that is constituted as, and only as, the ,senses/ are
rou%ht into a%ree&ent (ith the ,intellect,/ (ith ,reason,/ (hile, dialectically, once achieved,
once perception has ali%ned itself (ith reason, the de&onstration is conclusive. 0hus, ?alileo
stated, ,it see&s to &e a &atter of no s&all i&portance to have ended the dispute aout the
6il"y Way y &a"in% its nature &anifest to the very senses as (ell as to the intellectual./
D
4I.e., the %ala'y can no lon%er e considered a fir&a&ent, an aode, as it (ere, of fi'ed,
per&anent, perfect odies. Instead, it is &ade up of innu&erale stars confi%urin% the&selves
in clusters, (ith different de%rees of ri%htness5.
Contrary to the theoretically ri%id deter&ination of conte&porary science 4a'io&atic syste&,
theory, e'peri&ent, testin% as verification5, ?alileo.s hypotheses< at least those lar%e9scale
astrono&ical ones< could not e tested 4not until recently, i.e., not (ithout satellite i&a%ery
and proes5, ut testaility (as not in this sense part of his science. 40his is clear fro& our
discussion aove of the te't, Discourse on Bodies in "ater, (here the &ode of de&onstration
is narro(, strictly %eo&etrical... (hich to e sure, is decisive for ?alileo... and lo%ical, i.e.,
ar%u&entative, (ithout any recourse to e'peri&ent in our sense+5 Instead, his science is the
unit% of theori=ation, the pheno&ena that are instru&entally &ediated and perceptually or
sensuously adduced as evidence, and the ri%orous 4&athe&atically ased5 ar%u&ent to
co&prehend the latter in ter&s of, as confir&ation of, the for&er+ It is this ,deduction/ as a
(hole, or (hat else(here
#
he calls the necessar% de$onstration 4or, as in the Starr%
Messenger, si&ply de&onstration5, (hose necessity is that of the ri%or and lo%ic or ,force/
evinced in ,%eo&etric de&onstrations/
C
, that constitute his science, ,ar%u&ents< HthatJ
depend upon oservations< de&onstrations< sutle, %rounded on astractions/
O
and that
&i%ht, &isleadin%ly and inade)uately to e sure, e ter&ed as (hat counts as a ,test./
*nd it (ould e &isleadin%+ While ?alileo en%a%ed in countless e'peri&ents, precious fe( of
the& (ould today pass &uster as an e'peri&ent in our sense. 0his is si&ply ecause in that,
our sense, e'peri&ents had no &eanin% for hi&. *n e'peri&ent, for ?alileo, (as not intended
to validate a hypothesisE it did not ai& at verifyin% 4or falsifyin%5 a con1ecture, ecause in these
senses it did not function as a control, it (as not ased on artificial conditions that otain
no(here in nature and (as not ai&ed at prediction. 4Recall, a%ain, that the &odern science of
nature did not e&er%e full9lo(n or fully developed in ?alileo.5 ;or hi&, e'peri&ent (as not
de rigueur, and it (as not a necessary re)uire&ent of his science+ *s a function of sensuous
perception it (as not ,desi%ned/ to do anythin% other, co&in% at the end of a process of
reasonin%, than co&plete a de&onstration y ali%nin% itself (ith that reason 4intellect5. 0hus,
in the Dialogue, ?alileo has his interlocutor Salviati say, ,tell this philosopher, in order to
re&ove hi& fro& error, to ta"e (ith hi& a very deep vase filled (ith (ater so&e ti&e (hen he
%oes sailin%, havin% prepared in advance a all of (a'< (hich (ould descend slo(ly to the
otto& N so that in a &inute it (ould scarcely sin" a yard. 0hen, &a"in% the oat %o as fast as
he could, he should %ently i&&erse this all in the (ater and let it descend freely, carefully
oservin% its &otion. *nd fro& the first, he (ould see it %oin% strai%ht to(ard that point on the
otto& of the vase to (hich it (ould tend if the oat (ere standin% still. 0o his eye and in
1
I.e., an ,a'io&atic syste&ati=ation,/ the funda&ental propositions of (hich in this case are reductionist assu&ptions,
ato&istic postulates of a theoretical analysis pro1ected as real, as underlyin% ,realities./ See the ;ourth Study, Part III,
,0he 6aterialist :ialectic,/ elo(.
2
3etters on Sunspots 4third letter5, 1#D.
D
^to the e'tent necessary de&onstration 4or ,ri%orous de&onstration/5 rin%s it into line (ith thou%ht 4intellect5.
#
3etter to the 8rand Duchess Christina, 1F2 4t(ice5, 1FD91F#, 1FO 4t(ice5, 207.
C
3etters on Sunspots 4second letter5, 117.
O
3etter to the 8rand Duchess Christina, 200.
relation to the vase its &otion (ould appear perfectly strai%ht and perpendicular, and yet no
one could deny that it (as a co&pound of strai%ht 4do(n5 and circular 4around the (atery
ele&ent5./
1
0he e'peri&ent therey de&onstrates that the latter, analo%ous to the circular
&otion of the Earth as it rotates on its center 4a'is5, is ,co&&on to/ the all and the (atery
ele&ent and ,continues to e i&perceptile,/ (hile the ,do(n(ard &otion/ of the all is
,peculiar to it and not shared/ and hence perceptile.
2
0he e'peri&ent co&pletes the
de&onstration ali%nin% our senses, here (hat (e see 4up(ard or do(n(ard &otion, ani&ated
&otion as in the fli%ht of irds, etc.5, (ith (hat (e have reflectively reasoned to 4that the
co&&on or shared &otion of the Earth is not sensily %iven5.
But if an e'peri&ent did not co&plete a de&onstration, i.e., if it (as in our ter&s
,unsuccessful,/ it (as si&ply irrelevant, discarded 4and ?alileo, as it (ere, &oved on5. 3o(, in
point of fact, so&e of ?alileo.s e'peri&ents 4such as those in (hich he ar%ued his theory of
odies floatin% in (ater (ith o1ects placed in a uc"et of (ater5 (ere )uite i&pressive,
convincin% to those (ho (itnessed hi& 4(hich (as the only reason (hy he perfor&ed the&5.
But there (as no necessity that inhered in these ,de&onstrations,/ in &a"in% these
i&pressions+ It should e ovious that (innin% the certainty of another or castin% dout in the
&ind of still another alone did not and could not &a"e the& intrinsic to his science. 0hey
(eren.t.
8alileo and 7ristotle, ,L
Social 2le$ents in the Struggle
for and against the Ro$an Church Sanctioned 1ld 1rder
0hrou%hout the entire life of ?alileo, the Ro&an Church (as the lar%est and %reatest landlord
on the Italian Peninsula.
:urin% this period 4?alileoIs lifeti&e5, several for&s of laor 4and tenure5 co9e'isted in the
countryside. 0hese included a free peasantry that, re%ardless of the )uality of life and
livelihood its activity %enerated, constituted a social relation at the center of (hich stood the
peasant as proprietor of land, tools and cotta%eE (a%ed laorE and a sharecroppin% tenantcy.
0he last (as the predo&inant for& in 0uscany and perhaps all of central Italy 46oderna,
;errara, E&ilia, Ro&a%na5. It is i&portant not si&ply ecause (a%ed laor (as lar%ely ad1unct
to sharecroppin%, oth for&s additionally found in the sa&e peasant persona%es, ut ecause
it incarnated really and tendentially a hidden for& of proletariani=ation, i.e., it (as an i&portant
social for& throu%h (hich capitalist social relations penetrated the Italian countryside.
Called $e//adria, sharecroppin% tenancy stretched ac" to the early thirteen century 4and
for(ard do(n to the first i&perialist (orld (ar5. It (as a contractual relation, thou%h not one
that (as for&ali=ed in a (ritten contract. 0he landlord, i.e., aristocrats such as ?alileo.s friend,
;rederico Cesi, and aove all the Church institutionally e&odied in its orders and
&onasteries, provided the land, the peasant tenant the laor.
D
Estalished (ith and as part of
the institution of capitalIs for&al do&ination, it appeared to possess ele&ents of oth the old
and ne( order as this peasantry (as si&ultaneously su1ect to laor services and under(ent
a hidden proletariani=ation. -et it (as neither serf nor (a%ed laorer 4thou%h, this the latter
co&es closer to the truth5+ 0he peasant, alto%ether asent capital 4in &oney for&5, too"
advances of seed, (hatever draft ani&al &ay have een used in plo(in% or harvestin% and
1
Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s, 2C0 4second day5.
2
,&id+ 0hese re&ar"s anticipate the final section of this Study, ,Pole&ic and the @o%ics of *r%u&ent in the :ialo%ue,/
elo(.
D
>ften referred to as ,Prince/ Cesi, he (as titular head of the *cade&y of @ynceans, the %roup of oppositional
intellectuals of (hich ?alileo had officially een a &e&er since 1O11 4a &e&ership he pri=ed5 and (ho, on the
asis of ?alileo.s draft, y prior a%ree&ent edited and rou%ht The 7ssa%er to pulication. ;or the latter, see Redondi,
,&id, #C9#O.
thus in fodder also, and, thou%h perhaps possessin% a hoe and ra"e of his o(n, tools and
e)uip&ent 4plou%h5 re)uisite to his activity. If the contract called for an e)ual split 4share5 of
the product, the tenant invarialy crushed y the (ei%ht of det, rarely if ever sa( e)uality in
shares and 1ust as rarely lived aove susistence 4(hich in the socially and historically
specific sense sun" to an appallin%ly lo( level5. 3o(, there (ere other, further for&s throu%h
(hich the peasant and his fa&ily (ere roed of his and their livelihood 4e.%., accountin%
practices (hich, al(ays conducted y the landlord, 1ust as invarialy (ere conducted on his
ehalf5, that appear a%ain and a%ain in other historical for&s of sharecroppin% tenancy, ut
(hat concerns us here are those (hich reinforce the see&in%ly ,feudal/ nature of this
relation.
1
0hese included the perfor&ance of services to the lord 4di%%in% ditches to i&prove
property5, and provisions to the o(ner %ratis of a portion of the a%ricultural product, olive oil or
(ine, (ood for fuel and %a&e "illed as food. @i"e the situation as it prevailed on the 8un"er
estates east of the Ele fro& the &iddle nineteenth century throu%h the thirties of the follo(in%
century, these services &anifestly had the appearance of ,feudal/ dues. *nd they (ere for&s
of laor service, ut they (ere not ,feudal/ havin% none of the decisive characteristics of the
latter already descried
2
4or they (ere at least to those inclined to find ,feudalsi&/
every(here, in other (ords, to find in it a universal ,sta%e/ of hu&an develop&ent5. 3either
the Church nor lords li"e Cesi (ere old order lords, those (ho the ;lorentines had proscried
as $agnati 4to the contrary a&on% the &ost enli%htened landlords, there (as a tendency to
,lierate/ the&selves fro& the i%noility of this ancient for& of e'ploitation, to for%o laor
services in favor of a ,strictly usiness/ relation5+ ;ar &ore i&portant than services provided to
these lords, all of the& 4and the patriarchal paternalis& (hich (as the other side of this
relation5, (as, first, the (a%ed laor that the peasant 4and his fa&ily5 provided the lord, or a
&erchant representin% the Church 4(hich (as ironically and un"no(in%ly encoura%in% the
insinuation of a social relation, in the for& of capital.s for&al do&ination, that (ould eventually
under&ine its social and political po(er5, that (ent unco&pensated ut (as calculated as a
&onetary set9off for the det incurred, and, second, and this is crucial, the total situation of the
peasant 4fa&ily5. ;irst, sharecroppin% is a for& of lease, here an infor&al contractual relation,
and has appeared in history 4in En%land, and (estern Europe5 as a solvent of the custo&ary
proprietary ri%hts 4(hether for&ally free or not5 that protected peasants fro& the na"ed
financial relation that characteri=ed capital.s for&al do&ination.
D
Second, the sharecropper
(as not an independent proprietor, either as a peasant or capitalist far&er. $e did not produce
e'clusively for hi&self and his fa&ily a susistence 4nor did he produce for hi&self and
provide the state (ith a portion as triute5. $e also did not produce for a &ar"et (ith a vie( to
the conditions the prevailed in it, and on this asis decide (hat and 4if not (hat, then5 ho(
4&uch or little5 to produce. -et the value of his product (as deter&ined y the &ar"et and,
after the share out, his return on his and his fa&ily.s laor (ere decided on this asis 4and
lo(ered, often vastly, ut a cheatin% landlord, his factor, or &erchant5. Instead, the produce
(hich he "ept for self9sufficiency a&ounted to, had the structure of, a concealed age &elo
its value in the $ar!et+ 0hus, he (as effectivel% a disguised proletarian on the land su1ect to
1
0hese other for&s... il"in%, s(indlin%, defraudin%, roin% and plunderin% the tenant... can e found in al&ost all
for&s of this odious relation. See, for e'a&ple, Civil "ar and Revolution in 7$erica, ,0heses on Racial *partheid, the
>ri%ins of TSunelt. Capital, and the Re9*scendancy of Southern Property in the *&erican Polity,/ for the situation in
the Rnited States fro& the end of Reconstruction until the last i&perialist (orld (arE and, ;ran" Sno(den, The
)ascist Revolution in Tuscan%, 20921, 2F927, D19DD, #19#2, CD9CC, 779100, for the sa&e set (ithin the conte't of the
crisis situation in $e//adria relations fro& 1FG0 do(n to the eve of the first (orld (ar.
2
Reference is footnoted discussion concludin% ,Castilian E&pire in Early 6odern Europe, Capitalis& and ;or&al
:o&ination,/ aove.
D
0his is e'tensively developed, elo(. See the various discussions under the headin% ,for&al do&ination/ in the ;irst
Interlude.
a relentless effort to drive that concealed (a%e do(n far elo( reproductive costs 4i.e., fa&ily
susistence levels5. If the for&al do&ination of capital over laor (as insinuated in this
&anner, it (as ,feudal/ features of this relation that, for all the advanta%es accruin% to the
landlord, ,retarded/ the une)uivocal, and unrestrained penetration of the value for&, and
rendered capitalis& as it did develop on the Italian Peninsula ,ac"(ard/ all the (ay do(n to
the first i&perialist (orld (ar 4171#5 especially in central Italy, the rest of the Papal States and
even &ore so in the 3eapolitan re%ions of the south.
3o( it (as laor services and (ith it the appearance of ,feudal/ social for&s, and the
patriarchal paternalis& 4a %ift fro& the lord at a peasant (eddin%, &onetary assistance fro&
the Church, e.%., a con%re%ation.s priest, in ti&es of really dire need5, that arose fro& and
reinforced the&, (hich the Church defended, for it (as this &astery of &asses of &en and
(o&en, peasant fa&ilies lar%ely, that for&ed the visile, &aterial aspect on (hich Church
po(er and the old order rested. ;or the old order (hich the Church or%ani=ed, and, especially
for its conscious self9defense conducted y its van%uard 4and here (e have the 8esuits in
&ind5, the theoretical stru%%le a%ainst scientists and philosophers, the literati, dra&atists,
poets and &usicians, in a (ord, the innovators, (ho raised the anner of a ne( science,
philosophy on different foundations and a literature that (as sensuous, ,deased/ and
e'pressed in ne( for&s, (as 1ust another front in the stru%%le to &aintain its he%e&ony, to
sustain itself as Po(er. *%ainst heretical deviations li"e those of ;oscarini.s effort to assi&ilate
Copernicus, or ?alileo invocations of a different, &ore ,tolerant/ *u%ustinian tradition in The
7ssa%er, follo(in% the Council of 0rent 41C#C91COD5, ,Ro&e< opted for an all9out defense of
the *ristotelian Scholastic cos&olo%y and the literal si%nificance of the Bile,/
1
not ecause
this cos&olo%y had any truth value< this has never een an issue for those &en (ho self9
consciously defend Po(er< ut ecause it (as the traditional &anner in (hich the Bile (as
philosophically interpreted, and (as on the tripartite pillars of tradition, la&or services, and
scriptural literalis$ that its po(er and &astery rested. *ove all, as the institutional e'pression
of the po(er of a priestly caste, it (as Bilical interpretation< fro& (hich this caste had
derived its o(n le%iti&i=ation, the 1ustifications for the ri%ht 4i.e., e'istin%5 order of society,
sanctions and re(ards that accrued (ithin this order 4and the afterlife5 that the Church had
elaorated for over a thousand years< and its exclusive right to that interpretation on (hich
its i$$ediate control over and &astery of the de&o%raphically dense peasantry (as ased.
;ro& Copernicus to ?alileo, the ne( astrono&y directly challen%ed and contravened the
scriptural account of the (orld sanctioned y the Church and elaorately, convolutedly,
defended y the clerical orders 4especially the 8esuits5 and Peripatetics.
It (as ecause in astrono&y ?alileo had crossed a line< in The 7ssa%er he did far &ore than
cross a line< fro& a ,prudent/ ,hypothetical/ position re%ardin% the &otions of the Earth and
sun 4one for (hich &athe&atical calculations (ere &erely said to aid in deter&inin%, e.%., the
locations of stars in a fi'ed celestial fir&a&ent5 to a ,positive/ assess&ent of their relation
4i.e., an assertion of the real heliocentric structure of this relation5, that ?alileo ca&e under
8esuitical In)uisitional scrutiny.
2
1
Redondi, ,&id, #0 4citation5.
2
Redondi states, ,0he principal fronts of the Counter9Refor&ation stru%%le are neither the corridors of the Curia nor
the salons of the *cade&y, ut rather the plains and cities of $un%ary and Bohe&ia, (here the fathers of the Society,
follo(in% the i&perial line re%i&ents, are triu&phin%< in the territories 1ust (rested fro& the Protestants, (hole
populations are reconverted en &ass to Catholicis&, y every &eans, at all costs N even (ith solid coin, as Cardinal
Bellar&ino had cleverly su%%ested./ ,&id, #G.
,Prudence,/ ,hypothetical,/ and ,positive/ are ter&s that the ui)uitous Bellar&ino used to descrie the contrastin%
positions in a letter to a correspondent concernin% ;oscarini.s (or". Cited in :ra"e.s introductory re&ar"s to the letter
?alileo (rote Christina 4&other of the :u"e of 0uscany5, Discoveries and 1pinions of 8alileo, 1OD.
Historicall% Specific The$es in the "or! of 8alileo
Materialist 7to$is$, Copernicanis$, 7nti-7ristotelianis$
?alileo.s distinctively different positions (ith re%ard to astrono&y and physics in his later
(or"s have to e understood (ithin the conte't of his (illin%ness to suordinate his
funda&ental theori=ation to the ChurchE thus, to the Counter9Refor&atory, i&plicitly
counterrevolutionary stru%%le a%ainst, not &erely heresy ut dissent, deviation and
unorthodo'y, a%ainst profanation and the &erest scent of sacrile%e (ith a vie( to &aintainin%
Po(er 4here sustainin% the Church.s ideolo%ical, political and socio9econo&ic do&ination
(ithin the old order5. *t the heart of this stru%%le (e find its counterrevolutionary van%uard, the
8esuits.
1
What is at issue (ere ?alileo.s shiftin% positions, i.e., fro& entertain&ent of a Copernican
vie( of the solar syste& as a hypothesis to the assertion of its validity as an ontolo%ically real
description of planetary relations. 6oreover, later still he returned to the for&er position,
returnin% fro& a Pro&ethean concept of hu&an co%nitive li&itations to a very Christian vie( of
those capacities+ $is &ature defense of an ato&istic &etaphysics (as aandoned in favor of
a &athe&atical pheno&enalis& 4fro& a sort of an enco&passin% theoretically coherent,
e'perientially and e'peri&entally un%roundale, underlyin% a'io&atic syste&atic and fro&
(hich, as a point of departure, specific pro1ects for further, future investi%ation of natural
pheno&ena could e underta"en, call it a pro%ra& for research (ithin science, to a set of
&ere hypotheses.5
2
0he Church sanctioned the pheno&enalis&, for it (as elieved
&athe&atical hypotheses of this sort neither i&ply nor re)uire pursuit of a co&&it&ent to a
deter&ination of the essence of thin%s or to an ontolo%ical assess&ent of the structure of
nature and the universe
D
... If e hold, and ar%ue,
#
such an orientation is i&possile, an
illusory pro1ect 4it (as nevertheless fully con%ruent (ith the Church.s evaluation of the role of
philosophy, &athe&atics and lo%ic, i.e., their suordination, in relation to theolo%y in ?alileo.s
ti&es5... If, as a ,research pro%ra&,/ this &etaphysics (as perhaps the &ost interestin%,
intri%uin% and ar%ualy the &ost productive perspective ?alileo &i%ht have &ore fully
developed 4re%rettaly he did not5, it (as not at the center of his self9understandin% of his o(n
theori=ation, and thou%h it i&plications 4discussed elo(5 created a %ood deal of troule for
hi& (ith the Church, the response to it (as only an ele&ent in a socially overdeter&ined
co&ple' of pressures rou%ht to ear on hi& that (ere decisive for his shifts in position and
perspective.
1
*s in our o(n case, it &ay re)uire a personal for&ation (ithin the Ro&an Church, and perhaps a personal
ac)uaintance (ith the >rder of 8esus to fully co&prehend 4that is, to understand and "no(5 the 8esuitical suspicion of
?alileo.
Redondi is, nonetheless, helpful in this re%ard. :issectin% ?rassi.s a%%ressive dispute 4(ritten under the pseudony&,
@othario Sarsi5 ai&ed at ?alileoIs earlier (or"s and essays discussed aove, Redondi states, ,<the 3i&ra H3i&ra
astrono$ica ae philosohica? 1O17J transcends the ter&s and style of a nor&al scientific dispute. It reveals the
controversial and apolo%etic &atri' that saturates all for&s of 8esuit pole&ic. 0he &ysterious Sarsi etrays an
invincile propensity to introduce into the scientific dispute hypocritical conclusions and insinuations aout his
opponent.s reli%ious opinions/ ,&id, #D.
0here is no fi%ht the 8esuits ever entered (ithout the unsha"ale conviction that they en%a%e the &ost dan%erous of
opponents in a life and death stru%%le, that there are no &eans that are not licit in the defeatin% this ene&y, and
(ithout the over(hel&in% sense they are pursuin% a divinely inspired &ission.
2
;or usa%e (ithin &odern science of the concept of a research pro%ra& in this sense, see, for e'a&ple, the entire
discussion of the closin% sections to Larl Popper.s Ouantu$ Mechanics and the Schis$ in 4h%sics+
D
In the Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s, D#1, ?alileo has Salviati provide a concise state&ent of
this attitude+ ,<you &ust "no( that the principle activity of pure astrono&ers is to %ive reasons 1ust for the
appearances of celestial odies, and to fit to these and to the &otions of the stars such a structure and arran%e&ent
of circles that the resultin% calculated &otions correspond (ith those sa&e appearances. 0hey are not &uch (orried
aout ad&ittin% ano&alies (hich &i%ht in fact e trouleso&e in other respects./
#
See the ;ourth Study, Part III, ,0he 6aterialist :ialectic,/ elo(.
0here are three features of this situation that &ust e %rasped if his chan%in% perspectives are
to e ade)uately e'plained. 0hese (ere the Barerini pontificate and the lierali=in% openin%
it created, the political stru%%le (ithin the Curia for supre&acy in %uidin% overall Church policy
and practice, and the specific doctrinal contents of the Ro&an Church.s do%&a 4the Eucharist
pheno&enon, %eocentris&, un)uestioned clerical authority5. *ll (ere central to the Church.s
e&otive, political and co%nitive he%e&ony over &asses of (o&en and &en. Effectively
?alileo challen%ed all three.
Start (ith the papacy. 6affeo Barerini (as the son of a ;lorentine ,aristocrat,/ i.e., a (ealthy
landlord (ith lar%e holdin%s in the 0uscan countryside. $is father died (hen he (as only
three, and, desirous that he have a 8esuit education, his &other relocated to Ro&e 4(here
another ranch of the fa&ily resided and5 (here eventually he (as enrolled in the %reat 8esuit
school, the Colle%io Ro&ano. @ivin% (ith his uncle, ;rancesco, he (as ordained, and in 1CF7
he %raduated as a doctor of la(s. $is rise in the Church (as )uic".
1
>n O *u%ust 1O2D, days
after the death of ?re%ory V! 4a @udovisi and pro9Spanish5, Cardinal 6affeo Barerini (as
elected pope, ta"in% the na&e Rran !III, y an over(hel&in% &a1ority 4fifty of fifty9five5 in the
conclave of e&inences desi%ned specifically for that purpose. 0he vote (as si%nificant, not
ecause it e'hiited a%ree&ent et(een the t(o opposin% factions (ith the Curia 4the one
pro9;rench led y Cardinal Prince 6auri=io of Savoy, the Cardinal of Savoy, the other pro9
Spanish led y Cardinals @udovicio @udovisi and ;rancesco Bor%ia, the Bor%hese faction5, ut
ecause of the depth of the ;rench support the ne( pope achieved.
6affeo Barerini (as also a literary fi%ure 4he had t(o volu&es of poetry pulished in his
lifeti&e5, possessed a lieral sensiility (ith a vie( to the o1ectifications of *solute Spirit in
the $e%elian sense 4art, philosophy, reli%ion5, (as considered lively and a rilliant
conversationalistE and (as far &ore political than reli%iously doctrinaire in his appreciation of
the %reat events of the day. 4$e also had the distinction of practicin% nepotis& in the Church
to an e'tent not seen efore or since his ti&e.5 $is elevation had t(o i&&ediate
conse)uences. ;irst, it created the hope, then the reality, of a cultural lierali=ation in a
Ro&an at&osphere stultified y *ristotelian9Scholastic orthodo'y.
2
Second, a policy shift
(ithin the Church (as directly forthco&in%+ $is e'plicit pro9;rench leanin%s lent tacit support,
asent &onies or &en, to the Richelieu %uided ;rench 4financial5 co&&it&ent to Protestant
forces a%ainst the %reat ;rench ne&esis, the $apsur%s 4*ustria and, in particular, Spain5, in
the 0hirty -ears War. 0his put Barerini in opposition, not yet open 4since efore 1OD0,
$apsur% ar&ies (ere lar%ely ascendant in the various phases of the stru%%le then to date5,
to the Society of 8esus (ith its clearheaded assess&ent of the alance of forces in the (ar
and its une)uivocal defense of the ,pro%ra& of rene(al and stru%%le set forth y the Council
of 0rent for the Counter9Refor&ation Church/
D
e&odied y Catholic Castile.
Barerini did not, it appears to us, have a particularly astute analysis of the depth of the
opposition in Europe to the Ro&an Church. $e patently did not %rasp a tendency of all social
stru%%le< the second feature of ?alileo.s situation< (herein t(o historically si%nificant and
dia&etrically opposed forces confront one another, na&ely, a polari=in% tendency in (hich
1
In 1C72, he (as &ade ?overnor of ;anoE in 1O01, he (as assi%ned the position of papal le%ate to the ;rench "in%,
$enry I!E in 1O0#, he (as appointed archishop of 3a=areth, (hich, apart fro& the rise in the Church hierarchy, (as
&eanin%less since the entire @evant (as in the hands of the >tto&ansE at the sa&e ti&e, he (as &ade papal nuncio
at the ;rench courtE in 1O0O, he (as &ade a cardinal for&ally attached to at the Church of S. Pietro in 6ontorio 4later
S. >nofrio5E in 1O0F, he (as appointed ishop of SpoletoE and in 1O1G he (as &ade papal le%ate of Bolo%na.
With re%ard to nepotis& 4see the te't, i&&ediately follo(in%5, Barerini elevated three nephe(s and a rother to the
status of cardinals, and distriuted a&on% the& lucrative sinecures that vastly enriched his fa&ily. ;or this as (ell as
his rise in the Church, see the Catholic 2nc%clopedia online. Search under ,Rran !III./
2
Redondi, ,&id, #F.
D
,&id, #G.
each forcefully asserts and defends (hat it considers funda&ental to it, in the case of the
Church, its po(er and that fro& (hich it (as derived, un)uestioned authority in &atters of
specifically reli%ious concern, theolo%ical doctrine. But he (as ri%ht aout one thin%, na&ely,
the secular character of the stru%%le that (as, for us, inseparaly intert(ined (ith its reli%ious
features+ ;or every pious prince, lord or even ur%hers (ho o1ected to &andatory fastin%, to
priestly confession, to the (orship of saints, relics and i&a%es, to indul%ences, to the elief in
pur%atory, to @atin lan%ua%es services, to the orders and &onasteries, etc., etc., there (ere
t(o, three, four or &ore princes, lords and 4to(ns and cities (ho leadin% li%hts (ere5 ur%hers
(ho coveted church lands and pursued a policy and practice of e'propriation. 0he 0udor "in%
(ho financed 4ut alas, for hi&, only in part5 a fruitless (ar (ith ;rance 41C#D91CC15 on the
asis of the sale 4to local %entries, effectively the ori%ins of parlia&entary po(er in En%land5 of
the &onastic and chantry properties he sei=ed is only the &ost outstandin% e'a&ple of the
era.
1
*nd, on the continent, any forceful reassertion of Catholic po(er (ould have led to an
effort to reta"e those properties and lands. 0hus, the *ustrian $apsur% ;erdinand.s
pro&ul%ation 41O275 of the Edict of Restitution<
But let us return to Barerini.
Even a&on% those forces that opposed pope Rran.s papal direction and orientation 4&ost
pro&inently for us, the 8esuits5, the papacy as an institution, hence Barerini as its earer,
carried a lot of (ei%ht (ithin the Curia. It (as Bellar&ino (ho, for e'a&ple, not only had
ar%ued for papal infalliility 4lon%, lon% efore it eca&e doctrine5 ut for the suordination of
secular princes to his te&poral as (ell as spiritual po(er,
2
and it (as the sa&e 8esuits (ho
(ere the %reatest supporters of the papacy as an institution. 0hey, &oreover, fully supported
Spanish he%e&ony in Europe, their &ilitary efforts to retain and enhance it, since in their
Castilian rethren they reco%ni=ed the&selves, a spearhead a%ainst Protestant heresy, (hich
they sa( as a threat to Church political and ideolo%ical he%e&ony, a %enuine threat to the old
order, or at least the supre&acy of the Church (ithin it. >viously, the 8esuit focus on the
stru%%le a%ainst the Refor&ation put the& at odds (ith the lierali=in% Barerini (ith his
political sensitivities to the ;rench, and his 4lar%ely unsuccessfully reali=ed5 territorial
a%%randi=in% appetites and proclivities for &ilitary e'penditure restricted for the &ost part to
the Peninsula< :urin% his pontificate, Barerini lavished &onies on fortifications 4constructin%
;ort Rrano at Castelfranco, stren%thenin% defenses of the Castel of Santo *n%elo on 6onte
Cavallo, and on the ri%ht side of the 0ier River in Ro&e5 and ar&a&ents 4re&a"in%
Civitavecchia into a &ilitary port, estalishin% a (eapons &anufactory at 0ivoli5<
In considerin% the third feature of the socio9historically specific situation of ?alileo, na&ely, its
ideational &o&ent, (e can start in $edias res, (ith The 7ssa%er+ 0hou%h (e need not lin%er
here,
D
(e can re&ar" upon severe note(orthy features of the (or". Written y a stylistic
&aster, a (itty, urane, culturally refined &an (ho, y all appearances (as deeply i&&ersed
in the hi%h culture of his day, The 7ssa%er (as a rea"throu%h event, one that proclai&ed
(hat had the taste and feel of a %enuine cultural openin%, a torrent ai&ed s)uarely at the ri%id
traditions defended y ilical literalists 4lar%ely ordinary clerics, especially a&on% the
:o&inicans5, aove all, the university Peripatetics and *ristotelians, and &ost recently and
&ost dan%erous to ?alileo, the 8esuits.
#
In this re%ard, it (as ,presented in Ro&e as the
official &anifesto of their intentions and as their effort at pole&ical le%iti&i=ation vis9P9vis the
crushin% force of institutions (hich ased their po(er on tradition and authority./
C
But if it (as
1
$ere, (e are of course spea"in% aout $enry !III. See the Introduction to The 2nglish Civil "ars and the Birth of
)reedo$+
2
Redondi, ,&id, 10#.
D
See t3ote2, ,?alileo and the 8esuits+ *to&is& and the Eucharist Controversy,/ elo(.
#
Redondi, ,&id, 1G#.
C
,&id, 27.
effectively thrust in the face of those %uardians of the prevailin% Scholastic culture, (e should
point out that, a&on% the&, the ran%e of 8esuitical do%&atis& (as restricted to the core
issues of Church doctrine 4and, of course, the conviction that all reason should e
suordinated to Ro&an theolo%y5. In other respects, in astrono&y for e'a&ple, the 8esuits
"ept areast of all conte&porary scientific develop&ent, and assi&ilated &uch of it or at least
as &uch as did not even &ediately infrin%e on that doctrine. 0hus, for e'a&ple, they had the
very latest in &odern instru&ents 4e.%., telescopes5 and their astrono&ers (ere first rate.
Christopher Clavius (ith (ho& ?alileo had corresponded up until the for&er.s death 41O125
(as an acco&plished astrono&er 4and &athe&atician5. 0he sa&e could e said aout >ra=io
?rassi, astrono&er, &athe&atician and perhaps the est architect on the Italian Peninsula of
his %eneration. So, even as a our%eois, in pennin% the &anifesto of a tiny, cultured our%eois
stratu& on the out, in ta"in% ai& at ele&ents of Scholastic civili=ation, ?alileo consciously
too" on 8esuit intellectuals< oneti&e supporters 4as lon% as he had respected Church
strictures on astrono&y5, and he had to have "no(n that the pseudony&ous @othario Sarsi
(as in fact ?rassi.
3o( ?alileo had lon% een (ron% on his specific characteri=ation of the &otions of planetary
odies. 4@i"e the Ptole&aic tradition tenaciously clun% to y the Peripatetics, he &aintained
their orits (ere circular, and thus to deal (ith retro%rade &otion he si&ilarly (as forced to
uphold epicyclical &otion.5 $e did this in full "no(led%e of Lepler.s (or" 4The Ne 7strono$%,
1O075
1
in (hich, asin% hi&self on 0ycho Brache.s &eticulous decades lon% oservations, he,
Lepler, e'plained orital &otion as elliptical. In The 7ssa%er ?alileo continued an on%oin%
dispute, one in (hich he (as also (ron% a%ainst ?rassi in re%ard to co&ets. ?rassi had, in
astrono&ically &odern 8esuit fashion a%reed (ith and added ne( oservations supportin%
0ycho.s vie( that as real pheno&enon co&ets ori%inated fro& deep (ithin the solar syste&
eyond the &oon. ?alileo, not unli"e *ristotle hi&self, had ar%ued co&ets (ere solely and
strictly optical effects, the outco&e of at&ospheric refractions.
2
In his &anifesto, ?alileo had
%one a lon%, lon% (ay to(ard effectively, if only for pole&ical purposes, e&racin% *ristotle<
and even if solely on this specific issue... &erely in order to counterpose hi&self to a don of
the rei%nin% Scholastic culture. ?alileo.s re&ar"s, his puns and (itticis&s, his entire &ode of
presentation, (ere hau%hty and arro%ant. $e had &ade the issue personal. *nd it (ould co&e
ac" to haunt hi&, thou%h ?rassi, a hi%hly disciplined (arrior, "ne( ho(, (here and (hen to
dra( the line, and ?alileo provided hi& (ith precisely an issue that (ould contriute to his
later undoin%.
0hat issue (as ato&is&.
In The 7ssa%er, ?alileo e'plained heat in ter&s of the &otion 4speed (hich he calls velocity5,
)uantity 4nu&er, in this case vast5 and shape 4invisile and indivisile5 of particles in relation
to our sense or%ans.
D
Clearly layin% do(n a &ar"er that (ould co&e to characteri=e all
scientific theori=in% in the follo(in% centuries, ?alileo not only distin%uished et(een
)ualitative and )uantitative characteristics of thin%s 4in the *ristotelian9Scholastic lan%ua%e he
e&ployed, sustances5, he not only deter&ined that the essential features of thin%s are its
shape 4in the %eo&etrical sense5 and its occupancy of o1ective space 4and ti&e5, in a (ord,
its e'tension,
#
he desi%nated the o1ects of sensile perception 4(hat is seen in seein%, (hat
is heard in hearin%, etc.5 as )ualitative and purely ,su1ective/ (ithout independent reality, as
0he ,their/ refers to the literati and innovators, a&on%st the& ?alileo and Cesi, &ost i&&ediately housed in the
*cade&y of @ynceans ut also in the various literary palaces and ,saloons/ of Ro&e.
1
0his is confir&ed y a 1O12 letter of Lepler to ?alileo. See E&erson 6c6ullen, ,?alileo.s Conde&nation./
2
0he dispute dates to ?alileo.s Discourse on Co$ets 41O175 (here this ar%u&ent (as ori%inally &ade.
D
The 7ssa%er, 2GG.
#
,&id, 2GO.
(ords and (ords only.
1
In an anony&ous denunciation to the proper triunal of the $oly >ffice
4i.e., to the In)uisitional ody constituted for this purpose5, ?rassi had identified the core
doctrinal liaility of ato&is&, or at least ?alileo.s for&ulation+ If those sensuous )ualities that
characteri=e a sustance< the case in point ein% the read and (ine prior to the
pronounce&ent of those (ords that si%nify the act of transustantiation has occurred, for
e'a&ple, the (hite color of the (afer, its te'ture as it touches the ton%ue< disappear if and
(hen there is no sensin% ein% to perceive the&, if they are as ?alileo said ,annihilated,/
2
then the specific nature of the transustantiation< the transfor&ation of the read and (ine
into Christ.s ody and lood all the (hile the )ualities, ,accidents/ or sensuous appearances
that characteri=e the read 4and (ine5 re&ain 1ust as they (ere< cannot e true. Such (as
an error of the %rossest, &ost heretical sort, at least accordin% to the denunciation.
D
*t this
historical &o&ent at least, ho(ever, deter&ination of the relations et(een ,sustance/ and
,accidents/ could not e so une)uivocally set forth, for the do%&a as laid do(n y the Council
of 0rent (as not intended to theolo%ically parse doctrine, and did not e&ploy a lan%ua%e that
(ould per&it such to e done.
#
0his (as not, thou%h, the case (ith Copernicanis&, or (hat had een susu&ed under that
ter&, na&ely, the vie( that the sun is the center of the universe and the Earth itself not only is
not ut also &oves 4aout the sun5. Interestin%ly, this (as not a doctrinal aspect of the (or" of
the Council of 0rent. 0here (as in principle no reason, after all, (hy these issues could not
have een addressed+ Copernicus. De Revolutioni&us 1r&iu$ Coelestiu$ 41n the
Revolutions of the Celestial 1r&s5 (as pulished in 3ure&er% in 1C#D in the year of his
death, and the Council, &eetin% first in 1C#C, did not finish its (or" until 1COD.
C
40he Council
operated in three phases, the first, 1C#C91C#G, in (hich procedural, ostensile refor& and
so&e doctrinal issues (ere ta"en upE the second, 1CC191CC2, devoted &ostly to doctrine
especially sacra&ental issuesE and, the last 1COD91COC in (hich disciplinary concerns
predo&inated. In no phase (as the chief, urnin% non9Catholic issue of the role of the papacy
in the Church ever addressed.5 In point of fact, the Council itself (as a rear%uard action.
Wa%ons (ere circled+ 0he core doctrines (hich the Church could and (ould defend in
securin% itself as Po(er (ere identified and spelt out, and the spirit 4a fanatical te&pera&ent5
if not the specific institutional arran%e&ents 4especially, the In)uisition5 on the asis of (hich
the Church &i%ht %o over to the offensive (as identified and invo"ed. Beyond this, as
?alileo.s one9ti&e friend Paolo Sarpi elo)uently de&onstrated, the Council and its after&ath
(as shot throu%h (ith controversy, dissension and &aneuver (hich %ave a lie to its veneer,
for it (as a ra&part constructed a%ainst heresyE aove all, Sarpi vie(ed the Council and its
outco&e as tra%ic, and de&onstrated the %reat hopes and hi%h e'pectations of Church refor&
that (ere vested in it (ere frustrated fro& the outset.
O
In this respect, the 8esuits, as an order
1
,&id, 2GG.
2
,&id, 2GO+
D
Redondi, ,&id, 1C791OC.
#
*%ain, see the note, ,?alileo and the 8esuits+ *to&is& and the Eucharist Controversy,/ elo(, (here this )uestion is
discussed in detail.
C
0here (ere, in fact, prole&s (ith Copernicus. (or"+ In a strict sense, astrono&ers too" their point of departure in
their calculations fro& the Earth as fi'ed ody in respect to the heavens. Copernicus re)uired that the Earth.s orit
itself no( assu&e that point in re%ard to celestial odies. But these, the stars also assu&ed to e fi'ed, did not
indicate the Earth (as in &otion 4annually5 y sho(in% an annual paralla' 4i.e., an apparent difference of location, a
spatial displace&ent, $otion, (ith respect to the fi'ed stars5. If Copernicus (as nonetheless ri%ht, the heavens had to
e vast and i&&easurale in a sense not previously i&a%ined. It (ould e lar%ely due to Lepler.s effort< (or"in% out
a theori=ation, its details, (ith oservations to sustantiate the&< that a non9%eocentric universe (ould eco&e not
only conceivale ut reasonale.
O
Histor% of the Council of Trent. See, e.%., the account of the years 1CC191CC2 in Boo" I!.
Sapri.s (or", in so&e respects re&iniscent of ?uicciardini 4the Histor% of ,tal% (as first pulished in 1CO15, (as in one
respect at least strictly ,&odern/ and critical+ In it, he e'plicitly sou%ht to not &erely en%a%ed in narration or recount
founded in the decade prior to its initial convocation, (ere a perfect instru&ent for pursuit of
the CouncilIs real ai&s, the rollac" of Protestantis&, the prosecution and persecution of all
those (ho &i%ht e dee&ed ene&ies, the anish&ent of ideas that did not fit the &old and
the affir&ation of Church do%&a as the sole valid e'pression of the truth of ?od and &an.
Copernicanis& in its astrono&ical aspects decidedly did not fit the &ould. But it (as not until
1O1C that this eca&e clear. Based on his recent pulications 41O1091O125, a ;lorentine
:o&inican cleric had accused ?alileo, no less, of contradictin% Scripture. 0he &on" had een
)uestioned in Ro&e. ?alileo &ade his o(n deposition. Entirely consistent (ith their
astrono&ical &odernis&, 8esuit astrono&ers infor&ed Bellar&ino that ?alileo had
de&onstrated the Ptole&aic syste& (as lar%ely erroneous 4perhaps that it had %enerated a
convoluted co&ple' of au'iliary hypotheses to do (hat ?alileo could do (ith &uch &ore
si&plicity and elo)uence on different assu&ptions5, ut he had not proven the validity of
Copernicus.s heliocentric syste&. * co&&ittee of theolo%ians e'a&ined ?alileo.s ideas at
Bellar&ino.s re)uest. 40his (as procedurally de rigueur.5 0hey 4all eleven5 concluded that
Copernicus (as philosophically and &ost of all theolo%ically erroneous. >n 2C ;eruary 1O1O,
Paul ! instructed Bellar&ino to (arn ?alileo not to specifically hold the Earth &oved or the
sun (as at the center of the universe. It (as an in1unction, ut there (as no official criticis& or
accusation of heresy.
;ro& 1O1O 43etter to the 8rand Duchess Christina5 on(ard, thou%h, ?alileo had &ore and
&ore openly, al(ays carefully, indicated his support for a Copernican vie( of the ,universe,/
that is, the relation of the Earth and the various "no(n planets 46ercury, 6ars, !enus, 8upiter
and Saturn5
1
to the sun.
Barerini hi&self &ay have een a Copernican, and not 1ust in the sense that he considered
1n the Revolutions a state&ent of an elaorate, consistent &athe&atical hypothesis.
2
But the
success, includin% papal support, (hich The 7ssa%er had en1oyed per&itted ?alileo to pursue
in earnest, as lon% as his health held out, a pro1ect he had first announced as far ac" as
1O10.
D
Without any real opposition, (ith a enevolent pope s&ilin% on his efforts and output,
the (hole decade of the t(enties, its lierality and tolerance, had to have s(irled aout in
?alileo.s head, vastly encoura%ed hi&, told hi& that no( the &o&ent to forcily as possile
for&ulate and openly state his Copernican convictions, to once and for all in this re%ard
undercut and destroy the *ristotelian scaffoldin% that supported his Ptole&aic and Peripatetic
opponents. 0he oo" on the syste& of the (orld had een revie(ed y the usual array of
events ut to co&pose a history ased upon availale sources that per&itted hi& to disclose the real course and lo%ic
of events. 4See, for instance, his re&ar"s in Boo" III, 2CD5.
Sarpi (as Catholic, ut &ore i&portant effectively the state theolo%ian of independent !enice. $e hi&self (as no
stran%er to controversy, havin% een citi=en and official theolo%ian of !enice in 1O0C91O0G (hen Pius ! had i&posed
an interdict on the city, denyin% it ad&inistration of the sacra&ents, all puic reli%ious services and had, to oot,
e'co&&unicated the entire !enetian Senate all in a dispute over ecclesiastical ri%hts. 4In retaliation, a&on% others
thin%s, the 8esuits, al(ays contentious and al(ays in the &iddle of disputes, had een e'pelled fro& !enetian
territory.5
1
*ctually, there (ere si' odies (ere desi%nated as planets, since Earth.s &oon (as also considered one.
2
In his essay on ?alileo, E&erson 6c6ullen relates the follo(in%+ ,While ?alileo (as (ritin% the Dialogue, an
interestin% conversation occurred et(een Rran and 0o&&asso Ca&panella in 1OD0. Ca&panella told the pope
Tthat he had had the opportunity to convert so&e ?er&an %entle&en to the Catholic faith and they (ere very
favoraly inclinedE ho(ever, havin% heard aout the prohiition of Copernicus, etc., they had een scandali=ed, and
he had een unale to %o further.. Rran ans(ered (ith the follo(in% e'act (ords+ IIt (as never our intention, and if it
had een up to us that decree (ould not have een issued../ See ,?alileo.s Conde&nation/ and the sources cited
therein.
D
The Starr% Messenger, #D.
Church censors, and had all the proper reli%ious seals of approval.
1
In early sprin% 1OD2,
Dialogue Concerning To Chief "orld S%ste$s appeared in ;lorence.
Rnder official Church sanction of Copernican doctrine, ?alileo (ould not< (ithout a clear
conviction that there (ould e no conse)uences< have li%htly en%a%ed in an open, rather
ferocious attac" on asic ele&ents of *ristotelian &etaphysics 44h%sics, De Caela5 fro& the
perspective of Copernicus. But this precisely (hat he did in his Dialogue+ In his introduction,
he stated the tas"s he set hi&self... they (ere threefold... all &ediately or directly flo(in% fro&
the intent to affir& the Copernican vie( of the universe 4solar syste&5.
2
While spea"in% the
lan%ua%e of astrono&ical hypotheses, this intent &anifestly de&onstrates (here ?alileo.s
vie(s lay and (hat he ai&ed at, na&ely, estalishin% the reality of the Copernican vie( of the
(orld 4universe5. >ne does not assault *ristotelian thou%ht at its foundations unless he plans
to overturn it. *nd ?alileo did+ ;ro& the %et %o 4:ay >ne5,
D
articulated y Salviati and
Sa%redo he presents an e'tended criti)ue of the ontolo%ical asis of the distinction et(een
the celestial heavens and the terrestrial sphere< et(een perfection, the i&&utaility,
inalteraility, invariance, etc., of celestial odies (hen counterposed to the ,dre%s of the
universe, the sin" of all uncleanness/
#
4the Earth itself5, features (hich for&ed a &etaphysical
ul(ar" that separated heavenly odies fro& the Earth in its inferiority.. 0he (hole ar%u&ent
constituted a sustained roadside a%ainst *ristotelianis&...
It (as in late 6ay that a li&ited nu&er of copies of ?alileo.s (or" appeared in Ro&e.
So, if ?alileoIs pulication (as sanctioned, (hy (as an In)uisitional triunal asse&led
a%ainst hi& shortly after the Dialogue reached this city2
<0he 0hirty -ears War had een on%oin% since 1O1F. It (as fou%ht in the &ost ac"(ard
parts of Europe, over(hel&in% in the central continental =one that (as politically do&inated
y the ,$oly Ro&an/ e&pire. 0he latter included i&perial $un%ary, $apsur% lands 40yrol,
Carinthia, Styria, *ustria, 6oravia, Bohe&ia, Silesia and @usatia5, and in e'cess of a
thousand, lar%ely ?er&an spea"in% )uasi autono&ous statelets and principalities no&inally
under the su=erainty of the e&peror a&on% (hich the lar%est (here Brandenur%, Po&erania,
6ec"lenur%, Bre&en, Sa'ony, Bavaria, $essen9Lassel and WArtte&er% as (ell as
ishoprics and archishopric centered in cities 4;ulda, WAr=ur% and Ba&er%, and Colo%ne,
6ain= and 0rier5, and countless s&aller ,political units/ so&e a&ountin% to no &ore than the
private estates of noles.
C
Because this, the arena of the (ar, (as the lar%est re%ion
4considered as a re%ion5 (here the for&al capitalist develop&ent in Europe had ta"en hold
the least, the ar&ies that conducted the (ar (ere< unli"e, for e'a&ple, in En%land (here in
the sa&e era a civil (ar (as fou%ht and historically novel social strata, artisan proletarians,
capitalist far&ers and capitalist tenants fi%ured decisively in one, Cro&(ell.s, of the ar&ies<
co&posed of social %roups attached to the old order, led y lar%e lando(ners holdin%
hereditary titles to land and estates, ele&ents of (arrior strata 4e.%., ?aelic fi%hters5 and
declassed noles en%a%ed as &ercenaries, and i&pressed peasants. ;or&ally free cities
4e.%., Bre&en5, and ur%hers, (here they (ere involved, and such (as &ini&al, lined up
1
$ere it &i%ht e appropriate to re&ar" that (e should not underrate either the e'tent or the thorou%hness of Church
practices of surveillance and censorship+ ,*t the %ates of the cities, &essen%ers and &erchants are searched for ne(
oo"sE oo"stores are (atched and policedE e)uests to liraries are not %ranted (ithout scrupulous in)uiresE the
catalo%ues of international fairs are under control of the o&nipotent Con%re%ation of the Inde', (hich collaorates
(ith the $oly >ffice in the (or" of surveillance and inti&idation of authors, pulishers, oo"store o(ners, and private
liraries./ Redondi, ,&id, F1.
2
Dialogue Concerning To Chief "orld S%ste$s, O.
D
,&id, #09C0, CF9O0, F#9FC.
#
,&id, O0.
C
Richard Br=e=ins"i, 3Pt/en *QB'+ F 4&ap5, 7.
ehind Protestant princes ut played no independent role in any phase of the conflict. In any
case, these (ere not national ar&ies.
1
In spea"in% of ,phases,/ (e have adopted the lan%ua%e of conventional, our%eois
historio%raphy &erely as a &atter of convenience and not (ith a vie( to any inner lo%ic of
develop&ent of the (ar or even an ade)uate reconstruction of that develop&ent. Since (e
intend no account of either, this conceptual usa%e is passaly le%iti&ate. 0hus, in the first t(o
phases of the stru%%le 4the Bohe&ian, 1O1F91O2C, and the :anish, 1O2C91O275, Catholic
forces e&er%ed vastly victorious, so that, the Spanish faction itself (ithin the Ro&an Curia felt
no necessity to intensify its pressure on Rran to chan%e course, to plead or ar%ue (ith, to
ca1ole or even threaten, 6affeo Barerini as pope to aandon his pro9;rench policy
orientation. 0he Barerini pope (as, accordin%ly, ale to i&pose his line+ 0he (ar is lar%ely a
secular affair. It is territorial ai&s that do&inate it.
*s ?alileo (as deeply involved in (ritin% his Dialogue, in its latest :anish phase, *ustrian
Catholic $apsur% forces fielded t(o ar&ies.
Wallenstein 4*lrecht von Wallenstein, du"e of ;riedland5 had asse&led a lar%e ar&y of
&ercenaries and hired his services out to ;erdinandE (hile the forces of the still intact Catholic
@ea%ue 4lar%ely recruited fro& southern ?er&an principalities and loyal to the Ro&an Church5
(ere co&&anded y 0illy 48ohannes 0serclaes, %raf von 0illy5.
In *pril 1O2O, Wallenstein defeated units of the Protestant :anish "in% ChristianIs ar&y at
:essau in ?er&anyE and 2O *u%ust 1O2O, 0illy destroyed the &ain ody of ChristianIs ar&y at
@utter a& Barener%e 4?er&any5. 0o%ether, the co&ined forces of Wallenstein and 0illy, the
latter "no(n as I&perials, overran all of northern ?er&any, plunderin% to(ns and villa%es in
their (a"e.
ChristianIs forces retreated into the ne't year to the 8utland Peninsula (ith WallensteinIs
&ercenaries in pursuit. $ere they atte&pted to re%roup, ut there (as no further fi%htin%.
>n O 6arch 1O27, ;erdinand II, *ustrian $apsur% and $oly Ro&an e&peror, decreed the
Edict of Restitution, a docu&ent voiding 4rotestant titles to all Ro$an Catholic propert%
expropriated since the 4eace of 7ugs&urg 41CCC5. >n 22 6ay 1O27, :anish "in% Christian
capitulated, si%ned the 0reaty of @Aec", and on this asis %ave up a nu&er of &inor
holdin%s in ?er&an lands.
Cardinal Richelieu, chief &inister of ;rench "in% @ouis VIII, had een alar&ed y the
settle&ent achieved y ;erdinand, that is, the a%%randi=e&ent of $apsur% po(er and
presti%e in central Europe. Internal crisis had prevented his intervention, ut he had &ade
overtures to Protestant ?ustav II *polph 4?ustavus *dolphus5, "in% of S(eden.
?ustav had lon% een inundated (ith appeals fro& ?er&an Protestant princes. With the
pro&ise of ;rench financial support, and (ith territorial desi%ns of his o(n in the Baltic re%ion,
the S(edish ar&y entered the fi%ht. In su&&er 1OD0, his (ell9trained peasant ar&y eached
on the coast of Po&erania and opened a ne( phase in the (ar.
0he princes of Po&erania, Brandenur% and Sa'ony, had pro&ised support ut afraid of a
fi%ht, especially (ith a vie( to a do=en years in (hich $apsur% co&at forces had lar%ely
carried the day. Indecisive, they (avered, delayin% the ca&pai%n, costin% ?ustav the
advanta%e of surprise and the offensive.
1
In the third, S(edish phase 41OD091ODC5, ?ustavus *dolphus. ar&y had S(edish, ;innish, ?er&an spea"in% and
Scottish and En%lish infantry units, (hile his cavalry (as S(edish, ;innish and ?er&any spea"in%. In the sa&e
phase, the $apsur% I&perials consisted in ?er&an spea"ers, *ustrians, C=echs and Poles, 6a%yars, Croats,
Italians, and even Walloons. 0he latter enu&eration, &oreover, does not include the ethnicities of Wallenstein.s
&ercenary ar&y. ,&id, 17920, 2D.
0illy, in sole co&&and of the I&perials, laid sie%e to 6a%deur% 4?er&any5, a city in (hich
nearly the entire Protestant population had risen a%ainst the $oly Ro&an e&peror. $is forces
captured, then pilla%ed, sac"in% the city, destroyin% &uch of it on 20 6ay 1OD1.
0hat su&&er, 0illy.s I&perials advanced on the S(edes three ti&es and (ere eaten ac" on
each occasion. 3otaly, the last attle 4Breitenfeld5, 1G Septe&er 1OD1 4in (hich the Sa'ons
had ro"en ran"s, fled, e'posin% ?ustavIs left flan"5, the S(edes had nearly lost. In their
suse)uent re%roup&ent, they routed 0illyIs forces. 4Si' thousand (ere "illed or captured.5
0his (as a turnin% point, ecause it opened up central ?er&an lands to ?ustav, (hose ar&y
&arched uncontested into southern ?er&any do(n ,Cleric.s *lley/ 4i.e., throu%h the Catholic
ishoprics of ;ulda, Ba&er% and WAr=ur%, ta"in% the cities of ;ran"furt a& 6ain and 6ain=,
the latter of (hich as an archishopric (as the seat of one of the seven Electors of the $oly
Ro&an e&peror5, (here (inter ca&p (as &ade.
1
In late 6arch, S(edish forces ro"e (inter ca&p. 0hey had all the appearance of ein%
unstoppale.
In Ro&e, there (as panic.
0he stru%%le et(een the opposin% forces at the pinnacle of Ro&an po(er e'ploded into the
open. 0he pro9Spanish cardinals de&anded that the Barerini re%i&e aandon its lierality
and tolerance, and rene( its at any rate half9hearted co&&it&ent to the fi%ht a%ainst
Refor&ation in all its &anifestations, in particular to the stru%%le a%ainst heresy and the
suversive ideas of the innovatorsE and that it drop its pro9;rench orientation and ali%n itself
(ith the Spanish 4&eanin%, of course, (ith Catholic forces in the field, i.e., the *ustrian
$apsur%s5.
2
*%ainst the ac"%round of events in Bavaria, a secret concave, a council of
state of the Ro&an Church, opened. Supported y the entire array of cardinals of his faction,
Bor%ia read a state&ent openly denouncin% Rran, Barerini as pope. It conde&ned hi& for a
heretical alliance (ith the S(edish Protestant "in%. Barerini ordered hi& silence, ut the
entire Spanish party, oth its cardinals and Italian cardinals in the faction, %athered around
hi& protectin% hi& (hile he finished the state&ent. 3e(s of these events, and the accusation
that Rran hid heretics under his (in%, (as carried to all the e&assies, and official
secretariats of Europe. Spanish and *ustrian a&assadors de&anded i&&ediate, direct and
open support.
D
0he secret concave reopened on 11 6arch. 0here (ere further recri&inations fro& oth sides.
>n the 1F
th
, Rran struc" ac", e'pellin% Cardinal @udovisi, second a&on% e)uals in the
Spanish party, fro& Ro&e. 0here (as no resolution. *t the end of 6arch, actin% as special
representative of the *ustrian $apsur%s, Cardinal Pa=&any arrived in Ro&e. 0o the pro9
Spanish party.s de&ands for aandonin% the ;rench alliance, in addition he insisted on the
*ustrian need for &oney.
In the heart of the southern ?er&an spea"in% lands, the S(edes attac"ed 0illy.s I&perials on
the an"s of the @ech River on 1# *pril 1OD2, 0illy hi&self (as &ortally (ounded, and
6Anchen (as ta"en. $apsur% forces (ere in disarray.
#
In Ro&e, the pro9Spanish Bor%hese faction threatened Barerini (ith an apocalyptic scenario+
?ustavus *dolphus, (ith his ar&y no( sittin% astride 6Anchen, is preparin% to deouch fro&
1
,&id, 7911.
2
Redondi, ,&id, 227.
D
,&id, 22792D1.
#
*t this point, ;erdinand II, the e&peror, i&&ediately recalled Wallenstein 4(ho had een dis&issed follo(in% upon
&uch pressure fro& hi%h ran"in% I&perial officers (ho disli"ed his &ercenary status, and the po(ers and (ealth that
had accrued to hi& in the years of (ar5. Wallenstein possessed vast &ilitary resources of his o(n and (as ale to
very rapidly asse&le a creditale, &assive &ercenary force. $e soon had his ar&y in the field, and y the end of
6ay 1OD2, he had already recaptured Pra%ue, held y the Sa'on allies of ?ustavus. Br=e=ins"i, ,&id, 11.
the *lps and descend on Ro&e. 0hey have already plundered the 8esuit colle%es and
e'pelled the order in toto fro& the city.
6e&ories 4none livin%5 of a little over a century old event (ere i&&ediately stirred, for on 11
6ay 1C2O a Castilian ar&y of Charles ! sac"ed Ro&e. Recounted in ;rancesco ?uicciardini.s
Histor% of ,tal%,
1
(hich every literate Ro&an 4and native of the Italian Peninsula5 (ithout
e'ception had read, still a hundred years later the event left an indelile i&pression on
clerics< rapacious plunderin%, riotin% and even &urder (ithout re%ard to faction or
persona%e, i.e., (ithout respect to (hether or not one (as of the old Ro&an oli%archy, held
position and status (ithin the Church, or (as a (ealthy forei%n &erchant< (hich is difficult
for us to either i&a%ine or descrie.
Whether it (as a ruse or the surfacin% of depth9psycholo%ical an'ieties or oth 4the latter
underpinnin% the for&er5, the Bor%hese faction e'ploited a fantasy fear that provo"ed a
ni%ht&arish drea&scape of Protestant atrocities 4not unli"e that (hite &asters in the old
planter South i&a%ined in the *&erican Civil War (hen &ale lac" slaves (ere left alone (ith
(hite &istresses (hile the &asters %athered in le%islatures at state capitals< they (eren.t
doin% any fi%htin%< to plot (ays and &eans of runnin% the Rnion e&ar%o on cotton5. *fter
all, it had happened once efore 4carried out y a Catholic ar&y to oot5. ;eedin% the fantasy
(as the "no(led%e of the vast treasures of Ro&e, the center of the universe of (estern
Christendo& for the past 1C00 years, &uch of (hich (as illicit %ain, and, incident upon the
lo%ic of the &aster that "no(s he has (ron%ed those he oppresses, ri%htfully the o1ect of
plunder.
0he fear (as i&a%inary.
2
I&a%inin% or no, the Church hierarchy had no &an in its &idst of &ilitary stature, not even one
(ith enou%h insi%ht to ade)uately assess ?ustav.s intentions. ;antasy, and the real forces
that underlay it< supre&acy (ithin the Curia and a return to a pro9Spanish, i.e., openly
counter Refor&ation policy< freely ran a&uc". By late 6ay, Barerini capitulated to the
pressures en%ulfin% hi&.
1
?uicciardini, The Histor% of ,tal%, DGO, DF#9DFC, (herein he e'presses so&e of the horror this event sy&oli=ed for a
conte&porary thirty9five years after the event.
2
;irst, the S(iss ar&y (ould have to cli& &ountainous terrain, so&eti&es narro( passa%es, (ith ar&or 4infantry5,
horses 4cavalry5, artillery pieces in e'cess of a thousand pounds, their caissons, the entire train of food supplies, and
officer acco&&odations carried into the field. 0his (as no &ean feat in and of itself ut its enor&ous difficulty (ould
have een &a%nified since the &ost reliale, shortest route fro& 6Anchen to 6ilano (as throu%h the *ustrian
Haps&urg 0yrol and (as over DO0 "ilo&eters, t(o9thirds of (hich (as &ountainous and sno( covered, passa%es
(hich (ould have li"ely een &anned y s&all I&perial detach&ents.
Second, a line of co&&unications over the &ountains and a line of supplies could not e &aintained. 0he S(edish
ar&y (ould have een forced to fora%e on the countryside, &ultiplyin% and vastly deepenin% any pre9e'istin% hostility
it (as sure at any rate to encounter.
0hird, eyond the *lps lay CDC "ilo&eters of &arch y (ay of Bolo%na and ;lorence, a portion 4that et(een the t(o
cities5 (hich (as also &ountainous 4the *pennines5, thou%h nothin% li"e the *lps, and (hich (ould have surely
hosted irre%ular peasant %uerrillas defendin% their faith and its institutions (ith (hatever da&a%e they &i%ht inflict on
the S(edish ar&y. 6ercenary forces could also e &oili=ed on the Peninsula, alon% (ith the co&paraly far s&aller
forces of 0uscany, E&ilia, Ro&a%na, and the Papal States.
;ourth, ?ustav had no i&&ediate, practical reason to ris" his forces in such an adventure, one that &i%ht trap hi& on
the Italian Peninsula (ithout recourse. Wallenstein (as still in the field and could 4and did5 co&pel certain tactical
ad1ust&ents on the part of ?ustav. 0he S(edish "in%.s ally and in part his financier, the ;rench 4(ho had ri%ht up to
this &o&ent een supported y the papacy under Barerini (ho, in turn, had studiously avoided the conflict until this
ti&e &aintainin% the 0hirty -ears War (as secular5, (as territorially &otivated and pursued dynastic a&ition.
;ifth, thou%h the cardinals asse&led in Ro&e could not have "no(n (ith any certainty, Ro&e (as not the o1ect of
the S(edish ca&pai%n. Rather, puttin% an end to the (ar there and then... y assaultin% !ienna and topplin% the
entire edifice of the $apsur% E&pire... (as &uch &ore in tune (ith ?ustav.s sensiilities, ut even this he could not
pursue. Wallenstein dictated this &uch. >n this, the last point, see Br=e=ins"i, ,&id, 1D.
Pulished earlier in the sprin%, at the sa&e &o&ent 4late 6ay 1OD25 the first copies of the
Dialogue reached Ro&e. *t this &o&ent, the 8esuits (ere )uic" to e'a&ine the Dialogue+ 0he
te't (as %rist for the &ill of the rene(ed Counter9Refor&ation, no( triu&phant inside the
Curia.
*t this &o&ent, the char%es a%ainst ?alileo< Eucharist heresy,
1
Copernicanis&, a
lasphe&ous elevation of &an in relation to ?od< resurfaced. * preli&inary )uasi9
In)uisitional triunal (as convened< Barerini protected his papacy fro& a scandal that
&i%ht have deposed hi& and ruined ?alileo y usin% procedurally e'traordinary &easures to
control these develop&ents, and ?alileo (as convicted as a disciplinary offender
2
< he
ad&itted to violatin% the ter&s of Bellar&ino.s 1O1O in1unction to neither teach nor defend
Copernicanis&, and (as %iven in social and historically ter&s a relatively li%ht sentence
4house arrest, prohiition on pulication5. 0he ,sacrifice/ of ?alileo (as the ,price/ that the
Barerini re%i&e had to ,pay/ in order to de&onstrate that it had accepted its role as ,spiritual/
leader of the old order counteroffensive a%ainst not only heresy (ithin and (ithout
4Protestantis&5 the Church ut a%ainst the innovators 4especially those (hose syste&atic
thou%ht lay the foundations of a ne( for& of "no(led%e independent of faith5, inclusive of their
very ,&aterial/ acco&pani&ents 4financin%, provision of troops if re)uired, etc.5 in the stru%%le
on the %round a%ainst the earers of these perverse ideational doctrines.
D
4ole$ic and the 3ogics of 7rgu$ent in the Dialogue
>n first readin% the Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s, or at first %lance,
?alileo appear cautious and strictly aides (ith the Church %uidelines set do(n si'teen years
earlier y Bellar&ino. Salviati, ?alileo.s voice in the dialo%ue, re&ar"s to the ostensily
undecided Sa%redo ,that I act the part of Copernicus in our ar%u&ents and (ear his &as". *s
to the internal effects upon &e of the ar%u&ents (hich I produce in his favor, I (ant you to e
%uided not y (hat I say (hen (e are in the heat of actin% out our play, ut after I have put off
the costu&e, for perhaps then you shall find &e different fro& (hat you sa( of &e on the
sta%e./
#
0hus, Salviati refers to the Copernican account of the Earth to heavenly odies as a
,hypothesis,/
C
si&ilarly in offerin% a deter&ination of (hether the Earth is a fi'ed or &oveale
ody he states ,I a& undecided aout this )uestion,/
O
in one of the &any hi%hly developed
discussions aout the &otions of odies 4this concernin% (hether it is possile for a ody to
1
0he 1O2# char%es (ere, in fact, resurrected y 6elchior Inchofer, (ho, as one of the &e&ers of the popeIs
In)uisitional in)uiry, had reco&&ended that the char%e of ato&is& e added to the others. In this re%ard, a 8esuit
archival docu&ent that surfaced early in the past decade confir&ed Inchofer.s role and authorship of the docu&ent
that asically recapitulated ?rassi.s 1O2# position and accusation.
See t(o pieces, the first y 6ariano *rti%as, ,?alileo.s 0roules/ and the second y *rti%as, Rafael 6artive= and
Willia& Shea ,Revisitin% ?alileo.s 0roule (ith the Church./ 0he Inchofer docu&ent is reproduced in the second piece
in the ori%inal @atin (ith translation.
2
Redondi, ,&id, 2#D92#F, 2C792O0 4e'traordinary procedural &easures to protect the Barerini papacy and ?alileo5,
D2O 4disciplinary conde&nation5.
D
0he 0hirty -ears. War, ho(ever, did nothin% to ,advance/ capitalist develop&ent, and if anythin% (as a setac" for it.
,It (as notaly the 0hirty -earsI War (hich annihilated the &ost i&portant parts of the productive forces in a%riculture,
throu%h (hich, as (ell as throu%h the si&ultaneous destruction of &any cities, it lo(ered the livin% standards of the
peasants, pleeians and the ruined city inhaitants to the level of Irish &isery in its (orst for&./ ;riedrich En%els, The
4easant "ar in 8er$an%, chapter G 4,Si%nificance of the Peasant War/5. In this, an o1ective historical sense, the
0hirty -ears. War effectively reinforced the hold of the old order, if not the Church, over the &ass of &en and (o&en
in central Europe.
#
Dialogue Concerning To Chief "orld S%ste$s 4second day5, 1D1E and late in the sa&e day, Salviati re&inds
Si&plicio that, ,I< a& i&partial et(een the t(o opinions, and &as)uerade only as Copernicus only as an actor in
these plays of ours./ ,&id, 2COE and, a%ain on the third day, he as"s his fello( interlocutors to ,continue our plan, (hich
is to e'a&ine the validity of the ar%u&ents rou%ht for(ard y each side (ithout decidin% anythin%</ ,&id, DO7.
C
,&id, 10 4openin% speech, first day5.
O
,&id, 1D1 4second day5.
,naturally/ have t(o &otions5, he tells us, ,nor do I pretend to dra( a necessary proof fro&
thisE &erely a %reater proaility,/
1
and, in settin% forth so&e of reasons for the Copernican
case for the rotation 4&otion5 of the Earth, he e'pressly re&ar"s, ,3or do I set these HreasonsJ
forth to you as inviolale la(s, ut &erely as plausile reasons./
2
-et ?alileo (as censored.
*&on% those char%es, he (as accused of discussin% Earth.s &otion as real, not hypotheticalE
dealin% (ith the sa&e as si&ply undecidedE treatin% opponents of Copernican thou%ht (ithout
respect 4in fact, this treat&ent (as on occasion disdainful orderin% on ridicule5. 6oreover, he
(as also indicted for affir&in% a funda&ental, if li&ited, e)uality of divine and hu&an &inds
(ith re%ard to %eo&etrical su1ects 4and, in doin% so, he (as further accused of presentin%
this e)uality as a asis for the ,conversion,/ our ter&, of supporters of the Ptole&aic syste& to
that of Copernicus, and not the other (ay around. ;or e'a&ple, he has Sa%redo say he laid
a(a"e &ost of the ni%ht ,considerin% the reasons adopted y each side in favor of these t(o
opposin% positions/5.
D
In all instances, the char%es, (hile hardly e'haustive, constitute a fully
ade)uate assess&ent of the Dialogue fro& the perspective of Church orthodo'y+
#
*%ain for
e'a&ple, (ith a vie( to the e)uality of divine and hu&an &inds Salviati states, ,the hu&an
intellect does understand so&e of the& HpropositionsJ perfectly, and thus in these it has as
&uch asolute certainty as 3ature itself has. >f such are the &athe&atical sciences also< in
(hich the :ivine intellect indeed "no(s infinitely &ore propositions, since it "no(s all. But (ith
re%ard to fe( (hich the hu&an intellectual does understand, I elieve that its "no(led%e
e)uals the :ivine in o1ective certainty, for here it succeeds in understandin% necessity,
eyond (hich there can e no %reater sureness./
C
0he last state&ent &i%ht very (ell have
een considered lasphe&ous. 0he only ,error/ ?alileo avoided (as a recapitulation of the
ato&is& of the 7ssa%er+ *nd, hidden, even this (as present. 4We shall return to it later in this
section.5
*t a historical &o&ent of central European (ar, (hich, in the vie( of the &ost po(erful faction
in the Church hierarchy, threatened its e'istence, ?alileo (as crushed y the Church.s
response as a (arnin% to (ay(ard intellectuals. $is fate (as not preordained. $avin% lon%
a%o left !enice 4Padua5, he had su1ected hi&self to enor&ous ris" 4to the possiility of
Church conde&nation and proscription5 in statin% his &ost fir&ly held, rationally defensile
convictionsE politically otuse and dependent upon the aritrary (hi&s of %reat &en, he (as
unale to independently assess the cultural cli&ate in (hich he operatedE and, these failin%s
(ere e'acerated y the si&ple facts that he (as vain, proud and arro%ant, all of (hich
to%ether led hi& to &iseraly &is1ud%e the intellectual at&osphere in (hich he finally
pulished the Dialogue.
O
$e si&ply assu&ed an enli%htened &ilieu, an open9&inded settin%
for theoretical (or" that, havin% aruptly collapsed 4ut not (ithout (arnin%, one that any
perceptive political oserver (ould have noted5, no lon%er e'isted, and, on this assu&ption,
he &ost forcily asserted the entire ran%e of ar%u&ents affir&in% Copernicus. theori=ation.
G
Still he reco%ni=ed the $etaph%sical ele&ent so9called in this affir&ation could not produce a
co&prehensive de&onstration in his sense of the ter&< since such proofs ,are e'clusively
1
,&id, 11F 4second day5.
2
,&id, 122 4second day5.
D
,&id 40hird :ay5, 2GO 4citation5.
#
Still&an :ra"e, editor of the En%lish translation of the Dialogue that (e have utili=ed, %ives a su&&ary of the
char%es in his 3otes to the te't, ,&id, #G# 4n. 10D5.
C
,&id, 10D 4first day5.
O
*nd ?alileo (as incapale of suppressin% this vanity, so that in the Dialogue he has Salviati re&ar", ,&y a&ition...
en1oys itself (hen I a& sho(in% &yself to e &ore penetratin% than so&e other person noted for his acuity.../ ,&id
4second day5, 211.
G
Perhaps all this is unfair to ?alileo. $e did have a Ro&an i&pri&atur and his oo" (as e'a&ined thorou%hly y
censors< all of (ho& (e :o&inicans. It.s 1ust that 8esuits, not :o&inicans, ran the In)uisition, (hich of course
?alileo "ne(. See the 3ote, ,?alileo and the 8esuits,/ elo(.
&athe&atical< not lo%ical</
1
In other (ords 4in ter&s of our discussion of de&onstration
aove5, he could not conclusivel% de&onstrate the position that he put in Salviati.s &outh. We
"no( this ecause of all the proofs he undertoo" none are fully &athe&atical 4i.e., have a
stand9alone &athe&atical co&ponent5. $e (as co&pelled to ar%ue his 4Salviati.s5 position on
a different asis, a asis (hich, literarily reproduced, (as in fact, in our vie(, &odeled on his
o(n e'perience of insi%ht, discovery and theori=ation. 0o %rasp this, (e are re)uired to revie(
the structure of the ar%u&ent in the Dialogue.
0here are three participants in the Dialogue, Sa%redo and Salviati (ho& (e have already &et
and oth of (ho& (ere ased on real historical persona%es, %ood friends of ?alileo (hose
co&pany he %reatly pri=ed.
2
0he third interlocutor is Si&plicio, li"ely a co&posite character
rin%in% to%ether all those features< aove all, an uns(ervin%, do%&atic co&&it&ent to
*ristotle, or his te'ts, as the sole and final authority in all &atters that concern hu&anity, the
co&&unity, nature and the universe< that ?alileo found personally repu%nant in his
Peripatetic opponents. 0he discussion a&on% the three unfolds over the course of four days,
as each day for&s a &a1or division (ithin the te't.
*t its core the Dialogue has the character of the Socratic9Platonic dialo%ue. Salviati, as &ain
interlocutor, atte&pts to %uide the discussion throu%h a &a=e of see&in%ly tan%ential issues,
di%ressions and peripheral )uestions< all of (hich do have a &ore or less &ediated and
often hidden ut i&portant earin% on the &ain issue< in order to produce a coherent
account of the relation of the Earth and celestial odies to one another and to the universe
they for&. 0hrou%hout Salviati.s &ethod is Platonic in a doule sense, that is, the dialo%ical
lo%ic of analysis is dialectical in the Socratic &anner and the doctrine of re&iniscence is
constantly invo"ed as Salviati recurrently insists (ith re%ard to Sa%redo and Si&plicio
4especially Si&plicio5 that resolution of even &ost intractale prole&s their discussions pose
can e achieved throu%h recollection, y proin% one.s o(n a(areness and recallin% (hat is
already "no(n< 0he central )uestion is (hether or not the Earth is &otionless and at rest or
itself &oves 4circularly5. But ?alileo.s dialectic, particularly as it initially unfolds 4first day5,
lac"s the sharpness, and uns(ervin% persistence (ith (hich )uestions are posed that,
throu%h the interplay of re%ressions, dead9ends and advances, achieves resolution of the
)uestion in Plato.s Socratic dialo%ues+ Rnli"e Socrates, no( Salviati, then Sa%redo stru%%le to
&aintain the course, (hile 4as literary earers of ?alileo.s vie(s5 per&ittin% the&selves to %et
(aylaid y en%a%in% in pole&ical detours and secondary criti)ues of the Peripatetic vision of
the (orld.
?alileo stated the ai& of the discussions that for& the Dialogue in his introduction. It is
threefold+ $e (ished to sho( that no a&ount of e'peri&ents can de&onstrate the Earth
&oves since all are e)ually adaptale to its &otion and rest. $e further desired to investi%ate
celestial pheno&enon since he held such (ould reinforce the ,Copernican hypotheses/
renderin% it all ut unassailale. *nd, he intended to e'a&ine the ocean tides for, on the
pre&ise the Earth &oves, he elieved he &i%ht discern its causation.
D
In a very rou%h sense
each of these ai&s defines the content of the discussions of the second, third and fourth days,
respectively.
0he s(irl of issues that s(eep throu%h the first day renders it different. It is for&ed in and
throu%h an e'ploration and criti)ue of funda&ental *ristotelian assu&ptions as such<
conceptual deter&inations of up(ard and do(n(ard &otion, circular and strai%ht &otion,
infinite and finite &otions< and (ith a vie( to these the si&ilar deter&inants of celestial and
terrestrial odies. But not only is it unsyste&ati=ed in even the loose sense, it is difficult for
1
,&id, DC 4first day5.
2
,&id, G, (here this is e'plicitly ac"no(led%ed.
D
,&id, O.
alternatively Salviati and Sa%redo to "eep diver%ences and di%ressions fro& over(hel&in%
the proposed the&atic content of the discussion to hand. Perhaps ?alileo.s intense desire 4or
an'iety5 to hit on all the crucial underlyin% )uestions< those that i&&ediately and directly
i&pin%e on a vision of the (orld< lay at the source of the continuously shiftin% thread of the
discussion.
0hese sa&e asic assu&ptions appeared in Peripatetic astrono&y 4i.e. the various types of
&otion5, ut they (ere not ,oservational/ or ,e'peri&ental/ ut &etaphysical in the strict
sense 4i.e., the theori=ation (hich the propositions for&in% these assu&ptions %enerates has
no real referent and is independent of any and all possile o1ective su1ectivities< in
scientific ter&s, oservational fra&es of reference< and dependent on none for its validation,
and, thus, are only for&ed lo%ically and speculatively5. It is in this conte't that ?alileo< at
once politically naYve and rave soul that he (as< undertoo" a rather ferocious attac" on
asic ele&ents of *ristotelian &etaphysics in its astrono&ical aspects 44h%sics, De Caela5
fro& the perspective of Copernicus. It is this in the first day that concerns us &ost.
If ?alileo (as to successfully ar%ue his Copernican vie( of the universe, it (as inescapaly
necessary to fir&ly estalish that celestial odies 4planets, sun and stars5 and the Earth (ere,
as &odies, unifor& or, etter stated, ho&o%eneous. 0his is the "ey, the central ar%u&ent
around (hich the entire Dialogue revolves+ 0he &atter that &ade up the Earth is no different,
in principle, fro& that of 6ars, 8upiter, its 46edicean5 &oons, the sun or the stars, and that,
accordin%ly, the perfect circular &otion of celestial odies and their characteristics,
per&anence, inalteraility, either elon%ed to oth 4those odies and Earth5 or neither. *%ain
fro& e%innin% to end, this is the core of his position. So (ith one eye to Church strictures
4i.e., to puttin% forth his position &erely as a hypothesis that assists in astrono&ical
calculations5, he states, ,<if it is denied that circular &otion is peculiar to celestial odies, and
affir&ed to elon% to all naturally &ovale odies, then one &ust choose one of t(o
necessary conse)uences. Either the attriutes of %enerale9in%enerale, alterale9inalterale,
divisile9indivisile, etc., suit e)ually and co&&only all (orld odies N as &uch the celestial as
the ele&ental N or *ristotle has (ron%ly and erroneously deduced, fro& circular &otion, those
attriutes (hich he has assi%ned to celestial odies/
1
<
>f course, since the distinction et(een %aseous for&ations 4vaporous ones or those e&ittin%
e'halations, as ?alileo (ould say5 and solid ones arose for hi& 1ust as it does for us, it is
patent that only an ato&is& of a thorou%h%oin% reductionist "ind (ould per&it hi& to &a"e his
vie( of the ho&o%eneity of all astrono&ical odies stic". Within fifty years, ato&is& in its
various for&s 4e.%., socially and politically in $oes, philosophically and &etaphysically in
@eini= and his &onadolo%y, psycholo%ically and philosophically in the e&piricis& of @oc"e5,
(ill have eco&e self9evident to our%eois thin"ers, (ill e the do&inant for& of statin%
funda&ental assu&ptions. But for ?alileo it (as proscried+ $e (as foridden open
articulation of ato&is& ecause of its theolo%ical conse)uences.
2
0o oot, he confronted a
further prole&, for he could not proceed at least initially in the sa&e pheno&enalist &anner,
if you (ill, as he had in the Starr% Messenger (here recall he reconstructed, descriin%, the
asic identity of the terrestrial features of the Earth and the &oon, such as &ountains, ravines
1
,&id, DG.
0he ,a'io&atic/ assu&ptions on (hich Peripatetic natural philosophy (as ased find their precise counterparts in the
theolo%y of a perfect, eternal ?od (hich is counterposed to a corrupted, transitory and (ic"ed (orld 4includin% &an5.
*t their ori%ins, theolo%y and philosophy co&e to%ether ecause the &etaphysics of %ood and evil in Church doctrine
and the underlyin% cate%ories in *ristotelian physics are for&ally identical. 0his is co%nitively appealin%. 0he
conceptual oppositions (ere consciously transposed ac" and forth 4et(een theolo%y and natural philosophy5 y the
early Scholastics. See the footnoted discussion of *u%ustine in the Introduction, ,Ele&ents of the Conceptual
Structure of Science,/ aove.
2
*%ain, see the 3ote, ,?alileo and the 8esuits,/ elo(.
and valleys. In this respect, the prole& (as that in 1O12 the 8esuits in the astrono&y section
at the Colle%io Ro&ano had already reco%ni=ed the cos&olo%ical si%nificance of these lunar
features and had underta"en a doctrinal revision around the ed%es, ar%uin% that the
underlyin% character, su&stance in *ristotelian9Scholastic ter&s, of celestial odies re&ained
unchan%ed even if their pheno&enal features, accidents, &ay not.
1
0hese &odifications in
doctrine, thou%h sli%ht, %reatly secured the inner core of doctrine and &ade it that &uch &ore
difficult to challen%e, not to &ention chan%e. 0o oot, all this (as no( in the open so to spea",
since in 1O2O, the 1O12 discussion (as &ade pulic in a (or" 4Rosa ursina5 y the 8esuit
priest Christopher Scheiner 4(ho could also clai& priority over ?alileo in discoveries
concernin% the lunar surface5...
*fter so&e preli&inary sparrin% Salviati 4?alileo5 ar%ued that *ristotle 4and follo(in% hi& the
Peripatetics5 inferred, ,deduced/ (as ?alileo.s ter&, the content of the relations of real,
astrono&ical odies fro& the lo%ical structure of concepts that have een produced to
descrie the&, an illicit practice (hich (e shall refer to elo( as an a&stract dialectic of
concepts+
2
,<none of the conditions y (hich *ristotle distin%uishes celestial fro& ele&ental
odies has any other foundation than (hat he deduces fro& the different in natural &otion
et(een the for&er and the latter./
D
In pursuin% this analysis, and at any rate consistent (ith
his asic anti9*ristotelian predilections, ?alileo had no choice ut to &ount a direct assault on
the funda&ental distinctions that underlay *ristotelian9Scholastic 4i.e., Peripatetic5 cos&olo%y
as such+ Before he could underta"e an account of the essential si&ilarity of earthly and
celestial 4e.%., lunar5 appearances 4,accidents/5, he (as co&pelled to confront the issue of
alle%ed )ualitatively different underlyin% sustrata 4,sustances/5 head on. 0he asic
distinctions (hich 4conceptually5 %rounded Peripatetic cos&olo%y (ere the paired oppositions,
non%enerated9%enerated, incorruptile9corruptile, inalterale9alterale, indivisile9division,
per&anent 4eternal59transitory<
#
It is (orth notin% that, ta"en to%ether, the first ter&s in each
pair constitutes descriptively the &eanin% of sustance for the entire *ristotelian tradition ri%ht
do(n to the ti&e of ?alileo< 0hus he 4in the person of Salviati5 continued to ar%ue in this
&anner 4in the &anner of Si&plicio, astractly, y (ay of the elaoratin% of conceptual
content (ithout real referent5, until reco%ni=in% it (as fruitless, he &ethodolo%ically and
e'pressly esche(ed ar%u&ents aout the strictly lo%ical content of concepts< Salviati (arned
oth Si&plicio and Sa%redo, even as the latter opposed the Peripatetic position, a%ainst
further proceedin% in this &anner<,I see (e are once &ore %oin% to en%ulf ourselves in a
oundless sea fro& (hich there is no %ettin% out, ever/
C
not ho(ever efore for&ulatin% and
statin% his o(n position, ,the inte%ral parts of the (orld Hare assu&edJ to e disposed in the
est order, and as a necessary conse)uence e'cludes strai%ht &otions of si&ple natural
odies as ein% of no use in nature./
O
0hereafter he, ?alileo 4Salviati5, undertoo" to resu&e
1
Redondi, 8alileo, Heretic, 2D#.
2
See the ;ourth Study, Part III, ,*stract :ialectic of Concepts./
D
Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s, DG.
#
,&id, DG, DF, #09#D, #O9#G, #79C0, CF9O0, F#9FC.
C
,&id, ##.
O
,&id, #O. 0his is Sa%redo.s su&&ation. Salviati.s appears a fe( lines earlier. 4,*s to &otion y a strai%ht line, I do not
see ho( it can e of use for anythin% e'cept to restore to their natural location such inte%ral odies as have een
accidentally re&oved and separated fro& their (hole,/ ,&id, #C5.
3o( the opposin% Peripatetic vie(s, Si&plicio.s 4also su&&ari=ed y Sa%redo5 is ,that sulunar odies are y nature
%enerale and corruptile, etc., and are therefore very different in essence fro& celestial odies, these ein%
invariant, in%enerale, incorruptile, etc./ 4,&id5.
0he si%nificance of this is not ovious and &ay not e clear. In the initial sparrin%, Salviati had already e'plained 4,&id,
DG5 that (e should ,have the %race to aandon/ the vie( that the ,natural instinct/ of the various parts of odies 4say,
the Earth5 ,is to %o< to(ard the center of the earth,/ rather they tend ,to(ard the center of the universe,/ &eanin%
that ,(e do not "no( (here that &ay e, or (hether it e'ists at all. Even if it e'ists, it is ut an i&a%inary pointE a
nothin%, (ithout any )uality/ 4,&id5. This is alread% to have entirel% a&andoned the 7ristotelian, 4tole$aic and the
the discussion fro& &utually accepted characteri=ations of celestial and especially earthly
&otions 4lar%ely i%norin% the theoretical deter&inants e&edded in these characteri=ations5,
(hat he called ,oservations/ 4and (e &i%ht call ,facts/5+
1
By for%oin% efforts to lo%ically parse
e'plicit, speculative Peripatetic conceptual elaorations, ?alileo (as ale to ,hypothetically/
pose, only if fleetin%ly, his underlyin% &etaphysics 4ato&is&5
2
as an alternative (ithout havin%
to ac"no(led%in% (hat he had done 4not to &ention rehearsin% its criticis&s5, even if in so
doin%, he had to per&it Si&plicio to retreat to his narro( 4e'perientially un%rounded5
e'plications of conceptual content, (hich, at any rate, served as %rist for his &ill 4criticis& of
Peripatetic natural philosophy at its (ea"ness points5 and estalished a settin% for statin% his
perspective 4in its stron%est aspects5.
;ro& this point for(ard, ?alileo shifted the terrain of the discussion. ;or the &ost part, Salviati
no lon%er ar%ues aout concepts (ithout referents, &etaphysically< it is no lon%er a )uestion
of a dispute over the lo%ic of concepts as concepts 4incorruptiility, i&&utaility, etc.5, ut
lar%ely a )uarrel that is sustained y reference to the evidence provided y the heavens and
the Earth itself. 0hus, al(ays (ith an eye to e'hiitin% the ho&o%eneity et(een various
heavenly odies and the Earth, Salviati points to chan%es in the heavens, to the supernovas
of 1CG2 and 1O0# the for&er of (hich (as so ri%ht that it re&ained visile in the li%ht of day
for over three (ee"s.
D
*s ne( stars that appeared then disappeared, these chan%es (ere
&ona fide evidence of the &utaility of celestial odies. 4$ence, the identity in underlyin%
nature (ith the EarthE thus, the su&stantial ho&o%eneity of all odies lar%ely and relationally
constitutin% the universe.5 0hen, he pointed to sunspots 4and ,their friend,/ ?alileo hi&self,
(ho (ith his telescope had provided the& (ith an e'cellent account in his Starr% Messenger5+
0hey are de&onstraly conti%uous (ith the sun, real not illusory, chan%e si=e and shape, vary
&otions, and co&e into ein% and pass out of it.
#
;inally 4to close out their first day5, the three
Church vision of the cos$os? it is to have a&andoned, if onl% in thought, the old order? and to have dran the
conclusions that the orld 0universe5 is effectivel% ithout center, &oundless if not infinite, one in hich &odies are
ho$ogenous and su&9ect to quantitative, $athe$atical treat$ent+
1
,If< (e are to %et on (ith our &ain )uestion< it is necessary< HtoJ proceed to de&onstrations, oservations, and
particular e'peri&ents./ ,&id, ##+
2
In contradistinction, &ost i&portant here (as the Peripatetic elief< ased directly on *ristotle 4De Caela, i D, 2G0a
1C91FE 4h%sics, i G, 171a91715< that %eneration and corruption 4philosophically, (e (ould say co&in% into ein%
and passin% a(ay5 arise fro& contraries< ?eneration and corruption transpire only (here there are contraries,
contraries (ere said to found a&on%st si&ple natural odies, contrary &otions are &ade or found in strai%ht lines
et(een opposite ends 4a(ay fro& or to(ard a &iddle, that is, up or do(n5, these &otions characteri=e the Earth,
er%o 4,&id, D75< This is an a&stract dialectic of concepts, (hat Si&plicio calls ,ar%u&ent a priori/ 4,&id, C05, (hat fro&
Lant on(ard (ould e called 4a series of5 analytic a priori 1ud%&ent4s5, a conceptual ela&oration ithout experiential
foundation+
Salviati su%%ests that contraries &ay not have e'istence in nature. $e ridicules Si&plicio and the Peripatetics 4,<
teach &e nature.s &ethod of operation in )uic"ly e%ettin% a hundred thousand flies fro& a s&all )uantity of &usty
(ine fu&es, sho(in% &e (hat the contraries are in that case</ ,&id, D79#05, cities e'periential instances of (hich this
concept 4of contraries %eneratin% anythin%5 not only does not illu&ine ut confuses our understandin% of pheno&ena
4,&id, #05, and then concludes, ,Besides, I never (as thorou%hly convinced of any trans&utation of sustances
4al(ays confinin% ourselves to strictly natural pheno&ena5 accordin% to (hich &atter eco&es transfor&ed in such a
(ay that it is utterly destroyed, so that nothin% re&ains of its ori%inal ein%, and another )uite different ody is
produced< I do not thin" it is i&possile for transfor&ation to occur y a si&ple transposition of parts, (ithout any
corruption or the %eneration of anythin% ne(</ 4,&id, #05. 3o( in counterposin% the transposition of parts, i.e.,
individual, indestructile particles, to the %eneration and corruption of sustance, ?alileo (as not only ne%atin% and
denyin% the distinctive feature of the Earth 4as opposed to celestial odies5, that is, ar%uin% for their ho&o%eneity and
posin% an alternative that undercut the Peripatetic9Church doctrine, he (as not only tacitly reassertin% his ato&is& 4in
this conte't, ,&id, #C, #O, he distin%uishes the ,ele&ents/ of fire, (ater, etc., fro& their particles5, his account (ent
ri%ht to the heart of the Eucharist do%&a under&inin% it. 4Was not, for his conte&poraries, read a natural
pheno&enon2 If so, ho( could its sustance e ,trans&uted,/ ho( is transustantiation possile25
D
,&id, C1, C2, CG9CF.
#
,&id, C29C#.
interlocutors discussed the &oon and its relation to the Earth at %reat len%th,
1
a discussion
that (as punctuated y len%thy e'cursuses on &irrors and refracted li%ht,
2
and the rilliance
of li%ht as reflected respectively y polished and ruff, dar" surfaces.
D
0he discussion of the
play of li%ht and shado( and li%ht.s reflection (ere not di%ressions, ecause, li"e that of
sunspots 4(hose reduction in speed and si=e are apparent for ,anyone (ho "no(s ho( to
oserve the& and calculate dili%ently/5,
#
the &eanin% and si%nificance of the lunar
pheno&ena are not al(ays i&&ediately %iven in perception 4i.e., in seein% the& throu%h the
telescope5. 1&servation is not perception+
A
While ?alileo.s astrono&ical criti)ue of Peripatetic doctrine is evidentially %rounded, it is
nonetheless lar%ely a lo%ical, discursive ar%u&ent (ith i&portant analo%ical &o&ents that are
ai&ed at rin%in% the ar%u&ent to intuitive clarity. 0his is even &ore &anifest in the second
day.s discussion, and efore closin% this section (e shall cite one, the central ar%u&ent in that
discourse to &a"e this clear.
:iscussion on the second day is lar%ely %iven over to the )uestion of (hether the Earth is
&oile or at rest.
Salviati present seven reasons 4ar%u&ents5 (hy he is rationally convinced the Earth
periodically revolves around its o(n center 4&otion that is diurnal, co&pletely occurrin% in a
period of a day, t(enty9four hours5, and those odies that include the &oon, sun, planets and
stars and that &a"e up the celestial sphere do not revolve around a stationary Earth. ;or our
purposes here 4i.e., to e'hiit the &anner in (hich he ar%ues and the for& of his ar%u&ent5 it
is necessary and i&portant to enu&erate the& even if in co&pressed for&+ ;irst, considerin%
the i&&ense si=e of the ,starry sphere/ relative to the &inuteness of the Earth, a relation that
he identifies as ,&any &illions of ti&es/ %reater, (ith a vie( to the i&&easurale velocity
4speed5 re)uired for this vast sphere to turn over in a sin%le day, it is far &ore ,reasonale and
credile/ that it is the Earth that rotates.
O
Second, astrono&ical oservation ,incontrovertily/
sho(s that planets in their orits &ove sli%htly (est to east. But if the Earth is at rest and the
,sphere/ of heavenly odies as a (hole &oves around it, this &otion ,&ust then e &ade to
rush the other (ayE that is, fro& east to (est, (ith this very rapid diurnal &otion./ If, ho(ever,
the Earth rotates, then a sin%le &otion that is (est to east ,acco&&odates all the
oservations and satisfies the& all co&pletely./
G
0hird, the rotation of the entire heavenly
sphere upsets the orderly ,circulation/ e'istin% a&on% those specific odies (ith (hich (ere
are fa&iliar, and aout the period of (hose &otion (e are certain. 0he %reater the circle
descried, the lon%er the period of rotation. 0hus, Saturn co&pletes its rotation every thirty
years, 8upiter in t(elve years, 6ars ta"es t(o, the 46edicean5 &oons of 8upiter, si'teen,
seven and three and a half days and forty9t(o hours respectively, e%innin% (ith the lar%est
orit and endin% (ith the s&allest. -et, if the vastly lar%er celestial sphere is to rotate around
the Earth it &ust e done in t(enty9four hours.
F
0his is asurd. 4While if it (as conceded the
Earth revolves around its o(n center, on its o(n a'is as (e say, it (ould disrupt none of these
relations. 0he asurdity (ould disappear.5 ;ourth, there is a )uestion of the ,i&&ense
disparity et(een the &otions/ of the various stars. So&e (ould e re)uired to &ove very
)uic"ly in very, very lar%e circlesE others at a snail.s pace in very s&all circles accordin% to
their location relative to the poles. ;or so&eone (ith the sensiility of a &athe&atician, this is
1
,&id, O29G1, FO971, 7C9101.
2
,&id, G19GG.
D
,&id, GG9F#.
#
,&id, C#.
C
See this Study, the 3ote, ,>servation, E'perience and E'peri&ent in ?alileo,/ elo(.
O
Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s 4second day5, 11C 4second day5, D7O 4third day5.
G
,&id, 11G.
F
,&id, 11F9117.
a &atter of ad 1ud%&ent, and (ould reflect rather poorly, ?alileo &erely hints at this, on the
(isdo& and insi%ht of the Creator.
1
;ifth, oservations of the heavens %o ac" in the traditions
to (hich ?alileo related t(o thousand years. It is patent that so&e stars have shifted position
over this period of ti&e. So&e that (ere ,found on the celestial e)uator/ are found in our ti&e
to e &any de%rees distant.
2
0hus, these stars have and (ill e re)uired to "eep chan%in%
their orits and velocities, so&e (ill of necessity e re)uired to slo( their &otion descriin%
s&aller orits. ;urther, over a %reat e'panse of future ti&e so&e (ill e re)uired not only to
slo(, ut to stop and then restart their &otion.
D
Si'th, the Peripatetic vie( characteri=es the
starry heavens as ,solid,/ and y this &eans that the various stars are fi'ed fir&ly in the
,places/ 4our ter&5 (ithin the celestial sphere, that they do not chan%e places a&on%st
the&selves. 0his is si&ply not co&patile (ith the disparity of &otions that the sa&e vie(
re)uires in order to assert the i&&oility of the Earth. Seventh, attriuted to the vast sphere of
heavenly odies innu&erale nu&ers of (hich are &uch lar%er than the Earth, the diurnal
rotation (ould have to e of enor&ous ,stren%th and po(er/ carryin% the planets in a direction
opposite their orit as (ell. -et the Earth, a ,s&all and triflin% ody in co&parison (ith the
universe,/ (ould e un&oved y this entire &otion.
#
?alileo (as co&pelled to &a"e these ar%u&ents< so&e of the& ased on recent
astrono&ical oservations 4especially those &ade over decades y 0ycho Brahe and later
syste&ati=ed y Lepler5< if for no other reason that, ased on Ptole&aic theori=ation, the
Peripatetic universe (as &erely a develop&ent of i&&ediately %iven perceptions codified as
co&&on sense+ *fter all and &ost oviously the sun %oes round the Earth, it rises in the east
each and every day and sets in the (est, a%ain each and every dayE to oot, if the Earth does
rotate on its o(n center, is it not reasonale to elieve o1ects (ould fly off it2 Why arenIt
,roc" and ani&als... thro(n to(ard the stars/ and (hy do uildin%s re&ain attached to their
foundations2
C
So the first thin% he had to estalish (as a principle 4and the presentation of its
for&ulation precedes the enu&eration of various facts, his seven ar%u&ents5 that accounts for
our e'perience, the datu& that you and I standin% here on solid %round do not and cannot
i&&ediately perceive the &otion of the Earth+ ,6otion, insofar as it is and acts as &otion, to
that e'tent e'ists relatively to thin%s that lac" itE and a&on% thin%s (hich all share e)ually in
any &otion, it does not act, and is as if it did not e'ist./
O
* %ood case can e &ade that this
principle rises fro& a syste&atic reflection on e'perience in one of its non9&undane,
co&parative &odalities itself. Salviati points out that, ,the %oods (ith (hich a ship is laden
leavin% !enice, pass y Corfu, y Crete, y Cyprus and %o to *leppo. !enice, Corfu, Crete,
etc., stand still and do not &ove (ith the ship, ut as to the sac"s, o'es, and undles (ith
(hich the oat is laden and (ith respect to the ship itself, the &otion fro& !enice to Syria is
as nothin%, and in no (ay alters their relation a&on% the&selves./
G
0hus, the central
theoretical &o&ent of i&&ediate understandin% itself is not %iven (ith that e'perience. ?alileo
1
,&id, 117.
2
?alileo used the ter& ,celestial sphere/ in oth the Ptole&aic sense that counterposes it to sulunar odies pri&arily
the Earth, and in a &ore technical, astrono&ical sense. With re%ard to the latter, ,0he ac"%round of stars upon (hich
the precessin% path of the Earth.s spin a'is is traced is called the celestial sphere. 0he celestial sphere is a
coordinate syste& defined y a fictitious sphere of infinite radius on the inside of (hich are pro1ected the positions of
the fi'ed stars and the %eocentric coordinate syste& defined at a %iven epoch< 0hus, the celestial north and south
poles and the celestial e)uator are the pro1ections of Earth.s 3orth and South poles and E)uator on the celestial
sphere./ $erert Sha(, Craters, Cos$os, and Chronicles, D2.
D
Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s, 1179120.
#
,&id, 120.
C
,&id, 1FF. 0he )uestion is posed y Sa%redo. Salviati provides a len%thy and, on ?alilean assu&ptions, convincin%
response at ,&id, 170917G.
O
,&id, 11O.
G
,&id+
&ust drive it ho&e< We do not (itness the &otion of the Earth ,ecause it is co&&on/ to all
of us ,and all share e)ually in it/
1
<. But ?alileo, the Dialogue and t(o centuries of the
develop&ent of the &odern science of nature cannot &a"e this so. It is counterintuitive and
can only e understood analogicall%, e.%., y reference to the situation in shippin% et(een
!enice and Syria. But once science s%ste$aticall% entered production and reshapes the orld
of dail% experience in and through the production of a orld of co$$odities on a capitalist
&asis,
2
the &odern science of nature e%an to eco&e part of our thorou%hly theoretically
&ediated co&&on sense. Science eca&e a decisive &o&ent in the actual production of
$aterial for$s, these for&s and the roadest, aleit un9e'plicated theoretically scientific
cate%ories they presuppose eca&e e$&edded in and tacitl% live in that experience itself, as
those for&s constitute the everyday sensile data of that, our e'perience. But until this
&o&ent, %enerations of hu&anity are stuc", so to spea", (ith this analo%ical for& of
understandin%, and the lo%ic of ?alileo.s, and scientific, ar%u&ents &ust devolve on it+ ,If,
fro& the car%o in the ship, a sac" (ere shifted fro& a chest one sin%le inch, this alone (ould
e &ore of a &ove&ent for it than the t(o9thousand &ile 1ourney &ade y all of the&
to%ether./
D
>nly on this asis, do the astrono&ical oservations that Salviati relates
4especially, those contained in ar%u&ents t(o, three and five5 and e'plicitly theoretical
ar%u&ents that he &a"es 4those contained in ar%u&ents one, four, si' and seven5 &a"e
sense. But even on this asis, these 4theoretical5 ar%u&ents are not i&&ediately intelli%ile to
Peripatetic co&&on sense. *nother principle, ound up (ith the first, characteristic of
our%eois thou%ht itself, is intert(ined (ith the rest of the ar%u&ent4s5. 0his principle entails
re%ularity, efficiency and econo&y in thou%ht and practice, and here specifically in heavenly
&otions. It invo"es >c"ha&.
In offerin% his third ar%u&ent in (hich he indicates a rotation of the (hole heavenly sphere
upsets the orderly ,circulation/ e'istin% a&on% those specific odies, Salviati spea"s of the
alteration of a ,very har&onious trend/ and e'plicitly notes that the ti&es he calculates for
rotations of 6ars, !enus, 8upiter and Saturn (ith that of the re)uisite t(enty9four hours for the
entire celestial sphere is the ,&ini&al disorder that can e introduced./ In his fourth ar%u&ent,
Salviati refers to the ,difficulty of the i&&ense disparity in the &otions of the stars/ as ,indeed
a nuisance./ In his si'th ar%u&ent, he opposes the rotation of the Earth to that of the celestial
sphere as ,&ore effective and convenient./
#
,:isorder/ of any sort (hether ,&ini&al/ or
tendin% to(ard &a'i&al, ,difficulty/ that constitutes a ,nuisance,/ ,effectiveness/ yo"ed to
,convenient/ are not necessary e'pressions of a psycholo%ical state shaped y a co&pulsion
for orderliness 4thou%h they &ay e5, ut a logical re)uire&ent of a type of ar%u&entation and
co%nition for (hich econo&y in thou%ht is, not 1ust desirale ut, de rigueur and essentially
characteri=es rationality as such.
0he principle is present and operative fro& the start+ Salviati concludes his first ar%u&ent y
as"in%, ,(ho is %oin% to elieve that nature< has chosen to &a"e an i&&ense nu&er of
e'tre&ely lar%e odies &ove (ith inconceivale velocities, to achieve (hat could e done y
1
,&id, 11O, DG# 4third day5.
?alileo returns to this later over the course of several pa%es and in pursuin% several di%ressions on the second day
&a"in% the sa&e point, a%ain and necessarily analogicall%, y reference to a heavy stone dropped fro& the &ast of
ship, (hile it is stationary in haror and (hile under(ay, &ovin% y sail upon the (inds of the sea 4,&id, 1#191CC5.
Salviati su&&arily re&ar"s, ,the e'peri&ent< (ill the sho( that the stone al(ays falls in the sa&e place on the ship,
(hether the ship is standin% still or &ovin% (ith any speed you please. 0herefore, the sa&e cause holdin% %ood on
the earth as on the ship, nothin% can e inferred aout the earth.s &otion or rest fro& the stone fallin% al(ays
perpendicularly to the foot of the to(er/ 4(hich references another discussion and ,e'peri&ent/5. ,&id, 1##91#C.
2
We identify this &o&ent in the history of the develop&ent of capitalis& (ith (hat (e, follo(in% 6ar', call the real
do&ination of capital over laor. See the ;irst Interlude, elo(.
D
?alileo, ,&id+
#
,&id, 117, 117 and 120, respectively.
a &oderate &ove&ent of one sin%le ody around its o(n center2/
1
0his is an astrono&ical
state&ent of the >c"ha&ist principle that the (orth, value and effectiveness of ar%u&ent and
e'planation is to e found in its econo&y, or, in ?alileoIs for&ulation< a parenthetic portion of
the previous citation o&itted y (ay of ellipsis< ,y %eneral a%ree&ent/ nature ,does not act
y &eans of &any thin%s (hen it can do y &eans of fe(/E
2
or, as Sa%redo &uch later ar%ues
&ore forcefully, ,3ature does not &ultiply thin%s unnecessarily< she &a"es use of the
easiest and si&plest &eans for producin% her effects HandJ< she does nothin% in vain</
D
0hus, (e see that in central discussions of the Dialogue 4the second day and as (e shall see
the third also5,
#
?alileo proceeded y pole$icall% counterposin% his Copernican perspective to
the underlyin% Ptole&aic and Peripatetic vie( of the universe in a clash et(een concepts
and theories 4e.%., sustance and accidents versus i&plicitly ato&s and local &otion5 that are
speculatively and lo%ically %rounded 4i.e., (here )uestions of consistency and internal
coherence and not those of evidence are supre&e5, and, then, havin% estalished a
perspective of (ei%ht and at least e)uivalent validity, he further developed his ar%u&ents on
analogicall% sensi&le or perceptual 4second day5 or %eo&etric %rounds 4third day5 and
developed the& y proceedin% lo%ically in the necessaritarian 4not syllo%istic5 sense 4i.e., if
this, then that5. It is (ithin this fra&e(or" that ?alileoIs 4SalviatiIs5 presentation is %overned y
de&onstration in his sense in (hich, episte&olo%ically, our ,senses/ are rou%ht into
a%ree&ent (ith ,intellect/ y (ay of theori=ation, oservation and e'peri&ent
.C
0he structure of the ar%u&ent on the third day follo(s far &ore than less the sa&e for&at.
*fter a len%thy discussion inclusive of e'tensive calculations disposin% of a residue issue fro&
the first day 4the )uestion of (hether the supernova of 1CG2 and 1O0# (ere celestial or
sulunar pheno&ena5,
O
Salviati turns to the )uestion of (hether the Earth, li"e the other
planets, rotates or orits around a fi'ed center,
G
(hich neatly dovetails (ith his avo(ed
purpose of considerin% celestial pheno&ena in their relations to one another in order to
uttress the Copernican perspective
F
4or hypothesis, as he calls it5.
$e e%ins y for&ulatin% the funda&ental underlyin% position 4one that is &etaphysical
ecause it lac"s a real referent, (here the sense of ,real/ is shared5 that %overns the
*ristotelian9Peripatetic perspective+ Whether ,the earth is or is not at that center around I say
it turns< it is necessary that (e declare ourselves as to (hether or not you and I have the
sa&e concept of this center./
7
Si&plicio responds strai%htfor(ardly+ By ,center,/ he &eans
that of the universe, the (orld, the stellar sphere, the heavens.
10
But, in statin% such, he
1
,&id, 11G.
2
,&id+
D
,&id, D7G.
#
We shall for%o discussion of the fourth day. It is devoted to ?alileo.s theory of tidal causation< it is not accepted
today 4for this, see :ra"e.s re&ar"s, ,&id, #F7, n. #1C, the theori=ation itself appears at ,&id, #2O9#D1, #D19#D#, #DC9
#DO5< ut (hat is &ost i&portant for us is that, unli"e in days t(o and three, Salviati does not see" to uttress the
Copernican perspective on the solar syste&. Instead and to the contrary, he e'plicitly presupposes 4,&id, #2O5 oth
the Earth.s diurnal and annual &otions to &a"e the case for that theori=ation.
C
See ,0he Peripatetics 4*ristotelians5, T6ethod. and the 3e( Science/ aove, and the 3ote, ,>servation, E'perience
and E'peri&ent in ?alileo,/ elo(.
0he disparate results, and the inade)uacy of the senses in and of the&selves, are stated &ost forcily y ?alileo on
the third day. In reference to the annual &otion of the Earth around the sun, Salviati tells Sa%redo that, ,I repeat, there
is no li&it to &y astonish&ent (hen I reflect that *ristarchus and Copernicus (ere ale to &a"e reason so con)uer
sense that, in defiance of the latter, the for&er eca&e &istress of their elief./ ,&id, D2F.
O
,&id, 2F09D17 4third day5.
;or the si%nificance of this discussion< the novas ca&e into ein% and )uic"ly passed a(ay indicatin% that, if they
(ere celestial in ori%ins and nature, they (ere also transitory and &utale< see this section, aove.
G
,&id, D17.
F
,&id, O.
7
,&id, D17.
10
,&id+
&isses the asic issue, for as Salviati indicates, ,I &i%ht very reasonaly dispute (hether
there is in nature such a center, seein% that neither you nor anyone else has so far proved
(hether the universe is finite and has a shape, or (hether it is infinite and unounded./
1
?alileo )uic"ly< &uch )uic"er than on the second day and for %ood reason
2
< %rants
Si&plicio his unfounded Peripatetic assu&ption, esche(in% the &etaphysical )uestion, and
proceeds to evaluate the ar%u&ents for Earth.s centrality,
D
ut not (ithout re&ar"in% that none
of *ristotle.s ar%u&ents held unless this assu&ption (as &ade for they all rested on it.
#
40hus,
concession (as &ade &erely for the sa"e of ar%u&ent, (hich no dout enhanced the ris"
?alileo (as ta"in%.5 *s he did on the first day, Salviati continues, rene(in% his point of
departure y invo"in% ,po(erfully convincin% oservations,/
C
i.e., theoretically &ediated
accounts of pheno&ena that are, as accounts, lar%ely shared 4vi=., the specific theoretical
pre&ises &ediatin% these oservations are not apparent5.
Whereas on the second day, Salviati hi&self for&ulated the asis< several 4seven5
ar%u&ents supportin% the proposition the Earth turned on its o(n center< on (hich the
crucial discussion of that day hin%ed, y the third day discussion, ar%u&ent and persuasion
have co&e far enou%h that it is none other than Si&plicio (ho articulates< (ith Salviati
deployin% the Platonic &ne&onic $ethos to assist hi&< that asis 4at least in the
consideration of the &otion of the planets5, (hich consisted in 4an instru&entally &ediated5
&athe&atical 4calculative5 and %eo&etrical assess&ents of the spatial relations 4distances5
et(een Earth and the sun respectively, to one side, and the si' planets 46ercury, 6ars,
!enus, 8upiter, Saturn and the Earth.s &oon5 to the other side, all (ith re%ard to opposition
and con1unction.
O
>n this asis 4(hich entails the production y Si&plicio of a correct
dia%ra&&atic representation
G
of the "no(n solar syste& on heliocentric assu$ptions that
include a fixed center5, the crucial discussion of this, the third day hin%ed and follo(s, and in
unfoldin% proceeds y (ay of, the sa&e for&at, na&ely, opposition of the t(o chief (orld
syste&s 4Copernican and Ptole&aic5 and consideration of their relative &erits (ith a vie( to
coherency and the fullest account of celestial pheno&ena. ;ro& here on, the discourse in its
structure shifts ever so &uch fro& the second to the third day+ Si&plicio )uotes *ristotle less,
is also less certain of his Peripatetic convictionsE (hile Salviati proceeds (ith &ore
confidence, &ore often puttin% forth oth potential Peripatetic criticis& of Copernican,
F
as (ell
(innin% responses, and Copernican criticis&s of Ptole&y,
7
(hich appear unchallen%eale. >f
particular interest and i&port (ere the three &a1or difficulties of the Ptole&aic9*ristotle vie( of
a %eocentrically centered solar syste&+ ;or here, natural odies (ith circular &otions, the sun,
planets and the &oon, (ere descried in ter&s of irre%ular &otion (ith respect to their o(n
centers ut re%ularity around the EarthE to confor& to oservale &ove&ents 4to
,appearances/5, these odies (ere &ade to &ove in contrary directions 4retro%rade &otion5E
1
,&id+
2
*s :ra"e points out 4,&id, #FO, n. D175, this (as dan%erous %round for ?alileo to tread since it (as precisely for
intransi%ently declarin% the universe infinite that the In)uisition conde&ned ?ior%ione Bruno to death.
D
,&id, D179D20.
#
,&id, D20.
C
,&id, D21.
O
,&id, D219D2O. >pposition and con1unction are astrono&ically relational events, used y ?alileo to desi%nate the
relations a&on% sun, Earth and a third heavenly ody 4the &oon or one of the "no(n planets5. 0he for&er occurs as
the Earth, sun and say the &oon, all at the sa&e celestial lon%itude, are on a line (ith the Earth et(een the&. It (ill
produce a full &oon or 4infre)uently5 a lunar eclipse 4at the point in the &oon.s orit (hen it is closest to the Earth5.
Con1unction, on the other hand, occurs as, on the sa&e celestial lon%itude, the sun and &oon are on the sa&e side of
the Earth 4&oon is positioned et(een sun and Earth5. It (ill produce a full &oon or 4rarely5 a solar eclipse.
G
,&id, D2D.
F
,&id, e.%., D279DD0, DD#, DD79D#0.
7
,&id, e.%., DD19DDD, DDC9DDO, DDG9DD7, D#0.
and, to &ove at varyin% speeds, that is, to &ove fast at one &o&ent, slo(er at another, and
even to stop and then advance. 40hus, Ptole&y (as co&pelled to introduce epicycles to
account for these oserved characteristics, (here oservations, of course, are relative to the
Earth9ound oserver.5
1
Within the &athe&atical 4i.e., %eo&etric5 li&its of his e'planation,
2
?alileo (as ale to offer a dia%ra&&atically descried, far si&pler and far &ore ele%ant
account on his heliocentric assu&ptions.
D
0his, the consideration of planetary &otion and in
particular retro%rade &otion, planetary stoppin%s and advances, constitutes the first &a1or
investi%ation of the third dayE the second &a1or investi%ation is for&ed in the account and
discussion of sunspots.
#
While the discussion is lucid, &ore ele%ant in the ?alilean sense than
that of the 3etters on Sunspots, the presentation ein% %eo&etric and visual 4i.e., %raphic5,
and (hile ?alileo reaffir&s his >c"ha&ist co&&it&ents in his 4Platonically5 dialectical and
critical e'a&ination of the Ptole&aic account of sunspots, (hat is really interestin% in the
discussion is &ethodolo%ical and philosophical.
C
6ethodolo%ically, in his account of his
@incean *cade&ician friend 4i.e., ?alileo5 Salviati 4a%ain, ?alileo5 e%an fro&, undeveloped to
e sure, a heliocentric pro1ection of solar syste& relations, &ade a series of oservations,
elaorated his initial theori=ation and returned to oservation, no( carried out syste&atically
and carefully over a nu&er of &onths, and then for&ali=ed the theori=ation 4inclusive of its
%eo&etric for& of presentation5. 0his practice, &utually &ediatin% theori=ation and
4oservational5 e'perience is, &ethodolo%ically spea"in%, a process of concretion and
dialectical in our sense.
O
Philosophically, a%ainst the force of his o(n ar%u&ents< (hich in
various places he 4Salviati5 declares ,convincin%,/ ,sound,/ ,doutless,/ free of ,incon%ruities/
and ,inanities/ and ased on ,correct de&onstrations/<
G
?alileo continued to uphold the
charade that he does ,not %ive the ar%u&ents the status of either conclusiveness or
inconclusiveness, since/ his ,intention has not een to solve anythin% aout this &o&entous
)uestion, ut &erely to set forth those physical and astrono&ical reasons (hich the t(o
sides< set forth./
F
4Salviati refers to the entire e'ercise in ter&s of neither ,affir&in% or
denyin% anythin%,/ ut &erely a practice in (hich the participants ,philosophi=e 1o"in%ly and in
sport, havin% &ade certain assu&ptions and desirin% to ar%ue aout the& a&on%HstJ/
the&selves, ,a&on% friends./5
7
0he prole& is that the further the interlocutors develop their
1
,&id, D#19D#2.
2
;or this li&itation, see Conclusion, II, elo(.
D
Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s, D#29D##.
#
,&id, D#G9DC1.
0he third and final &a1or investi%ation of the third day involves &a"in% the case for alterations and differences that
ou%ht to e perceivale in the fi'ed stars so9called on the asis of annual &ove&ent of the Earth. ,&id, DOF9DG7, and,
less directly, D709D7O.
C
,&id, DCD9DCC. Salviati recounts the Ptole&aic account and sho(s it re)uires four distinct &otions. $e states, ,3o( if
these four &otions, so incon%ruous (ith each other and yet necessarily all attriutale to the sin%le ody of the sun,
could reduced to a sin%le and very si&ple one< then really it see&s to &e that this decision could not e re1ected./
,&id, DCC.
In point of fact there is &ore at sta"e than this. 0he ,incon%ruities/ re)uire a series of ad hoc hypotheses 4see ,&id,
DC#9DCC5 or the aandon&ent< unacceptale to ?alileo and the science he founds and that under%oes e'tensive
develop&ent startin% fro& hi&< of universal causality.
O
,&id, D#G, DC2+
,n our sense the dialectical character of ?alileo.s &ethod is riefly discussed in the account of the ali%n&ent of the
,senses/ (ith ,intellect/ 4reason5, this Study, ,?alileo and *ristotle, III+ @a(, the 3e( Science, *nti9*ristotle,/ aove,
and in the further discussion of a priori and a posteriori ar%u&ents in 3ote 1, ,>servation, E'peri&ent and
E'perience in ?alileo,/ elo(. ;urther, see the ;ourth Study, Part III, ,0he 6aterialist :ialectic/ and ,0heory of 0ruth,/
and Part I!, ,Criti)ue of $istoricis&,/ the concludin% three para%raphs, all elo(.
G
Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s, passi&.
F
,&id, DCG.
7
,&id, DCF.
discussion, the deeper Salviati proes, the clearer it is that co&pellin% lo%ic and evidence
support his Copernican position<
,s the Dialogue ScienceK
With acade&ic philosophers and historians of science (ho defend this paradi%& of our%eois
theory 4i.e., the &odern science of nature5 as a universal hu&an achieve&ent, the Dialogue is
lar%ely elieved to e so&ethin% a little less than ,real/ science. *&on% those (hose (or"s
have een cited herein, LoyrU e'e&plifies this attitude+ ,0he astrono&ical part of the Dialogue
is particularly (ea". ?alileo co&pletely i%nores not only Lepler.s discoveries ut also even the
concrete content of the (or"s of Copernicus. 0he heliocentris& offered us here y ?alileo is
of the very si&plest for& 4the sun in the centre (ith the planets in circular &otion around it5, a
for& (hich ?alileo "ne( to e false./
1
>f course, not all philosophers of science a%ree (ith
this assess&ent.
2
<0he lar%er part of LoyrU.s ar%u&ent, of course, is that ?alileo (as a ,Platonist/
D
< for
LoyrU, there are only t(o authentic for&s of philosophi=in%, Platonic and *ristotelian< that
%enuine science is &athe&atical and ,Platonic,/ i.e., proceeds deductively to %enerate la(s<
in LoyrU it appears this is ex nihilo, that is, (ithout reference to sensuous instances 4in
science, e'peri&entally %enerated ,oservations/5 that e'e&plify the la( 4universal5 as, say, in
$usserl, ut then there is that curious account in the Discourses and De$onstrations of the
la( of fallin% odies (here odies of different (ei%hts are said to fall at the sa&e speed in a
vacuu&, an account (hich is initially oservationally %rounded, not deduced<
#
?alileo did i%nore Lepler.s findin%s,
C
ut then he did so consistently fro& 1O07, fro& that ti&e
at (hich (e "no( (ith certainty he (as a(are of the&, ri%ht do(n to the end of his life 4thus,
inclusive of the 1ODF Discourses and De$onstrations, ,real/ science for LoyrU5. 0he
heliocentric vie( ?alileo defended< it (as not e'actly (hat Copernicus defended< is not as
si&ple as LoyrU &a"es it out to e since the stars that constitute the celestial sphere, and
"no(led%e, understandin% and calculations of their &otions (ei%hed heavily in his
assess&ent that the Earth &ust revolve on its center and around the sun. ?alileo reco%ni=ed
the positions of these stars are not fi'ed, as, for e'a&ple, evinced y the discussions of the
supernovas.
O
0he sun is a star, even on Ptole&aic assu&ptions a part of the celestial sphere.
0acitly, in this re%ard 4that is, as a star5 ?alileo also reco%ni=ed the sun has its o(n &otion,
and e'plicitly< in the discussion of sunspots on the third day, this (as particularly i&portant
for his ar%u&ent< he asserted the sun rotated around its o(n a'is 4or its center, and that a'is
is tilted, not perpendicular to the plane of the ecliptic5
G
<
0he year 1OD2 (as not 17D7, and even if there (ere for&al si&ilarities 4central Europe in its
entirely (as in oth cases at (ar5 the 0hirty -ears War is not a historical analo% to the last
i&perialist (orld (ar, for in the first case it (as the forces of old order "in%ship ,trapped/ (ithin
1
8alileo Studies, 222, n. 11C. See also the critical re&ar"s vis9P9vis LoyrU.s unconsciously ideolo%ical understandin%
of ?alileo in the 3ote, ,>servation, E'perience and E'peri&ent in ?alileo,/ elo(.
2
:ra"eIs appreciation of ?alileo.s science is road yet specific, and, fro& the perspective of ?alileo.s crucial and
irreplaceale (or" in the develop&ent of science, %oes far eyond LoyrU.s petty criticis&. See his notes to this 4his5
translation of the Dialogue, e.%., ,&id, #GO-#GG 4n. 1OC5, #GF, 4n. 17#, 177, 2015, #G7 4n. 21D, 21O5, #F0 4n. 22D, 22F,
2D05, #FO 4n. D175, #FG9#FF 4n. DG25, and #70 4n. #C15.
D
8alileo Studies, 20C, 20G, 20F, 22D n. 22D and 22O n. 1FF. 0hen, of course, there is Loyre.s Metaph%sics and
Measure$ent (hich devotes an entire chapter to ,?alileo and Plato,/ 1O9#D.
#
Dialogues Concerning To Ne Sciences, G29G#, discussed in the openin% para%raphs of ,0he Peripatetics
4*ristotelians5, T6ethod. and the 3e( Science,/ aove. See the second footnote in the section.
C
In this respect 4i.e., (ith re%ard to the Dialogue5, see :ra"e.s re&ar"s, ,&id, #70 4n. #CC, #O25.
O
,&id, #O19#O2, (here 4(ithout even reference to the supernovas5 Salviati asserts the ,e'tre&ely accurate
&easure&ents/ &ay detect &ini&al &otions of the fi'ed stars that other(ise re&ain i&perceptile.
G
,&id, DC0, DC19DC2.
the enco&passin% circuits of capitalIs for&al do&ination all the (hile stru%%lin% to retain a
li&ited, and disappearin% he%e&ony against a%ainst the %enuine earers of capital in its
for&al for&, and in the second case the conflict (as ithin capitalis& 4real do&ination5
et(een the ,de&ocratic/ i&perialists and their atavistic, totalitarian and fully capitalist
counterparts (ho only fantasi=ed aout ut did neither lived nor e'perienced an e'istence that
(as non9our%eois. 0he for&al freedo&s to pulish that LoyrU too" for %ranted 4(hich could
e ta"en for %ranted to the e'tent that science and the technolo%ies of capital it ani&ates are
decisive, deter&inate inputs to production, i.e., precisely ecause science is at ho&e in the
(orld of capital5 had little relevance and even less &eanin% in the (orld in (hich ?alileo lived
and operated.
?alileo "ne( the for& of heliocentris& that LoyrU i&puted to hi& is false 4and (e assu&e he
did, ut then it (as not (hat he defended5. $is position (as patently contradictory, ut not so
&uch lo%ically ut as a lived contradiction in the sense that ?alileo (as too far ahead of his
ti&es... We shall co&e ac" to this shortly... $ere note thou%h, first, that no(here did he
fetishi=e the heliocentrically ,fi'ed/ position of the sun 4as (e indicated, his ar%u&ents
i&plicitly su%%ested other(ise5E and, second, that he (as, aove all and for etter or (orse, a
&an of and for his ti&es, a passionate anti9*ristotelian co&&itted to Copernicanis& as the
sole fra&e(or" in (hich he could openly defend the ne( science, a pro1ect (hich had its first
pre&ise %ettin% the (or" 4the Dialogue5 y the censors, sta&ped (ith Church 4:o&inican5
approval. $avin% &ade the fateful decision to leave !enice 4i.e., co&pelled y his o(n
our%eois instincts that found hi& hood(in"in% the !enetian Senate over his telescope5 and
return to ;lorence, this pro1ect (as necessarily pursued under carefully scrutini=in% Church
eyes... $ad he een ale to consistently develop 4and ,develop/ here entails pulishin% and
openly discussin%5 his ato&istic predilections, this ,research pro%ra&,/ the Dialogue &i%ht
(ell had an additional, &ore ,scientific/ aspect 4in LoyrUIs sense5. But, then, develop&ents of
this sort (ere &ade possile y, socially and historically presupposed, precisely the stru%%les
that he (ent throu%h 4(hich is not to say, and affir&ation of this is part of the sense of our
ar%u&ent, that his (or" can e reduced to an effort to avoid the censors5.
LoyrU, (hose self9appointed tas" appears to e to preserve the sanctity of a Platoni=ed
science 4i.e., one detached fro& its lifelood, capital, (hich is ironic since science is as 1ust as
ays&ally parasitic as the va&pire, capital, it dra(s its stren%th fro&5, does not, e&phatically
does not, %rasp the &ethodolo%ical si%nificance of his truly %reat (or"s< The Starr%
Messenger, The 7ssa%er, and the Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s? and
their i&port for the ne( science of the our%eoisie as it (as e%innin% to e&er%e as a
historical class. Instead, he vastly prefers the lifeless astractions of the Discourses and
De$onstrations, a study of si&ple odies ased on %eo&etry, a strai%htfor(ard
acco&pani&ent to his study of si&ple &achines 41n Mechanics5 datin% fro& his last decade
at Padua. Pulished outside the Italian Peninsula 4in @eiden5, the Discourses appeared as
?alileo "ne( his life (as nearin% its end, and, thou%h ato&is& does appear in the latter,
1
it
appears strictly (ithin the confines of a &athe&atical pheno&enalis& disconnected fro& its
philosophical 4here or in this case, astrono&ical and cos&olo%ical5 i&plications and
conse)uences+ It is devoid of ani&atin% character as, (hat (e today (ould call, a
&etaphysically constructed set of assu&ptions for the purpose of for&in% a %uidin% research
pro1ect for scientific in)uiry and analysis 4as ?alileo.s ato&is& in The 7ssa%er functioned5. In
this respect, the Discourses and De$onstrations sadly sy&oli=ed the internali=ation of
Church strictures on his (or". Pulished aroad, in it ?alileo could have fully e'plored that
1
Dialogues Concerning To Ne Sciences, for e'a&ple, #7, C19C2, CC, O09O1, (here Salviati provides %eo&etrical
ar%u&ents for the necessary of vacuu&s 4vacua5 (ithin the fra&e(or" of an account of indivisiles 4even called
,ato&s/5 in the constitution of an infinitely sided poly%on as it is pro1ected on to a circle.
ato&istic ,research pro%ra&./ $e did not. Instead, it (as the (or" of a &an (ho had een
casti%ated, hu&iliated and eat do(n. 6a"e no &ista"e aout it, it (as the (or" of a defeated
&an.
Conclusion, ,
Triu$ph of the Ne Science
0here are historically transcendent the&es in ?alileo.s (or" that derive fro& his pro1ect of
&athe&ati=in% nature. 0he conceptual elaoration< call it his ne( science< he developed to
reali=e this end 4telos5< included &ethodolo%ical deter&inis&, his orientation to(ard
)uantitatively e'pressile ,la(s,/ the truth and efficacy of de&onstration constituted in rin%in%
the ,senses/ into a%ree&ent (ith the ,intellect,/ die 8edan!enexperi$ent. 0hese the&es
cannot e e'hausted in ter&s of an e'tre&e historicist thesis+ 0hey cannot, for e'a&ple, e
reduced to a &aneuver 4e.%., for%oin% elaoration of an ato&istic &etaphysics5 ai&ed at
avoidin% heretical conde&nation and further proscription<
The $athe$ati/ation of nature 4proceedin% y (ay of the %eo&etri=ation of space, if you (ill
y (ay of *rchi&edes5 (as, in fact, crucial for the develop&ent of the ne( science. ,t is
crucial &ecause ithout it the pro&le$ of $otion cannot &e solved, i+e+, until $otion is
quantified it is i$possi&le to technicall% ela&orate practical procedures involved in s%ste$atic
nature $aster%. Short of this, for e'a&ple, all &achines or devices that do (or" (ill at est e
&odeled on &ove&ents of 4parts of5 the hu&an 4or ani&al5 ody, (ith the sharply curtailed
&ultiples of hu&an 4or ani&al5 effort this entails, (hich, effectively, is &erely the e)uivalent of
recruitin% additional laor, &anpo(er if you (ill, to co&plete a tas" or pro1ect. >nce the
prole& 4of &otion5 is ,solved/ 4it is only inade)uately so in ?alileo5, it (ill in principle eco&e
possile to create &eans, procedures, instru&ents and tools, al(ays as (e shall see yo"ed to
capital accu&ulation, that vastly &ultiply hu&an effort and that, precisely ecause they have
such capacity, have no analo%ue in the hu&an 4or ani&al5 ody
1
<
*ristotle.s account, involvin% fro& our standpoint an e'pansive sense of causality 4includin%
&aterial and final causes asent in ?alileo5, is of course, )ualitative, and cannot, (ithout at
least doin% violence to the sense of *ristotelian concerns, e &athe&ati=ed. *ristotle, then,
started fro& the e'perience of daily life and, (ithin oth the cultural and theoretical conte'ts in
(hich he &oved and operated, developed an elaorate, sophisticated theory of natural
&otion. 6athe&ati=ation 4%eo&etri=ation5 of these odies &eans that ?alileo, on the other
hand, (as dealin% (ith ideal shapes 4circles or spheres, strai%ht lines or level planes, etc.5
Stated differently, these odies are dealt (ith purely in their )uantitative aspect, and it is
sufficient to consider the& as such.
0he core of the deate et(een the t(o, ?alilean and *ristotle, physics re&ained the
difference in accounts of Kodies in &otion.K
*ccordin%ly, for ?alileo, there (as nothin% on the order of Knatural placesK< recall it is this
assu&ption, to%ether (ith that of the Earth as the stationary center of the universe, (hich
&ade *ristotle.s account of the free fall of odies so intuitively ovious< ?alileoIs (orld, the
(orld of science, e%ins (ith theoretical pro1ection of a centerless, i.e., nonEarth9centered,
perhaps infinite, or, preferaly, oundless universe. While various for&ations (ithin that
universe &ay e'hiit sy&&etry, (ithout a center and li&itation there can e no natural place
to (hich odies tend to(ard and (here they rest< Its presentation too e%ins (ith a
theoretical pro1ection, 8edan!enexperi$ent or thou%ht e'peri&ent. 4Who, pray tell, has ever
seen or (itnessed a frictionless ody &ovin% in a strai%ht line endlessly25 >nly those (ith the
crudest notions of the role of theory in hu&an e'istence thin" other(ise. *t any rate, everyone
in daily life is a %ood *ristotelian, "no(in% that this ody (ill %radually slo(do(n eventually
co&in% to a full stop< If ideal shapes &ovin%, as it (ere, in %eo&etrical space are not real
odies &ovin% in real space, ?alileo, to the contrary, too" &athe&ati=ed shapes as real
instances of odies+ ;or hi&, odies could accordin%ly e indifferent not only to place ut also
1
Rnder the headin% of ,Capitalist 0echnolo%y and 0echnolo%ies of Capital,/ see the discussion of ,de9or%ani=ation/ in
the Postscript, elo(.
to one another+ In principle, they are, %iven si&ilar &asses, interchan%eale. ;or hi&, these
odies tend to(ard perpetual &otion, and, under ideal conditions 4conditions that ?alileo
considered real5, odies (ill re%ardless of (ei%ht 4(hether roc" or feather5 &ove the sa&e
distance in the sa&e period of ti&e. But, to e sure, eternal, strai%ht9line &otion is an ideal
condition+ It is in principle un(itnessale and unverifialeE it occurs in an i&a%inary, e&pty
4vacuous5 and oundless spaceE and, it is a product of this i&a%inary e'peri&ent<
It is enou%h to have stated these differences to %rasp that, &aterially 4that is, as re%ards
contents5 and lo%ically, the t(o theories in )uestion are not co&parale. Even &ore roadly
and in point of fact, late si'teenth century i&petus theory (ith its )uasi9*ristotelian
cos&olo%ical assu&ptions, ?alilean physics (ith its Copernican &etaphysics and 3e(tonian
celestial &echanics all account for the pheno&enon of daily life, say a pro1ectile, the &otion of
a thro(n stone after it has left the hand, and do so (ith si&ilar facility and consistency. >f
course, that consistency is internal, i.e., refers us to the relation of the ter&s of the description
of such pheno&ena to their asic theoretical assu&ptions. 0o oot, the latter are not reducile
one to another, for e'a&ple, ?alilean physics cannot e e'plained as an instance of
3e(tonian &echanics, and the concepts (hich as propositions for& the asic assu&ptions of
one theory cannot e coherently inte%rated into another, say, i&petus theory into 3e(ton.s
&echanics,
1
or, in our lan%ua%e, the theories are inco&&ensurate.
0hus, not only (ere &oth theories< that of ?alileo and the Peripatetic elaoration of
*ristotle< in the e'peri&ental sense coeval 4that is, oth could in the sa&e &easure &a"e
predictions (ithin the sa&e &ar%in of error5,
2
ut (ithin the fra&e(or" of daily culture of the
old order European and aove all 6editerranean (orlds 4i.e., e'clusive of the &erchant,
an"in%, %reat artisan layers of the risin% class situated lar%ely alon% the coastal ed%es of
these social for&ations5, *ristotelian assu&ptions (ith re%ard to natural pheno&ena
constituted prosaic ,co&&on sense./
D
>n this asis alone, ?alileo.s &echanics should never
have een scientifically estalished, &uch less triu&phed. Why, then, did it2
?alileo (as a(are of this situation, (hether his audience (as or not. * &aster stylist, in his
&a1or (or"s he parodied *ristotle and the Peripatetics (ith an intelli%ent yet foolishly
1
See Paul ;eyeraend, ,E'planation, Reduction and E&piricis&,/ #O9O2E and the sa&e author.s Realis$, Rationalis$
and Scientific Method, O29OG, for a discussion of inco&&ensuraility (ith reference to 3e(ton &echanics and 1O
th
century i&petus theory.
Si&ilarly, :uhe& states that ,it is i&possile to estalish any relationship et(een the first principles of this dyna&ics
and the essential a'io&s of 3e(tonian dyna&ics,/ Medieval Cos$olog%, DG#. 0he unidentified dyna&ics refers to that
of the tradition as he, and others (ho (rite strictly intellectual histories, reconstituted it, runnin% fro& the ancient
co&&entators on *ristotle, throu%h their latter *ra counterparts, In Ba11a, In Rushd 4*verroes5, to the Scholastics
and even to 1#
th
century Parisian no&inalists.
* )uite different 4thou%h analo%ous5 situation developed in nineteenth century physics. 6eyerson descried the
dile&&a that arose in e'peri&ental verification of the principle of the conservation of ener%y. In deter&inin% the
)uantity of heat re)uired to increase the te&perature of a pound of (ater y 1_ ;, 8oule.s data (ere not only (ildly at
variance (ith those of Sadi Carnot and 8.R. 6ayer, ut (ith the&selves. 6eyerson concluded, ,it eco&es really
difficult to suppose that a conscientious scientist, relyin% solely on e'peri&ental data, could have een ale to arrive
at the conclusion that the e)uivalent &ust constitute, under all conditions, an invariale datu&./ ,dentit% and Realit%,
17#917C.
6eyerson understood the prole& of the character of ener%y 4its tendency to dissipate itself5 in ter&s of the
necessary lin"a%e of the specific conditions of the e'peri&ent to the principle 4,la(/5 for&ulated 4,&id, 17C917O5.
?ranted. ;urther, if, as (e hold, specific theoretical ele&ents enter to the construction of an e'peri&ent, (e &ay also
have to reach ac" and e'a&ine that relation.
2
;eyeraend, Realis$, Rationalis$ and Scientific Method, C79O0, 2GC n.OO, D1F9D22. ;or e'a&ple, Ptole&y %ave the
&a'i&u& distance of the Earth to the sun as 1210 terrestrial 4i.e., Earth5 radiiE Copernicus %ave it as 11G7E and
?alileo %ave it as 120F. Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s, Still&an :ra"eIs notes to the te't, #FG
4n. DC75. *ll distance vastly underesti&ated y a factor of rou%hly 17 the distance as &easured today. ,&id, #F2 4n.
2CD5. See also ,&id, 27#9D0G 4third day5 and, in particular, :ra"e.s re&ar"s on this discussion, ,&id, #F# 4n. 27G5, #FC
4n. D025.
D
;eyeraend, ,&id, D1F9D22.
&is%uided spea"er (ho defended the Peripatetic perspective. ;a&iliar (ith oth intellectual
perspectives, in all li"elihood ?alileo reco%ni=ed there could e no outri%ht theoretical victory
over *ristotle, or the *ristotle as understood y the Peripatetics. -et, it is 1ust as li"ely that he
reco%ni=ed the (orld fa&iliar to conte&porary *ristotelians (as not the (orld his audience
lived and acted in< 0he lo%ical and content9ased inco&&ensuraility of the t(o theories
proaly escaped this audience, ne( &iddlin% %roups on the Italian Peninsula and eyond,
the faled ,risin%/ our%eoisie<
1
;or his audience.s standpoint, the intellectual content of
?alileoIs ar%u&ent, (e su%%est, si&ultaneously appeared theoretical and social+ ?alileoIs
critical destruction of *ristotelian physics (ould have also een ta"en, even first and fore&ost
ta"en, as an ele&ent in an attac" on a he%e&onic ut declinin% culture of the old order, in
particular on the Church, its concerns, e'pectations, de&ands all of (hich i&pin%ed on
an"in%, &erchant and artisan9eco&in%9industrialist practices 4re%ardin%, e.%., usury,
)uestions of the treat&ent of the poor, the e'ploitation of laor5. *nd, thus, for this reason
4one that has other(ise &ystified certain scholars5 ?alileo (rote in the vernacular.
2
In the conte't of an account of &otion con%ruent (ith the co&&erce9 and (or"9ased
concerns of the e&er%in% active our%eois ele&ents in the societies of Europe, the asence,
or, rather the successful eli&ination, of for&s and final causes, oli)uely i&plyin% the
devaluation of the &oral order of the (orld the Peripatetics (ere rooted in, lar%ely constituted
the sustance of ?alileoIs victory over *ristotle.
1
Still&an :ra"e 4Discoveries and 1pinions of 8alileo, 25 &a"es the sa&e point less the class specificity.
2
Confir&ed in a ne%ative (ay y Charles Sch&itt, (ho (rote in a re&ar" cited aove that @atin (as the ,international/
lan%ua%e of the ,scientific co&&unity./
Conclusion, ,,
Oualit%, Measure$ent, Ouantit%
0he &odern science of nature did not sprin% fro& the head of ?alileo, fully elaorated. * lon%
develop&ent postdated hi&, in its &athe&atical aspects receivin% novel treat&ent (ell do(n
into the &iddle of the nineteenth century and eyond.
;or ?alileo, to &athe&ati=e nature &eant to &erely ,%eo&etrici=e/ it, to conceive and
understand its underlyin% intelli%iility in ter&s of ideal perfect shapes, trian%les, strai%ht lines,
spheres, etc., (hich, e'istin% only in areal Euclidean space, he too" to e ,really real./
6ethodolo%ically in ?alileo (e do not, further&ore, find an orientation to(ard prediction,
(hich, in turn, yields a separate and distinctive, fetishi=ed ,practice/ of ,testin%./
0his orientation (as not a &atter of (hi& or caprice. It did not e&er%e in ?alileo ecause it
could not+ Effectively for hi&, and for the entire develop&ent of the &odern science of nature
at its ori%ins (hich too" shape and then crystalli=ed in pole&ical opposition to *ristotelian
natural philosophy, %eo&etrical shapes are $easura&le qualities, (hich are accorded pri&acy
in relation to perceptual ones. In this sin%ular feature, ?alileo did not %o eyond *ristotle or,
&ore preferaly, Peripatetic natural philosophy as it had developed over the past three
)uarters of a century+ $is thou%ht (as tied to it precisely ecause its develop&ent, %enuinely
novel as it (as, (as full% and ala%s in opposition to it<
Perhaps it is characteristic of all rationalist philosophy as such, and surely of the &odern
science of nature, ut ?alileo (as also further tied to *ristotle in funda&entally positin% not
&erely orderliness in nature, ut the &est order,
1
&eanin% nature &a'i&i=es order 4e.%.,
sy&&etry5 and, eyond *ristotle 4or follo(in% >c"ha&5, econo&y<
0hus, a funda&ental shift has yet to occur, and it (ould only occur (hen these &easurale
)ualities (ere reduced to quantities 4and not 1ust to )uantitative )ualities5, (hich, in turn, has
allo(ed for nu&erically deter&ined predictions validated y e'peri&entation no( understood
as testin%. In this re%ard, ?alileo did not, in other (ords, atte&pt an ,arith&eti=ation/ of
%eo&etry 4for (hich nature has the &eanin% of &ere spatio9te&poral &a%nitudes5. 0hus, his
&athe&ati=ed nature had not under%one a decisive transfor&ation for (hich it, nature, has
the sense of functional relations holdin% et(een pure nu&erical confi%urations.
2
0his (as the li&itation of the ?alilean science of nature. In our vie(, the first and decisive step
in its re&ediali=ation (as underta"en y @eini= and 3e(ton in their respective, independent
creations of an inte%ral calculus, for, ecause the calculus can provide us (ith rates of chan%e
of a %iven )uantity 4fi%ure the slope of a curve at a %iven point, calculate the area ounded y
a curve, per&it us to co&pute &ini&al and &a'i&al values of functions, etc.5, it (as here fro&
this point for(ard that &otion could e understood (ithout reference to )ualitative
deter&inants, strictly in ter&s of nu&er.
>nce a start on arith&eti=ation is &ade, the road to a technification of &ethod, so to spea",
an on%oin% i&prove&ent centered upon elaoration of for&ali=in% aspects in the develop&ent
of la(s, of la(ful for&ulae, can e and (as underta"en, (ithout re%ard to initial content 4i.e.,
)uantified deter&inants the&selves eco&e content5. It is in this technification that the ori%ins
of those pheno&ena, the )ualitative features and characteristics of odies as they are
perceptually e'perienced, are co&pletely lost si%ht of+ 0hose ori%ins are for%otten or, avoidin%
all su1ectivi=in%, &ethodolo%ically concealed, then oliterated. I.e., e%innin% fro& the
pheno&enal distinction et(een pri&ary and secondary )ualities, the separation of )uantity
fro& )uality is, auto&atically if you (ill, transposed into a doctrine 4&etaphysical in the
1
0he ,inte%ral parts of the (orld Hare assu&edJ to e disposed in the est order./ Dialogue Concerning the To Chief
"orld S%ste$s, ## 4first day5, #OE 11C 4second day5, 2#2.
2
Ed&und $usserl, The Crisis of 2uropean Science, #D9#F, esp. ##.
scientific sense, to e sure5 that rests on the radical, ontolo%ical distinction et(een reality
and illusion. 0he specific conte&porary for& of this doctrine is (hat (e call physicalis&.
1
;or it is only (hen a purely )uantitative deter&ination of natural pheno&ena eca&e possile,
that state&ents aout these pheno&ena, first, can ta"e the for& of %eneral propositions aout
functional dependencies otainin% et(een &easured )uantities, and then, e for&ulated as
la(s concernin% these functional dependencies, la(s that are in the strict sense nu&erically
e'pressed, la(s that %ive rise to predictions (hich are, in turn, su1ect to e'peri&ental testin%.
Eventually, on this asis nature can (ithout further reflection si&ply e assu&ed to have the
&eanin% of spatio9te&poral &a%nitudes.
2
*t this &o&ent 4and every step alon% the (ay as
aspects of &ove&ent that rises to this &o&ent5, the elaoration of scientific &ethod in and
throu%h (hich sensuous surroundin% 4earthly5 nature and the totality 4of nature5 in (hich it and
(e are e&edded, re1oins the ori%inal pro1ection of nature as a &athe&atical (orld9in9itself, a
purely )uantitative asse&la%e of odies in &otion, (hich has its everyday co&&on sense
counterpart in the i&&ediate intuition of nature as a ra( &aterial asins for capitalist
production, a point that in the history of the develop&ent of capitalis& (e identify (ith the real
do&ination of capital over in production.
D
;ro& this &o&ent for(ard, the &odern science of
nature is strictly deter&ined in the &ethodolo%ical sense. :iscussion of this develop&ent (ill
have to (ait until our ;ourth Study.
1
See the ;ourth Study, Part III, ,0he 6aterialist :ialectic./
2
$usserl, ,&id, #C.
D
See the Second Interlude, ,Real :o&ination,/ elo(.
Note*
1&servation, 2xperience and 2xperi$ent in 8alileo
*le'ander LoyrU (rote, ,0he only role in the irth of classical physics played y oservation,
in the sense of si$ple oservation, the oservation of co&&on sense, (as that of an
ostacle./
1
-es, in ?alileo, o&servation is not perception, that is, it is not i$$ediate experience in its
sensi&le 0sensuous5 for$+ ;or hi&, it is nonetheless a for& of e'perience, ut co&ple'ly
&ediated.
In a passa%e already cited aove, LoyrU also stated, ,*s for e'peri&entation N the &ethodical
interro%ation of nature N it presupposes oth the lan%ua%e in (hich its )uestions are to e
posed and a ter&inolo%y (hich &a"es it possile to interpret nature.s replies./
2
While this tacitly e%s the )uestion of 1ust ho( ,lan%ua%e/ and ,a ter&inolo%y,/ i.e., concepts
and their syntheses as theories, originate, settin% aside this )uestion, indeed, this too is so.
But if oservation is not perception, then, in 8alileo, neither is it Nexperi$ent> as e
understand the ter$, i.e., it is not one in (hich ,investi%ation/ entails a carefully desi%ned,
theoretically prepared artificial situation that, in testin% a prediction, presents us (ith results
that ,validate/ or ,falsify/ a hypothesis, la(, theory, (hatever, fro& (hich the prediction had
een derived.
$o(ever, LoyrU.s readin% of ?alileo, as a 4latonist pure and si$ple, is si&ply (ron%headed
4perhaps an atte&pt to assi&ilate hi& to the e'alted science of his o(n day, e.%., relativity
physics, and distin%uish hi& fro& its, one %ets the sense, astardi=ations in the *n%lo9
*&erican (orld, the practice of (hich has al(ays een tacitly and today has openly eco&e
synony&ous (ith science as such5. *nd (hile it is ,correct/ to say that in ?alileo, ,0he
e'peri&ent supports or (ea"ens an ar%u&ent. It does not replace it,/
D
it is si&ply &ista"en to
state, ,0he Te'peri&ents. (hich ?alileo, and others after hi&, appealed to, even those (hich
he did actually perfor&, (ere not and could never e anythin% &ore than thou%ht
e'peri&ents,/
#
and not 1ust ecause to actuall% perfor& an e'peri&ent, to sensuously en%a%e
oneself in a odily actin% that involves the deploy&ent of instru&ents, is to %o eyond
1
8alileo Studies, 2. E&phasis in ori%inal.
2
,&id+
D
LoyrU, ,&id, 77.
#
,&id, DG.
Si&ilarly, E&ile 6eyerson+
,But does not the very &anner in (hich ?alileo presents the facts sho( clearly that it is a )uestion of e'peri&ents that
are not real, ut &erely Ti&a%ined. ones, (hat the ?er&ans call Tthou%ht9e'peri&ents. 48edan!enexperi$ente52 It
(as in his i&a%ination that ?alileo set up his infinitely s&ooth plane, and there he inclines it less and less, so&eti&es
in one direction, so&eti&es in the otherE this is (hy he does not dee& it necessary to %ive a sin%le precise datu&, a
sin%le fi%ure resultin% fro& these e'peri&ents. 6oreover, ?alileo hi&self ta"es care to (arn us of this. 0he passa%e
fro& the Sixth Da% HsicJ? is only the develop&ent of another passa%e, proaly of old ori%in, (hich is in the )ourth
Da%+ 0his e%ins (ith the (ords+ T*ny &ovin% ody pro1ected upon a hori=ontal plane , conceive of &% Thought
0$ente concipio5 as isolated fro& every hindrance<I
,What is the real foundation of ?alileo.s de&onstration2 >n the hori=ontal plane &otion is unifor&, for there e'ists no
cause of acceleration or of retardation< It &ust, &oreover, e re&ar"ed that every de%ree of velocity (hich is found
in a &ovin% o1ect is, y its very nature, i&pressed upon it in an indelile fashion (hen one re&oves the e'ternal
causes of acceleration or of retardation, as ta"es place in a hori=ontal plane alone< It follo(s e)ually that &otion on
a hori=ontal plane is eternal.
,H$e, li"eJ :escartesH,J al(ays presents inertia as a pure deduction< scarcely &entionHin%J real circu&stance./
,dentit% and Realit%, 1#D91##.
;inally, (e can cite Einstein (ho, in assertin% the lo%ical i&possiility of ,astractin%/ ,funda&ental concepts and
postulates/ fro& e'perience, touched on the prole& of inco&&ensuraility in this (ay+ It ,is perfectly evident fro&
the fact that (e can point to t(o essentially different principles, oth of (hich correspond (ith e'perience to a lar%e
e'tent,/ provin% ,at the sa&e ti&e that every atte&pt at a lo%ical deduction of the asic concepts and postulates of
&echanics fro& ele&entary e'periences is doo&ed to failure/ 42ssa%s on Science, 1O, 1G5.
,&erely/ thin"in% 4i.e., i$agining5, ut it is fail utterly and &iseraly to %rasp the role and
si%nificance of the activity of e'peri&entation in ?alileo+ $e did invo"e ,e'peri&ents/
4includin% those (ith ,real odies/5 as (ell as o&servational e'perience in his atte&pted
,refutation/ of *ristotle or the Peripatetics as the case &ay have eenE it is 1ust that he cited,
invo"ed or rested his case on ,e'peri&ent/ onl% as a concluding $o$ent in a de$onstration,
one that renders it, the de$onstration, intuitivel% self-evident.
LoyrU provo"ed indi%nation fro& those that ar%ue for the centrality of e'peri&entalis& 4if not
e&piricis&, then esche(in% any &athe&atical ,Platonis&/5 in ?alileo, and tacitly in the
&odern science of nature 4Rossi, :ra"e5,
1
those for (ho& ?alileo ,fused/ an ,e&pirical
&echanics and the science of &otion< into a solid (hole of theoretical "no(led%e,/
2
and (ho
reco%ni=e, for ,science, a fact is only that (hich is arrived at on the asis of precise criteria of
a theoretical character./
D
So (hat does an e'peri&ent, not &erely a thou%ht e'peri&ent, in ?alileo.s sense loo" li"e2
In the Dialogue, to(ard the end of the first day, Salviati proposes and underta"es e'peri&ents
ai&ed at de&onstratin% to Si&plicio that the &oon is not a sphere possessin% a polished
surface, ut has the sa&e, roadly spea"in%, rou%h surface as the Earth 4i.e., the one, a
celestial ody, is ho&o%eneous (ith the other, a terrestrial ody5. 0here are t(o e'peri&ents,
each concernin% reflected 4sun5 li%ht. 0hey involve &irrors and (alls,
#
and a 4folded5 piece of
paper. Consider oth, especially the latter.
*r%uin% the Peripatetic position, Si&plicio elieves that a polished and s&ooth surfaced ody
reflects li%ht far &ore than a rou%h surfaced ody (ith irre%ular features. 0his is an inference
fro& the vie( that celestial odies are )ualitatively dissi&ilar to the Earth+ 0hey are i&&utale
and unalterale, hence are nole and perfectE and as perfect, spherical and s&ooth, they
&ust also e )ualitatively ri%hter 4i.e., reflect far &ore li%ht5.
0he discussion and 4first5 e'peri&ent (ith &irrors and their reflected li%ht as it appears on a
courtyard (all and an interior (all estalishes that a &irror reflects li%ht rilliantly 4&ore
vividly5, ut it concentrates that li%ht, (hereas a rou%h 4and &oreover dar" surface5 defuses it
so that the reflected li%ht appears to illu&inate a &uch %reater surface area.
C
It defuses li%ht
ecause ,the surface of the rou%h (all is co&posed of countless very s&all surfaces placed in
an innu&erale diversity of slopes, a&on% (hich of necessity &any happen to e arran%ed so
as to send rays they reflect to one place, and &any others to another,/ thus this dispersal
creates the diffusion over the entire surface on (hich the li%ht 4sun.s5 rays fall.
O
0he reflection of the sun.s li%ht on a rou%h surfaced (all analo%ously e'hiits (hy the &oon
does not possess, li"e the Earth, a polished, s&ooth surface such as that of a &irror. Salviati
su&&aries, ,the sa&e ody on (hich the illu&inatin% rays fall sho(s itself li%hted and ri%ht
1
0his state&ent is preceded y the follo(in%, ,*n *rchi&edean physics &eans a deductive and Tastract.
&athe&atical physicsE and it (as 1ust such a physics that ?alileo (as to develop at Padua. * physics of &athe&atical
hypothesesE a physics in (hich the la(s of &otion, the la( of the fall of odies, are deduced Tastractly,. (ithout
involvin% the idea of force, ithout recourse to experi$ents ith real &odies/ 4e&phasis added.5
*nd else(here 4,&id, 7G5 LoyrU asserts, ,it is scarcely necessary to say that, as is al&ost al(ays the case (ith
?alileo, it is a &atter of a thou%ht e'peri&ent</
:ra"e states ?alileo tau%ht his students (hat ,later eca&e to e "no(n as Te'peri&ental philosophy.. It (as not
apprecialy different fro& (hat (e call scientific &ethod,/ and then in a footnote offers the follo(in% %loss+ ,6odern
scientific &ethod is characteri=ed y an inseparale lin"a%e of theory to e'peri&ent, in such a (ay that no theory &ay
properly e called scientific unless it i&plies e'peri&ents or oservations capale of supportin% or destroyin% it</
Introduction to his selections fro& The 7ssa%er in Discoveries and 1pinions of 8alileo, 22O. 0his too is a vie( that
cannot e sustained, as LoyrU states and as (e shall sho(.
2
Paolo Rossi, 4hilosoph%, Technolog% and the 7rts in the 2arl% Modern 2ra, 112.
D
,&id, 11#. E&phasis in ori%inal.
#
Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s 4first day5, G19GG.
C
,&id, G#, GO9GG.
O
,&id, GG.
all over (hen loo"ed at fro& any place. 0herefore the &oon, y ein% a rou%h surface rather
than s&ooth, sends the sun.s li%ht in all directions, and loo"s e)ually li%ht to all oservers. If
the surface, ein% spherical, (ere as s&ooth as a &irror, it (ould e entirely invisile, seein%
that that very s&all part of it (hich can reflect the i&a%e of the sun to the eyes of any
individual (ould re&ain invisile ecause of the %reat distance</
1
Sa%redo )ueries (hy the ,%reater irre%ularity of the surface &a"es the reflection of the li%ht
&ore po(erful/ 4re&e&er ?alileo in the person of Salviati has 1ust stated that it is etter
understood as &ore diffuse5. Salviati responds that, assu&in% the sa&e source of li%ht, a
surface is &ore or less illu&inated dependin% on (hether ,rays of li%ht fall upon it less or &ore
oli)uely,/ the %reatest illu&ination occurrin% (here the rays are perpendicular to the surface.
$e offers to sho( Sa%redo 1ust ho(< and this is the second e'peri&ent< y ta"in% a sheet
of paper and foldin% it, ,so that one part &a"es an an%le (ith other,/ and then e'posin% ,it to
the li%ht reflected fro& the (all opposite to us/ 4(hich is reflectin% sunli%ht5. $e co&&ents,
,you see ho( this part that receives the rays oli)uely is less li%ht than this other (here the
rays fall at ri%ht an%les./ 0hen, tiltin% the folded piece of paper, he notes, ,the illu&ination
eco&es (ea"er as I &a"e it receive the& Hthe rays of li%htJ &ore and &ore oli)uely./
2
0ypical of ?alileo.s e'peri&ents (ith ,real odies/ 4here the piece of paper5, this is )uite
si&ple, and easily reproducile. >ne can, in fact, do it oneself (ith, of course, the sa&e
results
D
4and, of course, in the &odern science of nature this reproduciility ad infinitu$ is
essentially characteristic of the pulicly accessile character of science5.
?alileo.s e'peri&ents< those conducted (ith ,real odies/< do not entail the &eticulous
construction of a situation that does not e'ist in nature 4rather they involve o1ects that are
present in the (orld of daily practice, o1ects that are ready to hand5E
#
they do not produce
novel conditions 4ut instead atte&pt to &erely reproduce e'istin% natural conditions5E and
they are not underta"en to test a prediction in order to ,validate/ a theory or hypothesis (hich,
in turn, is %overned y the ai& of nature do&ination 4(hether it is socially for&ed hu&an
nature, ani&al nature, aiotic nature, their interstices or the syste& of their interrelations5. $is
e'peri&ents are of a different order. 0hey (ere underta"en in order to illustrativel% facilitate
understanding there&% concluding a de$onstration &% &ringing a&out intuitive clarit%+ In this
respect, ?alileo, entirely un9&odern and anticipatin% nothin% of the future traditions of
e'peri&ental philosophy (ith its desi%ns of &anipulatin% natural pheno&ena, preserves a
re&nant patri&ony of Italian hu&anis&.
LoyrU is ideationally lind to this, the distinctive sense of e'peri&ent in ?alileo ecause he is
pole&ically co&&itted to one of the older for&s of false consciousness a&on% the historical
%enerations of our%eois intellectuals, that is, to a history of ideas that unfolds independently
of social develop&ent, for (hich science is a co%nitive product, a profound insi%ht into the
structure of the 4naturally5 real, and (hich, of course, per&its hi& to sever< in thou%ht< all
ties of science to ,society,/ i.e., the our%eoisie and capital.
LoyrU is &issin% a "ey co&ponent of ?alileo.s science, e'peri&ent in a practical sense that<
to%ether (ith oservation, and reflection or theori=ation< for&s a unitary structure that is his
1
,&id, GF.
2
,&id+
D
See also, ,&id, FD, (here Salviati, foldin% it another (ay, uses the sa&e piece of paper in order e'a&ine another
aspect of oli)uity in illu&inatin% a surface.
#
0he est e'a&ples 4reference to (hich (ill recur in this (or"5 that point up this artificially constructed situation co&e
fro& iolo%ical sciences &odeled on the &odern science of nature and not fro& physicsE for e'a&ple, an octopus
(ith its %an%lia detached or a decererate cat< anato&ical and physiolo%ical conditions that are not found in
nature< utchered in order to construct a refle' physiolo%y 4i.e., a science of social control of hu&an ein%s and
ani&al nature understood as syste&s of internal causal relations5< or fruit flies &assed in a %lass 1ar to deter&ine a
rate of reproduction isolated fro& those actual conditions such as predation, seasonal chan%es, etc., under (hich
species reproduction is achieved.
science. 0his is a %ross &isunderstandin% and lindness, (hich can e traced ac" to a
&isapprehension of the character of "no(led%e itself and ho( it is produced. ?alileo hi&self
provided us (ith the asis for understandin% this &isapprehension in the follo(in% &anner+
In reference to *ristotle and re&ar"in% on Si&plicio.s distinction et(een ar%u&ents a priori
and a posteriori, Salviati states, ,What you refer to is the &ethod he uses in (ritin% his
doctrine, ut I do not elieve it to e that (ith (hich he investi%ated it. Rather, I thin" it certain
that he first otained it y &eans of the senses, e'peri&ents, and oservations, to assure
hi&self as &uch as possile of his conclusions. *fter(ard he sou%ht &eans to &a"e the&
de&onstrale./
1
Because as (e have estalished for ?alileo oservation and e'peri&ent
,contain/ theoretical ele&ents, ?alileo< contra LoyrU, 6eyerson, and others< i&plicitly
ar%ues here for a dialectical relation of theory and perception, one for (hich,
episte&olo%ically, "no(led%e includin% scientific "no(led%e at its ori%ins is inseparaly
,deductive/ and ,inductive/ 4or, if you prefer as (e do, neither ,deductive/ nor ,inductive/5.
$o( so2 $o( does he "no( this aout *ristotle2 $e "no(s it ecause, it is also his $ethod,
&ut not 9ust his $ethod, &ut? starting fro$ the distinction &eteen the logic of investigation
and that of presentation? in its for$al aspect the $ethod of thought itself. 0hus, those li"e
LoyrU (ho insist that ?alileo is a Platonist onl% %rasp the end product< 0he Dialogue ,is not
in fact a oo" aout astrono&y, nor even aout physics. It is aove all a criti)ue, a pole&ical
and co&ative< didactic< and philosophical,/
2
ut it ,is only a se&i9scientific (or"./
D
< $ere
science appears only in its o1ectified, finali=ed for&, as the contents of the presentation< so
that in ?alileo it only appears &ost fully developed in the Discourses and De$onstrations
4(hich ,representHsJ< a very &uch hi%her level of Tastraction,./
#
i.e., for&ali=ation5. >nly on
the asis of a narro(, onesided analysis that &erely understands thou%ht in ter&s of its
o1ectified products can LoyrU 4and others5 clai&, sort of a our%eois refle', that this is
?alileo.s science tout court.
C
1
,&id, C1.
2
LoyrU, ,&id, 1CF.
D
,&id, 7G.
#
,&id, 17G.
C
0heoretically elaorated on the asis of other insi%hts or &erely tacit assu&ptions that have een &ade e'plicit as
the case &ay e, the issue further devolves on to the theori=ation of the real that underlies the &anner of
presentation. While LoyrU ar%ues that it is ,the astract space of Euclidean %eo&etry/ 4&a"in% ,the invention of the
la( of inertia possile/5 (hich ?alileo, counterposes to, ,sustitutes/ ,for the concrete space of pre9?alilean physics/
4(hich itself rests on the assu&ption of reality as a Cos&os5, it is a )uestion of the ori%ins of this theori=ation. ;or
LoyrU, concepts, theories the&selves, are handed do(n, re(or"ed, ne( insi%hts are occasionally %enerated, all as
part of an intellectual tradition+ 0hus, the )uestion of ori%ins is &erely pushed ac" ut never resolved. LoyrU cannot
pose the )uestion of the ori%ins of ideational contents, concepts or thou%ht itself. 0hey re&ain un%rounded. 0he
(hole issue is discussed fro& another standpoint elo(, see the ;ourth Study, Part III, ,0he 6aterialist :ialectic/ and
,0heory of 0ruth./
Note'
8alileo and the Gesuits: 7to$is$ and the 2ucharist Controvers%
6affeo Barerini (as not &erely ?alileo.s patron. 0here (as an ele&ent of friendship involved
in their relation. ;or e'a&ple, in 1O12, at that &o&ent in (hich the deate et(een ?alileo
and Colo&e concernin% odies floatin% on (ater (as still on%oin% 4verally, not in (ritin%5
and open, in pulic 4i.e., efore Cosi&o intervened5, in at least one settin% representatives of
the t(o sides too" up positions in a for&ali=ed deate. 6affeo Barerini defended the ?alilean
position and acted as interlocutor of his Colo&e representin% opponent. Barerini (as a
cardinal at the ti&e. *s pope he enor&ously elevated ?alileo+ In everythin% ut a position and
sinecure, ?alileo (as not only the ovious favorite a&on% the literati and innovators of Ro&e
ut the official scientist sanctioned fro& the very pinnacle of the Church.
1
Barerini (as a hi%hly refined, even secular, aesthete, ut (ith a vie( to his politics ithin the
Curia, he (as asent the sa&e level of insi%ht, 1ud%&ent and savvy. Perhaps he i%nored, or
&erely (as not attuned, to the sutle niceties of Eucharist controversy, ut the later as
doctrine and do%&a (as one of the hin%es, the theolo%ical9theoretical one, on (hich the
loody political, reli%ious and territorial stru%%le called the 0hirty -ears War in its various
phases hun%. In the end, he (ould discover that he could not pursue a lierali=in% policy
a%ainst the resistance &ounted y the earers of a traditional, no( ossified Scholastic culture
and at the sa&e ti&e hold onto Church Po(er in the face of (inds of reli%ious, political and
econo&ic chan%e<
In The 7ssa%er, ?alileo, in discussin% (hat he clai&ed (as the illusorily lu&inous nature of
co&ets, s"etched the contours of an ato&istic theory of heat and &otion 4as (ell as hintin% at
the rudi&ents of a corpuscular theory of li%ht5. 0here is a len%thy passa%e in particular parts of
(hich re)uire citation and detailed e'a&ination+
<I &ust consider (hat it is that (e call heat, as I suspect that people in %eneral< elieve that
heat is a real pheno&enon, or property, or )uality, (hich actually resides in the &aterial y
(hich (e feel ourselves (ar&ed. 3o( I say that (henever I conceive any &aterial or corporeal
sustance, I i&&ediately feel the need to thin" of it as ounded, and as havin% this or that
shapeE as ein% lar%e or s&all in relation to other thin%s, and in so&e specific place at any
%iven ti&eE as ein% in &otion or at restE as touchin% or not touchin% so&e other odyE and as
ein% one in nu&er, or fe( or &any. ;ro& these conditions I cannot separate such a
sustance y any stretch of &y i$agination+ But that it &ust e (hite or red, itter or s(eet,
noisy or silent, and of s(eet or foul odor, &y &ind does not feel co&pelled to rin% in as
necessary acco&pani&ents. Without the sense as our %uides, reason or i$agination unaided
(ould proaly never arrive at )ualities li"e these. $ence I thin" that tastes, odors, colors, and
so on are no &ore than &ere na&es so far as the o1ect in (hich (e place the& is concerned,
and that they reside only in the consciousness. $ence if the livin% creature (ere re&oved, all
these )ualities (ould e (iped a(ay and annihilated.
2
Recall our ar%u&ent aove.
D
Episte&olo%ically, in ?alileo and in science one does not start
fro& 4in the sense of (hat is perceptually %iven5 ut arrives at odies 4in &otion5, i.e.,
constitutes the& as such, y i&a%inatively pro1ectin% the&. $avin% done so one proceeds (ith
oservation and description ut onl% on the &asis of a distinction et(een pri&ary and
secondary )ualities. 40his distinction is prior to all oservation. 3ote the te'tual e&phases, as
?alileo hi&self indicates his ar%u&ent is i$aginativel% and conceptuall% constructed, it does
not start fro& e'perience, fro& e'peri&ents or oservations in the non9scientific sense+5
0hese distinctions< et(een ein% ounded, havin% si=e and shape, relationally situated
1
Redondi, ,&id, 2F, 17D, 2#D, 2CF.
2
The 7ssa%er, 2G#. E&phases added.
D
See the Introduction, ,Ele&ents of the Conceptual Structure of Science./
a&on% other odies, and as self9sa&e 4distinct fro& other odies5, that is, as quantitativel%
deter$ined extension su&sisting in o&9ective space and ti$e to one side, and color, taste,
audiility and odor, that are qualitative features to the other side< )uantity and )uality, have,
in the &ore radical sense as it is present in ?alileo and lar%ely in science, ontolo%ically
different statuses, that of reality and illusion. 4While ,people in %eneral< elieve/ heat is a
,real pheno&enon,/ ?alileo does not.5 $e says, ,that tastes, odors, colors, and so on are no
&ore than &ere na&es./ 0hey are as (e say today &erely ,su1ective,/ or, as he says, ,they
reside only in the consciousness/ or, in other (ords, they are o1ectively illusory or have no
reality or o1ectivity other than ,in/ a(areness.
0here are three points to e &ade here. ;irst, that aspect of this perspective (hich refers to
the status of )ualities as ,&ere na&es/ derived fro& a tradition that can e traced ac" to
Willia& of >c"ha&
1
4actually &uch further ac", a century, to the Scholastic Roscelin, ut
>c"ha& presented its &ost forceful for&ulation and defense a%ainst the ac"%round of the
initial political develop&ent of the ,>ne/ in early uran Europe, sort of a principled asis for a
rarefied co%nitive opposition to that develop&ent, at the $o$ent of the rise of nascent state
centralis& over the corpse of oli%archical repulicanis& or chronolo%ically in the early
fourteenth century, >c"ha& hi&self ein% a political refu%ee fro& Church tyranny5.
2
0his is
no&inalis&, and it had a direct earin% on his o(n prole&, and ?alileo.s, to the e'tent that
his 8esuit opponents (ere all acutely a(are of the heretical 4a&on% others, the tri9theistic5
i&plications of no&inalist doctrine 4to%ether (ith >c"ha&Is e'co&&unication, and his fli%ht to
6Anchen (here he sou%ht and found political asylu&5. In adoptin% a no&inalist strate%y,
?alileo (as invitin% censure, (al"in% do(n a (ell9trodden path that in the past found the
Church (renchin%ly divided and its intellectuals su1ect to proscription, arrest or e'ile, and
rarely e'ecution. Second, the construction of odies as )uantitative, as fully and e'clusively
4in the sense of essentially5 deter&ined y e'tension, si%nified, once a%ain as (e ar%ued
aove, the eli&ination of sensuous 4and e&otive and valuative5 characteristics of o1ects. In
principle, it per&its those odies to e su1ect to &athe&atical treat&ent, (hich, in turn, (ill
&a"e prediction, e'peri&ent and validation, the deconstruction and reconstruction 4i.e., the
&anipulation5 of pheno&ena possile, (ill per&it odies solely %rasped e'tensively to for&
the ,sustance/ of nature9eco&in%9reduced to a ra( &aterials asin for capitalist production,
even if the conceptual aspects of this develop&ent (ere not part of ?alileo.s science. 0hird, if
,(hite or red, itter or s(eet, noisy or silent, and< s(eet or foul odor/ are not ,necessary
acco&pani&ents,/ are not o1ective )ualities, are instead features or 4in the lan%ua%e of the
School&en, the Peripatetics and the 8esuits5 ,accidents/ of a ,&aterial or corporeal
sustance,/ then ?alileo had run afoul, at this point un"no(in%ly, of the he%e&onic 4thou%h
not the doctrinal5 account of sensuous )ualities as they pertained to the theolo%ical do%&a of
transustantiation.
0he prevailin%, do&inant interpretation of this relation (as ased on an updated version of
classically *ristotelian9Scholastic &atter9for& analysis of transustantiation. 46ediated, or
,&oderni=ed/ if you (ill on the asis of the (or" of no other than >c"ha& and 8ohn :uns
Scotus, y 8esuits such as ;rancesco Su[re= in li%ht of the do%&a laid do(n y the Council of
0rent durin% ?alileo.s youth.5
D
6atter is )uantitative, e'tension, and consists in the ody of
1
Redondi, ,&id, OD, 21#921C, 21O, 222.
2
Willia& of >c"ha&, orn in Surrey, En%land 4circa 12FC5, (as a ;ranciscan doctor of the Church, teachin% a >'ford
fro& 1D07 into 1D17. 0he &ost for&idale of all opponents of 0ho&as and Scholasticis&, he (as denounced and
persecuted y the *vi%non pontiff 8ohn VVII for his (ritin%s. $eld captive for four years 41D2#91D2F5 under house
arrest in *vi%non, ;rance, he escaped and fled to 6Anchen. 40he dispute (as over the ;ranciscan co&&it&ent to
poverty, (hich >c"ha& defended.5 $e (as e'9co&&unicated. @ivin% in e'ile, he (rote a%ainst the papacy until his
death in 1D#G 4li"ely fro& pla%ue5.
D
,&id, 222922D.
any pheno&enon, here the Eucharist, (hile for&, a )ualitative &o&ent, %ives the
pheno&enon its specific features or properties as (ell as its a%ency 4,for&s/ the &otive for its
activity5. 6atter and for& to%ether constitute sustance. In this &oderni=ed interpretation,
theoretical clarity is %ained y condensin% and concentratin% the Eucharist &ystery in
reducin% it if you (ill to a sin%le &iracle, that &o&ent at (hich the ody is separated fro& its
e'tension.
1
$ere even the 8esuits e&raced >c"ha& for this is >c"ha&ist to the e'tent it
etrays an i&portant principle of theori=in% enunciated y hi&, the efficacy of e'planation lies
in its econo&y 4(hile criticis& developed fro& this principle is co&&only referred to as
application of >c"ha&.s ra=or5+ 0he su&stance of the read, all of it, is transfor&ed into
Christ.s ody, &eanin% oth &atter and for& inclusive of characteristic )ualities. -et, in all
appearances, the read re&ains, or see&s to, unchan%ed. What 0ho&as had affir&ed, and
this (as his innovation, (as that those appearances, accidents or )ualities, sensuous
pheno&ena had in the act of consecration, re&ained. 0his (as, philosophically 4i.e.,
theolo%ically5 spea"in%, the &iraculous event, for (hat (e have in ter&s of a rational
e'planation 4that is, one that undertoo" to syste&atically, discursively and lo%ically e'plicate
and clarify an arational, non9rational and anti9rational ,event/5 is ,accidents (ithout a su1ect/
4sustance5+ *ll the accidents or )ualities, in particular, color, te'ture 4taste5 and odor
persisted, re&ained, 1ust as if the sustance 4the read5 is present and despite its asence.
0his rationalist reli%ious do%&a or, if you prefer, faith (as patently tied to a ,&etaphysics of
&atter,/
2
for (hich accidents had to e understood as o1ectively real<
It (as &anifestly this rationalist do%&a, a philosophical construction necessarily affir&in% the
pri&acy of the Church and its theolo%ian intelli%entsia in Scriptural interpretation 4hence, its
po(er in ,spiritual/ &atters, and, of course, all the &ore &undane thin%s, e.%., land holdin%s,
that accrued to it out of deference for this ,spiritual/ leadership5 that @uther &ost vehe&ently
re1ected. 3otaly it (as also on this account, the character of the Eucharist, its presence
4(hether, ,real,/ spiritual,/ ,consustantial,/ etc.5, that @utheran refor&ists 4a&on% the&,
B(un%li, Sch(enc"feld, Carlstadt, even 6elanchthon5 diver%ed, that sectarian splinterin%
resulted, and that the *n%lican Church (affled<
D
It (as here at precisely this point that ?alileo had run afoul of the prevailin% doctrinal
interpretation, (hich, as 8esuitically pro&ul%ated, (as consciously, i&&ediately and directly
lin"ed to the stru%%le a%ainst the Refor&ation, a%ainst Protestantis&, e.%., @uther (ith his
doctrine of sustantial co9presence 4consustantiation, for (hich Christ is ,in, under and (ith/
the sustance of the read, a &iracle sustained y the po(er of the (ord of ?od and one,
relyin% strictly on faith, (hose 1ustification (as &uch easier to accept than the rationalistic
theolo%ical e'planations offered y the Ro&an Church5, not to &ention any nu&er of non9
deno&inational, &ore e'tre&e heresies. ;irst, ?alileo had ontolo%ically, not &iraculous,
separated the &atter and for& of odies and, second, he had su1ectivi=ed the for&s in a
radical &anner, for not only (ere color, taste, etc., not part of the o1ect 4ody, sustance5, ut
re&ove the su1ect 4us5 and they si&ply disappeared or (ere ,annihilated/<
Return to that passa%e in The 7ssa%er+
$avin% %iven an ontolo%ically ifurcated &atter9for&, )uantity9)uality account of sensuous
tactile perception, ?alileo turned to an e'planation of t(o other, ,less &aterial/ senses. $e
tells us that
1
We are follo(in% Redondi here, ,&id, 212921D. See also $ans $illerrand, The Division of Christendo$, D70.
2
Redondi, ,&id, 21D.
Redondi.s account of the underlyin%, hidden issue of the Eucharist in relation to ato&is& and corpuscular theory
ro"e ne( %round, revealin% the preferred &anner in (hich the 8esuits (ished to silence the ,innovator,/ ?alileo. If
his account is tendentially historicist to the e'tent it ne%lects the novel, situationally transcendent features of ?alileo.s
science, it re&ains e'tre&ely valuale, (ell developed and insi%htful, )uite rilliant really, if so&e(hat convoluted.
D
$illerrand, ,&id, 101, 1DD, 1C0, 1F#, 2#0, and DF79D7D for a su&&ary.
<there are odies (hich constantly dissolve into &inute particles, so&e of (hich are heavier
than air and descend, (hile others are li%ht and rise up. 0he for&er &ay stri"e upon a certain
part of our odies that is &uch &ore sensitive than the s"in Has in touchJ, (hich does not feel
the invasion of such sutle &atter. 0his is the upper surface of the ton%ueE here the tiny particle
are received, and &i'in% (ith and penetratin% its &oisture, they %ive rise to tastes, (hich are
s(eet or unsavory accordin% to the various shapes, nu&ers, and speeds of the particles. *nd
those &inute particles (hich rise up &ay enter our nostrils and stri"e upon so&e s&all
protuerances (hich are the instru&ent of s&ellin%E here li"e(ise their touch and passa%e is
received to our li"e or disli"e accordin% as they have this or that shape, are fast or slo(, and are
nu&erous or fe(<
0o e'cite in us tastes, odors, and sounds Hthere has 1ust transpired a for&ally identical account
of sound (e have passed overJ I elieve that nothin% is re)uired in e'ternal odies e'cept
shapes, nu&ers, and slo( or rapid &ove&ents. I thin" that if ears, ton%ues, and noses (ere
re&oved, shapes and nu&ers and &otions (ould re&ain, ut not odors or tastes or sounds.
0he latter, I elieve, are nothin% &ore than na&es (hen separated fro& livin% ein%s, 1ust as
tic"lin% and titillation are nothin% ut na&es in the asence of such thin%s as noses and
ar&pits.
1
0his is an entirely consistent ato&ist e'planation, other(ise "no(n as corpuscular theory 4sort
of a particle physics if (e (ere to su%%est a conte&porary analo% con%enial to &odern
e&piricis&, for e'a&ple, (ith its doctrine of sense9data5 for (hich indivisile particles i&press
the&selves on our sense or%ans. It is (holly ,su1ectivist,/ a%ain denyin% reality to those
)ualities or ,accidents/ (hich (ere, accordin% to Scholastic theolo%y and Peripatetic
philosophy, said to possess a reality independent of us as sensin% ein%s. $ere, a%ain,
?alileo ran afoul of that prevailin% doctrinally 8esuitical interpretation of the underlyin% relation
of )ualities to 4necessarily as part of5 sustance<
?alileo had, in 1O2#, een a(are that in Ro&e his (or", The 7ssa%er, had een denounced.
Well, if (e accept Redondi.s reconstruction 4and (ith a vie( to evidence and coherency there
is no reason not to5, this is not e'actly correct+ ?alileo (as a(are so&ethin% &i%ht e afoot,
ut he (as not ale to divine (hat it (as, (hether it had &erit or (as a serious char%e a%ainst
hi&. 4Such (as lar%ely due to fear9&otivated inaility, then incapacitation, of his Ro&e9ased
correspondent to %ather the re)uisite ,intelli%ence./5 Rne"no(nst to hi&, ?iovanni ?uevara
4(ho Redondi calls the ,authoritative provost,/ i.e., father %eneral5 of the once i&portant
Catholic order, the Re%ular 6inor Cler"s, a theolo%ian of so&e repute and an ally of the
Barerini pontificate 4he had contriuted to its sole si%nificant diplo&atic success, anne'ation
to the Papal States of the :uchy of Rrino, (hich certainly had to have &ade 6affeo, as a
territorial e'pansionist, happy5, had upon a procedurally re)uired re)uest y the $oly >ffice
presented a theolo%ical opinion concernin% the relation of the Eucharist to its sensuous
appearance, its accidents. 3ot to per&it his order< devoted to %ood (or"s, and to
conte&plative reflection on the doctrinal and sacra&ental &ysteries of his Ro&an faith< to e
tac"ed to the coattails of the 8esuits< do%&atic and controversial theolo%ians, a%%ressive
(arriors, %rand strate%ists of the Church< ?uevara presented his and his order.s vie(s
affir&in% a lon% since aandoned, traditionally 0ho&ist aleit unorthodo' position for (hich
the ,accidents/ constitute i&pressions of ,species/ 4i.e., )ualities5, usin% a very old Scholastic
ter&, i&a%es i&pressed on the sense or%ans. ?uevara.s position (as le%iti&ate ecause, in
layin% do(n the theolo%ical dividin% line that separated Catholicis& fro& heresy (ith a vie( to
the doctrine of the Eucharist 4in this respect, (hether @utheran or &ore %enerally Protestant
(as irrelevant5, the Council of 0rent had not en%a%ed in a detailed e'plication of nature of
sensile appearances of the consecrated read 4and (ine5 and had &erely desi%nated the&
1
The 7ssa%er, 2GO92GG.
4usin% the sa&e older 0ho&ist ter&5 ,species./ Counterposed to 8esuit realis&, to the
,o1ective/ reality of asolute accidents, this (as a ,su1ectivist/ position that at this &o&ent
41O2#5 fully vindicated ?alileo si&ilarly ,su1ective/ account 4(ith re%ard to the reality of
)ualities5 e&edded in his corpuscular theory of individual odies i&printin% the&selves on
our sense or%ans in his discussion of heat and ho( it is reco%ni=ed as such.
1
But this all transpired ehind, as it (ere, a screen and a veil. ?alileo had no "no(led%e of it.
Instead, his intent (as to push ahead+ Perhaps not y the standards of his ti&e a pious
Catholic, he nonetheless understood that the Scholastic &etaphysics underlyin% the Eucharist
theory and other doctrinal do%&as (ould not (ithstand the onslau%ht of, once confronted (ith,
a coherent and co%ent syste&ati=ation of the pre&ises that (ere necessary to elaoration of
&odern science of nature. In this respect, his *u%ustinian appeal to the separation of
orthodo'y and its doctrine fro& science (as an effort to place Catholic faith eyond the real&
of rational in)uiry and therey to preserve it in the face of his ne( science (ith its ostensily
universal truths.
1
;or ?uevara, Redondi, ,&id, 1#291#D,1C0, 1OO91OG, 1OF 4anne'ation of Rrino5, 1G091G1 4varieties of Eucharist
doctrine5.
NoteB
The Modern Bourgeois 2valuation of 3a&or
We have already pointed out the classical evaluation of laor (as not a )uestion of
counterposin% an active life to a conte&plative one as in *ristotle, and in particular as in the
theolo%ians in that era (hen Catholic thou%ht defined the culture of the 6editerranean and
north(estern European social for&ations that evolved in the lon% after&ath of Ro&e.s
collapse. Rather, this evaluation (as an assess&ent fro& the point of vie( of those leisured
%entle&en (ho, as lando(ners, not only did not laor ut (ho viscerally elieved that, in
principle, laorin% should, for starters, dis)ualify one fro& the %ood life understood in ter&s of
participation in polis activity.
?alileo.s perspective (as not only different fro& the ancient ?ree" lando(ner< he upheld a
%enuine estee& for laor
1
< it also differed )ualitatively and (as opposed to the onto9
theolo%ical attitude of the Church&en and the Peripatetics oth of (hich ste&&ed fro&
*ristotle. In the for&er case 4?alileo as (ell as the ancient lando(ner5, it (as a )uestion of
the type of "no(led%e that (as %enerated on the asis of artisan activity.
We have had occasion to descrie ?alileo.s intellectual tra1ectory, that in a purely astract (ay
he dre( on the te'ts of certain non9*ristotelian ancient sources 4Philoponus, $ero of
*le'ander5, defended and then aandoned 4supersedin%5 the i&petus physics of the Parisian
no&inalists, aove all, he (ent eyond the revival of 1Oth century *rchi&edeanis&. In
particular (e have e'hiited, once he lar%ely 4not entirely5 overca&e his youthful,
contradictory *ristotelian assu&ptions, ho( he e%an to operate outside the he%e&onic
Peripatetic tradition of the philosophers, &athe&aticians and theolo%ians (hich ta"en to%ether
constituted the &ost i&portant layers of the ChurchIs intelli%entsia, and all of (ho& (ere, li"e
hi&, ensconced in the universities and courts. $e did attle (ith the&, and he too" it to the&
4fro& relatively early on, in te'ts li"e his 3etters on Sunspots5. 0hus, for the &ost part ?alileo
pulished in the vernacular Italian and not @atin. But his science (ent (ay eyond this. 0hus,
it should co&e as no surprise that his science, and his personal practice, (ould e'hiit
%enuine opposition to the classical conception and its astardi=ation at the hands of the
Church intelli%entsia, to%ether (ith 4opposition to5 the necessary, internally connected
acco&panyin% valuations 4the nole, estee&ed and ad&irale nature of (hat is invariant,
i&&utale and non9corruptile, and eternal, (hich are precisely (hat are the o1ects of
conte&plation5.
?alileo (as in re%ular contact (ith technolo%ical develop&ent as it (as o1ectively e&odied
in the (or", oth the plannin% and the output, of artisans, &aster crafts&en and en%ineers,
and those such as &ilitary officers and even &en of affairs to the e'tent they stayed areast of
technical develop&ents. $e noted ho( the for&er %roup of &en in particular operated (ith a
concept of "no(led%e that re)uired a certain &athe&ati=ation, perhaps li&ited, of the spaces,
planes and surfaces they (or"ed (ith and on, that loo"ed to past practice itself as a asis for
theori=ation, that (as inventive and cooperative. 4?alileo.s (or"shop or, if you prefer, his
laoratory, (as not the product solely of o(n individual efforts ut had the appearance of a
s&all crafts&anIs (or"shop (ith a handful of e&ployees en%a%ed in a co&&on laor, he, of
course, ein% in this analo%y the &aster crafts&an.5 It (as not so &uch a )uestion of the
laor itself, and it as craft la&or, ut of the type of "no(led%e it %enerated, a technical
"no(led%e that is e'peri&ental 4thou%h here not in the &odern sense5 and characteristically
rational in the sense of oservational, pulicly accessile and reproducile. 0he latter is
si%nificant+ Lno(led%e of this sort could in principle e su1ect to &ethodolo%ical
deter&ination and reproduced y anyone so en%a%ed, and (as %enerated as a "no(led%e
1
0hat is, hi%hly s"illed, theoretically infor&ed artisan laorE not all laor and certainly not the a&stract laor of
capitalis& estalished on its o(n foundations 4real do&ination5 (hich, in the event, has yet to appear in history.
that is, if not entirely pro%ressive, cu&ulative in character. 0his type of "no(led%e 4and,
refle'ively, its very conception5 is distinctively ,&odern,/ that is, it is our%eois.
<We repeat, this is not the a&stract laor of capitalis& as (or" appears once it, capital, is
estalished on its o(n foundationsE it is not the laor po(er that 4e'chan%ed for the &onetary
&eans re)uisite to &aintainin% and sustainin% a historically specific for& of hu&an e'istence5,
confrontin% &eans of production 4as the property of the capitalist5, it, capital, sets in &otionE it
is not this laor ecause the latter is reduced, astracted, in production, is %enerali=ed,
te&porally )uantified, and o1ectified and e&odied in co&&odities as value. Instead, it is
craft laor that controls its o(n &eans and instru&ents of production, %enerates or
participates in the (or"plan, and creates a (hole product, craft laor as a characteristic of
capitalis& at its ori%ins and early develop&ent, the len%thy era of the for&al do&ination of
capital over laor<
1
It is craft laor to (hich ?alileo (as oriented.
0hat orientation, pole&ical and hostile in character at least vis9P9vis the Peripatetics
4characteristics that si&ply cannot e derived fro& the intellectual tradition fro& (hich he
started, or, (e should say that it (as a feature of the tradition he (as effectively in the
van%uard of creatin%5, (hen ta"en to%ether (ith scientific outco&e of his successful efforts to
&athe&ati=e nature, &ade hi& a revolutionary<
?alileo.s attitude of hostility in opposition to the classical, and Church evaluation of craft laor,
as (e said, e'tended forci&l% to all the acco&panyin% valuations. Sa%redo states this
une)uivocally in the Dialogue in re&ar"in%, ,;or &y part I consider the earth very nole and
ad&irale precisely ecause of the diverse alterations, chan%es, %enerations, etc., that occur
in it incessantly./
2
<
In this re%ard, it is (orth repeatin% (hile holdin% the chair in &athe&atics at Padua, the
university operated y the Repulic of !enice, lecturin% (ithin faculties lar%ely do&inated y
Peripatetic intellectuals, ?alileo spent &uch ti&e at the Repulic.s %reat arsenal and
shipyards in !enice (ith their artisans (here he en%a%ed the crafts&en e&ployed therein in
discussions.
D
?alileoIs curiously a%%ressive hostility to *ristotle and, in particular to(ard the
Church.s or%anic intellectuals (as &erely the other side of the arro%ance of that he%e&onic
intelli%entsia (hich, su1ectively certain of its speculatively constituted truths, held the laor of
1
;or all this, see the ;irst Interlude, elo(.
2
Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s 4first day5, CF.
0his re&ar" is preceded y the follo(in% one, &a"in% the contrast even &ore e'plicit+ ,I cannot (ithout %reat
astonish&ent N I &i%ht say (ithout %reat insult to &y intelli%ence N hear it attriuted as a pri&e perfection and noility
of the natural and inte%ral odies of the universe that that they are invariant, i&&utale and unalterale, etc., (hile on
the other hand it is called a %reat i&perfection to e alterale, %enerale, &utale, etc./ ,&id+ $ere, of course, it is to
e recalled that, first, in *ristotle and a&on% the *ristotelians of ?alileo.s ti&e, the Peripatetics, the celestial vault (as
perfect ecause i&&utale and invariant and, as such, counterposed to the Earth precisely ecause of alteration and
&utation, of co&in% into ein% and passin% a(ayE and, second, this vie( had to e undercut if ?alileo (as to
successfully assert his Copernicanis&. It (as, &oreover, this vie( (hich he so co&pellin%ly and convincin%ly
assailed in the 3etters on Sunspots in his de&onstration that the surfaces of the Earth and its &oon are )ualitatively
si&ilar.
D
See Dialogues Concerning To Ne Sciences, 1, (here ?alileo in the person of the interlocutor Sa%redo, e'plicitly
stated he ,fre)uently visitHedJ/ and conferred (ith the %reater artisans.
?alileo.s revolutionary te&per (as dialectically constituted+ >n the one hand, he (as intellectually and personally
aused y Peripatetic intellectuals so&e of (ho& (ould not even condescend to consider the ,e'peri&ental/
evidence he rou%ht forth, at their insistence no less< thou%h for %ood reason, since ,e'peri&ent/ had a different
practical &eanin% and o1ectives for oth.
>n the other hand, this distasteful e'perience found reinforce&ent a&on% "indred souls, crafts&en, (ith (ho& he
had re%ular contact, (ho openly e'hiited their resent&ent to(ard the Peripatetics, and (ith (ho& he shared, if
perhaps &ore refined and suli&ated, that hostility. 0hat hostility, in turn, %ripped hi&. $is (or" displayed it at every
ter&. See, for e'a&ple, the posthu&ous pulished poe&, ,*%ainst the *ristotelians/ 4,Contro %li *ristotelici/5 of 1O2D,
translated and appearin% in Telos, #. O29G7.
crafts&en in conte&pt and their "no(led%e at est deficient.
1
In so&e aleit li&ited &easure,
?alileo.s reciprocal en&ity derives fro& the conte't of this practice, his interaction (ith the
artisans and crafts&en (ith (ho& he surrounded hi&self<
If theori=ation and e'peri&entation in the scientific sense peculiar to ?alileo (as far fro&
identical (ith those developed y crafts&en, it should e stated clearly that they (ere entirely
con%ruent<
Rossi &anifestly captured the sense of ?alileo efforts in statin% that, the ,i&a%e/ of ?alileo as
,re&ote fro& the "no(led%e of technicians and e'peri&entalists N indeed assertively averse
to/ this "no(led%e is asurdE that (e find in ?alileo ,the thesis that Tinvesti%ation. 4filosofare5
&ust ta"e into careful consideration the (or" of technicians and ear on the Tactivity. 0pratica5
of artisans, ut also find e'plicit the reco%nition that the (or" of &aster crafts&en<
constitutes a help to the investi%ation carried on y Tstudious &inds./E
2
that ,?alileo (as
certainly "eenly a(are of the fact that the elevation of a theory shifts it to another level, or, as
he said, Tfar out(ei%hs. the testi&ony and the oservations of e&piricists and technicians/ and
that ?alileo understood the ,difference et(een "no(led%e 4the co%nition of truth of a fact5
and understandin% T(hy this happens.< ,
D
E and, that in ?alileo, ,the function of so called
theoretical &odels in the real& of scientific "no(led%e/ (as (ithout dout ,e'plicitly proposed
and reco%ni=ed. ;or science, a fact is only that (hich is arrived at on the asis of precise
criteria of a theoretical character/
#
<
0hus, ?alileo.s appreciation of craft laor (as not oriented to(ard the activity itself, ut, as (e
pointed out and Rossi indicated, to(ard the type of "no(led%e that for&s on its asis. In this
respect, a revolutionary and co&&unist perspective< this co&es &uch later< is as distinct
fro& ?alileo and counterposed to science as ?alileo.s evaluation (as distinct fro& that of the
Church.s theolo%ians 4not to &ention *ristotle hi&self5+
;or the for&er, thou%ht itself produces the concepts in and throu%h (hich the (orld in its
i&&ediacy is apprehended, and in specific for&s, on the asis of (hich reality in its
intelli%iility is co&prehended and e'plained. But thou%ht, and theory, are, in this perspective,
the&selves for&s of activity< *%ain, this e'cludes that ,activity/ (e call a&stract laor 4or
includes it to the e'tent it is contradictory, at once ,activity/ that is passive5, laor as it e'ists
for capital< Both ,pro9duce,/ in the ety&olo%ically ancient sense they rin% forth so&ethin%
ne( into the (orld. 0he one 4thou%ht, concepts5 lives in 4is i&&anent to, e&edded in5 the
other, renderin% the other &eanin%ful and intelli%ile to itselfE the other as the activity of an
incarnate su1ect operatin% on the sensuous &aterial surroundin%s, in &a"in% and, especially,
in transfor$ing the given 4(hether that %iven is the o1ects of laor, situations or the very
(orld itself as in revolutionary activity5, illu&inates novel arran%e&ents presented y the ne(
o1ects it has created, illu&inates situations or the (orld itself, y %eneratin% concepts in this
very doin% 4in this sense, activity as ne%ativity, as transfor&ative, is itself spontaneous
thou%ht5.
C
1
See, e.%., Still&an :ra"e in his introduction re&ar"s to The Starr% Messenger, CE Paolo Rossi, 4hilosoph%,
Technolog% and the 7rts in the 2arl% Modern 2ra, 11O, 11G.
2
Rossi, ,&id, 112.
D
,&id, 11D.
#
,&id, 11D911#.
C
;or astract laor, see the Second Interlude, ,Capital as Capital,/ and for the relation of theory to activity, see the
;ourth Study, Part III, ,0he 6aterialist :ialectic./
First Study
Science at its $ri#ins
Biblio#raphical Sources
*nderson, Perry. 4assages fro$ 7ntiquit% to )eudalis$+ @ondon, 17G#
WWWWWWWWWWWWW. 3ineages of the 7&solutist State+ @ondon, 17G#
*rendt, $annah. The Hu$an Condition+ Chica%o, 17CF
*ristotle, De Caela 41n the Heavens5 in Richard 6cLeon 4ed.5, The Basic "or!s of 7ristotle+
3e( -or", 2001
WWWWWW. 4h%sics in Richard 6cLeon 4ed.5, The Basic "or!s of 7ristotle+ 3e( -or", 2001
*rti%as, 6ariano. ,3e( @i%ht on the ?alileo *ffair/ 46ay 20025. *ccessed online at
(((.&etane'us.net
*rti%as, 6ariano, Rafael 6artive= and Willia& Shea. ,Revisitin% ?alileo.s 0roules (ith the
Church/ 4;eruary 20015. *ccessed online at (((.&etane'us.net
Bachelard, ?aston. The Ne Scientific Spirit+ Boston, 17G# 417D#5
Barnes, Will. 1rigins and 2ndings: 8enerali/ed Hu$an 2$ancipation in the 4erspective of a
Ne 2arth+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5
RRRRRRRRR+ The 4ro&le$ of )eudalis$: Historical 1rigins, )or$s and Significance, Boo" I of
Revolutionar% 1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch of Capital#s )or$al Do$ination of
3a&or in 4roduction+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWWW. The Histor% of )lorence and the )lorentine Repu&lic fro$ the fro$ the 2ra of
)eudal Decadence 0**((-*'A(5 to in the 2ra of the Rise of 1ligarchical 4oer,
:ingl% 8overn$ent and ,ndividual T%rann% 0*BC(-*DCA5: ,nstantiating the Historical,
4roductive and Class Struggle Matrix of the 2pochal Rise of Capital#s )or$al
Do$ination, Boo" II of Revolutionar% 1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch
of Capital#s )or$al Do$ination of 3a&or in 4roduction+ St. Paul, 201#
4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWWW. The 2nglish Civil "ars and the Birth of )reedo$, Boo" III of
Revolutionar% 1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch of Capital#s )or$al Do$ination of
3a&or in 4roduction+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWW Catalan and Castilian 7ntagonis$ in ,&erian Histor%+ Rise and )all of Catalonia as
a Sea&orne Mercantile 4oer: ,sa&elle, )ernando and the 7scendanc% and Decline
o CounterRevolutionar% Castile, appearin% as $istorical 3ote 12 in
Revolutionar% 1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch of Capital#s )or$al Do$ination
over 3a&or in 4roduction+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWWWW. The 8er$an Road to Reneed ,$perialist "orld "ar, *CS(-*TBC+ St. Paul,
200F
WWWWWWWWWW. Co$$unit% and Capital+ St. Paul, 2001
WWWWWWWWW. Civil "ar and Revolution in 7$erica+ St. Paul, 1777
Bayley, C.C. "ar and Societ% in Renaissance )lorence. 0oronto, 17O1
Bloch, 6arc. )eudal Societ%+ Lol+ *: The 8roth of Ties of Dependence. Chica%o, 17O1
4;rench ori%inal, 17DF5
Braudel, ;ernand. The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean "orld in the 7ge of 4hilip ,,,
!ol. 1, 3e( -or", 17G2
Br=e=ins"i, Richard. 3Pt/en *QB': Cli$ax of the Thirt% Mears "ar+ Westport 4C05, 200C
Catholic 2nc%clopedia+ 7ccessed online at (((.ne(advent.or%
Ciriacono, Salvatore. ,6ass Consu&ption ?oods and @u'ury ?oods+ 0he :e9Industriali=ation
of the Repulic of !enice fro& the Si'teenth to the Ei%hteenth Century/ in $er&an
!an der Wee 4ed.5, The Rise and Decline of Hr&an ,ndustries in ,tal% and the 3o
Countries+ @euven, 17FF
de !ries, 8an. The 2cono$% of 2urope in an 7ge of Crisis, *Q((-*SA(+ @ondon, 17GO
:ra"e, Still&an. K0he Role of 6usic in ?alileoIs E'peri&ents,K Scientific 7$erican 2D2 48an9
8une 17GC5+ 7F910#
WWWWWWWWWWWW. ,0he Evolution of De Motu 4?alileo ?leanin%s VVI!5,/ ,sis, !. OG, no. 2 48une
17GO5+ 2D792C0
:uhe&, Pierre. Medieval Cos$olog%: Theories of ,nfinit%, 4lace, Ti$e, Loid, and the 4luralit%
of "orlds+ Chica%o 17FC
Einstein, *lert. 2ssa%s in Science+ 3e( -or", 17D#
En%els, ;rederic". The 4easant "ar in 8er$an% 41FC05. *ccessed on line at
(((.&ar 'archive.or%
;eyeraend, Paul. Realis$, Rationalis$ and Scientific Method+ 4hilosophical 4apers, L+ ,+
Ca&rid%e 4En%.5, 17F1
WWWWWWWWWWWWWW. ,E'planation, Reduction and E&piricis&/ in $erert ;ei%l and ?rover
6a'(ell 4eds.5, Minnesota Studies in the 4hilosoph% of Science, !ol. III 4Scientific
2xplanation, Space, and Ti$e5. 6inneapolis, 17O2+ 2F971
;inley, 6oses I. The "orld of 1d%sseus+ 6iddlese' 4En%.5, 17G7
;elloni, ?iuseppe. ,Structural Chan%es in Rran Industry in Italy for& the @ate 6iddle *%es to
the Be%innin% of the Industrial Revolution+ * Synthesis/ in $er&an !an der Wee
4ed.5, The Rise and Decline of Hr&an ,ndustries in ,tal% and the 3o Countries+
@euven, 17FF
?alileo ?alilei. ,*%ainst the *ristotelians/ 4,Contro %li *ristotelici/5 of 1O2D, translated and
appearin% in Telos, #, 17O7
RRRRRRRRRRR+ Dialogue Concerning the To Chief "orld S%ste$s+ Ber"eley, 17OG 41OD25
WWWWWWWWWWW. Discourse on Bodies in "ater+ Rrana, 17O0 4;acsi&ile reproduction of the
translation y 0ho&as Salusury. @ondon, 1OOD, (ith an Introduction y Still&an
:ra"e5
WWWWWWWWWWW. 1n Motion in I.E. :ra"in and Still&an :ra"e 4eds.5, 1n Motion and 1n
Mechanis$s+ 6adison 4WI5, 17O0
WWWWWWWWWWW, 1n Mechanics in I.E. :ra"in and Still&an :ra"e 4eds.5, 1n Motion and 1n
Mechanis$s+ 6adison 4WI5, 17O0
WWWWWWWWWWW. The Starr% Messenger in Still&an :ra"e 4ed.5, Discoveries and 1pinions of
8alileo+ 3e( -or", 17CG
WWWWWWWWWWW. 3etters on Sunspots in Still&an :ra"e 4ed.5, Discoveries and 1pinions of
8alileo+ 3e( -or", 17CG
WWWWWWWWWWW. 3etter to the 8rand Duchess Christina in Still&an :ra"e 4ed.5, Discoveries and
1pinions of 8alileo+ 3e( -or", 17CG
WWWWWWWWWWW. The 7ssa%er 4lar%ely e'cerpted5 in Still&an :ra"e 4ed.5, Discoveries and
1pinions of 8alileo+ 3e( -or", 17CG
WWWWWWWWWWW. Dialogues Concerning To Ne Sciences 4Discourses and De$onstrations,
:iscorsi e Di$onstra/ioni, Mathe$atiche5+ 3e( -or", 171# 41ODF5
0he ?alileo Pro1ect. NLincen/o 8alilei+> *ccessed online at (((.%alileo.rice.edu
?old&ann, @ucien. The Hidden 8od+ 7 Stud% of Tragic Lision in The 4ensIes of 4ascal and
the Tragedies of Racine+ @ondon, 17O#
?ross&ann, $enry". ,:escartes and the Social >ri%ins of the 6echanistic Concept of the
World,/ in ?ideon ;reudenthal and Peter 6c@au%hlin 4eds.5, The Social 2cono$ic
Roots of the Scientific Revolution+ Texts &% Boris Hessen and Henr%! 8ross$ann+
:ordrecht, 2007
?uicciardini, ;rancesco. The Histor% of ,tal%+ @ondon 17O7 41CO15
$illerrand, $ans. The Division of Christendo$: Christianit% in the Sixteenth Centur%+
@ouisville 4L-5, 200G
$usserl, Ed&und. The Crisis of 2uropean Science. Evanston 4I@5, 17G0 4?er&an ori%inal,
17DO5
LoyrU, *le'andre. 8alileo Studies. *tlantic $i%hlands 4385, 17GF 4;rench ori%inal, 17D75
WWWWWWWWWWWWWW. Metaph%sics and Measure$ent: 2ssa%s in Scientific Revolution+ @ondon,
17OF
6alani&a, Paolo, ,*n E'a&ple of Industrial Reconversion+ 0uscany in the Si'teenth and
Seventh Centuries/ in $er&an !an der Wee 4ed.5, The Rise and Decline of Hr&an
,ndustries in ,tal% and the 3o Countries. @euven, 17FF
6eyerson, E&ile. ,dentit% and Realit%. 3e( -or", 17F7 4;rench ori%inal, Drd e'panded edition,
172O5
6oioli, *n%elo. ,:e9Industriali=ation in @o&ardy :urin% the Seventeenth Century/ in $er&an
!an der Wee 4ed.5, The Rise and Decline of Hr&an ,ndustries in ,tal% and the 3o
Countries. @euven, 17FF
6c6ullen, E&erson 0. ,?alileoIs Conde&nation+ 0he Real and Co&ple' Story,/ 8eorgia
Gournal of Science 4200D5. *ccessed online at www.metanexus.net
Par"er, ?eoffrey. The 7r$% of )landers and the Spanish Road, *AQS-*QAT+ The 3ogistics of
Spanish Lictor% and Defeat in the 3o Countries "ars+ Ca&rid%e 4En%.5, 17G2
Pfister, Christian. ,Cli&atic E'tre&es, Recurrent Crises and Witch $unts+ Strate%ies of
European Societies in Copin% (ith E'o%enous Shoc"s in the @ate Si'teenth and
Early Seventeenth Centuries,/ 0he Medieval Histor% Gournal, 10, 1`2, 200G
Popper, Larl. Ouantu$ Mechanics and the Schis$ in 4h%sics+ ;ro& the 4ostscript to The
3ogic of Scientific Discover%. Edited y W.W. Bartley, III. 0oto(a 4385, 17F2
Redondi, Pietro. 8alileo, Heretic+ Princeton 4385, 17FG
Sarpi, Paolo.

Histor% of Benefices and Selections fro$ Histor% of the Council of Trent+
0ranslated and edited y Peter Bur"e. 3e( -or", 17OG
Sch&itt, Charles B. Studies in Renaissance 4hilosoph% and Science+ @ondon, 17F1
Sha(, $erert R. Craters, Cos$os, and Chronicles: 7 Ne Theor% of the 2arth+ Stanford
4C*5, 177#
Sno(den, ;ran". The )ascist Revolution in Tuscan%, *T*T-*T''+ Ca&rid%e 4En%.5, 17F7
0au%er, 6ichael. 7griculture in "orld Histor%+ @ondon, 2011
Wood, Eileen 6ei"ens. 4easant-Citi/en and Slave+ The )oundations of 7thenian De$ocrac%
@ondon, 17FF
$irst Interlude
0he follo(in% discussion is intended to provide conte't and 1ustification for our perspective on
the relation of the our%eoisie and capital to the &odern science of nature.
)or$s of Sociation, ,
)unda$ental )or$s of Sociation in Hu$an Histor%
$ere (e shall spea" of for&s of hu&an sociation and 4(here they e'ist5 productive for&s. We
shall not spea" of ,&odes of production,/ (hich, in our vie( 4one that is e&inently and
rationally defensile5 i&plies a &etaphysical co&&it&ent to a unilinear notion of historical
develop&ent. 0his can e seen &ost clearly in the case of ,feudalis&/ to (hich the diverse
social for&ations that stretch in historical ti&e fro& the ancient (orld until 4and far eyond5 the
rise of capitalis& 4and in historical space across the entire (orld5 are often assi&ilated+
1
;eudalis&< found only in the a%rarian (orld, characteri=ed y the presence of an unfree
peasantry and e'tensive use of service tene&ent instead of peasant self9sufficiency or
enslave&ent or (a%es, do&inance of a social class of speciali=ed (arriors, ties of oedience
and protection indin% &en to &en, (hich, (ithin the (arrior class, assu&e a distinctive for&
called vassala%e, and fra%&entation of political authority and the asence of state
centralis&< is %enerally and &ost i&&ediately identified in ter&s of a lar%e serf presence.
2
3o( (hat are (e to &a"e of strata of ,sustantial/ serfs, a characteristic feature of &ost
servile peasantries in central and eastern Europe prior to the short t(entieth century2
D
Wor"in%, relatively spea"in%, a lar%e holdin% (ith co&&ercial potential, this social fi%ure (as
ale to avoid unpaid laor services 4e.%., provision of (ood or %a&e, of crop or produce to the
lord, etc.5, triutes and, or corvUes y e&ployin% aged laor in his place.
#
Such a historical
reality &a"es a &oc"ery of the ,dialectic/ (hich refuses to %rasp the historical specificity and
indeed rarity of feudal social relations, counterposes in historical ti&e feudalis& to capitalis&
the latter follo(in% on the for&er, and sees in oth ,sta%es/ in a universal societal
develop&ent<
We shall set aside the vast period of hu&an ti&e fro& the first appearance of anato&ically
&odern hu&ans 4aout 110,000 years a%o5 until the full onset of the last inter%lacial 4aout
11,000 years a%o5. Within this enor&ous te&poral span, hu&an sociation (as (holly
no&adic. $ere (e (ish to spea" strictly in ter&s of settled, or sedentary, social life, (hich
lar%ely, thou%h not entirely, coincides (ith the earliest for&s of a%riculture 4far&in%, (hich in a
ri%orous sense is not a%riculture at all5.
C
Because a%riculture rose on the asis of distinct,
1
I.e., y 6ar'ists.
While there have een individuals e'e&pt fro& the follo(in% criticis&, the sa&e cannot e said for ever% significant
Marxist tendenc% (ithin the history of the (or"ers. &ove&ent.
:iscussed aove in various notes to the ;irst Study, the (hole prole& of ,feudalis&/ is e'a&ined, if far fro&
e'haustively, fro& a critical and e&ancipatory perspective in the Perspective, The De&ate over Capitalis$ and
Transcendence of the Capitalist Mode of 4roduction in our Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ 0Hrgeschichte5. H;or &ore
e'haustive treat&ent, no( see The 4ro&le$ of )eudalis$ in its entirety. EditorIs note.J
2
;or e'a&ple, @enin, The Develop$ent of Capitalis$ in Russia, passi&.
D
6.@. Bush, ,0enants Ri%hts and the Peasantries of Europe under the >ld Re%i&e,/ 1#2.
;or the concept of a short t(entieth century, and a tentative sche&ati=ation of the prehistory of capitalis& in the West
%enerally, see this interlude, ,Chronolo%y and $istory,/ elo(.
#
Bush specifies holdin%s si=es+ Circa 1GC0, in Poland ,sustantial/ serf holdin% (ere nearly forty acresE in
Brandenur%, nineteen acresE in Bohe&ia, si'ty9oneE in $un%ry, thirty9fourE and, in East Prussia, no less than forty9five
acres. ,Iid./ 3o(, in historical conte'ts in (hich servile peasantries have (or"ed as little as half9acre plots, these
(ere truly sustantial holdin%s.
C
Hierarch% and Social Division, Natural Deter$inis$ and Modern Man,, ,Is *%riculture at its >ri%ins Prole&atic2/ in
1rigins and 2ndings+ HEditorIs note.J
fi'ed positions in a production, (hich it 4a%riculture5 itself created, (e are also si&ultaneously
referrin% to history at its ori%ins 4i.e., in the narro( sense in (hich history is constituted
throu%h the stru%%le of distinct productive %roups, stru%%le and stratification ein%
characteristics of divided societies5, even as that history has enco&passed co&&unities
(hich are unitary.
0hou%h nu&erous, distinct for&s of sociation have historically appeared and reappeared at
different ti&es and in different places 4e.%., huntin%, huntin% and %atherin%, far&in% and
ani&al do&estication, shepherdin% and livestoc" cultivation5 (e can, roadly spea"in%,
distin%uish three %reat epochs in hu&an history, the first y far the oldest and lon%est lastin%,
each desi%nated y their do&inant for& of sociation, and co&prehended y their funda&ental
activities and the central social features that characteri=e the&. 0hese epochs are the archaic,
the triutary and capitalist &odernity.
*rchaic co&&unities as distinctive co&&unities, and not as a fusion of for&s 4,fused/
precisely to the e'tent they share features in co&&on (ith stratified a%ricultural societies5, are
distin%uished y a settled social life 4(hich separates the& fro& hunter9%atherer ands as
no$adic %roups that stretch ac" in %eolo%ical, as opposed to strictly hu&an, ti&e all the (ay
to hu&anity.s ho&inid ori%ins5, the asence of property in production, the none'istence of
coercive political po(er 4a state5, y a &aterial aundance and y social individuals (ho lac"
an elaorate need structure, are asent e%ois& and the e'tre&ely individuali=ed su1ectivity
raised upon it, (hich ta"en to%ether renders social laor lar%ely superfluous. 0hese
co&&unities are further asent an ,econo&y/ 4that is, a separate sphere of &aterial
production5, and conse)uently archaic individuals are not fastened onto fi'ed positions in a
division of laor. E'istin% every(here on Earth, archaic co&&unities have under%one their
furthest develop&ent in tropics (here a natural aundance provided the re)uisite resources
for a social life (ithout laor.
Politically decentrali=ed (ith private property in production that in part ut only in part 4and not
decisively5 distin%uished it, feudalis& is a rare species of sociation, and, lac!ing state
centralis$, not a triutary for&ation. It is not to e counted a&on% funda&ental for&s of
sociation or %reat epochs in hu&an history. It ori%inally appeared in north(est Europe 4circa
F00912005 and 8apan 4circa 110091O005, the t(o ,aseline/ societies that are deter&inant for
our understandin% of it and as a socio9historical pheno&enon define its asic features.
0riutary for&ations, on the other hand, are y and lar%e characteri=ed y villa%e9ased
sedentary a%riculture, ad&inistrative to(ns, a state that is resident, so to spea", to the to(n
and is identified (ith the persona%e of a "in% and in a &ore re&ote sense (ith his household,
1
and is lar%ely e'ternal to the daily life of the villa%e co&&unities 4(hich often particularly in all
ancient and so&e &odern for&s inhiits the penetration of capital throu%h a re%ular division of
co&&unal lands5.
1
0his identity can e seen as late as, for e'a&ple, E%ypt in the &iddle of the lon% nineteenth century. E%ypt had een
an autono&ous province of the >tto&an E&pire since 1F0C. 0he Lhedive 4rou%hly, !iceroy5 (as the %reatest overlord
of the country. In his person, he e&odied the state so that each (as inseparale fro& the other, each lac"in% an
institutional reality distinct fro& the other. 40he proper ter& (hich susu&es oth is !ingship+5 0hus, Rondo Ca&eron
notes that, in re%ard to the det controlled y forei%n capital, ,0he e'act a&ount of the det, as (ell as its ori%in, has
al(ays een a &oot point o(in% to the fact that there (as no clear distinction et(een the dets of the !iceroy and
those of the %overn&ent./ )rance and the 2cono$ic Develop$ent of 2urope, #OF n. D0.
In contradistinction, the &odern state of the our%eoisie and capital stands out sharply+ 0he &odern state of capital is
unique in its institutional and separate character, its appearance as a KpulicK force clothed in this sha$ o&9ectivit%
that sets it apart fro$ and over and against individuals, the underlyin% social classes, and society at lar%e. While any
&odern, centrali=ed state &ay co&e in the short run to e identified (ith a specific historical persona%e, (hat
distin%uishes it fro& states that appear in other past epochs is a see$ing efficacy, per&anence and reality that render
it at once o1ectively independent in relation to society and independent of any specific ruler.
0he villa%e co&&unities stand opposite the state (hich oppresses the& first and fore&ost y
the e'traction of triute, then, in ancient (orld in particular, y the periodic conscription of
laor in &assive construction of di"es and da&s, irri%ation ditches and canals, in te&ples and
urial sites. 4!aries for&s of laor, slave, corvUe, serf, etc., &ay have also een i&portant
deter&inants of social life in so&e &odern triutary for&s.5 *ove the villa%e level these
societies are hi%hly stratified, perhaps in so&e cases ased upon class differentiation,
&aterial ine)uality is at once ra&pant and e'tre&e. 4In ancient for&s the villa%es the&selves
constitute one ho&o%eneous layer in the for&ation counterposed to other social %roups,
hence itself an ele&ent in stratificationE (hile in &odern for&s social division, even class
relations, can penetrate the villa%e co&&unity itself5. Before the first triutary for&ation ever
reached its apotheosis, stated &ore secularly, efore ancient triutary for&ations fully
&atured and characteri=ed a distinctive epoch in hu&an history, a divine "in%ship descendin%
directly fro& the %ods and unifyin% the various distinct co&&unities characteri=ed nearly all
triutary civili=ations, (ritin% in its various early for&s had appeared, &etals such as ron=e
and copper had eco&e (idely used in productive activities, a &onu&ental art and
architecture 4as in te&ples, pyra&ids, palaces, etc.5 had already lon% ,advanced/ eyond its
initial develop&ent.
1
@in"ed to oth ancient and &odern precapitalist civili=ations, these social for&ations e'hiit
de 9ure statified for&s of property in production (hile in practice the villa%es en%a%e in far&in%
4not a%riculture5 in (hich their lands are cultivated co&&unally. Statified property is really an
inade)uate &odern construction+ 0he state is identified (ith the persona%e of a "in%, and
,property,/ that is, productive land, elon%s to that persona%e. 0here is no conception of
property as such in ancient triutary for&sE (hile in &odern for&s, ecause the state is &ore
institutionally ureaucrati=ed and ecause &odern strata 4especially &erchants5 play a role in
this for& of sociation, there is so&e private property in production 4say in &ovales, in
&erchantsI inventory5, productive land still for&ally and in all historical si%nificant events and
develop&ents (here ,o(nership/ is at issue elon%s to "in%ship. 40hus, 0o"u%a(a 8apan,
0sarist Russia, and the *=tec and >tto&an e&pires5. 0he &ention of the institutional
ureaucrati=ation of &odern triutary for&s further hints at one i&portant distinction et(een
ancient and &odern for&s+ 0hat distinction consists in the )ualitatively %reater state
centrali=ation of the latter, Cold War tacit criti)ues of Soviet state capitalis& 4here Wittfo%el
aove all co&es to &ind5 as a &odern rendition of ancient hydraulic civili=ations
not(ithstandin%. With respect to 1ust this )uestion and ancient for&s %enerally, the E%ypt of
1
0he one possile e'ception (here "in%ship did not appear to descend fro& the %ods (as Su&er, at least in its early
period. See $enri ;ran"furt, :ingship and the 8ods, 22#, 22C. In E%ypt, divine "in%ship unified disparate co&&unities
throu%h constitution of a sea&less inte%ration of society into the cos&os. Society did not e'ist apart fro& the
cos&olo%ical order, or, in ;ran"fortIIs pre%nant phrase, ,0he purely secular N insofar as it could e %ranted to e'ist at
all N (as the purely trivial./ ,&id, D.
0he deter&ination in ter&s of the appearance of a &onu&ental architecture (e also o(e to ;ran"fort, ,&id, 1C, (here
he refers e'clusively to ancient E%ypt of the Pharaohs. We have %enerali=ed.
the Pharaohs is e'e&plary and paradi%&atic 4as is dynastic China under the $an5.
2
0hus, (e
can cite one concise su&&ary of recent research at so&e len%th+
,?radually, te&ples and the "in% asserted &ana%erial control over a %ood a&ount of land in
periods of centrali=ed control. H3ote that there (ere (hole eras (here centralis& si&ply
collapsed, the so9called Inter&ediate Periods et(een the dynasties of the >ld and 6iddle
Lin%do&s and et(een the 6iddle and 3e( Lin%do&s.J Such control over the flood asin
land (as very often held (ith te&ple estates, lar%e tracts of land< Individuali=ed private
property in the asins did not e'ist< 0he E%yptian syste& Hof propertyJ< connected the "in%
and the te&ples 4collectin% ta'es and rents5 to local fa&ilyastatus %roups respondin% to the
flood. 0he co&&on holdin% of property, essentially conveyale usufructuary ri%hts, rather than
individuali=ed private property, in "inshipastatus %roups, (as< due to the fact that a
hierarchical social syste& in a chaotic environ&ent &ade reallocation of resources annually
an efficient solution. Such a syste& (ould have een reinforced y the necessity of %roup
cooperation in &aintainin% the irri%ation canals, the ti&in% of (ater into the asins and so
on< 0he rid%e to the central state (as the local te&ple, at least in &any areas (hich
coordinated land tenure in its re%ion, and into (hich the "in% played a ritual role of chief priest
in the local cult.
,0e&ples 4<the &a1or state te&ples as opposed to local shrines and s&aller re%ional
te&ples5 held portfolios of land distriuted throu%hout a lar%e area and served as
ad&inistrative and &ana%e&ent< centers. 0e&ples provided e&ploy&ent, (ere the location
of local festivals, the center of cult, sy&olically the %uarantor of staility and the social order,
and conduit throu%h (hich the "in% ruled. 0he hierarchical social syste&< evolved around
flood recession a%riculture and co&&on property holdin%s. But the i&portant point is that the
E%yptian syste& of %overnance created an e)uiliriu& often lastin% &any centuries./
0he functionalist ias is clear in this citation. But of overridin% si%nificance, the ele&ents of are
analysis are all present here.
1
...
We shall recount the ori%ins of capitalis& shortly.
*lthou%h first appearin% se)uentially 4they are also si&ultaneous5, these road for&s of
sociation are not ,sta%es/ in hu&an for&ation, do not constitute a develop&ent+ We can
docu&ent that the archaic first appeared so&e 10,000 years a%o 4and its linea&ents e'tend
further ac", thou%h the evidence is &ore s"etchy5 and that triutary societies (ere (ell
for&ed 4ut not fully developed, i.e., not yet ancient civili=ations5 so&e O,C009G,C00 years.
2

0he t(o co9e'isted lon% into the epoch of capitalist &odernity, in fact into the t(entieth
centuryE &oreover, their relation is historically and necessarily intert(ined+ *rchaic
2
;or the relation of "in%ship to property in &odern triutary for&ations, the >tto&an E&pire is e'e&plary. ;or the
>tto&ans, see $alil Inalci", 7n 2cono$ic and Social Histor% of the 1tto$an 2$pire and Laren Bar"ay, Bandits and
Bureaucrats< and for 0sarist Russia, 8ero&e Blu&, 3andlords and 4easants in Russia, 1G09O20, for this relation as it
under(ent historical transfor&ations. Even in the pre90sarist and triutary9for&ative period, the "ey aspect of this
relation 4all property elon%s to a prince, (here centrali=ation had not yet rise to the level of a sin%le %reat overlord5
(as already present. ,&id, GD9G#. Si&ilarly in the early 0sarist period, the po(er of the tsar over %reat &en %re( to the
point (here hereditary title to a status conferrin% &e&ership in the tsarIs Council disappeared in favor of
appoint&ent. See the re&ar" y Richard $ellie, 2nserf$ent and Militar% Change in Moscov%, 2F2 n. D. 0he &o%ars
should e understood as (ealthy retainers in the service of the tsar, not an independent ecause landed noility.
Laren Bar"ay and Rudy Bat=ell, ,Co&parisons *cross E&pires,/ 2C292CC, present a nuanced discussion of the
a&i%uities of "in%ly possession of property 4land5 in Russia as &odern strata e&er%e. HEditorIs note.J
1
8.C. 6annin%, ,Water, Irri%ation and their Connection to State Po(er in E%ypt,/ 1291D. 0his is a draft version of a
paper presented at a 2012 acade&ic conference on (ater resources.
0he functionalist ias is &anifest in the paper as a (hole and tends to read conte&porary deter&inants of the totality
of social life N those elon%in% to one tradition (ithin our%eois political econo&y N ac" into ancient E%ypt. HEditorIs
note.J
2
;or archais& at its ori%ins, see Hierarch% and Social Division, Natural Deter$inis$ and Modern Man appearin% in
1rigins and 2ndings+ HEditorIs note.J
co&&unities have e&er%ed and disappeared over and a%ain as a counter$ove$ent to the
rise of the state, its ethnocidal and territorial a%%randi=e&ent, its efforts to capture the laor of
other(ise free &en and (o&en to (or" the fields of rice padi a%riculture, of toacco, cotton,
su%ar and ruer &onocultural plantation, latifundia, etc., estates. 0his counter9 &ove&ent
has een for&ed over and a%ain in historical ti&e as these other(ise free &en and (o&en
fled state efforts to count, re%ister, conscript and ta' 4or e'tract triute5 fro& the&, and in
fleein% as they for&ed free 4i.e., archaic5 co&&unities.
1
?enerally, these t(o %reat for&s of hu&an sociation did not under%o internal collapse in the
sense that they could no lon%er sustain the&selves on their o(n foundations. 0his is not to
say that these co&&unities did not e'perience disturance, these social for&ations did not
erupt in opposition. So&e )uite &assive, nu&erous peasant revolts occurred in every dynastic
period of Chinese history. *nd (hile ,e'ternal/ disruption< in particular invasion and
con)uest< led to the destruction of all the ancient triutary for&ations 4e.%., Su&er, E%ypt of
the Pharaohs5, &odern ones as (ell 4the *=tec and Inca E&pires, for instance5 and countless
archaic co&&unities 4one need recall the fate of &any of those archaic co&&unities
orderin% the ever e'pandin% Inca e&pire or their destruction in the tropic =one of the
*&ericas y Spanish< and Portu%uese< con)uerors as reported y Bartolo&e de las
Casas5, in the historicall% significant sense, it as not their internal contradictions of
develop$ent so-called, &ut capitalis$, the value for$ or, if %ou prefer, the penetration of
aged la&or or the circulation of goods as &earers of that for$ 0produced as co$$odities and
exchanged for the hat has &een hunted, fished, or captured ith i$ple$ents characteristic
of archaic co$$unities5, hich has &een the solvent of &oth $odern tri&utar% for$ations and
surviving archaic co$$unities, for, in &oth cases, do&inant social relations loc"ed the
&ove&ent of capital 4especially on the asis of the internal differentiation of a lar%e capitalist
far&er out of the peasantry, and develop&ent of an internal &ar"et5.
2
)or$s of Sociation, ,,
Beteen Tri&utar% )or$ations and Capitalist Modernit%
0he actual e&er%ence of capital and capitalis&< the distinction (ill eco&e clear in the
course of this presentation< into hu&an history (as a contin%ent event, (hich is not to say
that the once capital appeared its develop&ent did not possess a certain necessity 4(e shall
return to this5.
Since (hat (e ai& at here is a deter&ination of the concepts of for&al and real do&ination in
production, one that includes a periodi=ation of the entire history of capitalist develop&ent,
and on this asis an account of these for&s of do&ination as epochs in the history of
capitalis& in their relation to historically si%nificant, novel departures in the history of &odern
science, (e are re)uired to inte%rate discussion of the specificity of for&s of do&ination (ith
the conditions of the for&ation of capital.
We start fro& the previous reconstruction and analysis of real historical, funda&ental for&s of
sociation in order to su&&arily recount the for&ation of capital in its reco%ni=aly &odern
shape as self9valori=in% value. *t its ori%ins 4e%innin% (ith its antediluvian for&s5, it did not,
ho(ever, and could not have this character. 0his account 4the follo(in% sche&ati=ation5 (ill
effectively yield a deter&ination of for&al do&ination 4in 6ar', the for&al susu&ption of
1
$ere see Pierre Clastres, Societ% against the StateE and &ost evidentially assessed, forcily stated and
syste&atically ar%ued, 8a&es C. Scott, The 7rt of Not Being 8overned: 7n 7narchist Histor% of Hpland Southeast
7sia+
2
*&on% the villa%e co&&unities of oth ancient and &odern triutary for&ations, e.%., especially the latter 4e.%.,
colonial 6e'ico (ith its Indian co&&unities, 0sarist Russia (ith its o&schina5, it (as the periodic division of land y
the villa%e asse&ly that, if not al(ays assurin% a rou%h e)uality of holdin%s a&on% its &e&ers and preventin% the
develop&ent of a hard stratification, sty&ied the penetration of capital.
laor under capital5,
1
(hich is the first of those for&s of capital.s do&ination in production and
(hich, returnin% to the sche&ati=ation of historical develop&ent, per&its us to reconstruct not
1ust those for&s 4for&al and real do&ination5 ut, in the oth cases, their various phases.
2
It is
only on this asis that (e can elicit a deter&ination of the relation of for&s to epochs of
do&ination in the history of capitalis& and de&onstrate the internal connection of the latter to
novel, historically i&portant departures in the history of science<
0here is certainly circularity in all this+ It appears that our presentation presupposes a prior,
operative concept of the conditions necessary for the for&ation of capital as capital. 0his is
true. 0his circularity lar%ely resolves itself into the difference et(een 4&ethod of5
investi%ation and 4that of5 presentation+ If (e have stressed the &eticulous, detailed study,
scrutiny and assi&ilation of historical contents< effectively the (or" carried out y 6ar' in his
preparatory studies to Capital<
D
in so &any (ords, the ele&ent of investi%ation, (e can
reco%ni=e there is a lo%ic or a ,&ethod/ to investi%atory activity. 0his lo%ic is dialectical, that is,
there is no ,essence/ that can e e'tracted (ithout analysis of the various for&s of
pheno&ena as they e'hiit the&selves, the investi%ation ad&its of no asolutely valid startin%
points, does not &ove for(ard in a strai%ht line, reco%ni=es each particular &o&ent, detail,
fact, idea or cate%ory receives its si%nificance only as it assu&es its places in the totality, a
totality that si&ultaneously can only e %rasped as its partial, inco&plete &o&ents, the ,facts/
(hich for& it, coalesce. 0he lo%ic of investi%ation &oves fro& tacit theoretical assu&ptions to
detailed historical analysis, ,facts,/ and ac" to the theory, &ore or less &odified and ac" to
analysis in a circular &ove&ent that concreti=es oth &o&ents and totality, analysis and
theoryE and, it is in this &ove&ent that specific deter&inants< here the conditions for the
for&ation of capital< e&er%e. 0he lo%ic of presentation, the presentation itself, ta"es as its
point of departure the results of the entire investi%ative underta"in%, i.e., efore the
presentation has even e%un, the o1ect is understood+ Presentation is or%ani=ed to assure
&astery, to facilitate co&prehension. Its lo%ic also has, aleit distinctively different, a (ell9
defined &ethodolo%ically necessary structure. @i"e $e%el 4and 6ar'5, (e al(ays e%in (ith
the o1ect as it is si&ply %iven or i&&ediately present, (hat is isolated and astract,
#
understandin% that (hat is there i&&ediately, undeter&ined and i&plicit in the e%innin% is
there concretely< the varied for&s of its appearance traced out in detail and their
connections e'hiited, thus full% $ediated and deter$ined, full% developed< in the end, and
is thus co&prehended and no lon%er &erely understood+
C
0he lo%ic of presentation de&ands
1
6ar', MResultate des un&ittelaren Produ"tionspro=esses,
0his is the today (ell9"no(n and so9called Oth chapter of :apital, unpulished in 6ar'.s lifeti&e or for that &atter until
the 17G0s.
*s a &atter of oth nuance and clarity< the En%lish translations are &ost often too literal< (e have used the
?er&an and presented our o(n translations of this te't as (ell as other (or"s of 6ar' fro& (hich (e cite.
2
;or the historical for&s of real do&ination in production, see the section under that headin% in the Second Interlude,
elo(.
D
In En%lish, Contri&ution to the Critique of 4olitical 2cono$%, 8rundrisse, The 2cono$ic Manuscripts of *CQ*-*CQB,
"or!s, !ols. D09DD and The 2cono$ic Manuscripts of *CQ*-*CQD, "or!s, !ol. D#.
#
,*llerdin%s &ub sich die :arstellun%s(eise for&ell von der ;orschun%s(eise unterscheiden. :ie ;orschun% hat den
Stoff sich i& :etail an=uei%nen, seine verschiednen Ent(ic"lun%sfor&en =u analysieren und deren innres Band
auf=uspAren. Erst nachde& diese *reit vollracht, "ann die (ir"liche Be(e%un% entsprechend dar%estellt (erden.
?elin%t dies und spie%elt sich nun das @een des Stoffs ideell (ider, so &a% es aussehn, als hae &an es &it einer
Lonstru"tion a priori =u tun./ 4,>f course the &ethod of presentation &ust differ in for& fro& that of in)uiry. 0he latter
has to appropriate the &aterial in detail, to analy=e its different for&s of develop&ent, to trace out their inner
connection. >nly after this (or" is done, can the actual &ove&ent e ade)uately descried. If this is done
successfully, if the life of the su1ect9&atter is ideally reflected as in a &irror, then it &ay appear as if (e had efore
us a &ere a priori construction./5 Cited fro& the M3ach(ort/ to the second ?er&an edition 41FGD5 of :apital. >ur
translation.
C
,<1ener Rn&ittelar"eit und Einfachheit des *n%an%s ist es daru& %leich< Es ist das Werden seiner selst, der
Lreis, der sein Ende als seinen B(ec" vorausset=t und =u& *nfan%e hat, und nur durch die *usfAhrun% und sein
the points of departure and arrival, capital, are for&ally identical, that in the end (e return to
our initial situation, no( conceptually deter&ined, co&prehended and e'plained...
Capital can only appear on the asis of social division, (here a%riculture, social stratification
(ith fi'ed positions in a division of laor and a state are already present. So if (e return to
triutary for&ations (e can note that it is here that capital first appeared 4and &anifestly not in
its &odern for&5, ut not in all such for&ations at all ti&es+ We recall that they rested on
villa%e co&&unities. In a %eneral (ay, all hu&an needs (ithin such co&&unities are fulfilled
fro& (ithin the co&&unity itself. 0he presence of a%riculture is &assive and over(hel&in%.
0he land is (or"ed, is considered< it is &erely strai%htfor(ardly ta"en for %ranted< the
patri&ony of the co&&unity (hether free peasant fa&ilies (or" it and the householder is
effectively the proprietor or (hether a ,hi%her unity/ 4i.e., Po(er, the state (hether in the
person of a pharaoh, an e&peror, a tsar, or a divine "in%5 is ,o(ner/ and the relation of the
co&&unity &e&ers to the land is one of usufruct. In any case, land and soil are related to
those (ho (or" it in a &atter in (hich they cannot e detached, are inseparale, or in 6ar'.s
pre%nant phrase, the Earth is the inor%anic ody of those (ho (or" it and this is an o1ective
characteri=ation, i.e., the soil is the ,unor%anische 3atur vor%efundner @ei seiner
Su1e"tivitQt./
1
0hose needs satisfied in and this relation are, to e sure, narro( or restricted,
and (here they transcend the i&&ediate fa&ily, it is so&eone (ith non9a%riculturally special
s"ills 4say a s&ith5 (ho is nonetheless indistin%uishaly part of the co&&unity, a &e&er of
the villa%e, that provides for the re)uire&ent, e.%., faricates an iron fittin% for a cart(heel.
0he narro( or restricted character of needs here &a"es it possile to characteri=e this
situation in ter&s of household production 4(here, of course, a household &ay include a
fa&ily of several %enerations all (or"in% the land 1ointly, not the nuclear fa&ily of the &odern
our%eois era5<
;ollo(in% upon collapse of the Ro&an E&pire do(n to e&er%ence of to(ns, all production in
the West started fro& the self9sufficient household 4oi!os5, either that of free peasants or that
of the lord.s &anor or oth< It (as in these interstices (ere a &odicu& of intercourse (ithin
the vast rural faric of a feudal social for&ation that e&er%ed fro& and re&ained for so&e
ti&e intert(ined (ith an assort&ent of for&s of sociation 4decayin% triutary, villa%e
co&&unities detached fro& "in%ship, landed aristocracies controllin% lar%e estates (or"ed y
peasant tenants or slaves or oth, villa%e co&&unities in (hich property appeared and risen
to the level of clan o(nership controlled y villa%e elders, peasant allods, etc., (ith hyrid and
&i'ed for&s to oot5, for&s (ithin (hich e'chan%es too" place and, thus, (herein a &ediu&
of this e'chan%e, precious &etals 4%old, silver5, appeared. *&idst this, over historical ti&e
feudal for&s asserted their pri&acy in north(estern Europe. * len%thy historical develop&ent
led to for&ation of &ar"et to(ns, to a division of laor in (hich the &erchant appeared< not
1ust as a trader (ho e'chan%es %oods of one co&&unity (ith another ut< as a fi'ture (ithin
the division of laor (ho helped to rin% this &ediu& in its &ost astract for&, &oney, into
ein% and (ho accu&ulated (ealth in &onetary for&+ It (as only on the ed%es of %reat
ancient triutary for&s 4e.%., the ?ree" cities alon% the (estern peri&eter of the Persian
e&pire5 and in the uran enclaves of feudal era in the @o( Countries, Catalonia and Italy that
Ende (ir"lich ist., 4,I&&ediacy and si&plicity are characteristic of the e%innin%< It is the process of its o(n
eco&in%, the circle (hich presupposes its end as its purpose, and has its end for its e%innin%E it eco&es concrete
and actual only e ein% carried out, and y the end it involves./5 $e%el, M!orrede,, 4h@no$enologie des 8eistes+ >ur
translation.
1
0he soil is the ,o1ective, nature9%iven inor%anic ody of his Hthe toiler.sJ su1ectivity/ 4our translation5. 6ar',
8rundrisse, ,;or&en, die der "apitalistischen Produ"tion vorher%ehen,/ in Marx-2ngels "er!e, Bd+ D', E!ono$ische
Manus!ripte, *CASU*CAC: DFC.
capital appeared and appeared only in its antediluvian for&s (hich, follo(in% 6ar', (ere
&erchant.s capital and usury.
1
Within these to(ns at their origins 0the fauour%s5, the &erchant.s ori%inal function (as to
dispose of (hat tiny surpluses the villa%es %enerated 4(here they accrued at all5. But (ith
their develop&ent, an internal, relatively elaorate division of laor for&ed, crafts&en and
s&all9scale co&&odity production first appeared.
2
It is at this &o&ent that production lost its
strictly local character 4i.e., its relation centered lar%ely fro& its standpoint on the surroundin%
villa%es as its hinterland5. * social si%nificant layer of &erchants constituted< over ti&e
characteri=ed y a relatively fi'ed division of laor (ithin this ,co&&unity/< a layer for&ed
not 1ust y traders (ho &ediated e'chan%e a&on% the villa%es, ut y &erchants (ho related
to(n to to(n in ter&s of a roader9ased e'chan%e of products, and y &erchants (ho
speciali=ed in &oney itself, i.e., y lenders9eco&in%9an"ers< all of (ho& created a re%ular
outlet and &ar"et for products 4a&on% individuals (ho (ere strictly to(n d(ellers5,
accelerated the develop&ent of crafts (ith their array of artisans, and a craft social structure
4&aster, 1ourney&en, apprentices5 (ith its institutional e&odi&ent in the %uild. We can spea"
of production of this sort, that (hich corresponded to the for&ation of to(ns (ithin 4ancient5
triutary for&ations and 4&odern5 feudalis&, and (ithin (hich an accu&ulation 4a hoard5 of
&onetary (ealth as &erchant capital appeared, as 0handi5craft production. Craft production
developed (ith the for&ation and develop&ent of to(ns, (ith &erchant capital &ediatin% the
co&&erce carried out a&on% to(ns. But (hile the full elaoration of this for& leads eyond
itself, it did so onl% on the ed%es of feudal society, and in this sense (ithin the historical
fra&e(or" and conte't of develop&ents that occurred (ithin and as a response to feudal
social relations as the developed in (estern Europe 4and not 8apan5.
D
>n the ed%es of the feudal for&ation that too" shape in (estern Europe, in present day
Britain, ;rance, Bel%iu&, the 3etherlands, northern and eastern Spain and poc"ets on the
Italian Peninsula, the develop&ent of the to(ns %ave rise to the %reat cities of the hi%h
&edieval era, i.e, an early early in the epoch of capitalIs for&al do&ination over laor in
production+ 0he i% &en of these cities< ancestors of the oli%archy of old fa&ilies a&on% the
%reat &erchant9an"ers, &erchants9&anufacturers and &erchant9traders< actually
con)uered the feudal lords of their surroundin% countryside< in ;lorence the populo grasso
&oili=ed the s&all to(ns&en in &ilitias to defeat the strictly rural, sei%niorial lords 4(ho
(ould later e proscried as $agnati, and, on the asis of (hose final defeat a popular
co&&unal re%i&e ased on the &ost productively si%nificant %uilds (ould e estalished5.
0his con)uest freed the %reat &erchants, per&itted the& to participate fully in, &ediatin%, the
social elaoration of a %ro(in% detailed division of laor in craft production. With their detailed
re%ulations coverin% all aspects of daily life in production, the %uilds protected the structure of
1
MEs is viel&ehr durch Wucher N esonders auch %e%en das %runei%entu& aus%eAten N und durch
Lauf&anns%e(inne auf%ehQuftes &oiles !er&c%en N ?eldver&c%en, das in Lapital i& ei%enlichen Sinn,
industrielles Lapital ver(andelt (ird... so(eit sie... nichts als selst ;or&en des Lapitals, sondern als frPhere
Ler$Vgensfor$en erscheinen, als Lorausset/ungen fPr das :apital... Die :apital&ildung geht daher+++ vo$
:auf$anns- und "ucherver$Vgen+N 4,0he &oney (ealth (hich eco&es transfor&ed into capital in the authentic
sense, into industrial capital, is rather the &oile (ealth a&assed throu%h usury 99 particularly that practiced a%ainst
landed property and otained y &ercantile H&eansJ< 0hey the&selves do not appear as for&s of capital, &ut as
earlier for$s of ealth, as presuppositions for capital? The for$ation of capital thus e$ergeWsX? fro$ $erchants
and usurers ealth+/5 6ar', ,&id 48rundrisse,, ,;or&en, die der "apitalistischen Produ"tion vorher%ehen/5, #12+ >ur
translation, all e&phases added.
2
;or the fauour%s, see ;or&al :o&ination, II 4@inea&ents5+ :ecay of ;eudal Social Relations, the Rise of 0o(ns and
the 6erchant as the :o&inant Social ;i%ure,/ elo(.
D
In 8apan, the direction of develop&ent constituted a return in a &odern, despotic for& to triutary social relations,
and not to capitalis& in any, even its earliest for&. HSee The 4ro&le$ of )eudalis$, :ivision III, Part !I, ,Conclusion+
Prole&s of the 0o"u%a(a Sho%unate as a 6odern 0riutary ;or&ation./ EditorIs note.J
the crafts, first and fore&ost the %reat crafts&en, the &asters, (ho on occasion eca&e
detached fro& production, &erchants in their o(n ri%ht. Where< on the asis of craft
production< &erchants developed a culture of their o(n, they could institute a 4transitory5
social for& in its o(n ri%ht... recall the situation in late fourteenth century ;lorence riefly
alluded to aove< ut they did not revolutioni=e and transfor& the social relations of feudal
production 4they didnIt need to, it (as already lon% decadent, decayed nearly eyond
reco%nition5+ 0heir ai& re&ained a&assin% &oney (ealth, and in this respect it purpose (as
t(ofold, for its o(n sa"e and for displayE so, thou%h e'chan%e &ay have een vastly
e'panded, &ar"ets %reatly enlar%ed and the %eo%raphical reach of &erchant activity N no
lon%er local N &ay have enco&passed lar%e distances on a re%ular asis, the &erchant
do&ination in production (as contradictory, a lo%ic of accu&ulation 4&oney (ealth5 appeared
and (as co&pellin% for (hole strata of &erchant ut it (as not decisive, it did and did not
si%nify that social relations (hich rose fro& it re&ained, in a hi%hly &ediated (ay, ,relations...
that e'pressHedJ a prevalence of use value and production oriented to(ard use value, as (ell
as a real co$$unit% (hich is itself still i&&ediately present as a pre&ise of production/
1
4our
translation, our e&phasis5. It It did ecause production did not e'ist for its o(n sa"e, did not
ai& at reproducin% and e'pandin% (hat had yet to fully co&e into ein%, capitalE and it did not
ecause, in the constitution of a net(or" of social relations that for&ed a continental econo&y,
the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in production tended to (hat it never achieved, an
autono&ous lo%ic of econo&ic develop&ent.
0hus, to return to ;lorence 4?enoa and perhaps !enice5 (here this develop&ent (ent further
than any(here in history, not only did 1tti$ati 4oli%archical5 po(er collapse lon% efore the
capitulation of the Repulic to Charles !.s Castilian colu&ns in 1CD0, in the face of %ro(in%,
successful co&petition e&anatin% fro& the @ondon and *nt(erp, as (ell as nu&erous s&all
to(ns in the @o( Countries and in eastern and central En%land, y no later than the first
)uarter of the chronolo%ical fifteen century ;lorence (as already under%oin% a ,de9
develop&ent/ as the %reat uran patricians retired to their country estates< %ivin% the
se$&lance of a ,re9feudali=ation/ of social relations< satisfied (ith their accu&ulated
&ercantile, fa&ily (ealth and the vicious e'ploitation of sharecroppin% tenants 4$Ita%ers5.
2
*nd, even thou%h a for& of capitalist do&ination in production itself, and not 1ust one
characteri=ed y its non9interventionist he%e&ony over production, had indisputaly appeared
(ithin ;lorence 4as far ac" and further than the &o&ent of the Cio&pi Revolution, 1DGF5
a&on% the sottoposti? the proletarian ele&ent (hich (as co&posed of cloth(or"ers
4pri&arily (ool ut also sil" (or"ers5, the corders and eaters (ho perfor&ed the least s"illed
tas"s in the clothin% &otteghe, (ho (ere clearly the &ost ho&o%eneous stratu&, and (ho
(ere propertyless (a%e earners 4not hourly ut y contract5< its appearance there at this
&o&ent (as local or sporadic, and did not a&ount to a develop&ent+ Barriers to further
penetration of the value for& re&ained. 0hese included the %uild structure of the co&&unity
(hich (as fully inte%rated into ;lorentine %reat &erchant do&inated polityE &anufacture
(hich, havin% een li&ited y de&o%raphical collapse and havin% lost its character as an
early for& of &ass production, had 4after 1D#F91DC05 returned to a restricted character of the
production of lu'ury %oods, havin% never een production for production.s sa"eE and the
1
>!erhQltnisse, die eensosehr ein !orherrschen des ?erauchs(erts und der auf den u&ittelaren ?erauch
%erichteten Produ"tion (ie eines un&ittelar selst noch als !orausset=un% der Produ"tion vorhanden realen
?e&ein(esens ausdrAc"en./ ,&id, #1O+
2
It should e stressed a%ain this (as a contradictor% develop&ent, for, as in the other %reat, and risin%, centers of
capitalIs for&al do&ination, the ;lorentine &erchantIsI 6edici leadership pursued state9sponsored &ercantilist trade
practices oriented to their defense.
HIn re%ard to rural estates, see the fourth the&atic discussion, The Contado, Tenanc% and the Me//adria, ,6e==adria
and 0enancy after 1D00,/ in The Histor% of )lorence+ EditorIs noteJ.
contradictory practice of the %reat &erchants 4as an"ers, &anufacturers and traders5 that
ai&ed at the accu&ulation of &oney (ealth oth for its o(n sa"e and for display. In ter&s of
the for&ation of capital, the (hole situation, ecause it estalished a reified o1ectivity 4an
econo&y5 on a continental scale (ith its o(n (ei%htiness in the affairs of &en a&ountin% to a
co&pulsion e'ercised on the&, can e apprehended as one of &erchant.s capital, call it an
antediluvian for& if you &ust, that eventually led eyond itself+ 0his restricted develop&ent
(as a &o&ent 4at an earlier &o&ent, a not9at9all9restricted one5 in a continent9(ide activity
(hich effectively inau%urated the &ove&ent of capital+ In 0uscany and &uch of @o&ardy in
the era of 6edicean supre&acy, the presence of these antediluvian for&s 4&erchant.s and
usury capital5 e'hiited the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in production in a hyrid or
astard, stagnating for& in (hich an"in% and &erchantIs profit heraldin% that strictly
,econo&ic/ do&ination (ere fused (ith shares and services e'tracted fro& peasants y lord
and landlord.
But the point is that this later, restricted develop&ent did not stand or occur alone, ut (as an
aspect 4at an earlier date, a nodal point5 in a vast net(or" of o1ectified and reified social
relationsE so that (ithin that net(or" and later develop&ent a far different historical outco&e
&ore or less si&ultaneously appeared and unfolded. In this, the latter case, en%a%ed in
production itself a &erchant, a %reat crafts&en or a country lord, as the case &ay have een,
pursued the accu&ulation of social (ealth in its various for&s for its o(n sa"e+
In the En%lish countryside, a s&all lord, a %entry %entle&an, and a lar%e tenant 4especially a
lar%e tenant (ith a custo&ary tenure that per&itted hi& to e'ploit the difference et(een the
fi'ed rent he paid a %reat lord and the econo&ic rents he char%ed s&all peasants5 each of
(ho& e%an to pursue accu&ulation, not 1ust of &oney (ealth ut, of land, and instru&ents
deployed in a%riculture 4o'en, cattle, plou%hs5< Re%ardless of (hether they (ere for&ally
free or not, custo&ary tenure provided peasants (ith the ri%ht to hereditarily hand do(n that
tenure to a son, set his rent on his lord.s land at an a&ount fi'ed y custo& 4and not y, e.%.,
the nascent &ove&ent of price5, it allo(ed hi& access to the lord.s uncultivated lands for
%ra=in% his ani&als, %atherin% (ood for fuel, pic"in% erries, nuts, &ushroo&s, etc., to
supple&ent his and his fa&ily.s diet, and %atherin% heral plants for food and &edicinal
purposesE and it %ave hi& the ri%ht to participate in local %overnance such as &anorial courts
or villa%e asse&lies...
1
*l(ays ai&ed at eli&inatin% custo&ary tenure, ruthless stru%%le (as
underta"en y lando(ners and lar%e tenants9eco&e9capitalist far&ers to effectively
e'propriate poor freeholders and copyholders, (ith the o1ective historical outco&e the
dissolution of custo&ary ri%ht, peasant suordination to capital.s for&al do&ination, and
proletariani=ation. "hether in 2ngland, estern, central or eastern 2urope, the entire histor%
of the develop$ent of the for$al do$ination of capital over la&or in agriculture cr%stalli/ed in
the fight for and against custo$ar% tenure?
In the cities, for e'a&ple those on the Italian Peninsula the social for&ation developed in one
direction, (here &asters distriuted (or" in their o(n lar%e do&estic (or"shops a&on%
1ourney&en and apprentices that (ere here, at this &o&ent, for&ally proletarians, and yet it
developed in another direction as %reat &erchants, the heads of %reat %uilds or corporations<
in En%land, they (ere called ,co&panies/< parceled out (or", piece(or" if you (ill, a&on%
laorers that operated out of their o(n d(ellin%s. In either direction, craft control in production
slo(ly e%an to dissolve. 0he socially (ell9or%ani=ed production that suse)uently developed
can e characteri=ed as a do$estic s%ste$+ In 0udor and Stuart En%land 4(hich is the &odel
here5, this (as the historical &o&ent of the suordination of to(ns to national unification, the
initial e&er%ence of a distinctively national econo&y e&edded in the continental one that
1
Bush, ,Iid,/ 1DG91DF.
i&&ediately predated the first theoretical reflections on these develop&ents other(ise "no(n
as political econo&y...
We can step ac" and recount and su&&ari=e this entire &ove&ent, e%innin% fro& that
&o&ent (hen it ca&e to a rea" in this len%thy historical process 41ust riefly descried5
earin% (ithin itself its o(n presuppositions. 0he latter entailed, in particular, si&ple
co&&odity production for e'chan%e on local &ar"etsE the develop&ent of &oney as a
universal &ediu& of e'chan%eE accordin%ly, a %enerali=ed circulation of products and &oneyE
and an accu&ulation 4or, as 6ar' says, the ,pilin% up/5 of &oney (ealth, its concentration in
the hands of a tiny social layer of individuals, often on the asis of an"in% profit, usury 4that
constituted a ,free fund/ (ith (hich the purchase of land, instru&ents and capacity to laor
(as &ade5.
0he rea" occurred, and it is at this crucial point< it appeared first in history in the West, on
the Italian peninsula, in the @o( Countries and in southeastern En%land< that a fateful
develop&ent occurred. 0here is a passa%e fro& R&erto Eco.s The Na$e of the Rose that,
aleit novelistically, neatly su&&ari=es this develop&ent, a &ove&ent in (hich, descried
o1ectivistically, the &onetari=ation of social relations opens up a fissure in the structure of
society, a structure (hich fro& the standpoint of production characteri=ed all hitherto e'istin%
for&s in (hich an undeveloped 4and if not undeveloped then an indeter&inate5 sphere of
&aterial production e%an to under%o a startlin% chan%e, fro& production for the sa"e of
consu&ption 4in ho(ever hierarchical a for& distriution (as or%ani=ed and the enefits of
production (ere appropriated5 to one in (hich increasin%ly so&ethin% other, at first &erely an
inter&ediary, too" precedence+ ,6oney, in Italy, has a different function fro& (hat it has in
your country, or in &ine. 6oney circulates every(here, ut &uch of life else(here is still
do&inated and re%ulated y the arterin% of %oods, chic"en or sheaves of (heat, or a scythe,
or a (a%on, and &oney serves only to procure these %oods. In the Italian city, on the contrary,
you &ust have noticed that %oods serve &oney. *nd even priests, ishops, even reli%ious
orders have to ta"e &oney into account</
1
0his, the develop&ent of pri&acy of e'chan%e
over production, the unfoldin% ascendancy of &ercantile (ealth over %oods and services
(hich 6ar' called use values, (as also a lon% historical process and it (as not capital 4or
capitalis&5 in its reco%ni=aly &odern for&, ut this &ove&ent, ideally reconstructed, did
si%nify and point ac" to an actual historical transfor&ation of &o&entous i&portance, a
process of dissolution in (hich old onds of personal dependence< rural as (ell as uran<
(ere cut, cast aside.
2
What is at issue here is the process of dissolution, its historical si%nificance+ * &ass of
individuals, (hole social layers or strata, (ere cut loose fro& their place in the division of laor
(ithin a co&&unity to (hich hitherto they (ere see&in%ly indissoluly ound. If they (ere
serfs, free peasants, or tenants and they (or"ed the soil, this ond (as so inti&ate the Earth
(as si&ply sensuously9&aterially %iven, appearin% as their inor%anic odyE if they (ere
crafts&en 4&asters, 1ourney&en, apprentices5, previously they had real, practical control over
or 4the prospects of5 proprietorship of the instru&ents and tools of their craft, all of (hich (as
heritale and not alienale. 0hrou%h a len%thy historical process, all these ere alienated and
1
0he spea"er is Eco.s prota%onist, Brother Willia& of Bas"erville.
2
MIn allen diesen *uflcsun%enpro=essen... dab !erhQltnisse der Produ"tion auf%elcst (erden, (orin vorherrscht+
?erauchs(ert, Produ"tion fAr den u&ittelaren ?erauchE der 0ausch(ert und die Produ"tion desselen das
!orherrschen der andren ;or& =ur !orausset=un% hatE daher auch in allen diesen !erhQltnissen 3aturallieferun%en
und 3aturaldienste Aer ?eld=ahlun% und ?eldleistun% vorherrscht., 4,In all these processes of dissolution< the
relations of production are ro"en up+ (here use value prevails, production for i&&ediate consu&ptionE (here
e'chan%e value and its production rests on the prevalence of the other for&E and, thus, in all these relations
pay&ents in "ind and services in "ind predo&inate over cash and &oney pay&ents./5 6ar', ,&id 48rundrisse5, #10.
>ur translation.
eca&e freely availale, purchasale, to those (ith the (here(ithal to &a"e that purchase. *ll
the individuals, laorers, (ere left (ith (as their capacit% to la&or.
1
3o( if the separation of a &ass of individuals fro& the o1ective conditions of their productive
reali=ation, fro& the &eans and &aterials of laor, is the first historical condition of the
for&ation of a syste& of social relation "no(n as capitalis&, the second is the other side of
the sa&e ,event/ 4i.e., historical process5, the creation of this KfreeK laor to%ether (ith its
e'chan%e on a &ar"et for &oney in return for reunion (ith those sa&e &eans and &aterials
of production. It is only (hen these conditions (ere satisfied and eca&e socially %enerali=ed,
accordin%ly, (hen the laorers, stripped of their control or proprietorship over oth instru&ents
of production and property in production, &et another (ho possessed oth and (ith (ho& the
laorers e'chan%ed their capacity to laor in return for the KopportunityK to earn the &onetary
&eans to provide for their vital needs 4(hile that other, no( a capitalist, retained possession of
the product as his property5, that the valori=ation process, and hence the creation of capital,
can e instituted. 0hese are the foundations of capitalis&E they re&ain e'tant, are repeated
daily in countless e'chan%es, and constitute the necessary conditions (ithout (hich it cannot
e reproduced.
0he sa&e historical develop&ent, as necessary, concurrent conse)uences, dissolves all
hitherto e'istin% social relations 4e.%., personal dependency as in the case of the slave or serf,
proprietorship as in the case of the free peasant, inheritaility of craft, tools and s"ills and their
status as property as in the case of the craft &aster5 and, as (ell, the institutional fra&e(or"
(hich these social relations (ere created and (ithin (hich they functioned 4e.%., %uilds as in
the case of crafts&en5. Rnder these conditions ,finally the very relation et(een the o(ner of
the conditions of laor and the (or"er is dissolved into a pure relation of &u%ing and selling, or
a $onetar% relation/ 4our translation, e&phases in ori%inal5.
2
*d&i'tures, sei%niorial, patriarchal and sacred, disappear fro& the relation of e'ploitation+ 0he
for&ation of capital has een inau%urated<
Startin% fro& a su&&ary analysis of feudalis& and the intricate co&ple' of issues it has
raised (ith re%ard to the appearance of capitalis&, (e shall trace out in detail the historical
develop&ent in (hich the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in production (as
estalished in the epochal sense and, thus, in (hich the for&ation of capital (as inau%urated.
The 4ro&le$ of )eudalis$
,ts 4lace and that of )eudal Social Relations in Histor%
D
In its historical specificity feudalis& is not a &a1or and decisive for& of hu&an sociation, ut
contradictorily co&ines... it (as not a ,synthesis,/ a concept that ears the &ar"s of a
,dialectically/ pro%ressive, i.e., sta%ist &etaphysics of historical develop&ent... central
1
,Capacity to laor/ translates< literally and, in our vie(, far &ore preferaly than ,laor po(er/< 7r&eitsver$Vgen+
M*uf der einen Seite (erden historische Pro=esse voraus%eset=t, die eine 6asse Individuen enire 3ation etc. in die
@a%e, (enn =unQchst nicht von (ir"lichen freien *reite& verset=t haen, doch von solchen, die es d%na$ei sind,
deren ein=i%es Ei%entu& ihr *reitsver&c%en und die 6c%lich"eit, es aus=utauschen %e%en vorhanden WerteE
Individuen, denen alle o1e"tiven Bedin%un%en der Produ"tion als fre$des 2ignetu$, also ihr Nicht-2igentu$
%e%enAerstehn, aer =u%leich als "erte austauschar, daher anei%enar =u eine& certain de%ree durch leendi%e
*reit., 4,0o the one side, historic processes are presupposed (hich have placed a &ass of individuals in a nation,
etc., in the situation of for&ally free (or"ersE if not so at first, then so d%na$icall% Hi.e., o1ectively and historically,
individualsJ (hose only property is their capacity to laor and the possiility of e'chan%in% it for values that are to
handE individuals (ho confront all o1ective conditions of production as alien propert%, not as their o(n propert%, ut at
the sa&e ti&e as values, as e'chan%eale, thus ac)uirale to a certain de%ree throu%h livin% laor./5 6ar', ,&id
48rundrisse5, #07. >ur translation, all e&phases in ori%inal.
2
M...endlich das !erhQltnis der Besit=er der *reitsedin%un%en und der *reiter selst in ein reines :auf- und
Ler!aufverh@ltnis oder 8eldverh@ltnis auflcst., 6ar', MResultate des un&ittelaren Produ"tionspro=esses.,
D
0his is the Conclusion to a co&parative study of the t(o independent ori%ins of feudalis&, The 4ro&le$ of
)eudalis$+ HEditorIs noteJ.
features of the &a1or for&s of hu&an sociation, non9statis& to one side 4archais&5 and
e'tre&e hierarchy to the other 4triutary social for&ations, capitalist &odernity5. 0here are five
considerations here.
;irst, there (ere t(o %eo%raphical locales (here feudalis& ori%inated, each independently of
the other. 0hese (ere in 8apan on the &ain island of of $onshd, in the surroundin%
peripheries of a re%ion that ran fro& Wa"asa Bay south(ard alon%side @a"e Bi(a to Lyoto
and the %reat plain to the south, east of >sa"a, a re%ion (e can characteri=e as the -a&ato
nucleusE
1
and in north(estern Europe et(een the @oire and Rhine Rivers.
In 8apan, after rou%hly 1CC0 only out(ard for&s 4and not all of the&5 of feudal social relations
re&ained. ;eudalis& (as asored ac" into a lar%ely, historically uni)ue &ilitary despotic
triutary for&ation (hich (as not fully staili=ed until around 1OC0.
In Europe, feudalis& also disappeared, and earlier. But so&ethin% novel developed, na&ely,
the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in production that tended 4ut never reali=ed5 the
autono&y in the develop&ent of the continental te'tile econo&y. What this develop&ent
tended to(ard (as the ,la(/ of value, i.e., in the roadest sense the tendential reduction of
social relations to productive ones, that is, the disciplinin% and re%i&entation of for&er y the
latter i&plied in the re%ulation of production of co&&odities and their distriution 4and later, as
capital is estalished on its o(n foundations, the auto&ati=ed rene(al and au%&entation of
capital5 y socially necessary laor ti&e. It (as never fully reali=ed ecause the %ro(in%
(ei%ht of for&al capitalist social relations that ore do(n on (hole populations, thou%h lived
and e'perienced as the &ystified and reified (ei%ht of the econo&y, (as al(ays
deter&inately &ediated y princely po(er in all historically si%nificant events. >nce for&al
do&ination (as institutionally staili=ed in the political sense 4i.e., throu%h the our%eois
revolution (hich at the level of the state sanctioned the pri&acy of the for&al &ove&ent of
capital5, over historical ti&e this lo%ic (as fully constituted,eco&in% historically efficacious
and increasin%ly deter&inant for all of society. It (as identifiale, a&on% historical a%ents, in
ter&s of that internali=ed lo%ic &anifested in their ehavior, in the historically si%nificant
activity of these a%ents 4(ell to do peasants, %entle&en %entry, &erchants pursuin% capital
for&ation as that capital circulates in the &ove&ent of &oney and price5. *ove all, aleit
&ystifyin%ly and ofuscatorily it (as identifiale as the ,natural/ course of develop&ent the
econo&y in the societies of Europe and En%land over %enerations. It is this lo%ic that (as
increasin%ly set free y the political staili=ation of our%eois relations in production, and it
(as this lo%ic that the 0o"u%a(a sho%unate stru%%led a%ainst in closin% the country off to
forei%n trade, in incorporatin% &erchants in a thorou%hly suordinate fashion into the Ba!ufu
ad&inistration of the %reat cities and in effort to re%ulate the &inutia of &erchant ehavior and
daily life, in re&ovin% the (arrior 0sa$urai5 fro& productive a%ricultural activity and depositin%
hi& in the to(ns, in strappin% the peasantry do(n to its villa%es and refusin% it the chance to
fore%o rice production.
Second, if the t(o asic feudal for&s 4these t(o historicities5 are ithout arrant %iven e)ual
status, they 4ofuscatorily5 appear in road historical s(eep as si&ultaneous and concurrent.
-et 8apanese feudalis& &ay have een &ore funda&ental ecause it e'hiited all the
possiilities of feudalis& as a syste& of social relations in (hich any productively9driven,
develop&ental transcendence (as aorted. It (as the autono&ous lo%ic of econo&ic
develop&ent that (as forcily ter&inated, or never allo(ed to developE in 8apan, the class
stru%%les a&on% %reat triutary lords and y these lords a%ainst the peasantry 4thou%h not the
&erchants (ho (ere too intert(ined (ith these lords fro& early on
2
(as fro& e%innin% to
end stru%%le in the for& of a stru%%le for political po(er over the entire social for&ation. It (as
1
See The 4ro&le$ of )eudalis$, :ivision III, Part I, ,0he -a&ato 3ucleus,/ for the si%nificance of this re%ion in
8apanese history. HEditorIs note.J
asolutely pri&aryE and (hen that stru%%le susided and political staility (as te&porarily
achieved it as the political poer of the great tri&utar% lords that ala%s deter$ined the
contours, te$pos and rh%th$s of econo$ic develop$ent.
1
3one of this ehavior s&ac"s of a
po(erful persona%e e&edded in the &atri' of feudal social relations 4for these ehaviors,
(hile reinforcin% the lordsI &ilitary stran%lehold, si&ultaneously under&ined those relations5.
In respect to the distance traversed fro& feudalis&, and in this respect onl%, the 8apanese
triutary lords, then, (ere the historical analo%, ithout havin% assi&ilated and internali=ed the
lo%ic of capital, of the En%lish %entry our%eoiseie circa 1CC091OC0.
0hird, (e cannot escape a deter&ination and assess&ent of the situation of feudalis& in
relation to capitalis&. ;or (hether it is strai%htfor(ardly our%eois intellectuals (ho see in
capitalis& the foundations of a %loal civili=ation 4alternately, si&ply defend capitalis& (ith
reference to the e'alted traditions of the ,West/5, or it is their covert rethren, productivists and
6ar'ists, (ho see a historically necessary develop&ent for (hich capitalis& is the final
&aterial preparation for the socialist heaven 4i.e., a hi%hly rationalistic, technocratic
capitalis&5, in either case feudalis& is the i&&ediately antecedent societal for& fro& (hich
capitalis& rose 4either &erely antecedent or, alternately, a si%nificant &o&ent in the unfoldin%
of those e'alted traditions or, &etaphysically, a necessary sta%e in the eco&in% of a
universal free society ased on the unha&pered and fullest develop&ent of production5.
*%ainst these do&inant currents, our )uestion is, ,(hat does our analysis tell us aout the
relation of feudalis& to capitalis&2/
2
In ran%in% the historical civili=ation of 8apan alon%side that of (estern Europe, (e can first,
&ost oviously, note that feudalis& in 8apan (as not i&&ediately historically antecedent to
capitalis&, that is, feudalis& does not, then, (ith historical necessity %ive rise to capitalis&. In
fact, in (estern Europe, it did not either+ * nu&er of inter&ediate for&s of sociation, the &ost
i&portant of (hich (ere the uran co&&unal civili=ation on the Italian Peninsula and "in%ship
in ;rance and ?er&anic central Europe 4and a (ea"er for& of the sa&e under the later
Ste(ards in Scotland5 ased on the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in production,
preceded its develop&ent. It is i&&ediately antecedent if (e dissolve these for&s into a
,reinvi%orated/ feudalis&,
D
therey dilute the actual historical content of feudalis&, and render
the concept vacuous and &as" the distinctive features of those inter&ediate for&s. In this (ay
an ideolo%ical deter&ination of the antecedent character of feudalis& can e &aintained.
When feudal social relations first appeared, rose to do&inance for a sin%ular epoch, and then
disappeared and %ave (ay to so&ethin% &ore 4&ediated y inter&ediate for&s of sociation,
(estern Europe5 or less 48apan5 novel, the t(o sites of ori%ination revealed different
tra1ectories.
* princely &ediated, lo%ic of econo&ic develop&ent first for&ed on the uran ed%es of the
(estern European feudal for&ation, (hile, inhiited and suppressed, it never for&ed in 8apan.
2
Who, after all, (ere not en%a%ed in the production of a surplus, and (ho fro& (ithin circuits of e'chan%e e'tracted a
surplus not unli"e the %reat lords (ho e'tracted theirs directly as triute and as rents, in "ind or in coin,
1
0hus, even in the &idst of %reat instaility and fi%htin% and even efore 0oyoto&i $ideyoshi 4re%ent and de facto
Sho%un, 1CFD91C7F5 achieved the individuation of the peasantry throu%h the Tai!Y no :enchi, effectively under&inin%
peasant solidarity, it (as a %reat lord (ho in 1CDG introduced a crop irri%ation syste& for channelin% (ater a&on%
%roups of villa%esE in 1C#C it (as another %reat lord 40a"eda Shin%en5 (ho oversa( the construction of stone
e&an"&ents for flood control alon% triutaries of the ;u1i"a(a RiverE it (as the $f1f fa&ily (hich si&ilarly initiated
(or"s alon% the course of the 0one%a(a to control its flo(s throu%h the 6usashi plainE and, particularly i&portant, it
(as the really %reat territorial lords (ho after 1CD0 or%ani=ed the i&prove&ent and enlar%e&ent of e'istin% %old and
silver &ines and prospectin% for ne( &ines 4ecause they e'chan%ed silver for copper coin (ith (hich, a&on% other
thin%s, they purchased ar&a&ents5, and (ho encoura%ed e%innin% in 1C#D the Portu%uese trade 4profits fro& (hich
(ere crucial to &aintenance of &ilitary stren%th5. ?eor%e Sa&son, Histor% of Gapan, ,,: 2CD, 2CG, 2O#.
2
Reference here is The 4ro&le$ of )eudalis$ in its entirety+ HEditorIs note.J
D
0he est e'a&ple is Perry *nderson, 3ineages of the 7&solute State
0hrou%h a series of inter&ediate for&s of sociation 4varyin% and, in so&e cases, )uite
different in different re%ions or "in%do&s5, (estern Europe %ave rise to a novel our%eois
class and the for& of productive activity that it ore, then to a confrontation et(een the
residue ele&ents of old and the nascent ne( orders, and finally the revolutionary victory of the
latter over the for&er in the end usherin% in capitalis&. -et the transfor&ation and then
disappearance of feudalis& in 8apan, (hile also e'hiitin% the for&ation of &ercantile classes
and to(ns 4and not at all on the %eo%raphical peripheries of this feudalis&5, ,reverted/ to an
older for& of sociation, triutary "in%ship+ Mediated &% its entire historical develop$ent, in its
Nreversion> 8apanese civili=ation concretely de&onstrates that hu$an histor% is not a unilinear
$ove$ent, does not unfold in Nstages,> is not deter$ined &% an ahistorical logic of the
develop$ent of productive forces, and for its greatest span is constitutes &% different
historicities ith different rh%th$s, te$pos and tra9ectories+
;eudalis& is e&phatically not a prolo%ue to capitalis&, a unilinear historical process or a
succession of interloc"ed, necessary connected and recurrin% social for&ations do not
characteri=e the &ove&ent of hu&an sociation. *s (e have had &ore than one occasion to
ar%ue else(here, capitalis& at its origins (as, in other (ords, radically contin%ent.
1
>viously, then, ecause relations et(een feudalis& and capitalis& as historical totalities
are contin%ent, and that the clai& for feudalis& as a funda&ental for& of sociation is
unfounded.
;ourth, it re&ains to specific the co&ple'ly &ediated relation of feudalis& to capitalis&.
0he one i&portant connection et(een feudalis& and capitalis& is private property in
production. In oth cases it (as and is, needless to say, hierarchically or%ani=ed.
In (estern Europe, feudalis& cannot have een said to have for&ed the historically actual
and necessary conditions for the rise of capitalis&E nor can the counter&ove&ent at its ed%es,
the rise of to(ns, a class of &erchants, artisans and a suordinate yet distinct for& of
productive activity 4ur&an-ased &anufactures5 said to have co&pleted those conditions. 0his
&uch also otained in 8apan. What (as si%nificant in feudalis& in re%ard to the rise of
capitalis& (as, first, autar"ic estates that unified production and %overnance, thus
fra%&entary politically authority that created the social space for the rise of to(ns and,
dialectically pre&ise and result of their rise a class of &erchants (ho strove to create
$unicipal li&ert% to defend e'chan%e and co&&odity circulationE and, second, no( at these
peripheries in opposition to feudalis&, a uni)ue e'plication and enlar%e&ent of this concept of
lierty (as elaorated, one co&pellin% a &erchant intelli%entsia to reach ac" to an epoch
that predated feudalis& and one that (as a nuanced, co&ple' for& of >1ective Spirit, la(+ In
a hi%hly specific for& as private la( concernin% trade and e'chan%e, a distinction (as
%enerated et(een &ere possession and private, a&solute and unconditional proprietorship
4of land, &anufactured %oods, &erchants inventory, etc.5 that affir&ed the pri&acy of the
latter. 0hese (ere the crucial differences and, all ta"en to%ether, constituted a uni)ue
develop&ent in hu&an history. It (as this difference that %ave the crafts&en or &erchant
eco&e capitalist the le%ally sanctioned (here(ithal to enforce his (ill, to &a"e his
a%%randi=e&ent real a%ainst the resistance of laorin% %roups, to dispossess, e'propriate
their o1ective sustance, render the& propertyless and then e&ploy the& under )ualitatively
novel productive conditions. It (as this constellation of institutions that &ade it possile, once
1
;or e'a&ple, Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ 0Hrgeschichte5, ;irst Study, ,!alue *ccu&ulation and 3ature :o&ination/
4$istorical 3ote 15.
H*lso see 4roductivis$ and the Metaph%sics of Negentrop% and 2xpanded Reproduction: 7 Modest Critique of
4resuppositions, Contents and Method in 3%n Marcus. Dialectical 2cono$ics, Part III, ,$istorical Issues.,/ appearin%
in 1rigins and 2ndings+ EditorIs note.J
the revolutionary victory of the our%eoisie politically staili=ed the&, for an autono&ous lo%ic
of econo&ic develop&ent to slo(ly for&...
Capitalis& as it first appeared in the En%lish countryside (as not possile (ithout an
appropriale, uni)ue tradition of astract for&al la(. It (as, further&ore, not possile (ithout
the unstale dynastic po(er (hich autar"ic feudal estates created and (hich al(ays
threatened to and often did devolve in internecine rulin% class stru%%le. 0hese features
per&itted &erchants as a class to connect the various re%ions of production in Europe
throu%h co&&odity e'chan%e 4i.e., (ea" or unstale political authority per&itted develop&ent
of uran enclaves (hich, (innin% their autono&y, e'panded into cities connected y circuits of
co&&ercial capital, lin"in% other(ise locali=ed production, settin% in &otion this for&al
develop&ental tra1ectory of capital5. 0his, thou%h, did not transpire in the (ay it is understood
in a 6ar'ist &etaphysics of sta%ist develop&ent+ It did not unfold necessarilyEE to the contrary,
this ,se)uence/ (as so&ethin% sin%ular and contin%ent that, its &ove&ent creatin% a dyna&ic
and the lo%ic of a susu&in% cannial, eca&e universal.
;ifth, (e can render a 1ud%&ent as to (here (e situate feudalis&, and feudal society so9
called, in history.
;eudalis& in the places of its ori%ination lac"ed state centralis& ased on a lar%e
ureaucratic stratu&. Instead, as the predo&inant for& of productive activity characteri=in% an
entire social for&ation, feudal social relations (ere at once rare and sui generis, arisin% only
in conditions of &assive social disorder, dislocation and the rea"do(n of an older for& of
"in%ship, (hether triutary 4$eian "in%ship in 8apan5 or not 46erovin%ian "in%ship in ;rancia5.
:ecisive for the entire social order, these relations the&selves (ere not triutary. Where they
ori%inally eca&e, as (e said, predo&inant, they (ere neither sualtern nor incidental
4peripheral and of little account5E yet they have not recurred over historical ti&e in the s(eep
of hu&an history (hich dates ac" to that &o&ent that hu&an %roups in the %reatest nu&er
aandoned no&adic e'istence 4in a different lan%ua%e, call that &o&ent the end of the last
%lacial5, as a%riculture and a sphere of production first developed, and (ith it fi'ed positions in
division of laor and a rudi&entary state in its earliest for& first appeared. In this i&portant
respect, feudalis& is alto%ether secondary as a for& of hu&an sociation.
)or$al Do$ination, ,
Chronolog% and Histor%
We shall offer t(o inner historical ,chronolo%ies,/ the first politically9centered and the second
revolvin% around the ascendancy of capitalIs for&al do&ination over laor as its occurs in
production. 0he reasons for these t(o periodi=ations, lines of in)uiry and historical
deter&ination (ill eco&e apparent as our account unfolds.
We can e%in y pausin% and recapitulatin% the tentative deter&ination of the for&al
susu&ption of laor under capital 4for&al do&ination5 offered aove+ ;irst risin% historically
fro& the stru%%le of peasant proprietors a%ainst dispossession, for&al do&ination is activity
underta"en fro& outside the production process proper usually y a &erchant. $e siphons off
surpluses in e'ploitin% laor and does so ithout either reor%ani=in% those productive
activities or %eneratin% ne( technical inputs to the&< no technolo%ical transfor&ation or
reor%ani=ation of that process itself is underta"en (hich in the event in oth cases (ill
dra&atically increase the productivity of laor 4at this historical &o&ent &easured in ter&s of
a%ricultural output5< Rather, the producers are ,si&plyK suordinated to e'chan%e, the
&ar"et and the &erchant, ut not to the production process itself.
We offer t(o periodi=ations ecause, (e elieve, ta"en to%ether they (ill facilitate
understandin% of the epochs in the history of capitalis& and per&it us to validate that concept
of capitalIs for&al do&ination y (ay of a deter&ination of the social and productive for&s in
and throu%h (hich it (as it (as actually, historically constituted.
We distin%uish et(een the si&ple chronolo%y of our%eois historio%raphy and a
revolutionary, co&&unist perspective for (hich the &ove&ent of capital shapes inner
historical develop&ent, creatin% oth that history as universal history and &a1or divisions
(ithin it, the %rand periodi=ation 4epochs of for&al and real do&ination5 (ithin (hich this
&ove&ent unfolds, and the perspective (ithin it fro& (hich that entire develop&ent can e
levera%ed (ith a vie( to its revolutionary transcendence 4i.e., aolition of capital, its
&ove&ent and the o1ectively separate institutional and co%nitive for&s it has %iven rise to5.
Perhaps see&in%ly other(ise, this history has een neither linear nor pro%ressive+ 0he
develop&ent it recounts is only that of capital and the increasin%ly inte%rated specific societal
envelopes that for&ed its &ediu& and content. 0he &ove&ent of capital has ceaselessly
shifted spatially< unfoldin% in the @o( Countries, in ;lorence and 0uscany, in En%land or
else(here< and te&porally, has unfolded at rhyth&s and te&pos that vary in "ind and
duration fro& place to place and fro& one ti&e to another 4i.e., constituted those various ti&es
in their inner historicity5. In the %eneral re%ions (here this develop&ent occurred, (hole
areas< the *&ericas, 8apan, China and the rest of East *sia, the *sian interior, su9Saharan
*frica< (ere for the lon%est ti&e never dra(n into, re&ainin% su1ect to the different
te&poralities and historicities of other social for&ations.
Consider, then, a periodi=ation of &a1or divisions (ithin, (hich as a conceptual lever provides
us (ith %enuine insi%ht into this &ove&ent and develop&ent. We shall e%in (ith political
deter&ination 1ustified y the fact that a lo%ic of econo&ic develop&ent (as never fully for&ed
durin% this, the for&al, epoch in capitalIs do&ination, ut, even as the astract, reified
deter&inants of the &ove&ent of capital eca&e increasin%ly (ei%hty, instead (as &ediated
y princely po(er. 8ustification of this conception of a princely &ediation of the &ove&ent of
capital in its for&al aspect in the epochal sense (ill appear in the follo(in% section (herein
(e outline the early phases of this epoch. We &a"e no clai&s as to the ,ulti&ate real/ value of
this periodi=ation, and (e shall proceed y utili=in% chronolo%ical history as a point of
reference and contrast.
0he divisions e%an (ith the rou%h date of 1200, (hich 4startin% fro& circa F005 &ar"ed the
close of the period of feudal social relations in their %eo%raphical heartland concentrated in
north(est Europe fro& the @oire to the Rhine. In point of fact, the first date is &erely a
&idpoint, an avera%e, since, as (e shall shortly see, no(here else in Europe esides in this
heartland is it ade)uate. 0he first period had already e%un to unfold 4efore the close of the
feudal epoch5 (ith the very initial creation< thou%h not in this core =one alone< of a sphere
of social life that (as detached fro& the rest of society, i.e., the for&ation of petty co&&odity
producin% re%ions ased on econo&ies of uran &anufacturers, an"in% and trade. 0his
occurred perhaps first in old Catalugya, aout the sa&e ti&e in the @o( Countries 4;landers
and Braant in the north(estern reaches of the old feudal heartland5, so&e(hat later in
;lorence and still later in En%land, i.e., in the %reat uran center of @ondon, (ith a far &ore
radical, rural version ased on the estalish&ent of (a%ed laor appearin% for the first ti&e at
this sa&e &o&ent in its, @ondon.s, i&&ediate north alon% the eastern En%lish coast and to its
southeast in those counties orderin% the Channel. In class ter&s... and these ter$s are in
ever% era the decisive reference point &ecause it is social and class struggle and their
institutional outco$es that reconstitute societ% on a different &asis and inaugurate ne
$o$ents or novel Nphases> in this periodi/ation+++ the period ended (ith the su&ission of the
no&lesa castral in the Barcelona countryside 4and the (restin% of control of the surroundin%
villa%es fro& 6oorish freeooters and land pirates5, the proscription of %reat landed noles of
the ;lorentine contado as $agnati, and the &ove&ent of te'tile production in the @o(
Countries fro& its rural ori%ins to the to(ns, creatin% cities 4-pres, Bru%es5E for&ally, its end
(as &ar"ed y the for&ulation of codes that %overned relations et(een to(n and country
and the classes that inhaited oth, the Catalan Hsatges developed and for&ali=ed fro& 10C0
to 112C, the pro&ul%ation of the >rdinances of 8ustice in ;lorence in 1272, for (hat had
disappeared here (as the effective do&inance of specific for&s of landlordis& or feudal social
relations in Catalonia, on the Italian Peninsula, thou%h not 4yet5 the @o( Countries.
1
E&phasi=in% a%ain that these te&poral de&arcations for& a sche&a desi%ned &erely to
facilitate co&prehension of the &ove&ent of capital in ter&s of its for&al ascendancy in
production, (e can note the various phases, eras or periods that follo(ed.
0he first follo(in% close upon a feudal period (itnessed the institutional consolidation and
effective political he%e&ony of the Ro&an Church and in 0ho&as *)uinas 4122#912G#5 and
Scholasticis& 4later, *lert of Sa'ony, d. 127#, (ho thou%h (as not a Scholastic philosopher5.
0his constituted the %reatest elaoration of *solute Spirit, ut (hich only ca&e after the
ChurchIs political do&inance had e%un to (ane, and after sustantive develop&ents and
achieve&ents in production and the &aterial culture of daily life had already reached their
=enith and had e%un to under%o decline.
2
It lasted until aout 1DF0, a year efore 3at 0ylerIs
Reellion in En%land and t(o years after the Cio&pi stru%%le for full incorporation into the
;lorentine political co&&unity, &ar"in% the %enuine historical ter&inal points of the internal
political and re%ional econo&ic e'pansion of the ,&edieval/ Co&&unes as suchE and the
?hent (ar 41DG791DFC5, (hich (as a faint echo of the &ost si%nificant inner historical
ter&inus of the epoch occurrin% thirty9five years earlier (ith the defeat of the revolutionary
&ercantile our%eois, van *rtevelde dictatorship that, restin% on (eavers and ased in ?hent,
rose over ;landers and, efore final defeat, en%a%ed in insurrectionary actions for nearly a
decade (hich once and for all laid lo( the po(er of the feudal noles of ;landers.
D
1
,;eudal,/ in the Catalan case at least, (as a &isno&er+
When set aside the pastoral =one that do&inated central to northern Ieria and latifundia slavery and petty co&&odity
production in the 6oorish center and south, the co&parison allo(ed Catalonia to appear y (ay of contrast as
,feudal./ But the specific type of tenantcy, the funda$ental social relation on hich the entiret% of Catalan countr%side
in this era rested, here entailin% the production of (heat, olives and vines and (ith it the handin% over of halves in
"ind, (as not ,feudalis&./ 4See the e'tended discussion, ;irst Study, Part I, ,Castilian E&pire in Early 6odern
Europe, Capitalis& and ;or&al :o&ination,/ aove.5
In the Catalan countryside, the central social relation of feudal society, reciprocal ties of personal dependence, that is,
the provision of laor services in return for protection and security of tenure, ere lar%ely $issing. >nce he had
forced ,his/ peasants to the (all as tenants, the Catalan overlord e'tracted surpluses on the asis of a productive
relation+ * rent in "ind (as delivered up to the lord in turn for lease of the land. -es, ,e'tra9econo&ic/ &easures,
na&ely ta'es, (ere i&posed to enhance the lord.s revenue. -et the funda&ental social relation on (hich the lord.s
for& of life depended e'hiited &utual dependency only in the for&al ,econo&ic/ sense. In return for the &eans to his
e'istence, the lord reciprocated nothin%+ 0here (as no internali=ed oli%atory relation (hich co&pelled hi& to provide
,his/ peasants (ith protection, defense and secure tenure. In Catalonia, a social structure (as estalished on the
foundations of a syste& of land rent, as opposed to service+ 0he lord did not reciprocally provide protection to ,his/
tenants. H;or this see the discussion of the Counts of Barcelona in Catalan and Castilian 7ntagonis$ in ,&erian
Histor%+ EditorIs note.J
2
0his is the epoch of Chaucer in En%land, ?iotto and Boccaccio, Petrarch and :ante on the Italian Peninsula, of a
Catalan national literature of chronicles and poetry, thus, of architecture, paintin% and sculpture and poetry, all
achieve&ents of *solute Spirit. See ,;or&al :o&ination, II 4@inea&ents5+ 0he $i%h(ater 6ar" of Early Econo&ic
E'pansion. * Sualitatively E'panded Continental 40e'tile5 Econo&y 4Cul&ination of Second IPhaseI5,/ elo(.
D
See chapter 2 of $enriette Roland $olst.s :e Revolutionaire 6asse9*ctie, the section entitled ,:e &assa9acties van
de &iddeleeu(se stadsevol"in%./ Concludin% the sa&e develop&ent, (e (ould note the peasant insurrections, the
lar%e 1ac)uerie in ;rance in 1DCF, riefly discussed y Roland $olstIs in an earlier section entitled ,:e &assa9actie
van de &iddeleeu(se landevol"in%./ 0he 3at 0yler and 8ohn War(e led peasant revolt is e'a&ined far &ore fully in,
e.%., *lastair :unnIs The 8reat Rising of *BC*: The 4easants# Revolt and 2ngland#s )ailed Revolution 4Stroud, En%.,
20025. H;or a su&&ary of all these develop&ents includin% the van *rtevelde dictatorship, see The Histor% of
)lorence, the si' the&atic discussion, ,Contraction and :epression in the Era of the Blac" :eath 40hird ,Phase/5, II./
EditorIs note.J
0he ne't ,phase/ 4a%ain, understood &erely as a retrospective, tentative sche&ati=ation and
not as the structure of a necessary historical develop&ent5 e%an fro& these defeats and (as
characteri=ed y the rapid rise of political for&s 4oli%archical %overnance and on this asis
individual tyrannyE %reatly increased centrali=ed "in%ly %overn&ent, 6aso de%li *li==i in
;lorence, after a couple false starts $enry I! in En%land, the Bur%undian count Philip called
,the Bold/ in ;landers5 far &ore con%ruent (ith the po(er of the %reat an"ers and
&anufacturers that had developed in production, and an initial centrali=ation that (as
necessary to further develop&ent. It had already co&pleted its inner develop&ent y 1#FC.
In one of the advanced =ones 4fro& the standpoint of capital co&in% into ein%5 this last date
desi%nates the Battle of Bos(orth, last attle of the En%lish dynastic civil (ars 4War of the
Roses5. 0hirty years 41#CC91#FC5 of stru%%le a&on%st the En%lish feudal noility e'hausted
and ruined it, in raisin% ar&ies, in actual fi%htin% 4&a1or attles (ere fou%ht in 1#CC, 1#O0,
1#G091#G1 and 1#FC5, in intri%ue resultin% in &urders and e'ecutions. In the alance, the
En%lish cro(n (as vastly stren%thened, i.e., centrali=ed, y the financial resources that
accrued to it as oth of the %reat nole fa&ilies 4@ancaster and -or"5 en%a%ed, (hile holdin%
the cro(n, in estate confiscations to fund their fi%htin%... Such (as the institutional outco&e of
this internecine stru%%le... *sent the &lood% internal class fi%htin%, never havin% een feudal
and ased in uran cloth &anufacturer and in the financial institutions %enerated to support it,
in central Italy the ;lorentine oli%archy traced out a si&ilar tra1ectory as the 6edici fa&ily
4throu%h &aneuver, proscriptions, aolishin% so&e and pac"in% other odies of co&&unal
%overn&ent5 %ained control of the various repulican institutions, centrali=ed the&, and
reduced the& to e&pty shells and ruer sta&ps of the activity of an individual tyrant.
1
*t the
sa&e ti&e, the end of this era si%nified the close of the period of initial elaoration of those
for&s of >1ective Spirit, na&ely, la( and civil ad&inistration, (hich (ere crucial for later
%ro(th and e'pansion of capitalis& in Europe and 3orth *&erica.
;ro& 1#G0 until 1C70, four ,events/ unfolded and defined a ne( era or ,phase/+ ;irst, Castile
rose and Spanish "in%ship co&&itted to stoppin% the spread, then annihilatin%, oth
repulican and non9Catholic for&s of a(areness consolidated itself, all the (hile it plundered
the (ealth of, destroyed and reor%ani=ed the triutary for&ations in the *&ericas, (hile,
second, ironically layin% the %round(or" for the penetration of capital 4and (ith it a ac"(ard
capitalis&5 in the 3e( World, so called. 0hird, the petty co&&odity =one in the northern
re%ions 4$olland, Beeland, Rtrecht5 of the @o( Countries rapidly e'panded on the asis of the
develop&ent of to(ns in the previous ,period./ ;ourth, these t(o 4Castile and the @o(
Countries5, and the for&s of or%ani=ed social life each rested on, clashed in a (ar that lasted
ei%hty years. By the closin% years of the chronolo%ical si'teenth century 4i.e., fro& 1C705, the
&onstrous Castilian &ilitary &achine 4especially the *r&y of ;landers5 e%an to consu&e its
o(n foundations, (hich in its o(n (ay contriuted &i%htily to the eventual, institutionally
political staili=ation, thus the ulti&ate triu&ph, of the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in
t(o of these three =ones 4En%land and the 3etherlands5. 0hus, reachin% ac" on the asis on
the entirety of the for%oin%, (e can 1ustify datin% oth the disinte%ration of feudal social
relations the outset of capitalIs for&al do&ination in all three of the initial core =ones rou%hly
at 1200. Return to that &o&ent to (hich our periodi=ation has rou%ht us to.
*lready a transcontinental econo&y had for&ed (ith its centers in the %reat coastal cities,
@ondon, Bru%es and *nt(erp, ?enoa, ;lorence and !enice, and (ith these and other cities
4Barcelona, 6arseilles5 &ediatin% the passa%e of unfinished %oods and ra( &aterials fro&
interiors and re%ions such as 0uscany, the 6idlands, Castilian9Estre&adura9*ndalusia 4(here
1
See The Histor% of )lorence, the seventh the&atic discussion, 8roing Supre$ac% of Medici in the )lorentine State,
Historical Disintegration of Repu&lican Constitution, ,ntertining of )lorentine 4olitics and Struggles on the 4eninsula
0*BC(-*DCA5, Part III in its entirety, (here these &a1or develop&ents in this history are traced out. HEditorIs note.J
the %reat Castilian sheep lords %a=ed their herds5 to the crucial centers, those coastal cities.
E'tendin% into the @evant 4and soon into the colonies of 3orth *&erica5 y (ay of trade, this
,(orld/ econo&y (as ased lar%ely on te'tiles, on various %rades of (oolens and,
secondarily, sil". 4Each center possessed its o(n specific au'iliary industries, for e'a&ple, in
!enice, %lass and &irror, (a', su%ar and soap production.5 It (as Spanish (arrin% that
under&ined &uch of this and set the sta%e for a &assive, fa&ine9(ar9epide&ics enhanced
contraction of productive activity circa 1O0091O#0, and thereafter the shift of the center of this
econo&y fro& the 6editerranean to the @ondon9centered *tlantic 4concentrated in the
trian%ular trade et(een @ondon, plantation a%ricultural !ir%inia and the West Indies, and later
central, coastal West *frica5. It (as also durin% this ,phase/ that those historical events and
practices for&in% the o1ective asis for a theori=ation of ho&o%eneous space 9 (e have
?alileo in &ind 9 unfolded, therey creatin% a central, decisive condition for the elaoration of
the &odern science of nature<
Castile (as e'hausted in its stru%%le (ith a nascent :utch capitalis& and then attered
lar%ely y the ;rench in the final phase 41OD#91O#F5 of the 0hirty -ears. War. 3ot even the
vast treasures ori%inally plundered in and the triute accruin% to it fro& the *&ericas and
annually returned to Spain could it avoid the an"ruptcy of its treasury. >ccurrin%
si&ultaneously and at the &idpoint of this period, the decline, then collapse, of the %reatest of
the old order "in%ships that appeared in Europe in the entire epoch prior to capital.s real
do&ination (as the other side of the dual triu&ph the Stadtholder our%eoisie in a (ar of
national independence and the Puritan, parlia&entary earers of British capitalis&, (hich (as
ased on that trian%ular trade, and (hich points to the t(o of the three other si%nificant
,events/ of the period, na&ely, the %ro(in% estalish&ent of national oundaries, the
appearance of our%eois nations as the asis of capitalist develop&ent, and, unifyin% this
develop&ent throu%h &ercantile policies and practices, the creation y rulin% class social
%roups, so&eti&es )uite diverse 4e.%., (ith landed aristocratic and uran, %reat &erchant
co&ponents5, of a national state. 0he fourth, and retrospectively y far the &ost si%nificant,
feature of this phase of the inner histor% of the develop$ent of 2uropean capitalis$ as
creation of the novel, $odern science of nature, an event that stretched in ti&e fro& ?alileo
earliest efforts 4Du Motu, 1C705 to 3e(ton.s 4hilosophiae Naturalis 4rincipia Mathe$atica
41OFG5, dates (hich define this ,phase./
1
>n the heels of the si&ultaneous, first %reat our%eois revolutions, their 3etherlands
elaoration and Co&&on(ealth defense and transfor&ation, respectively, the era (hich
follo(s (as inau%urated y the de&ise of En%lish "in%ship in the historically si%nificant sense
at one end 41OF75, (ith that event (hich fir&ly estalished the class alliance that (ould first
rin% into ein% in Britain the real do&ination of capital over laor in production, startin% fro&
the Industrial Revolution as it is called. *t the other end 41GF75, it is circu&scried y the
onset of the %reatest sin%le revolutionary9transfor&ative event of this history to this &o&ent,
the ;rench Revolution, (hich, in its turn, estalished the asis for the penetration of the value
for& as real do&ination in the =one of (estern Europe as a (hole.
0o this &o&ent this sche&ati=ation has lar%ely involved a politically deter&ined periodi=ation
ecause institutional he%e&ony in the state is as a rule re)uired to staili=e ine)uitale and
e'ploitative social relations in production in the entire epoch stretchin% ac" to the ori%ins of
a%riculture so&e ten thousand years a%o. 0he era of the for&al do&ination of capital over
laor in production is solely in this respect no different than past ones.
If (e no( &ove eyond the historical fra&e(or" in (hich capitalIs for&al ascendancy in
production unfolded, (e can note three further ,phases/ in this sche&ati=ation, as it (ere
conte&porary elaorations eyond for&al susu&ption. 0hus, it (as precisely the institution
1
0his is the period (ith (hich the ;irst Study (as &ost concerned.
of real do&ination that has created the conte&porary (orld startin% fro&, eyond Britain and
y (ay of 3apoleonic con)uest, occupation of the ;rench revolutionary ar&ies and (ith oth
the institution of the co&plete &aterial pre&ises, the le%al and social codes pro&ul%ated y
3apoleon, of this for& of do&ination in this =one 4conte&porary Bel%iu&, @u'e&our%, the
Rhine lands, Bavaria, and outside continental Europe, $aiti, and @ouisiana in the Rnited
States5. 0his is the period of the lon% nineteenth century lastin% fro& 1G70 until 171#. It (as
in this period that &odern science e%an to &ost forcily assert its s(ay over daily life throu%h
its fusion (ith technolo%y (hich created, as it (ere, real do&ination as it syste&atically
in%resses into production. 4>f course, it is the class earers of science (ho (ere the real
a%ents here.5 It (as durin% this period that the first %reat international capitals 4in ?er&any,
Britain, ;rance and the Rnited States5 rose+ 0heir co&petition has een carried out in the
arena of the (orld, in the i&perialis& that has rou%ht lar%e re%ions of the (orld under the
s(ay of capitalist develop&ent 4oth for&al and real5 and (hich has een consu&&ated in
i&perialist (orld (ar.
1
While the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in production reaches ac" to its first
appearance in the 6editerranean (est 4Barcelona5 and center 4?enoa, ;lorence and !enice5
and coastal north(est Europe 4Bru%es5 circa 1200 and for(ard to the %eneral crisis of capital
in the first half of the last century, in the after&ath of that prolon%ed crisis< &ar"ed y t(o
(orld (ars and a Slu&p (hich (as its &ost &assive, concentrated e'pression< (e can fi'
the date 17C0 as that &o&ent at (hich real do&ination of capital over laor in production<
itself stretchin% ac" to the ori%ins of capital as capital, the Industrial Revolution so9called<
had e%un to effectively hold s(ay over the lar%est parts of the (orld. Standin%, so to spea",
at its &idpoint, this date is circu&scried y the short t(entieth century 4171C917715+ *t one
end, (e can loo" ac" to that %eneral crisis, (hile the collapse of the entire =one of hi%hly
ureaucrati=ed, state capitals, the on%oin% decline of the rei%nin% *&erican he%e&on, and the
rise of alternative (orld centers of accu&ulation in East *sia, si%nalin% the e%innin% of
another, historic shift in the locus of the &ove&ent of capital, delineate it at the other end.
We can conclude y notin% that, utili=in% the date 1772, the last period in this sche&ati=ation,
a transitional, perhaps even novel develop&ent in the history of capitalis& has een set off y
the inau%uration of the totali=in% do&ination of capital over society,
2
the ree&er%ence of a
tendential drift to(ard rene(ed i&perialist (orld (ar and, hei%htenin% all the contradictions of
this develop&ent, y a cli&ate chan%e that itself is the product of the dyna&ics of capitalist
develop&ent and, in particular, product of the depth penetration of techno9science into,
reshapin%, the foundations of life in earthly nature. Based on planetary (ar&in%, on%oin%
cli&ate chan%e threatens to destroy the entire edifice 4uilt environ&ent, hu&ani=ed natural
landscapes, and the &aterial e&odi&ents of capitalist civili=ation5 raised on the asis of this
develop&ent<
0hrou%hout the rest of this (or", reference to various eras, periods, phases and even
,centuries,/ as a te&poral fra&e(or" definin% and defined y specific develop&ents is, unless
other(ise indicated, to the for%oin% discussion understood in ter&s of a &ere conceptual
sche&atic, (hose ai& is to illu&inate the historical for&ation of capital in its &ediate relation
to the &odern science of nature and (hose &o&ents serve as points of reference.
1
See our The 8er$an Road to Reneed ,$perialist "orld "ar, the Introduction in its entirety.
2
See the Second Interlude, elo(.
)or$al Do$ination, ,,
3inea$ents of the 2poch of the )or$al Do$ination of Capital over 3a&or
at its 1rigin and the )or$ation of a Continental 2cono$% Based on Textile Manufacture, circa
*(A(-*AB(
1
0he follo(in% e&odies a second periodi=ation. It constitutes an effort to validate that concept
of capitalIs for&al do&ination y (ay of a reconstruction the linea&ents of that epoch in its
earlier phases (ith a vie( to the for&ation of o1ectified, reified sphere shapin% social
e'istence, the continental te'tile econo&y.
Startin% fro& on%oin% deco&position of feudal social relations of personal dependency and
their replace&ent y &onetari=ed rents, (e can discern several ,phases/ in the for&ation and
%ro(th of a continental econo&y, its ,%lue/ ein% the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in
production 4i.e., in co&&on, very far fro& fully ade)uate parlance, &erchant he%e&ony in the
to(ns, and the constitution of a &ercantile econo&y5, throu%h to 1CD0, see&in%ly an aritrary
chronolo%ical point, ut in fact the date of the historical &o&ent at (hich the final ;lorentine
Repulic collapsed, a collapse (hich si%naled the triu&ph and si%nified the irreversile
consolidation of centrali=ed &onarchical po(er on the continental, even if that po(er (ould
itself under%o steady evolution and further develop&ent. It (as this state centrali=ation that, in
the West at least, rendered a return to feudal social relations (ildly i&proale 4if not
historically i&possile5, and thus assured capitalIs for&al do&ination a purchase, aleit still
tenuously, on social life, i.e., &ade it a deter&inant &o&ent in any e'planation of the
intelli%ile structure of the societies of Europe.
We need carry this account (ith its periodi=ation no further, for it (as rou%hly at that &o&ent
that the staili=ation of the capitalist or%ani=ation of production 4and, increasin%ly, society5
eca&e &ore and &ore politically prole&atic in the &ost advanced re%ion, (ith an on%oin%
proletariani=ation of the En%lish peasantry reachin% its inner historical co&pletion
4differentiatin% a (ell9to9do far&er out of a peasant &ass throu%h creation of capitalist
tenantcy en%a%ed in the e'ploitation of rural, landless (a%ed laor5E (ith the develop&ent of
ne( classes in production oth rural and, or, a%ricultural 4that far&er, landed %entry, rural
(a%ed laorers en%a%ed in oth a%riculture and do&estic puttin% out5 and uran
&anufacturin% 4propertyless artisans, crafts&en e&ployers5E (ith rene(al of &ass production
of a (hole ne( series of consu&er %oodsE and, on the asis, (ith the increasin% elaoration
of a %enuinely our%eois 4and, in En%land, Puritanical5 culture that, in confrontation (ith the
old order, (ould e%in to create in daily life the foundations of an oppositional culture fro&
(hich the de&and for a revolutionary political solution, staili=in% for&al capitalist relations in
production, (ould eventually arise. 40o oot, at this &o&ent the ele&ents of a nascent theory,
the &odern science of nature, (hich (ould constituted the historical infrastructure of the
e&er%in% our%eoisie as a class, and (ould co%nitively &ediate its understandin% of &an,
society and nature and the pro1ect that distin%uishes it in history... nature do&ination yo"ed to
e'pansion of productive forces... first e%an to co&e to%ether.5
We shall focus on te'tile, pri&arily (oolen, production. While other products (ere e'chan%ed
and in lar%e )uantities, for e'a&ple, %rain 4(heat, arley, oats5, corn and spices, it (as the
&anufacture, e'chan%e and distriution of (oolen cloth that created the continental 4and,
eyond this, transcontinental5 net(or"s of social relations &as)ueradin% as an e'chan%e
et(een thin%s, that stood at the ori%ins of the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in
production as an epochal event+ Wheat and other foodstuffs (ere funda&entally produced
locallyE eyond to(ns and their countrysides, &erchants traded in these food products
ecause the hinterlands of so&e lar%e cities 4;lorence and Barcelona co&e i&&ediately to
1
0his section 4)or$al Do$ination, ,,, 3inea$ents5 as a (hole is adapted fro& the si'th the&atic discussion of The
Histor% of )lorence+ HEditorIs noteJ.
&ind5 did not produce enou%h, e.%., %rain, for year round consu&ption, and ecause these
&erchants stood to enefit enor&ously 4y (ay of &assive profits5 ut neither re%ularly nor
predictaly and relialy, as the case of periodic fa&ine de&onstrates+ ?rains (ere not, as it
(ere, the (arp and (oof of daily, %eo%raphically enlar%in% transactions. Si&ilarly spices.
E'chan%e 4purchase5 here had the ai& of lu'ury consu&ption+ By the&selves such
e'chan%es could never have created anythin% li"e a tan%led, yet inte%rated net(or"s of
continental social relations. So, aove all, it (as te'tiles that drove the e'pansion of trade and
created the net(or"s that ound distinct and other(ise 4lin%uistically, culturally5 unrelated
re%ions to%ether.
)or$al Do$ination, ,, 03inea$ents5
Deca% of )eudal Social Relations, the Rise of Tons and
the Merchant as the Do$inant Social )igure
4ri$ac% of the ,talian 4eninsula at the 1rigins of the Continental 2cono$%
6ar"in% a noticeale increase in population, &erchants and traders, so&e havin% their ori%ins
as peddlers, e%an to appear in the countrysides ad1acent the coasts of the (estern
6editerranean as the 3orse invasions ended, and as over ti&e the fear of raids, plunder, rape
and &urder dra&atically lessened.
0hese traders stopped at, connectin%, the various castles 4called ur%s5 that had een
constructed at the outset of the era of invasions at intervals alon% ancient trade routes, roads
and rivers. 0here they sold their (ares. *t these sites &en asse&led, and traders even
(intered at the& as the (eather turned cold. *s population steadily increased, and as the
roads and rivers eca&e relatively safer, the incident of traders fre)uentin% castle &anors
also increased, and increased to the e'tent that these settin%s could no lon%er )uarter the&.
0hey (ere forced to find acco&&odations outside, on %round i&&ediately around or near the
castles. So&e of these traders, nascent &erchants, had at any rate already settled lon%er
than a &ere stopover. $ere to(ns for&ed outside to(ns 4castles5, literally fau&ourgs. >ther
traders and &erchants set up per&anent lod%in%s.
If peddlers had e'isted in the interstices of the &anorial estates for&in% the loci of feudal
productive activity, and traders could e &ore or less distin%uished y their travels et(een
castles alon% the rivers and (ell9(orn roads, the &erchant appeared as soon as the castle
e%an to %ive (ay to the fauour%, insertin% hi&self, thou%h decayin% feudal countrysides of
a%rarian Europe (ere still autar"ic, into a transcontinental net(or" of e'istin% trade,
co&&erce and lon%9distance trade, that traversed routes of Baltic9Russia 4Liev5, Liev9*sia
6inor, *sia 6inor9China, !enice9By=antiu&, and the re%ions of the @evant as a (hole and
3orthern *frica.
*s trade increased, coin 4never entirely vanishin%5 and its circulation reappeared. Its velocity
increased. *t this &o&ent, a social %roup (hose life activities (ere divorced fro& a%riculture
and dependent upon e'chan%e fully appeared. 0his (as a %enuine &erchant stratu&. *t this
point the populations of fauour%, at least the lar%est ones, %re( eyond the internal &anorial
populations. 0he to(ns the&selves consisted in strictly uran strata, i.e., those (hose life
practices no lon%er depended directly upon a%riculture for food supplies 4and certain ra(
&aterials5, ut instead (ere &ediated y &ar"ets, so that fro& the e%innin% the %ro(th of the
to(ns dre( the productive a%ricultural &anors into the circuits of e'chan%e, even if only in the
person of individual peasants 4ut not only the& for ,their/ lords (ere deli%hted to consu&e
(hatever in the (ay of lu'ury %oods to(ns produced and, or, their &erchants e'chan%ed5. In
this respect, the very presence of the to(ns contriuted oli)uely to the decline of the &anor
in its feudal for& and a li&ited e&ancipation of the peasantry+ 0he to(ns functioned as a pole
of attraction for a servile peasantry. 3ever co%ni=ant of the condition of unfreedo& (ithout a
livin%, viale and %enuinely historical alternative, peasants accepted their condition until the
rise of the to(ns. 0hereafter, the attraction led to the aandon&ent of &anors, either for etter
ter&s else(here on the land or for &i%ration to those to(ns. ;eudal lords and sei%niors too
did not %o unaffected+ 0hey (ere co&pelled to offer etter ,ter&s/ of laor to peasant
households, si%nificantly li%htenin% or alto%ether aolishin% laor services, a&elioratin% ta'es,
lo(erin% rents 4in "ind5 and liftin% restrictions on peasant ehavior 4such as fore%oin%
restrictions on &arria%e5. 0he upshot of this entire &ove&ent (as the disappearance on the
land of social relations of servile, personal dependency and their replace&ent y &onetari=ed
rents.
Briefly re1oin the discussion of the early to(ns.
0o this point, rural and in so&e cases do&estic, e'istin% industries, aove all, cloth
&anufacture 4(eavin%5 eca&e uranE that is, artisans e%an to %ather in the fauour%s, an
,econo&ically rational/ decision since oth ends of production ca&e to%ether here as
&erchants i&portin%, say, (ool, fullerIs and dyerIs soap and dye9stuffs and the sale of cloth
could oth e found here.
3o(, pause and reflect on the si%nificance of this develop&ent.
0he %reater the %eo%raphical e'tent and social penetration of capitalist social relations...
historically, they are &ore or less si&ultaneous... the )uic"er the pace and te&po of their
on%oin% develop&ent. *t the sa&e ti&e, as these social relations deepened across the
readth of that history 4i.e., the history of capitalis& (hich has created a unified (orld history5,
specific for&s of productive have co&e to the fore and do&inated (hole eras. 0hus, early in
the epoch of capitalIs for&al do&ination cloth production appeared, and it (ould re&ain the
central &anufacturin% activity for the ne't five centuries. While toacco production in the
&ature era of the sa&e epoch rivaled it for a short period 4circa 1O2#91O705 and (as central
for an historically si%nificant %eo%raphical e'tension of capitalist social relations 4trans*tlantic
&i%ration to the *&ericas5, only t(o other for&s of productive activity... te&porally
co&pressed ecause of the e'tent and depth of the penetration of those relations... have
played a si&ilar role, railroad construction 41F#0917105 announcin% the forceful in%ression of
real do&ination into a %loal capitalis& still he%e&oni=ed y the for&al susu&ption of capital
over laor in production 4thus, also announcin% the t(ili%ht of this epoch5, and autos in the era
of i% factory 4172C917G#5 heraldin% a ne( epoch in this history, the ascendancy of real
do&ination of capital over society.
Return to the &o&ent at (hich the first and earliest of these enor&ously si%nificant,
he%e&onic productive develop&ents occurred.
In their concentration if not al(ays in their anti)uity, the to(ns that first appeared on the Italian
Peninsula... ;lorence, Bolo%na, Pisa, ?enoa, !enice, a&on% others... did so (ell in advance
of else(here in the 6editerranean and, (ith one other re%ional e'ception, on the continent.
0hey (ere i&portant ecause, first, as lar%e to(ns at this &o&ent, they do&iciled %roups of
&erchantsE second, they &ade vital contriutions to the develop&ent of >1ective Spirit in its
very early &ercantile capitalist for&, to universal la( and, aove all in this re%ard, created a
concept of asolute, unconditioned 4private5 property 4in production5. Bolo%na co&es
i&&ediately to &ind. Pisa, ?enoa and !enice (ere seaoard to(ns and, as traders and
pirates 4as a&on% the 3orse and the 8apanese of the southern island to(ns, the t(o for&s of
activity at this point (ere inseparale5, their &erchants turned to the seas. ;lorence (as
landloc"ed, and (ith lar%e countrysides stretchin% out in every direction, it (as he&&ed in y
%reat sei%niorial lords. But its &erchants (ere every &uch as a&itious, ar&ed and (illin% to
fi%ht as the seaoard to(ns. 4*nd fi%ht, and suordinate those lords, they did.5 What (as
different aout ;lorence (as its location. ;ood 4%rains, ve%etales, olives, &eat fro& sheep
and %oats, etc.5 could e appropriated 4either traded for or e'propriated5 fro& the countryside.
But shelter and clothin% could not. $andfuls of artisans had en%a%ed in oth residential
construction and the &anufacturer of coarse (oolen (ares efore the ti&e of Countess
6atilda 4rei%nin%, circa 10FC9111C5 to provision and do&icile assorted ur%hers. Whatever the
specific turn of events and co&&it&ents that encoura%ed the e'pansion of this activity, cloth
production eca&e central to ;lorence efore the co&&unal era had een inau%urated.
Si&ultaneously, peasants floc"ed to the to(ns, estalishin% the&selves as laorers
dialectically cause and effect of a steady enlar%e&ent of the sphere of and division of laor
(ithin this activity. ;lorence (as one of t(o or three early centers of cloth 4te'tile5 production,
shortly to e follo(ed y other, aleit s&aller centers of te'tile &anufacture in the Italian
center. 0his early and e'tensive develop&ent of to(ns on the Peninsula, of advanced 4and
advancin%5 seaorne &erchant activity, of a concentration of to(ns (ere cloth production (as
pursued in earnest, the early and on%oin% elaoration of >1ective Spirit 4&erchant le%ality
and universal la(5 full consonant (ith an uran culture, and the political for& 4co&&une5
uni)ue to these tendencies and develop&ents as a (hole, all led to the practical assertion of
the pri&acy of the Italian Peninsula in the ori%ins of the continental econo&y.
>n the Peninsula, driver and conse)uence of rapid co&&ercial develop&ent and constitutin%
ele&ents of a %eneral population e'pansion, uran strata 4artisans and various distinct layers
of &erchants5 si&ply did not produce the diversity of %oods 4and for&s of production5 to &eet
the levels of consu&ption that no( e'isted. 0his pointed ac" to the e'istin% transcontinental
net(or" of co&&erce that, reachin% into 3orth *frica and the @evant, developed in loc"step
(ith a ne( uran evolution in (estern Europe, and (ithin (hich &erchants of this re%ion
inserted the&selves.
1
The 7ppropriation of Ro$an 3a in the
2sta&lish$ent of the )or$al Do$ination of 3a&or over Capital in 4roduction
,ts Role and Significance in the Rise of Capitalis$
2
Without detail (e can re&ar" that y the &o&ent of 6erovin%ian ascendancy 4circa C10 in the
co&&on era5, Ro&an la( had fallen into disuse.
D
;or it to play any si%nificant role in
under&inin% feudal social relations in (estern Europe, it had to e revived. 3o( the revival of
Ro&an la(, !ino%radoff calls it spontaneous,
#
had t(o distinct roots.
1
0he circuits of &erchant capital also, as indicated, included trade routes that enco&passed the Baltic to Liev and
Liev into *sia 6inor 4especially, Constantinople5.0he for&ation of trade relations alon% these interconnected routes
started fro& the :nieper and centered on Liev, also connected the river valleys of the Bu%, >"a, !istula and :on.
0hese trade routes had (itnessed an independent develop&ent that, si&ilar to the re%ions of 3or&andy and the
@oire !alley, e%an after F00 (ith raids and incursions y !i"in% 4"no(n as !aran%ian5 peasant9(arriors. 0ranspirin%
earlier 47009112C5 yet &ediately lin"ed y trade to develop&ent later and further (est, e'pansive co&&ercial activity
e'hiited real si&ilarities 4use of coin, rise of to(ns, de&o%raphic densification, craft differentiation, appearance of the
Church in >rthodo', not Ro&an for&, as a %reat lando(ner5 to those in the 6editerranean as (ell as &ar"ed
differences. 4In particular, &erchant strata (ere not earers of this develop&entE rather, it (as !i"in% chiefs (ho,
havin% assi&ilated to the Lievan (orld, rose to the status of princes (ith retainers and (ho, collectin% forest product
triute, furs, honey and (a', and slaves, (ere its earers5. 8ero&e Blu&, 3ord and 4easant in Russia, 1D, 1#, 1C91O,
1G, DD, D#, DC9DO, #1, #D, CGE 6arc Bloch, )eudal Societ%, ,, 1C922.
0he differences, (hich further included a turn to (ealth accu&ulation throu%h a%%randi=in% land, e'ploitin% peasant,
indentured and slave laor and the centuries lon% no&adic presence at the frontiers that entailed not infre)uent
incursion and (arrin%, lay at the asis of a different historical tra1ectory in Russia as opposed to (estern Europe.
2
0his section is adapted fro& NNor$an> 3a 07ppropriations of Ro$an Civil5 3a, Custo$ar% 3a and Social Gustice:
The 3eveller Struggle against Hn9ust 3egalit%, and The 4ro&le$ of )eudalis$, :ivision II, Part I!, ,0he ?ro(th of
0o(ns, the Spread of 6ar"ets and the Rise of 6erchants/ and ,0he Role and Si%nificance of @a( in the Rise of
Capitalis&/ HEditorIs noteJ.
D
Paul !ino%radoff, Ro$an 3a in Medieval Ti$es, 119#1. ;or the &ost co&pellin% %eneral reasons for this decay,
,&id, 1#91C.
#
,&id, #D.
0he first (as a return to to the Ro&an le%al codesI assertion of universality and finality in its
authoritative interpretation, (hich (as that of the e&peror. $ere, it (as the reconstruction of
the entire ody of the 8ustinian codification 4Corpus Guris Civilis5 that (as at issue, and it (as
the $oly Ro&an e&peror, a%ainst the fra%&entation of political authority effected y enor&ous
e'panse over (hich feudal social relations held s(ay, on (hose ehalf the 1urists laored to
effect this reconstruction.
1
0he second root (as ased on another revival, that of the to(ns and in particular co&&erce.
$ere the adaptation of Ro&an to custo&ary la(, to its evolvin% peculiarities and concerns
4centrally co&&erce5 (as a decisive &o&ent in actually %eneratin% for&al capitalist
do&ination, contriutin% &i%htily, thou%h oviously &ediately, to the staility of that risin%
oli%archical %overnance.
2
*t this point, the t(o roots ca&e to%ether. ;or it (as precisely those "in%ly political for&s, in
the period, say, fro& 1DF0 to 1#FC, that con)uered and destroyed the uran co&&unes
e'istin% on the lar%ely coastal ed%es of the 6editerranean. Effectively and in either case, then,
the revival of Ro&an la( (as not a develop&ent (ithin feudal society, or, if it (as, it (as only
to the e'tent that it (as consciously deployed to under&ine and destroy it.
D
So (hat (as it aout Ro&an civil la( that rendered it so ade)uate as an e'pression of capital,
of freein% 4&erchant5 capital fro& its en&esh&ent in Church strictures 4e.%., usury5, %uild
re%ulations, etc., i.e., lieratin% it fro& constraints on &a"in% &oney, restrictions on the
e'ploitation of laor in craft production, and in En%land per&itted %entry lords to circu&vent
custo&ary title to copyhold land, etc.2 It (as its for$ulation of propert% as private, a&solute
and unconditioned,
#
a for&ulation itself that (as the product of a len%thy historical
1
,&id, O19O2, OO9OG, OF, especially the discussion of !acarius and Inerius. 0he Scholastics played an i&portant role
here in elaoratin% &ethod, a &odification of Socratic dialectic in (hich the )uery into truth e'pressed lin%uistically
proceeded y e'hiitin% contradiction, the &odification centerin% on close te'tual analyses (hose passa%es (ere
de&onstrated to e co&plete, supportin% each other, or to ,contain %aps and contradictions/ 4,&id, CO, C75. 0his (as
the (or" of the %lossators (ho& countered Inerius as one of their o(n.
2
,&id, GC9GO, and especially FO, (here Philippe de Re&iIs Coutu$es de Beavauisis is discussed.
It is in re%ard to a section of this te't that Philippe, sire de Beau&anoir, appropriated the 8ustinian classification of
actions dividin% the& into three cate%ories, personal 4enforcin% oli%ations5, real 4assertion of o(nership of thin%s5
and &i'ed 4startin% fro& oli%ations ut endin%s (ith o(nership clai&s5. It (as precisely in the evolvin% acceleration
of the develop&ent of to(ns and e'chan%e et(een the&, co&&erce, that issues of this sort ca&e to the fore.
D
0his is tacit, thou%h hardly intended, in !ino%radoff, ,&id, 2#.
#
$.;. 8olo(ic=, Historical ,ntroduction to the Stud% of Ro$an 3a, 1#2, 2G2E also *nderson, 3inea$ents of the
7&solutist State, 2C, #2#9#2C.
Property as unconditioned, asolute 4if not universal5 (as found no(here efore the Ro&ans, and not a%ain to its
revival and elaoration as a decisive &o&ent of >1ective Spirit uttressin% the develop&ent of capitalIs for&al
do&ination over laor in production. So fro& the perspective of freedo& and a %eneral hu&an e&ancipation, it is a
%rand historical irony that the ori%ins of this conception of property (ere ound up (ith the class stru%%le of the
pleeians a%ainst aristocratic patricians. 0his stru%%le cul&inated in a series of for&al le%al enact&ents, victories of
the ples, over the course of early Ro&an Repulican history 4i.e., durin% a period of that history fro& rou%hly #F09
2FC c5. Perhaps the &ost i&portant enact&ent (as the creation of the 0(elve 0ales, a civil code e&odyin%
pleeian, in particular, peasant proprietor self9defense a%ainst the a%%randi=e&ent and en%ross&ent of the %reat
lando(nin%, patrician fa&ilies.
>f specific i&port in re%ard to property (as the distinction in la( et(een res $ancipi and res nec $ancipi, et(een
land su1ect to Ro&an o(nership, slaves, cattle and others ani&al utili=ed in production and a%ricultural do&estics
and everythin% else. 0he point of self9defense (as that the for&er could only e transferred... it could not &e
alienated, the intent (as it e passed fro& father to son... y a for&al procedure that involved (itnesses 4at least five5
and instru&ents of &easure&ent. In the case of res nec $ancipi, such thin%s could e transferred 4or alienated5 fro&
hand to hand, or y a si&ple act of for&al conveyance 4e.%., a docu&ent e'chan%ed et(een the parties5. In
8olo(ic=Is e'a&ple, sheep, their (ool or 4slau%htered5 their consu&ale flesh, (ere transferale as res nec $ancipi,
ut o'en, used to plou%h 4i.e., to produce5, (ere not+
0hus su1ect to the proper, for&al procedure of conveyance, this "ind of o(nership (as "no(n as Suiritarian, its
desi%nations in the literature ein% do$iniu$ ex 9ure Ouiritu$, do&inion over property that e'isted solely y ri%ht of
Ro&an citi=enship, or ex 9ure Ouiritu$, y Ro&an ri%ht. ;or the fore%oin%, 8olo(ic=, ,&id, G91O, 10O9111, 1DF91#1,
develop&ent+ In this respect, it (as counterposed to custo&ary la(, in En%land a for& of
le%ality developed y Sa'on "in%ship in the nearly t(o and a half centuries prior to the
3or&an victory in the attle of $astin%s.
3o(, it is the asence of specificity and concreteness of Ro&an concepts 4the lac" of &utual
&ediation of the particular and universal5, (hich in a for&al (ay is only possile as co&&on
la(, as a continuous accretion to the la( estalishin% ever ane( precedent, that in En%land
&ade it possile to utili=e and deploy Ro&an concepts in their asoluteness and
unconditionality a%ainst the copyhold, (hose land (as, unless 4he, the copyholder, (as
fortunate and5 listed in the &anorial rolls, &erely his ithout title 4(hich elon%ed to the lord5
y virtue of i&&e&orial social practice. ;or a concept of property that is asolute and
unconditional, it is irrelevant ho( &any %enerations of peasants have far&ed this plot of land,
the title is in the lordIs na&e and he, thus, can dispose of it in any &anner he sees fit, (hich,
of course, includes raisin% fi'ed rents and re&ovin% the peasant 4havin% a sheriff do so5 (hen
he falls ehind on his pay&ents...
*t a further re&ove, (e can follo( this &ove&ent in thou%ht, its lo%ic and the astraction fro&
situations and circu&stances in their specificity, for there is little that is &ore astract than this
la( eco&e our%eois, i.e., as it is refor&ulated and %oes eyond &ere defense of private
property in land. 0he asolute unconditionality of the Ro&an conception of private property is
e'pressed &ost forcily in the universality of la(. 0he first condition of transposin% this and
other concepts early in the era of the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in production
involved ,cleansin%/ Ro&an concepts ,of all re&nants of national conte'tual association and/
their elevation ,into the sphere of the lo%ically astract.../
1
0his (as crucial since, ,Property, in
national Ro&an la(, (as y no &eans a particularly astractly ordered institution, and it (as
not even a unitary one in %eneral./
2
In the case of the En%lish la(yers, ,le%ally hetero%eneous
Hsituations (ereJ... thro(n to%ether in order to otain actionaility y indirection./ 0his (as a
custo&ary procedure, and it (ould not do. But in ,the Ro&an instance, y contrast, situations
(hich... H(ereJ ne( and diverse econo&ically,/ as a conse)uence of co&petition et(een
capitalists 4&erchants, %reat crafts&en5 %eneratin% innovation and chan%e, thus novel and
different situations, (ere ,susu&ed under a sin%le and appropriate le%al concept./
D
... 0his
(as the second condition+ 0he universality of Ro&an la( per&itted it to falsely transcend its
one %larin% li&itation in ;ranco93or&an hands, na&ely, its first ,application/ (as to private
property in land+.. We can deepen our understandin% y contrastin% the situation of
6editerranean &erchants (ith that of Lievan princes at rou%hly the sa&e historical &o&ent+
;or these princes, the 4ravda Russ!aia 4Russian 3a5 (as a codification ,connected in
lar%est part (ith the protection of the private property Hin productionJ of the princes, and (ith
the people (ho &ana%ed and laored on their estates./
#
It (as nothin% &ore, there (ere no
clai&s to universality, 1ust the defense of the property of a po(erful &an si&ply ecause he
(as po(erful, i.e., o(ned and possessed vast tracts of land, villa%es and their populations,
and slaves... But increasin%ly i&portant for the our%eoisie as it for&ed historically, &oveale
property 4e.%., &erchantIs inventory5 lac"ed the per&anence of the land as (ell as its natural
1#291##, 1C291CD, 1OO91O7, 2G2.
1
6a' Weer, 2cono$% and Societ%, FC#.
2
i&id, ,,+ F01.
$ere Weer specifies the supre&ely i&portant Ro&an civil la( concept of do$iniu$+
D
,&id+
Weer specifies ,En%lish la(yers/ in an e'press co&parison of ,Ro&an le%al lo%ic/ and ,the &odes of operation of
En%lish cautelary 1urisprudence./ ,&id, F00.
#
Blu&, 3ord and 4easant in Russia, 2G, 2F n.F, #O 4citation5.
0he citation is ta"en fro& the 4ravda of the Sons of Iaroslav elieved to have een (ritten et(een 10C0 and 10GC.
0his docu&ent (as one of t(o parts that &ade up (hat is "no(n as the Short !ersion of the 4ravda Russ!aia+
Iaroslav (as a very po(erful prince of the early Lievan era in Russian history.
fecundity+ It (as not i&&ediately considered as property. With the rise of the co&&unes the
situation eca&e acuteE ut the universality of Ro&an la( (ith its practice of lo%ical
susu&ption per&itted a codification that esto(ed the sa&e le%al status on the &oveale
property of, say, ascendin% ;lorentine &erchants 4the popolo grasso5 as the landed property
of the rural &a%nates they defeated. 0his, (e &i%ht add, had the distinct advanta%e of
entailin% in la( reco%nition of sui generis sociality and personality of the &erchant, thus, no
lon%er a &ere au'iliary social fi%ure e&edded in, aleit at the ed%es of, feudal society...
$ere (e can anticipate our presentation so&e(hat.
0his &ove&ent in thou%ht... it is a for&alis& (hose astractness is elaorated )ualitatively
over and a%ain (ith the develop&ent of capitalis&... is fully con%ruent, in the structural sense
entirely ho&olo%ous, oth (ith the internal conceptual structure of our%eois science, the
&odern science of nature,
1
and (ith capitalist develop&ent, and, as capital (as estalished
on its o(n foundations 4i.e., as the real do&ination of capital over laor in production5, (ith
capital as a self9contradictory ,sustance/ 4i.e., one that is e&pty and ho&o%eneous5 and its
character as a universal astraction do&inatin%, shapin%, reshapin% and for&in% and re9
for&in% the inner&ost core of social life. 3one of these con%ruences and si&ilarities are
accidental or hapha=ard+ ;or&alis& and its elaoration, the develop&ent of the &odern
science of nature and the &ove&ent of capital as capital, none of (hich are ,causally/ related
4in the historical sense5 at their ori%ins, all e'hiit affinities in structure, in &ove&ent and in
direction of develop&ent. 0he affinity can e sin%ularly characteri=ed as the evolution of the
universal astraction (hose ho&olo%y develops in loc"step historically, and (hich at a certain
definale point 4the &o&ent of inau%uration of the real do&ination of capital over laor in
production, characteri=ed y the syste&atic in%ression of science and technolo%y into that
production5 eca&e dialectically causally connected. *ll are &ar"ed y their repressive 4and
re%ressive5 character e'pressed &ost co&pellin%ly in the inaility to co&prehend the %iven
4sensuous nature in its i&&ediacy5, the latter re&ainin% an irreducile residue in the face of
efforts to dissolve it into rational for&s or susu&e it under said for&s...
2
this is science (ith
its ,la(s/ of nature5... or to transfor& it, as concrete laor, into an unresistin% ele&ent in
production, a thin%, &echanis&, dead laor... this is capitalist production... as the case &ay
e.
Pervasively shaped y class i%otry, our%eois le%ality achieves this indifference of for& to
content in the hi%hest de%ree. Every violation of capitalist nor&ality is defined as a le%al
outra%e, a ,cri&e/ so that as a &ultiplicity of distinct cases co&e into ein% they &ust e
susu&ed under a sin%le statute, i.e., a for&ally universal le%al nor&.
D
,*&on% the ancient
1urists... properly IconstructiveI aility... (as only of s&all si%nificance. 3o( (hen this la( (as
transposed into entirely stran%e fact situations, un"no(n in *nti)uity, the tas" of Iconstruin%I
the situation in a lo%ically i&peccale (ay eca&e the al&ost the e'clusive tas"... It is this
very fact (hich has %iven rise to the fre)uently &ade char%e that the purely lo%ical la( is
Ire&ote fro& lifeI/ 4in the ?er&an, le&ensfre$d5. Indeedh
#
0his &uch said, (e need to e &ore specific to %rasp, e'plain and co&prehend the role and
si%nificance of la( in the rise of capitalis&. We can facilitate this tas" y leapin% for(ard in
historical ti&e and &o&entarily considerin% the @evellers in the En%lish Civil Wars.
1
See Co$$unit% and Capital, ]C19]O2, and the Introduction, ,Ele&ents of the Conceptual Structure of Science,/
aove. H*lso see The Converging Crises in Nature and Societ% and their Denounce$ent appearin% in 1rigins and
2ndings. EditorIs note.J
2
$ere see @u"acs, Histor% and Class Consciousness+ @ondon, 17G1 4172D5+112f
D
Practically as (ell as lo%ically this reinforces the practical tendency of our%eois le%islation to a proliferation of
statutes coverin% each and every possile case of deviation fro& that nor&, (hich renders facile the aritrary
apprehension, arrest, detention, incarceration and arrai%n&ent of anyone the stateIs a%ents dee& ,dan%erous./
#
Weer, ,&id, FCC.
*s rationalists and perhaps the &ost intellectually sophisticated ones of the era, the @evellers
(ere a product of the sa&e develop&ents in society that created the affinity for specific
concepts of Ro&an civil la(, thus the un1ust la(s 4i.e., these concepts transposed into En%lish
custo&ary la(5 that they so forcily criti)ued. 0he defense of custo&ary la( could only e
carried on the asis of the sa&e logos that (as incarnate in (hat (as ,3or&an,/ alien, (ritten
in forei%n ton%ues 4@atin and ;rench5, i.e., on the asis of an ahistorical, thus astract and
for&al, rationalis&. 0his entrap&ent (as a piece, underlyin% in the depth9social sense, (ith
their articulation of the revolutionary de&ocratic vision of the s&all producer, the artisan and
s&all holderIs Repulic. It (as also, in our vie(, a triute to the e'tent to (hich for&al
capitalist social relations had already penetrated En%lish social life.
-et (ithout this astract le%ality it is doutful that the &ove&ent of capital could have ever
transcended its o(n specific ori%ins 4specific locale5 and for&ality 4i.e., for&al do&ination of
capital over laor5, that it could have een freed fro& custo&ary la( in the %reatest part of the
(orld, especially (here it has under%one its &ost ,advanced/ develop&ent. E&edded in
institutionally reli%ious sanctions a%ainst usury or re)uire&ents concernin% lordly treat&ent of
the poor, or %uild re%ulations as they appeared in the (estern 6editerranean, or in si&ilar
restrictions and li&itations as they e'isted in the co&&ercial centers 4e.%., Constantinople,
S&yrna, :a&ascus5 of the >tto&an E&pire or those 4e.%., >sa"a, Lyoto5 in 0o"u%a(a 8apan,
capitalist develop&ent (ould have li"ely re&ained &erely for&al, an uran accessory %eared
to the lu'ury consu&ption of the households of princes (ho he%e&oni=ed rural, aristocratic
social for&ations.
Sche&atically, (e can say in each case, those of 3orse&en, !enetians, By=antines, the
Isla&ic caliphates, and the 8apanese, either activity (as oriented to co&&erce, or settle&ent
or oth, e'clusively (ithout efforts to estalish control over laor in production, or that
co&&erce (as %overned, le%ally restricted, y the i&peratives of the state. $o( did this differ
fro& the situation in (estern Europe2
0he response has t(o parts.
;irst, the asic e'istential re)uire&ents of the port&en, ur%hers or our%eoisie and their
activity as such (as the uni&peded pursuit of co&&erce, called it ,freedo&/ of a sort. We can
cite PirenneIs for&ulation for its clarity and incisiveness+ What (as ,&ost indispensale (as
personal lierty. Without lierty, that is to say, (ithout the po(er to co&e and %o, to do
usiness, to sell %oods, a po(er not en1oyed y serfdo&, trade (ould e i&possile. 0hus,
they clai&ed it, si&ply for the advanta%es (hich it conferred, and nothin% (as further fro& the
&ind of the our%eoisie than any idea of freedo& as a natural ri%htE in their eyes it (as &erely
a useful one./
1
0here (ere conse)uences of this funda&ental conviction and, in front of the&,
ra&ifications already i&&anent to the situation as it e'isted on the %round. ;irst, a ,useful
ri%ht/ already in fact elon%ed to so&e of those (ho had ta"en up residence in the to(ns.
0hese included those orn of unfree parents, perhaps serfs perhaps not, ut (ho could not e
traced ac" to a lordE then there (ere the e&phatically serfs. In either case, they could not e
coerced ac" to a &anor. 0he po(er of the &anor did not e'tend to the city. 0his de facto
situation, thus, had de 9ure i&plications. 0he peasants (ho no( (ere e&ployed in the city had
to e %uaranteed their freedo&+
2
Because they (ere e&ployed in the uildin% trades, y the
&unicipal authority, y crafts&en, as porters and laorers, and thus ecause they (ere
en%a%ed in (or" that socially reproduced or &aintained the uilt environ&ent of the city, its
co&&erce and its &anufacturers, ecause in other (ords their laor secured the reality of the
city as a city, the &erchants and the &unicipal institutions they created could not leave the
peasants to the tender &ercies of the rural lord. In the to(ns, this &eant they could not e
1
$enri Pirenne, Social and 2cono$ic Histor% of Medieval 2urope, C0.
2
,&id+
co&pelled to &arry only (ithin their station and classE and, in the countryside, it (as additional
i&petus to fore%o laor services and to aolish the cheva%e in order to render the to(ns 4or
(orse, or%ani=ed revolt5 less attraction, to the "eep the rate of desertion of the estate fro&
alloonin%.
Return to the &unicipal lierty of the novel, specifically uran social %roups.
In a practical (ay, this lierty (ent far eyond the personal status of individual &erchants, to
the le%al status of &erchants and artisans 4actual or possile5 as social %roups. @ierty (as, in
fact, increasin%ly an institutional characteristic of a &unicipality, 1ust as serfdo& (as,
see$ingl%, a feature of the soil.
1
See&in%ly. In fact, the proper contrast (as et(een the
personal dependency that characteri=ed rural life under feudal conditions, and the lierty of
place, persona%e and activity that characteri=ed the to(ns en%a%ed in co&&erce and a
distinctive division of laor that ste&&ed fro& lar%e9scale trade. It (as this activity, trade, that
&ost re)uired institutional and le%al sanction, and the early &erchants (ho first estalished
a&on%st the&selves that institutional fra&e(or" in (hich they acted. 0his (as the contract. It
covered aspects of a for& of life predicated on e'chan%e that ran%ed fro& the &ost &undane
to the decisively i&portant and hit on the unusual as (ell. 0hus, pacts (ere dra(n (hose
clauses dealt (ith reduction of tolls and access over roads and (ater(ays to ri%hts in cases of
dispute settle&ent and co&pensation over un1ust sei=ure, and clai&s of o(nership of
&erchandise in %ray areas such as a ship(rec" off the territory of the party that (as not
transportin% the %oods.
2
3o( the funda&ental pre&ise of this entire evolution and develop&ent, the situation in the
to(ns, &unicipal lierty, rested on fra%&ented political authority across the re%ion, the
historical predo&inance of the autar"ic estate in (hich production (as not institutionally or
spatially separated fro& the ad&inistration of 1ustice, (here the latter (as carried out, either in
the asence of or in opposition to "in%ly po(er, a historical situation 4of fra%&entary political
authority5 fro& (hich urani=ation evolved. @i"e la( this uni)ue &erchant ,freedo&/
D
4(hich
is, as already de&onstrated, i&&ediately and directly connected to the elaoration of a
1
,&id, C1.
2
:avid *ulafia, ,Corneto90ar)uinia and the Italian 6erchant Repulics, 22C, 11O92D0.
D
I.e., lierty.
In a %enuine historical and class sense, the concepts of lierty and freedo&, arisin% fro& and orne y anta%onist
%roups in production, are antithetical.
0he concept of li&ert% has its startin% point in the uni&peded disposition of private property in production. It can e
confused (ith free activity ecause it arose in opposition to Church and state authority over and re%ulation of
property, its ra( &aterials and products and their exchangeE and over the suppression of &ar"ets 4those in coin, i.e.,
the suppression of usury5. But, in opposition to reli%ious sanctions on their activity, a central concern of individualistic,
individual proprietors re&ained sha"in% off their oli%ations as &asters of laor, oli%ations that restricted and li&ited
the e'ploitation of that laor.
>n the other hand, the concept of freedo$, thou%h li&ited at its ori%ins, (as orn of the activity of &asses of &en and
(o&en in the En%lish Civil War, for the &ost part pleeian or propertyless. It first appeared in @eveller inspired, &ass
discussion a&on% artisans in taverns and in the streets, unfor&ali=ed asse&lies, in (hich needs (ere articulated,
aspirations uttered. I&&anent to the concept (as a vision of property as the asis of an autono&ous livelihood rooted
in o(nership and control of &eans of production. It assu&ed the activity of producin% itself provided a &eanin%ful
e'istence, free of the control of a $aster, that afforded a living, ithout i$poverish$ent, for the proprietor and his
fa$il%+
*ll future elaorations of the concept of freedo& sprin% fro& the activity of &asses of &en and (o&en, lar%ely
proletarians, en%a%ed en $asse, in asse&ly, in settin% forth de&ands on Po(er 4capital, the state5, and in
overturnin% it.
In the o1ectively historical and hence class sense, freedo& &eans uncoerced and unrestricted 4y Po(er5 asse&ly
and speech in (hich &asses of &en and (o&en articulate their needs and aspirations, address their %rievances and
for&ulate a co&&on plan of action. Instances of the for&s in (hich freedo& forcefully announced itself durin% a &ass
upsur%e (ere the 8acoin clus after 1GF7, the artisanate in the streets durin% the 8uly Revolution, proletarians
constructin% and at arricades in 8une 1F#F, the ?aponist *ssociations in Petersur% after Bloody Sunday 170C, the
(or"ers in the streets of Petro%rad in ;eruary, 8uly and Septe&er 171G, etc.
universalist concept of la(5, and underlyin% it the asence of a %reat overlord sittin% atop a
centrali=ed state, (as one condition for the for&ation of early capitalis&, (hat (e refer to as
the 4%ro(in% ascendency5 of the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in production,
ecause production 4cloth, aove all5, li"e e'chan%e, (as a controlled y the &erchant 4and
not y the state5.
0he contraposition of the &anors and the to(ns (as at its sharpest and %reatest in vie( of the
reality of political authority, or, &ore precisely, its practical e'pression in the ad&inistration of
1ustice. ;eudal ,la(,/ the trial y ordeal, the or%ani=ation of the &anorial court, and the
,custo&s of the &anor/ all had little relevancy to the e'chan%e of %oods, the pro&ise i&plied
in contract, the %ro(in% for&s of contract, the e'tension of credit, etc. :isputes that arose
fro& )uestions of tenure, rents and issues of cultivation, and their custo&ary sanctions and
the for&s and institutions of le%ality that rose fro& the& si&ply (ere not %er&ane to disputes
over the e'chan%e of %oods, reach of pro&ise, )uality of %oods, etc. 6unicipal lierty, in
other (ords, de&anded its o(n le%ality, 1ud%es (ho (ere inti&ately ac)uainted (ith the
activities of &erchants 4and artisans, thou%h far less i&portant5, for&s and institutions that
&ore ade)uately corresponded to, could resolve contracts for&in% on the asis of, co&&erce,
and not 1ust co&&erce, ut the ne( situations that arose as its volu&e %re( and its velocity
accelerated.
1
*fter 1000, &erchant practice and its re)uire&ents %ave rise to an incipit co&&ercial code
49us $ercatoriu$5, a collection of usiness usa%es that de facto functioned as &erchant
le%ality even if it (as not reco%ni=ed eyond the &erchant co&&unityE and they %ave rise to
&erchant aritrators to resolve disputes, pro&ptly it &i%ht e added. *fter 1100, (hat (as de
facto and ad hoc (as increasin%ly reco%ni=ed as pulic, &unicipal authority and la( (here,
for&ally, territorial political authority e'isted 4that authority eni%n as recipient and enor&ous
eneficiary of tolls (hich &erchants paid, and (hich the e'pansion of co&&erce vastly
increased5, such as in ;landers 4Count of ;landers5, ?er&any and Italy 4$oly Ro&an
e&peror5, and En%lish 4the En%lish "in%5.
2
;reedo&, then, is a concept developed 4and rene(ed ever ane(5 y pleeian and propertyless strata. 40hus, it is
unli"e lierty, a concept developed y proprietors of property in production to further their interests in e&ploy&ent of
that property (ithout political or reli%ious restriction.5 *&on% these strata, there is invarialy a tacit layer of &eanin%
underlyin%, anticipatorily and hopefully, the concept of freedo&E na&ely, the desire for self9&astery in (or" and life,
the lon%in% to e eholdin% to no &an, especially in production to a ,oss,/ a &aster.
H0he (hole force of the de&onstration that for&s one essential feature of Revolutionar% 1rigins of )reedo$ 1ustifies
the fore%oin%. Editor.J
1
Pirenne, ,&id< Bloch, ,&id, ,,: DC#.
Both authors 4Pirenne and Bloch5 e&phasi=e 4as (e do not5 that the ne( le%ality of the to(ns (as desi%ned to
overco&e the co&plications, delays and ,archais&/ of feudal ,la(/ and &anorial custo&.
;urther&ore, oth authors also stress the co&&unal oath of loyalty s(ore y the ur%esses o1ectifyin% their
co&&it&ents to class solidarity, as (ell as the &unicipal principle of ta'ation 4startin% fro& defense, in fortifyin% to(ns
ut e'tendin% to rid%es, )uays, &ar"et structures, and financin% for an office to re%ulate production and trade, e.%.,
the %uilds5 (hich estalished a rule of proportionality, i.e., re%ular levies (ere estalished for the sa"e of the
&unicipality, as opposed to the private enefit of a %reat lord (ith his tolls, therey reestalishin% the principle of
pu&lic ad&inistration that had een lost durin% the feudal era. *t the sa&e ti&e, these develop&ent (ere pre&ised on
and, dialectically, resulted in the estalish&ent of self9%overnance e%innin% fro& &unicipal councils 4elected
&a%istrates and consuls, 9urIs, and alder&an in Italy, ;rance and En%land respectively5. ;or the latter 4ta'ation and
self9%overnance5, Pirenne, ,&id, C29C#E for the for&er 4the oath5, Bloch, ,&id, ,,: DC#.
0his (as entirely consistent (ith the inner historical develop&ent of (estern European to(ns, and it (as a practical
and lo%ical evolution that thus led to %reater autono&y 4and proaly econo&ic e'pansionis&, e.%., ;lorentine
i&perialis&, also5. We have fore%one elaoration of these features, rele%atin% the& to a footnote, ecause (e have
underta"en our account fro& the perspective of the institution of the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in
production, for (hich the entire &unicipal tra1ectory (as a ,phase,/ aleit an entirely crucial one, in its estalish&ent.
2
Pirenne, ,&id, C19C2.
0he circuit of the e'chan%e of %oods 4uyin% and sellin%5 no( enco&passed &anors and
our%s, fauour%s and %enuine to(ns, and the really econo&ically i&portant cities in the
(estern 6editerranean 4;lorence, Pisa, ?enoa, 6arseilles, Barcelona5, the north(est
4@ondon, Bru%es, Ips(ich5, the Baltic and Russia 4:an=i%, @Aec", Ri%a, 3ov%orod, Liev5, the
eastern 6editerranean and the @evant 4!enice, Constantinople, *ntioch, *leppo, *le'ander5
and still further east 46edina, 0ari=, Ba%hdad, Basra, Isfrahan, Rai, 3isaphur, 6erv and
Sa&ar"and, %ate(ay to China5, and north *frica 46ehilli, *l%iers, 0le&cen, 0unis and 0ripoli5.
0he portion of the circuit that included the (estern 6editerranean and the north(est, as (ell
as the interior situated to the north of the for&er and et(een the t(o 4includin% 6ilan,
;ran"furt9a&96ain, Erfurt, 6a%deur%, $a&ur%, Colo%ne and *nt(erp, a&on% nu&erous
others perhaps the &ost i&portant cities in the strictly econo&ic sense5, ho(ever, (as
different+ It had for&ed, and continued to do so, on the asis of a tendency to(ard the pri&acy
of econo&ic develop&ent in (hich the i&pedi&ents to co&petition 4pri&arily estalished y
state re%ulation5 (ere li&ited, especially in the sphere of production 4(here cloth &anufacture
predo&inated in asolute sense, the leadin% centers ein% Bru%es and ;lorence5 in (hich a
,nor&ative/ price (as estalished and re%ulated the flo(s of %oods as co&&odities.
0his rin%s us ac" to the discussion of the first of part of the response as to (hy (estern
Europe (as different (ith a vie( to the develop&ent of co&&erce in the vast transcontinental
re%ion into (hich it (as inserted, rin%in% us ac" full circle to the si%nificance of for&al,
(ritten la( in the rise of capitalis&.
0hus, the other, the second, crucially si%nificant develop&ent differentiatin% co&&erce and
production in (estern Europe fro& the rest of the co&&ercial (orld 4circa 12005 constituted
an o1ectified and institutionali=ed elaoration, a di&ension of >1ective Spirit that crystalli=ed,
recreated as a principle of social or%ani=ation and o1ectively codified the lived and
e'perienced, lierty of the &erchant. It (as an elaoration of &unicipal le%ality as le%al
concept, the essential aspect on (hich (e have already &ade a start in recountin% the
develop&ent of Ro&an la( and Suiritarian property ri%hts...
While see&in%ly peripheral, in this respect it is necessary to indicate (hy the Church and its
activities (ere not tan%ential to the revival of co&&erce, and since the Church (as openly
and unrelentin%ly hostile to the %ro(th of trade and the 4freedo& of the5 to(ns,
1
its i&portance
(as oviously not intended or conscious, ut &ore on the order of a ,ruse of historical
Reason/ in the $e%elian sense+
* si%nificant ele&ent in this recovery and rene(al of co&&ercial activity had een the
ChurchIs insistence 4)uite old no(, reachin% ac" to the ti&e of ?re%ory I5, (hose ai&s also
intended le%al transfor&ation, on estalishin% its o(n uni)ue, sacred and transcendent
identity, its spiritual &ission and its priesthood, in relation to thin%s secular and ordinary
elievers.
2
0o secure this identity, the Church (as e'traordinarily sensitive to and insisted on
a for&al principle of trans&ittale property that (ould %uarantee the inte%rity of %ifts 4precious
o1ects such as chalices ta"en in attle, land, ut aove the estates to (hich these (ere
attached5. 0he sensuous9&aterial sustance of the Church, its o1ective sustance or social
(ealth, after all, accrued to in precisely the for& of the %ifts, enefices, etc. We shall return to
this principle shortly. $ere it i&portant to note that it is a for&al concept of la(, at least civil
la( as it related to co&&erce, that (as the historically i&portant feature of the revival of
co&&erce (ith a vie( to the ensuin% capitalist develop&ent 4for&al do&ination of capital over
laor in production5, thou%h, to e sure, this concept of la( (as not lo%ically possile,
co%nitively conceivale and, aove all else, practical reali=ale (ithout the prior e'istential
lierty of the &erchant as he (ent aout his usiness in daily life 4a ,freedo&/ itself &ediated,
1
,&id, 2G, #79C0, C#.
2
Bloch, ,&id, ,: 11O, 10G.
as (e have indicated, y the fra%&entary political soverei%nties and &ultiple s&all authorities
characteri=in% the re%ion5.
In fact, elaoration of specific cate%ories of 4for&al5 la( (as &erely a &o&ent in this lar%er
cultural develop&ent, ut, fro& the standpoint of conse)uences, a hi%hly si%nificant one. It is
for&al la(, and aspects as they relate directly to property, that (e shall turn to.
0he develop&ent of cate%ories of for&al la( and their o1ectified codification, especially as
they relate to private property in production, is thro(n into old relief in a contrast (ith
precisely the situation of the precedin% era in (hich, pervasive, feudal social relations
predo&inated, a situation these cate%ories (ere intended to &ediate, (hose outco&es they
(ere desi%ned to decisively transfor&.
0he first feature of this situation (as the pri&acy of locality in all clai&s on o1ective
sustance, (hether property or inheritance in the lar%er sense, or in clai&s of ri%ht 4droit,
Recht5. Each %roup resident to a specific la( tended to develop its o(n tradition of ri%ht.
1
0his
(as (hat should have een e'pected since little (as codified or for&ali=ed in (ritin%, each
locality and the %roup that created its contours varied accordin% to the specificity of its history,
%eo%raphy, even cli&ate and topo%raphy. In this situation (here custo& and tradition ruled, it
should a%ain co&e as no surprise, that the funda&ental principle operative in any such
clai&s, the second feature of this situation, (as,/I(hat has een is si&ply and as such (hat is
ri%ht./
2
Peculiarly, and perhaps not so peculiarly at all, as Bloch notes this &ade ri%ht, neither
fi'ed in (ritin% or statutory la(, e'traordinarily fle'ile.
D
8udicial decisions (ere y and lar%e
&ade orally, and recourse to the& (as ased on oral recollection, so that, as Bloch fails to
note (ith no chec" on it &e&ory (as shaped y current interest.
We should already e ale to intuit the enor&ous prole&s this infor&ality (ould %ive rise to
in cases (here the transfer of %oods ased on trust, i.e., on the e'tension of credit and its
ter&s, (as concerned. *nd, in this re%ard as Bloch a%ain points out, it (as e'ceedin%ly
unco&&on for anyone under these conditions, i.e., (ith a vie( to real property in the era of
the predo&inance of feudal social relations, to refer to o(nership, (hether it (as an estate or
official position that (as at issue.
#
Instead, (hat (as invarialy invo"ed (as seisin. 0his is
decisive, and it is (orth )uotin% Bloch at len%th+ Seisin (as ,possession &ade venerale y
the lapse of ti&e. 0(o liti%ants %o to la( aout a field or a ri%ht to ad&inister 1ustice. 3o &atter
(hich of the& is the present holder, that one (ill succeed (ho is ale to prove that he
plou%hed the land or ad&inistered 1ustice in previous years or, etter still, that his ancestors
efore hi& did so./
C
0he entire situation co&prehended y seisin (as reinforced, enor&ously
stren%thened, y the &ultiplicity of oli%ations, and thus of le%iti&ate clai&s, that urdened
the land.
O
4* si&ilar situation otained in 8apan, (here various shi!i, a possessionary title, to
the sa&e plot of land aounded.5 If the tenant and his fa&ily (or"ed the land and harvested
its crop, (hile, to oot, his father did the sa&eE if a retainer collected a portion of the surplus
as triute, the asis of his livelihoodE if his lord had %ranted hi& the ri%ht to e'ploit this
e'panse of landE and, still at a further re&ove, if the lord of his lord had %ranted hi& a fief of
the land in the first placeE if the successive fa&ilies of the lord of lords had and (ould each in
1
,&id, ,: 112.
2
0his is a paraphrase. BlochIs for&ulation is, ,What has een ipso facto has the ri%ht to e./ ,&id, ,: 11D.
D
,&id+
#
,&id, ,: 11C.
C
,&id+
$e continues, ,in so far as the case is not re&itted to the ordeal or trial y attle, he (ill invo"e as a rule, Ithe &e&ory
of &en, as far as it e'tends.I 0itle9deeds (ere hardly ever produced save to assist &e&ory, and it they proved that a
transfer had ta"en place it (as &erely a transfer of seisin. >nce the proof of lon% usa%e had een adduced, no one
considered it (orth(hile to prove anythin% else./
O
,&id, ,: 11O.
So&e of the e'a&ples i&&ediately follo(in% the parenthetical re&ar" are ta"en fro& Bloch, ,&id+
ti&e re%rant the fiefE if the villa%e co&&unity recouped use of the land after the harvest 4e.%.,
%atherin% corn stule for (or" ani&als5E if all these could &a"e a clai& on the sa$e piece of
land, (hat sense did e'clusive title, o(nership in the Ro&an 4or our%eois5 sense, &a"e2 0he
ans(er (as none.
So (hat is crucial here (as the recovery, if you (ill, of Ro&an la( and its develop&ent,
especially the cate%ories of Suiritarian o(nership, aove all, the recovery, elaoration and
o1ectified institutionali=ation of the concept of property as unconditional and asolute, (hich
raised clai&s of le%al title 4property5 over clai&s of possession and &ade the& unassailale
and inviolale.
It re&ains to identify (ho (ere the social %roups and institutions, for&in% ele&ents of this
,transitional/ order, (ho sou%ht to effect the destruction of custo&ary la(.
While (e have stressed the centrality of the ur%hers in de&andin% a concept of property that
facilitated the alienation of &ove&ent and %oods, and %oods as co&&odities
1
... in the na&e
of rational procedure they desired precisely that unassailaility and inviolaility of their title to
land, &ovales and &erchants inventory... (e (ould, thus, e re&iss if (e did not also point
out, in a %enuine ruse of history, there (as an other(ise po(erful, ut hidden, actor in rin%in%
into ein% novel, for&al le%al cate%ories that en%a%in% social practices, very effectively
assisted in securin% a political and social fra&e(or" in (hich capital itself could freely
circulate and its for&al do&ination over laor in production could e tentatively estalished.
It (as Ro&an Catholicis& that played a pivotal role in this recovery. It (as alto%ether
secondary that the centers of learnin% (ere often Church endo(ed institutions, or that
university faculties en%a%ed in the (or" of recovery (ere &ore often than not philosophers,
i.e., theolo%ians. What (as truly si%nificant (ere the ChurchIs leadin% fi%ures all understood,
and en%a%ed its clerical intelli%entsia in conceptually producin% a theoretical fra&e(or" that
(ould enhance, rationali=e and le%iti&i=e the overthro( of custo&ary notions of possession in
favor of una&i%uous concept of le%al o(nership and, (ith it, a concept of inheritance that
(ould i&&ediately, and une)uivocally orient its practice. 0his, the latter (as that asolute and
unconditional concept of property, est trans&itted y (ay of pri&o%eniture.
What (as at issue for the Church (as a clear set of rules that %overned the transfer of
property... usually land ostensily 4and often5 in the for& of %ifts, for e'a&ple, in (ills... that
(ould preclude challen%es to the esto(al fro& the fa&ily and "in. In this respect, it only need
e recalled that, the ?re%orian refor&s not(ithstandin% 4and here (e call luntly state they
(ere every &uch an ofuscatory &as" as an e'pression of a spiritual renovation5, the Church
(as the %reatest lando(ner in hu%e e'panses of (estern Europe and the 6editerranean,
especially on the Italian Peninsula.
2
$ere, as else(here, the Church &ade every efforts to
rea"do(n ,old custo&ary and sei%niorial i&pedi&ents/ that stood in the (ay of ,individual
possession./
D
1
,Iid./
2
,&id, ,: 1#2< 1D1, (here Bloch states that, effectively, in the tenth century the Church (as already operatin% (ith a
concept of unconditional o(nership of property.
;or Church lands, see the ;irst Study, Part II,/?alileo, II/ (ith reference to the discussion of the Ca&aldoli, aove.
D
Bloch, ,&id, ,: 20F, 2079210.
We counterpose this co&prehension of the un(ittin% role of the Church in the rise of capitalis& to the crude,
ideolo%ically &otivated understandin% evinced y Perry *nderson (4assages fro$ 7ntiquit% to )eudalis$, 1D291DD,
1D#91DC5 (ho sees in &onastic unity of intellectual and &anual la&or the elevation of latter characteristic of capitalist
&odernity and, (e &i%ht re&ar", so ini&ical to a %enuinely e&ancipatory, revolutionary and co&&unist vision of a
future lierated hu&anity.
0he crudely ideolo%ical intent is, of course, to e&race laor, as laor9po(er, as a&stract la&or, for its productivity in
the capitalist sense, i.e., for the e'pansion of productive forces it entails. 0he ,theori=ation/ has een the intellectual
patri&ony of the nationalist petty our%eoisie of the underdeveloped capitalist periphery (ho &ain concern has een
a fli%ht, full throttle, into I/&oderni=ation/ on the asis of )ualitatively increase in the 4rate of5 e'ploitation of ,its/
;inally, co&pletin% the phalan' of forces ai&in% at the restoration and develop&ent of
Suiritarian o(nership, there (ere the harin%ers of centrali=ed "in%ship, the early &onarchies
of the ne( Europe, the Capetians and the ?er&an princes (ho laid clai& to the cro(n of the
,$oly Ro&an/ e&pire. :irectly counterposed to the provincial and custo&ary la( of the
tendentially autar"ic &anor, their interests in consolidatin% control over their vast territories,
thus in a unifor& 1urisprudence in (hich the codified (ord of i&perial "in%ship (as la(, (as
reinforced y the revenues re)uired to ad&inister these e'panses, stren%thened, that is, y
the need to le%iti&i=e their ri%ht to e'tract tolls and custo&s over far9flun% re%ions.
)or$al Do$ination, ,, 03inea$ents5
3ong-Distance Trade and the Cha$pagne )airs
7 )irst N4hase> 0,nitial Develop$ent5 of the 2arl% Continental 2cono$%
1
3o institutions (ere of %reater i&port for the initial for&ation of a transre%ional, nascently
European econo&y than the fairs.

0he est "no(n of this era (ere the ;ive ;airs of ;landers,
the En%lish 6idlands ;airs and, (ithout dout &ost i&portantly, the Cha&pa%ne ;airs.
We can &a"e note of another re%ional concentration of to(ns and center of early econo&ic
develop&ent, one other than that on the Italian Peninsula. 0his (as in north(estern ;rance
and the conti%uous Pays9Bas, *rtois, ;landers, Braant, $ainaut, Picardy and @ii%e, the area
rou%hly defined y the So&&e in the south, the Scheldt estuary in the north and the 6euse
valley in the east. Characteri=ed y productive a%ricultural lands (or"ed y a peasantry (ho,
if su1ect to feudal dependency had ro"en (ith it early on, and y pastoral land on (hich
sheep (ere raised, a density of villa%es and a %ro(in% population that, also early on, %ave rise
to a &ultiplicity of s&all to(ns, this re%ion (as the other leadin% center of (oolen production
in the period of feudal decadence. 0o its south, the Cha&pa%ne re%ion featured a host of
villa%es that too en%a%ed in ho&e production of cloth, ut here it (as hi%hly li&ited, not9yet9
uran and did not really %ro(n 4i.e., de&o%raphically densify5 until after the fairs the&selves
e%an to flourish. -et Cha&pa%ne (as i&portant ecause it (as there at the sa&e historical
&o&ent 4circa 1120911D05 the &ain fairs that (ere a crucial deter&inant of this era appeared.
3o(, hosted y local po(er, as for&al %atherin% places of &erchants intent on uyin% and
sellin% their cloth (ares 4and other %oods, e.%., @evantine spices5, fairs, patroni=ed y the
counts of ;landers, had perhaps first appeared at &onthly events in the to(ns of @ille,
6essines, 0orhout, and later at Bru%es y 112G. 0hey had sta%%ered openin%s, each lastin% a
&onth and runnin% fro& the end of ;eruary to early 3ove&er. So the Cha&pa%ne ;airs, the
&ost si%nificant, (ere not the first to appear. 0hat si%nificance2
0he fairs in the Cha&pa%ne re%ion only developed in the t(elfth century. 0hey (ere set up in
four s&all to(ns, 0royes, Provins, Bar9sur9*ue, and @a%ney. 0he north(estern re%ion of
(oolen production (as close yE y (ay of the Rhone, throu%h 6arseille and ?eneva, the
to(ns of Cha&pa%ne lay over the &ost direct, and protected, route fro& the north(est to
@o&ardy and 0uscan, thou%h this &ay only have een reco%ni=ed after the fact of their
estalish&ent. 4Italian &erchants did not e%in to appear re%ularly in lar%e nu&ers until the
1170s.5 3onetheless, this points to that si%nificance+ ;irst, the fairs (ere the locus of the intra9
continental net(or" of e'chan%e relations for&ed throu%h the&E second, they channeled the
products of dispersed, s&all sites of production, unifyin% the& throu%h a &ar"et in an
overland continental net(or" of trade and e'chan%eE and, third, this net(or" lin"ed these
s&all scattered sites to the lar%er to(ns and e&er%in% cities, enhancin% the %ro(th of oth.
(or"ers.. It has precious little to do (ith &ediatin% a %eneral hu&an e&ancipation.
1
0he pri&ary sources for (e have consulted for this discussion are t(ofold. 0hey are Roert Bautier, ,0he ;airs of
Cha&pa%ne/ and 8ohn 6unro, ,0he I3e( Institutional Econo&icsI and the Chan%in% ;ortunes of ;airs n 6edieval
and Early 6odern Europe./
Prosaically he%e&oni=ed y &erchants 4i.e., %overned y the for&al do&ination of capital
over laor in production5, this north9south, north(estern Europe96editerranean asin
e'chan%e (as the first for& in (hich an incipit European econo&y, as other than isolated and
locali=ed 4i.e., as unitary and re%ional5, appeared. But once this connection (as &ade, and
e'chan%e et(een re%ions (as fully or%ani=ed, intra9continental econo&ic develop&ent
vastly accelerated. ,t as, then, in the period of the )airs+++ e can date it fro$ the $o$ent
the )airs rose and &eca$e the $ediu$ in hich so$ething other than locali/ed trade as
conducted, sa% fro$ **A( to *''(, or, utili/ing the )le$ish case, the period fro$ *(S( to
*'(A, a &roader fra$eor! 0or, again, *(A( to *'((, a still &roader fra$eor!, that of feudal
decadence5 hich, having originated, enco$passed the initial develop$ent of tons or,
again, to $ar! a definite point in historical ti$e, **T(, the $o$ent at hich ,talian $erchants
&egan to regularl% appear in the Cha$pagne region for the )airs+++ that capital#s for$al
do$ination in production as inaugurated, the $o$ent at hich the possi&ilit% of a return to
local self-sufficienc% &ased strictl% on village exchange and ton $ar!ets as a&rogated, that
a reified o&9ectivit% ith its on eight and its on logic, an econo$%, nascentl% appeared
and &egan to undergo a develop$ent hich, as product of the interactions and transactions of
all its &earers, re$ained distinct and other and increasingl% shaped constitutive social
relations for$ed in dail% life+
0his develop&ent did not, to e sure, occur all at once or fro& the outset. *rtesian and
;le&ish cloth &erchants did not appear until circa 11#0, and, as (eIve already indicated,
?enoese and @o&ard &erchants not until the 1170s. *nd, it too" until the 12D0s for the
to(ns of the north(est and the @o( Countries to institute an enco&passin% or%ani=ation, the
$anse of seventeen to(ns, to advance and protect their interests. It (as, &oreover, only in
the follo(in% decades that 0uscan, @o&ard and Provencal &erchants did si&ilarly in for&in%
societas and universitas.
0hese societies consisted in representatives 4consuls5 and an elected senior official, a
captain, (ho "ept tas on fair activity and e'chan%es. In this respect, these or%ani=ations
constituted an e'tension of &unicipal la(, or etter, evolvin% &erchant la(. 0his raises the
)uestion as to (hether (e can say that the fairs 4not 1ust the Cha&pa%ne ;airs, for (e thin"
they (ere typical5 spontaneously %re( up as a &ere elaoration of e'istin% practices. If no
purpose %uided their construction fro& the outset, (e &i%ht o1ectively refer ac" to the social
and historical function of these institutions as the first for& of the appearance, aleit nascent,
of a re%ional, transcontinental econo&y, and leave it at that.
But (e thin" &erchant intent and consciousness (as present at the outset. While in a %eneral
(ay purpose and function coincided in the institution of the ;airs, this purpose and function
resolve the&selves into an analysis of their historical success+ 0heir prosperity did not si&ply
rest on location, ut si&ultaneously depended on the %uarantee and the capacity of the
counts of Cha&pa%ne, of a non9local ut non9re%ional po(er, to provide personal security,
and security of property, to enforce property ri%hts in travel to and fro Cha&pa%ne

4oviously
entailin% a%ree&ents (ith other si&ilar princes5, to enforce &erchant security and &ercantile
contracts throu%hout the =one of petty co&&odity production. *nd this rin%s us ac" to
)uestion of purpose+ 0he counts of Cha&pa%ne did not offer this pled%e until 1207, ut its
offer and the enforce&ent of property ri%hts that follo(ed coincided (ith that &o&ent fro&
(hich the ;airs e%an to really flourish and prosper. 0his relation et(een (ealth and po(er
(as characteristic of the lar%est part of the epoch under consideration.
)or$al Do$ination, ,, 03inea$ents5
Conditions of the Oualitative 2xpansion of the Continental 2cono$%, ,
0Re-51pening of the "estern Mediterranean
Closed y Saracen pirates in the 0yrrhenian Sea in the ti&e of Charle&a%ne, the (estern
6editerranean (as reopened in t(o, lar%ely unrelated phases occurrin% over t(o centuries
apart. In the first, these pirates 4also "no(n as Corsairs5 (ere cleared fro& coastal southern
Italy 4and eastern coastal ;rance5 y ar&ed Pisan and ?enoese &erchant ships over the
course of a len%thy stru%%le enthusiastically ac"ed y the Church+ 0he first assaults (ere on
Sardinia in 101C, and on Sicily 4Paler&o5 in 10D#. Co&pletion of this stru%%le ca&e (ith the
con)uest of Sardinia in 1022, Sicily fro& 10CF to 1070 and Corsica in 1071. In the second
phase, it (as the eastern Catalan coastal Balearic Islands that (ere at issue+ Rnder the
*ra%onese9Catalan "in%, 8au&e I, a Catalan and ;rench force too" the Balearics startin% fro&
6a1orca and e%innin% in 1227. ;i%htin% here (as &ethodical, continuous and lasted si'
years efore the con)uest (as co&pleted.
0he reopenin% of the (estern 6editerranean did not, at any rate, create a viale alternative
trade route that ypassed the Cha&pa%ne ;airs, for it should e noted the overland route
fro& northern ;rance to @o&ardy, or 0uscany, (as only aout O00 "ilo&eters, (hile the
voya%e y ship (ith all its va%aries 4unreliale (inds, stor&s and the real prospects of %ettin%
lost if only te&porarily, hence the irre%ularity of scheduled arrival ti&es5, say fro& Calais to
Pisa, (as (ell over si' ti&es lon%er 4rou%hly #000 "ilo&eters5.
Instead, co&&ercial freedo& of these seas %ave an enor&ous oost to capitalIs for&al
do&ination+ It thic"ened the net(or" of for&al capitalist social relations ased on &erchant
trade 4and, underlyin% it, artisan petty co&&odity production5+ In the first phase, it %ave
northern Italian &erchants 4aove all, Pisan, ?enoese and ;lorentine, and the !enetians also5
direct and i&&ediate access to Sicily and 3aples, to their vast %ranaries, and provided the
&erchants of their cities (ith outlets for their cloth (ares.
Beyond this, it opened a direct route to 3orth *frica, (here &uch the sa&e "ind of e'chan%es
transpired. In the second phase, a si&ilar direct and i&&ediate route, via 6a1orca 4the &ain
Balearic island5 and &ain entrepot in the (estern 6editerranean, to Barcelona and the
Catalan 4*ra%onese and Castile5 interiors (as opened for the sa&e Italian &erchantsE (hile,
patently, and si&ultaneously, that route in reverse (as opened to the Catalons. In oth cases,
as often as not finished %oods (ere e'chan%ed. ;or the Catalons, it also &eant a direct route
to 3orth *frica 40ripoli and 0unis5, ut in a due easterly sailin%, Catalan &erchants could no(
access Crete, Cyprus and the cities of the @evant 4*cre, Beirut, 8erusale&, etc.5 and E%ypt
4*le'ander5, and thus e'chan%ed linens and (oolens for spices, pepper, %in%er, lac, &astic,
linseed oil, and &ore.
0hus, the volu&e of trade &ar"edly increased, the net(or" of co&&ercial social relations
spread 4%eo%raphically5 and deepened 4i.e., involved )ualitatively &ore e'chan%e and &ore
&erchant %roups5, the dependency on the capitalist &ar"et of the social classes of the to(ns,
cities and their i&&ediate countrysides &ar"edly %re(.
)or$al Do$ination, ,, 03inea$ents5
Conditions of the Oualitative 2xpansion of the Continental 2cono$%, ,,
Centralit% of Textile 4roduction and its Dispersed Sites of Manufacture
Productively, in the thirteen century the ;airs rested on the &ultiplicities of to(ns and villa%es
of the northern ;rance N Pays Bas re%ion. In ;landers alone, the etter "no( little to(ns and
villa%es included Lortri1", Wervi", :i"s&uide, :ein=e, :ender&onde, Co&ines, Warneton,
$ondschoote, and Poperin%e, so&e t(o do=en in all. It &i%ht e noted these s&all to(ns, and
villa%es, did not, in an a%e of co&&ercial e'pansion and %ro(in% prosperity, 4yet5 e'perience
any crushin% co&petition for& the lar%er to(ns en%a%ed in cloth production. 4*ll of (hich
su%%ests the i&portance of still %ro(in% population of Europe, of de&o%raphic densification in
the period of feudal decadence.5
0he activity of &erchants that the Cha&pa%ne ;airs rou%ht to%ether, the ;airs the&selves,
induced do=ens of &ore to(ns, so&e lar%e, in northern and central Italy, and in @an%uedoc,
Provence and Catalonia to initiate or e'pand production of a diverse array of cheap te'tiles
such as (oollens, (orsteds and se&i9(orsted or ser%e type farics, and especially fustians,
(ith linen (arps and cotton (efts.
*t the sa&e historical &o&ent the En%lish te'tile to(ns 9 Beverly, Colchester, $untin%don,
@eicester, @incoln, @outh, 3or(ich and >'ford, not to &ention 3ortha&pton, Sta&ford,
Winchester and @ondon 9 supported the En%lish fairs at St. Ives, St. ?iles 4Winchester5,
Sta&ford and 3ortha&pton to na&e the &ost note(orthy. *s in the Cha&pa%ne re%ion and
eyond 4northern ;rance and the @o( Countries5, these fairs (ere closely lin"ed y
production of cheap clothes to the eastern te'tile9&anufacturin% to(ns, and y e'chan%e to
Italian and ;le&ish &erchants (ho ca&e to these fairs to purchase (oolens. 0hus, they too
(ere connected in a &ediate &anner to the (hole net(or" of relations on (hich Cha&pa%ne
re%ion thrived.
;airs, then, (ere the central &o&ent in this developin% net(or" of e'chan%esE cheap, li%ht
and coarse te'tiles (ere the ac"one of trade durin% this entire periodE and the central fi%ure
in the (hole evolvin% co&ple' of social relations (as the 4travelin%5 &erchant.
0hus, fro& this ti&e 4circa 11C0, perhaps earlier5 a potential net(or" of to(ns in northern
;rance and the conti%uous Pays Bas, in eastern En%land and in 0uscany all en%a%ed in
for&al capitalist te'tile &anufacture already e'isted.
In and throu%h the fairs, travelin% &erchants 4&ista"enly, in our vie(, identified as ,lon%
distance/ &erchants5 tied this net(or" to%ether. 0hey did so y creatin% a narro(ly continental
&ar"et out of a &ultiplicity of local ones. But in so doin%, the de9locali=ed the character of that
local production, renderin% production dependent upon e'chan%e over a vast re%ion 4vast at
least fro& a local perspective5, for&in% a nascent econo&y, an o1ective pseudo9autono&ous
sphere (ith its o(n deter&inants 4lar%ely, the &ove&ent of price5, and therey su1ected local
production to considerations, events, ,processes/ and a net(or" of social relations far eyond
its control or "en. In this respect, that net(or" (as ripe, as it (ere, for a )ualitative ,advance/
in its develop&ent.
)or$al Do$ination, ,, 03inea$ents5
4rincel% Mediation of Merchant Hege$on% over the Continental 2cono$%
Mechanis$s of the Oualitative 2xpansion of the Circuits of )or$al Capital#s Move$ent
In his study of 0uscan &erchant9an"ers at their ori%ins, 8ohn Pad%ett e'a&ined the papal
ulls of Innocent I!, *le'ander I!, Rran I! and Cle&ent I!.
1
What is i&portant here is that
fro& 12D2 on(ard, none (ere issued fro& Ro&e. 0he popes had een driven fro& the
!atican y the ?er&an e&peror, $ohenstaufens, (ho (ere pursuin% clai&s on northern and
central Italian lands+ ,...the popes no lon%er even had a stale ho&e in Ro&e+ they fled fro&
one &ountain top to another, in search of security and friends, all the (hile frantically issuin%
papal ulls and co&&ands that &ade it see& li"e their ureaucracy still functioned./
2
0heir
dan%er (as %rave indeed. 0he situation and the e'istential threat it posed overlapped (ith
1
0his section has een adopted fro& Boo" II, the discussion entitled ,Ban"in% and ;inance in ;lorentine $istory+ 0he
Efflorescence of ;inance and its Period Collapses,/ of Revolutionar% 1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch of Capital#s
)or$al Do$ination over 3a&or in 4roduction+
What follo(s relies heavily on Pad%ett, and additionally on Walter E. Rhodes, ,0he Italian Ban"ers in En%land and
their @oans to Ed(ard I and Ed(ard II/ and 8ohn 3a1e&y, The Histor% of )lorence+ HEditorIs noteJ
2
8ohn ;. Pad%ett, ,0he E&er%ence of @ar%e, Rnitary 6erchant9Ban"s in :u%ento 0uscany,/ 1#91C.
another, the financin% of &ilitary operations. 0he pope (as not a soverei%n in the classical
statist sense, i.e., he did not have his o(n ar&ed force 4or one that, &ilitarily, a&ounted to
anythin%5. 0hus, any atte&pt at territorial a%%randi=e&ent or, for that &atter, &ere self9
defense found hi& dependent on rin%in% to%ether local noles and their retainers, s&all
feudal ands, (ho he reli%iously &otivated. Rooted in )uasi autar"ic estate econo&ies, the
territorial reach of these lords (as narro(, and their &ain concern (as hostile nei%hors. *ll of
northern and central Italy suffered fro& the sa&e divisiveness. In the face of these divisions,
reli%ious =eal only (ent so far efore issues of defense of estate eca&e para&ount for the
lords te&porarily allied to pope, and, even if not pressin%, prole&s of &aintenance and
support, thus coin, eca&e an issue. In this respect, the $ohenstaufen threat these alliances
(ere desi%ned to &eet dovetailed (ith issues arisin% in the Crusades.
0he prole& for the papacy (as t(ofold and, in %oin% ac" to earlier Crusades, it preceded
the rise of the $ohenstaufen clai&ants to the i&perial cro(n+ 0he Church (as forced to rely
on secular princes to finance its o(n underta"in%s, so that in the field these princes (ere in all
senses independent of papal direction, e.%., they could en%a%e (ho they (ished, (hen they
(ished and ter&inate the en%a%e&ent (hen, for (hatever reason, they dee&ed it necessaryE
to oot, involvin% nu&erous po(ers, this assu&ed the effort 4any %iven Crusade5 could e
ade)uately synchroni=ed. In fact, only in a fe( cases (ere the various aspects of any such
underta"en ade)uately ali%ned. So one issue (as financin%, ut other (as control over the
venture. In the e'tre&e instance in the early 12C0s, the En%lish "in%, $enry III, offered to
divert his pled%e to a crusade in the $oly @and to an invasion of Sicily ai&ed at sei=in% the
cro(n fro& the $ohenstaufen 6anfred. Innocent I! refused the offer.
* start on the prole& of financin% had in principle een &ade as early 121F and thereafter,
(hen popes Innocent III and $onorius III created the ad&inistrative procedures and
&echanis&s for e'tractin% a Church levy 4triute5 fro& the Catholic populations of Europe to
under(rite the so9called ,;ifth/ Crusade 4121G912215, (hich effectively never %ot off the
%round 4i.e., an ar&ed force (as never asse&led, &uch less en%a%ed in fi%htin%5.
3onetheless, re%ulari=ed levies (ere collected on Church properties across the continent
4inclusive of En%land5 y appointed papal ureaucrats, nuncios or special envoys. In this
practice, the Lni%hts 0e&plar eca&e the first papal ,an"ers,/ i.e., they collected coin fro&
local churches and &onasteries all over Europe, and, protectin% it, &oved it east 4i.e., to a
locale closer to the @evant5, (here it (as distriuted y papal le%ates to the aristocratic and
nole field co&&ands of the Christian ar&ies.
0he $ohenstaufen ;rederic" had en%a%ed ?re%ory and the shiftin% coalition of local lords he
tac"ed to%ether et(een 12DG912#1, then Innocent I! five years later et(een 12#O and
12#F. Innocent, further, found hi&self atte&ptin% to "eep a force coled to%ether in the field
a%ainst 6anfred in 12C#.
*t this point, *le'ander did (hat Innocent (ould not+ $e called for an ,Italian Crusade/ a%ainst
the $ohenstaufen ,anti9Christ/ and (ent ac" to $enry, the En%lish &onarch, to enroll hi& in a
ne( version of his Sicilian adventure. $enry accepted, see"in% to place his youn%er son,
Ed&und, on the Sicilian throne. 0his sent in &otion the &echanis& of levies a%ainst church
properties in En%land to finance the pro1ected con)uest. In the event, collection of the levy
(as dra(n out, and there (as real resistance fro& the lords of the En%lish countryside. *s in
the Si'th Crusade 412#F912C#5, the pace of the collection of coin (as too len%thy, inco&plete
and, on this occasion, led to open revolt 4the Baron.s Revolt, 12CF5 in (hich $enry (as
defeated, his po(er (as &ar"edly cured, as the ,Italian Crusade/ (ent unreali=ed.
$enry (as nonetheless saddled (ith det in this failure venture and in this lies the ori%ins of
the relation et(een the En%lish cro(n and 0uscan &erchants.
By 12O0, the situation of the papacy had eco&e desperate+ 6anfred supported 4(ith a ody
of ?er&an "ni%hts5, and his presence on the Peninsula (as reinforced y a 0uscan ?hielline
victory outside Siena at 6ontaperti. In the follo(in% year, Innocent died. * concave of ei%ht
cardinals selected 8ac)ues PantalUon of 0royes as pope 4Rran I!5. 0royes (as the lar%est of
four to(ns that &ade up the Cha&pa%ne area, a fact (orth earin% in &ind.
0he pro9e&peror, ?hielline party no( held s(ay in not only traditional ?hielline cities such
as Siena, ut in cities (ith stron% ?uelphist parties also, li"e ;lorence (here in the after&ath
of 6ontaperti e)ually traditional papal allies, so&e of (ho& (ere old fa&ilies en%a%ed in
co&&erce and an"in%, had een e'pelled fro& the city. It appeared that ad hoc papal
alliances (ould no lon%er e capale of holdin% ac" a %ro(in% ?er&an stor&. $avin%
assu&ed the papal &antle, it (as at this point that Rran acted decisively, innovatively and
forcefully. $e reached out to all the ?uelphist and neutral, (ealthy co&&ercial forces in
central Italy aove all in 0uscany, (hile at the sa&e ti&e he proed his ;rench connections for
all they (ere (orth intend on findin% hi&self a cha&pion to defeat 6anfred. $e found that
&an in Charles of *n1ou, rother of the ;rench "in%, @ouis IV. $e ca1oled 0uscan (ealth to
assist in financin% and in collectin% revenues 4triute, unli"e *le'ander, this ti&e in ;rance5 for
a stru%%le of Charles a%ainst 6anfred, and he did so y threatenin% to issue a papal ull
4another one5 releasin% their detors fro& any oli%ations of repay&ent 4presu&aly on the
%rounds that they (ere co&plicit in the nefarious activity of the $ohenstaufen ,anti9Christ/5.
3o( it (as not as if the 0uscan an"ers had not previously &ade loans to the papacy+ Prior to
this &o&ent, individual an"ers 4ca$psores5, 0uscan and other(ise, had often &ade short9
ter& loans to popesE ut this had een done y &en (ith li&ited resources, (hich also found
e'pression in their for& of self9or%ani=ation as s&all, fluid partnerships. 0his or%ani=ational
for& had een ori%inally a response to the opportunities that Cha&pa%ne ;airs and its
&ar"ets had provided &oney9chan%ers and s&all lendin% operations, the afore&entioned
partnerships. Partnerships usually consisted in t(o rothers or so&eti&es a father and son.
0hese (ere the &oney9chan%es cu$ incipit an"ers that Rran captured for his strate%y to rid
Italy of $ohenstaufen po(er (ere directly en%a%ed in trade+ 0he e'chan%ed coin of different
deno&inations and ori%ins and, as &erchants, their trade consisted al&ost e'clusively in the
purchase of cloth as ra( &aterials. 0hey had operated on the road, so to spea", or as
travelin% &erchants. If they had a center fro& (hich their operations could e levera%ed it (as
Cha&pa%ne, not ;lorence or ?enoa or Siena or 6ilan.
3o( in financin% the papal (ars, i.e., CharlesI (ars a%ainst 6anfred 4(ho he defeated at
Benevento in 12C#5 and the youn% Conradin 4cul&inatin% in his defeat at 0a%liaco==o in
12OF5, and in under(ritin% the disastrous Seventh Crusade in 12G0, these partnerships
under(ent a transfor&ation, a chan%e ce&ented in the relation of the Ricciardi to the En%lish
Planta%enet "in%s, especially Ed(ard I after 12G2. >nce the s&all partnerships had access to
the European9(ide Church revenues that the papacy could levy, they 4their or%ani=ational
for&5 under(ent chan%e. *nd this chan%e, that is their transfor&ation into &uch lar%er, still
partnership9ased &erchant9an"in% fir&s (ith ,international/ operations, eca&e irreversile
once these s&all lendin% operations eca&e inte%rated, aleit partially, (ith papal and state
financial ad&inistrations.
In the En%lish instance, the ne( fir& (as for&ed lar%ely y e'patriate &erchants (ithin the
country, that is, y those (ho poolin% their &onetary resources ori%inally estalished the ne(
relation (ith the state 4the "in%, Ed(ard or, &ore for&ally spea"in%, the state as the "in% and
his household in its fiscally ad&inistrative aspect5E the vast resources they no( co&&anded
led the& reor%ani=e the partnership %reatly enlar%in% it to estalish a net(or" of per&anent
ranch offices later run y close, &ale fa&ily &e&ers 4rothers, fathers and sons, nephe(s5,
renderin% each sedentary &ana%ers of ranch offices 4filiali5 spread out across Europe or
do&iciled in its %reat co&&ercial centers, no lon%er i&&ediately &ediatin% the transport and
distriution of %oods 4cloth5 y coin, i.e., heavy, cu&erso&e &etal, ut effectin% the
&ove&ent of these %oods and that coin throu%h (ritten e'chan%e or y the convoluted ca$&ii
4see elo(5. 0his situation (as at the ori%in of the co&&ercial revolution so9called, the
&ove&ent of %oods y (ay of usiness letters, ill of e'chan%es and account oo"s of
increasin% co&ple'ity, orne y unli&ited liaility partnerships stretched across Europe.
0he &utual advanta%e of this relation is as easy to reco%ni=e no( as it (as then+ In their
association (ith popes 4and "in%s5, the &oney chan%ers cu$ traders-becoming-merchant
bankers gained legitimacy, protection and access to massive deposits from other
merchants, clerical institutions, and aristocrats throughout Europe. The papacy (and
kings gained rapid, relia&le access to the funds necessary to &a"e (ar. *t the sa&e ti&e,
the vast su&s of &oney, and the profits co&&ensurate (ith operations on this scale,
)ualitatively accelerated econo&ic develop&ent in the sense of for&al capitalist do&ination.
0he Scali (ere the first ;lorentines to operate as the popeIs an"ers. 0hey (ere succeeded
y the 6o==i and Spini. In the fourteenth century, this trade fell to the Bardi and Peru==i. We
can consider the %enesis and for&ation of one aspect of this ne( relation, the En%lish,
fore%oin% another 4that (ith Charles of *n1ou and the *n%evin "in%s5.
*s prince of ?ascony, Ed(ard Planta%enet (as a leadin% fi%ure of the failed Seventh
Crusade, or%ani=ed y @ouis IV of ;rance 4rother of Charles of *n1ou5. In the periphery of the
ca&pai%n, Ed(ard had participated in the relief of *cre and victory at $aifa. But as the center
of attention of these crusaders, an assault on 0unis never occurred. @ouis died of dysentery in
0unisia in late *u%ust 12G0 shortly after leavin% ;rance. 0he Seventh Crusade did not develop
eyond this point.
0hus, Ed(ard, li"e the &ass of crusaders, e%an his return ho&e at this &o&ent. $e paused
for over a year in ?ascony (here he (as titular ruler. With hi& durin% the entire course of
these travels (as one @ucasio 3atale of @ucca, "no(n to hi& as @ucas or @u"e of @u"a.
@ucasio (as a traditional ,an"er,/ i.e., &oney chan%er, that crusadin% forces found necessary
to have in their &idst (hile &a"in% their (ay east 4and, after the fi%htin%, ho&e5. Ed(ard and
@ucasio (ere on very %ood ter&s and, it appears, &ay have "no(n each other prior to their
travels, for @ucasio had een a resident in @ondon, part of the na/ioni, a fluid nei%horhood9
ased co&&unity of e'patriate, settled &erchants (ho as individuals rotated in and out of the
country. Rnder $enry III 4Ed(ardIs father5, they had estalished the&selves in @ondon to
purchase hi%her )uality En%lish (ool. >nce there, they (ere deployed as papal a%ents to
collect the levies the popes i&posed on the En%lish cler%y. In this case, the &erchants (ere
0uscan and included Sienese, ;lorentines and @uccese. Ed(ard and @ucasio tal"ed, and one
of the thin%s they discussed (as the ne( usiness &ethods that had een developed in the
relationship et(een the papacy and 0uscan &erchants. 0o oot, Ed(ard &ay have een
e'tensively orro(in% fro& @ucas on the return fro& the @evant.
In 12G2, $enry III died and Ed(ard )uic"ly returned to @ondon (here, reco%ni=ed as "in% y
the %reat En%lish lords, he assu&ed the cro(n. 0his (as early 12GD. Ed(ard (as a&itions,
ut not in the &anner of Charles of *n1ou+ 0hou%h pursuin% territorial e'pansion of En%land
4ad&inistrative consolidation of Wales to En%land, con)uest of Scotland5, Ed(ard (as (hat
todayIs our%eois historians (ould call a ,&oderni=er./ While still son to his father as "in%, he
had supported 4essentially a%ainst his father5 the BaronIs Revolt 412CF5 and helped draft the
docu&ent, the Provisions of West&inster 412C75, that had een a further codification of their
victory. 4-et Ed(ard, at this &o&ent, (as, it appears, &erely tac"in% et(een the t(o ca&ps
in an internecine rulin% class stru%%le. In 12O#, he had fou%ht a%ainst the aronial risin%.5
Be%innin% shortly after his ascendancy do(n to 1270, he enacted le%islation that %radually
under&ined lordly po(er vested in aronial courts, eli&inated feudal tenures and estalished
the foundations of parlia&ent as a ody of %reat lords periodically called into ein% to ratify,
so&e say critically so, cro(n policies. But (hat Ed(ard needed in his (arrin% a%ainst the
Welsh 412F2912F#5, his ,pro%ra&/ of castle uildin%, his stru%%le a%ainst the arons 4triutes
on (hose estates provided part of cro(n revenues5, his repudiation of the papacyIs ri%ht to
collect levies in En%land, his introduction of ad&inistrative refor&s in ?ascony, arran%in% his
&arria%e to 6ar%aret of 3or(ay, and his suppression of revolts in Scotland 41272, 127O,
1D0#91D0C5, and ?ascony 4127G5, (as coin, or its e)uivalent, )uic"ly and in lar%e a&ounts.
Ed(ardIs prole& (as to find a steady, re%ular and ade)uate source of revenue and, in
events of e&er%ency 4lar%ely (ar includin%, for Ed(ard, the real possiility of civil (ar5 a lar%e
ready source, independent of (hat he could in ,nor&al ti&es/ e'pect to e'tract fro& his
noles and the cler%y. @ucasio and the na/ione provided the funds. But the prole& did not
end here, and for the Italian &erchants in @ondon it entailed the transfor&ation of the
partnerships touched on earlier. If (e very riefly consider this, (e can note that @ucasio
&ediated et(een Ed(ard as "in% and other persona%es in the 0uscan na/ioni+ @uccese
&erchants raised lar%e su&s of &oney, as (e have indicated aove, y refor&in% their
partnership, enlar%in% the nu&er of &erchants 4involvin% closely related, sil" &erchant9
&anufacturers ac" ho&e5. 0his (ould co&e to e the Ricciardi fir&. It (ould %ro( very
rapidly, its profits soarin% after the seventies. 0he @uccese Ricciardi (ould e succeeded y
the ;lorentine ;rescoaldi. 0his, ho(ever, did not entirely resolve Ed(ardIs prole&+
En%lish la( prevented the e'port of precious &etal, and open usury (as custo&arily
unacceptale. Ed(ardIs arons and his o(n lar%ely @ondon ased &erchant co&&unity (ere
sensitive to this. 0his (as not the %rounds on (hich to pic" a fi%ht. So, (ithout e'portin% coin,
ho( (as Ed(ard to repay loans (hich, &ediated y @ucasio, e'patriate 0uscan &erchants
&i%ht &a"e2 Ed(ard had plenty of (ool e'tracted as papal triute 4tithes5 fro& En%lish
Cistercian &onasteries, and the &erchants (ere conscious of the superior )uality of this cloth,
havin% the&selves &ade re%ular purchases fro& these &onasteries. In 12GC, le%islation (as
decreed that su1ect the e'port 4at this point &ostly to ;landers5 of (ool to ta'ation+ 0he
En%lish custo&s service (as instituted and, to oot, 0uscan &erchants, i.e., the Ricciardi,
(ere the first to participate in its ad&inistration as favored financiers. Startin% fro& specific
seaoard to(ns, port revenues (ere assi%ned to 0uscan an"er9&erchants in lieu of direct
repay&ents or for losses on loans &ade to the cro(n. But it (asnIt al(ays the custo&s+ 0a'es
collected fro& cities, orou%hs and de&esne lands as (ell as tithes fro& ishoprics (ere
turned over to Italian &erchant9an"ers.
0he revenues derived fro& custo& dues could not, ho(ever, e utili=ed to repay the
&erchant9an"er loans, so the (ool, (ool hides and (ool fells that (ere assi%ned to the
&erchants 4(hat they could %enerate fro& their sales (as theirs5 and duties (ere lifted to
co&pensate the &erchants for principal, interest and any fees derivin% fro& ad&inistrative
services.
We can stop here, y si&ply notin% that the intert(inin% of interests et(een Italian &erchants
and En%lish cro(n, the ensuin% dependency of those &erchants on the %ood faith of the
En%lish cro(n in &atters of repay&ent, the re%ularly oilin% over of En%lish &erchant
co&&unity resent&ent of their Italian counterparts for their privile%e position (ith re%ard to
4lac" of5 duties and appropriation of choice (oolens, and the enor&ous costs of (a%in% (ar
(hich in &a1or confrontations even the En%lish cro(nIs (oolen receipts (ould not cover, all
led on &ore than one occasion 4the ;rescoaldi 1D0G, the Bardi and Peru==i e%innin% 1DDF5
to a 4contrived5 default on dets o(ed Italian &erchant fir&s and their resultant an"ruptcy.
)or$al Do$ination, ,, 03inea$ents5
7 Second N4hase>
D%nastic 4olitics, the 4apac%, Merchant Ban!ing and Bills of 2xchange
Driver of the Oualitative 2xpansion of the Continental 2cono$%
0he decline of the ;airs coincides (ith the dra&atic disappearance of these cheap and li%ht
sa%etteries and other draperies lIgZres in the @o( Countries and else(here in north(estern
Europe 4see elo(5. But that coincidence does not account for the causation of the ;airsI
decline, an account of (hich is tacitly present in the previous section...
0he fictional re&ar"s y R&erto EcoIs Brother Willia& of Bas"erville
1
su%%est the contrast
et(een the ,advanced/ develop&ent on the Italian Peninsula especially in the center and the
north... ,advanced/ at least (ith a vie( to the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in
production... circa 12O0 and relative to the rest of the continent, inclusive of En%land 4and
e'clusive of 6oorish Ieria5. 0his difference (as real, very &ar"ed, and in respect to it and
for&al capitalist develop&ent the Italian Peninsula could have le%iti&ately said to have place
a role very si&ilar to Britain in institutin% the real do&ination of capital over laor in production
4in the run9up to and at the outset of the Industrial Revolution so9called5 or the Rnited States in
%loal private capitalist recovery in the i&&ediate after&ath of the last i&perialist (orld (ar.
Wherein lay this difference2 Recount our previous analysis.
;ro& the 12O0s, the %reat Italian &erchant9an"in% co&panies, precisely those (ho had
do&inated the co&&erce of the ;airs, %enerated t(o &a1or, roadly spea"in%, financial
innovations. 0hese innovations (ere the&selves called into ein% y the re)uire&ents for
institutional survival of the papacy and sustained throu%h financially servicin% the dynastic and
territorial a&itions of %reat princes. 0he financin% that these innovations created per&itted
%reat lords, princes and, aove, &onarchs to pursue (arfare as the &eans to reali=in% their
a&itions. But these (ars disrupted the overland trade routes, in particular the north(est to
southeast route 4especially in the north5, raisin% the costs involved in transportin% the (ares
ou%ht and sold at the Cha&pa%ne ;airs. 0he ne(, vastly hi%her costs 4involved in lon%er
travel ti&es due to detour around =ones of conflict, pricin% pilla%in% and hosta%e ta"in% into
transactions, etc., that (ould occur if encounterin% a (arrin% ar&y or force5 and the
disruptions (ere in part responsile for the death of the ;airs. But only in part. *t the sa&e
ti&e, these (ars, and the develop&ent and refine&ent of the financial for&s on (hich they
depended, produced a ne( order of &erchant activity, &erchant9an"in%, a novel "ind of
or%ani=ation 4lar%ely identical (ith one of those innovations5, unheard of ne( (ealth, and a
period of rapid e'pansion of the centers of this (ealth and activity, such as ;lorence.
Because in the reopenin% of the (estern 6editerranean and the nu&erous dispersed sites of
te'tile &anufacture the &aterial pre&ises (ere present, the other conse)uence of this ne(
lin"a%e of polity and econo&y, of princes and &erchants, (as to estalish the co&&erce of
the European econo&y on a ne( foundation. 40hus, our characteri=ation of a second
,phase./5 It (as this ne( order of co&&ercial activity and the &erchant9an"in% on (hich it
rested that the other develop&ent that passed a death sentence on the ;airs.
We have considered the innovations of the %reat Italian &erchants and the decisive &o&ents
of this ne( lin"a%e aove, so (e shall only very riefly recapitulate the& here.
0he first, &ost i&portant innovation (as a shift in trade ased on travelin% &erchants oriented
to(ard the ;airs to ,sedentary/ trade. 0he latter entailed estalish&ent of a &ulti9partner
ased net(or" of per&anent ranch offices. By &odern standards, office personal (ere not
nu&erous+ 0hey consisted in a couple to four or five cler"s (ith one or t(o of the partners at
their head. With a ranch set ri%ht do(n in an uran co&&ercial center, the local office could
ac)uire )ualitatively %reater insi%ht into local &ar"et conditions. 0he insi%ht and, in so&e
1
Cited in ,;or&s of Sociation, II+ Bet(een 0riutary ;or&ations and Capitalist 6odernity,/ aove.
respects the infor&ation it (as in part ased on, per&itted the ranch office to act
autono&ously and &a"e &ar"et9ased decisions in situ. It (as not 1ust that this constituted a
hu%e advanta%e over the travelin% &erchant, that the ranches (ere patently &ore effective in
en%a%in% and concludin% e'chan%es, that their costs of transactin% usiness et(een the
various ranch offices and the Italian ho&e office (ere lo(er... all of (hich (as true... ut that
this novel arran%e&ent accelerated the volu&e of trade 4especially for the e'port of te'tile ra(
&aterials to the 6editerranean and the i&port of 6editerranean, and @evant ori%inatin%, lu'ury
%oods to north(estern Europe5 ecause it increased its, that tradeIs, velocity 4decreased its
turnover ti&e5. But a condition... and it (as a necessary condition... of ra&pin% do(n turnover
ti&e (as access to vastly &ore coin 4or its e)uivalent5. 0his access (as, as (e have seen,
achieved, first, y handlin% papal funds as the popeIs an"er, triute levied on churches,
aeys and &onasteries across Europe 4east as (ell as (est of the >der5E and, second, y
attachin% the "in%Is custo&s levied on En%lish e'ports.
0he second innovation %enerated y the %reat Italian &erchant9an"ers, actually it (as
adoption and i&prove&ent of early practices, (as ills of e'chan%e to replace the un(ieldy
and costly pay&ent &echanis& "no(n as the instru$entu$ ex causa ca$&ii. While little need
e said, (hat (as asically different (as that the older letter of pay&ent (as a for&al ond
entailin% indetedness, hence it re)uired the presence of a notary and, &ost si%nificantly, that
of the detorE the ill of e'chan%e (as a four9party docu&ent involvin% the uyer and seller
and their respective a%ents and did not re)uire the actual presence of persona%e of the detor
4uyer5. It should e intuitively clear that this ne( ,instru&ent,/ li"e the novel institution of
ranch offices, si&ultaneously contriuted to the increasin% velocity of trade.
@etIs su&&ari=e ho( these innovations played out y referrin% the& ac", y (ay of contrast,
to the historically specific situation in (hich they (ere ori%inally for&ed.
It has een su%%ested the collapse of the Cha&pa%ne ;airs, occurred fro& 12FG to 1D1#, (as
due to risin% incidence and destructive of (arfare and the costs associated (ith it. In point of
fact, up until 1DDF 4i.e., until the outrea" of really lar%e9scale (arfare on the continent, the
$undredIs -ears (ar5, (arfare actually enhanced &ercantile develop&entE that it (as
precisely the creation of &erchant9an"in% as a novel for& of continental enterprise startin%
fro& the the papacyIs efforts to rid Italy of the $ohenstaufens in the 12C0s912O0s, the rene(al
and enlar%e&ent of this for& of an"in%, the funds it &ade availale to &erchant9an"ers
en%a%ed in (oolen co&&erce and the ar&a&ents spendin% (hich princes pursued in order to
reali=e territorial and dynastic a&itions, that )ualitatively e'panded the reach, scope, and
volu&e and velocity of co&&erce. 0hat (arrin% consisted in, first, En%lish incursions into
Wales in order to rin% the Welsh 412F2912F#5 ad&inistratively in line (ith the En%lish royal
householdE orro(in% to finance the so&eti&es parlia&entarily peaceful 9 so&eti&e (arrin%
internecine stru%%le a%ainst other ele&ents of the rulin% class, a%ainst Ed(ardIs aronsE the
fi%htin% to suppress Scottish revolts 41272, 127O, 1D0#91D0C5 and that in ?ascony 4127G5.
0hat (arrin% consisted, second, in the &ilitary ca&pai%ns of Charles of *n1ou 412O#, 12OF5 in
ta"in% Sicily and 3aples, and in defendin% 4and losin%5 Sicily 412F25, the Sicilian !espers.
;ro& the other side of the sa&e (ar, it consisted in, third, the passa%e of Sicily to the
*ra%onese. Warrin% did not, (e repeat, si%nificantly curtail trade ut shifted its locus to the
(estern 6editerranean, fro& the northern Italian to Catalan &erchants (ho actually
expanded the net(or" of for&al capitalist relations into re%ions (here they had previously
een (ea" at est 4e.%., E%ypt5 and deepened the& (here they had een shallo( 40unis,
0ripoli5. 0hat (arrin% did not, &oreover, consist in the Castilian96arinid stru%%le. 0he latter did
not even incidentally fit this se)uence, for it reached ac" to the ,recon)uest/ of C\rdoa and
Seville in 12DO and 12#F respectively, t(o centuries of sporadic (arfare. Instead, that (ar
launched Castile as an European %reat po(er, consolidated its productive foundations y
raisin% the Castilian noility up 4throu%h %old coin e'propriated fro& the 6usli& "in%do&s,
throu%h land con)uered and utili=ed in sheepherdin%, throu%h slaves used in aristocratic
households and sold for coin, etc.5 and incorporated it into the circuits of capitalIs for&al
&ove&ent, even as contradictorily Castile (ould co&e to play the crucial counterrevolutionary
role in efforts to i&pede the rise of strictly our%eois %roups 4the En%lish Puritan and
Stadtholder our%eoises5 to po(er in (estern Europe.
0he real turnin% point, if not in the precipitous decline in the Cha&pa%ne ;airs then in the
e'pandin% and deepenin% circuits of for&al capitalist do&ination (as the atte&pt of the
En%lish Ed(ard III to enlar%e his holdin%s in northern ;rance, the outrea" of the $undred
-earsI (ar in 1DDF, the ensuin% Bardi and Peru==i collapses in the sa&e years that
revererated throu%hout the ;lorentine &erchant, an"in% and artisan &anufacturin% sectors
and thre( the& into depression, the an"ruptcy of these fir&s in the follo(in% years 41D#D,
1D#O5 that, vastly e'acerated y uonic pla%ue9induced rapid de&o%raphic crash, led to a
vast contraction in the continental circuits of &erchant capitalIs &ove&ent and that of the
continental96editerranean econo&y.
Rntil this &o&ent, resultin% fro& (ar9ased disruptions of trade routes the spiralin%
transportation costs had lar%ely een asored as those &ercantile circuits s(elled. 0he ;airs
had eco&e a sidesho(, an ele&ent, li"e those transportation costs, that (as asored in the
novel develop&ent, no( fully &atured, of ;lorentine &erchant9an"in% as the asis of
continent and 6editerranean (ide, econo&ic %ro(th.
1
)or$al Do$ination, ,, 03inea$ents5
The Highater Mar! of 2arl% 2cono$ic 2xpansion
7 Oualitativel% 2xpanded Continental 0Textile5 2cono$% 0Cul$ination of Second N4hase>5
;lorence (as indeed the center of the 6editerranean9(estern European petty co&&odity
producin% universe.
;ro& circa 12G0 until 1DDF, ;lorence (as the fulcru& fro& (hich the &erchant9an"in%
driven, early develop&ent of capitalIs for&al do&ination in the epochal sense (as levera%edE
it (as such in the sa&e &anner that @ondon (as decisive for the reor%ani=ation and
)ualitative e'pansion 4y (ay of creation of the trans*tlantic trade5 of capitalIs for&ation
do&ination far later in this epoch, circa 1O2091O70, that &id9century nineteenth century Paris
(as decisive for the continental institution of the real do&ination of capital over laor in
production, and increasin%ly over society, y (ay of Credit Mo&ilier and its creation of rail
construction fir&s, and its financin% of railroads, %as(or"s and rid%e construction throu%hout
Europe into the @evant 40ur"ey5 and southern 6editerranean 4E%ypt5, and that Shan%hai
today is the center and hu throu%h (hich (orld(ide production and trade, %loal supply
chains and internationally circulatin% surplus all pass, &ediatin% all and inte%ratin% the
s&allest fir&s, co&&unities and &ost isolated (or"places into the sa&e syste& of social
relations that do&inates production and e'chan%e in the &ost developed sites of capitalis& in
the epoch of capitalIs totali=in% do&ination over society.
*t the early &o&ent of capitalIs develop&ent, the "ey to %raspin% this is the reali=ation that
&erchant an"in% itself e&odied a ne( principle of or%ani=ation of for&al capitalist social
relations+ 0he re%ularity, the fre)uency and, aove all, the inte%ration of production, &ar"ets
and distriution, all resultin% in a )ualitative increased level, a ne( order, of volu&e and
1
It (ould e re&iss not to recall the decade lon% ;lorentine (ar (ith @ucca, (hich, to%ether (ith decadent $agnati
policy in the driverIs seat of the co&&unal treasury, created a &onstrously lar%e 4y conte&porary historical
standards5 prole& of pulic det, created the full set of &aterial9financial conditions for the severe ;lorentine
econo&ic contraction of the 1D#0s. But it (as ;lorence and its central, decisive role in the te'tile econo&y of Europe
that (as at issue.
velocity of trade, no lon%er operated on the asis of 4and thus is not co&prehensile in ter&s
of5 the lon%9distance trade ,&odel./

It (as not so &uch that in and y itself, the ,estalish&ent
of a direct sea route fro& the Italian &ariti&e repulics to the chief ports of northern Europe,
especially to Bru%es, Southa&pton, and @ondon/ constituted a ,revolution in shippin% and
navi%ation,/
1
ut that it (as ,revolutionary/ only in the conte't of the (ar9induced disruption of
overland trade routes, and only then once this novel for& of &erchant activity had ta"en
shape. >nly then could seaorne trade routes function as an alternative and appear
,revolutionary/ at all.
Rnli"e other %reat cities in this still rather early era of the epoch of capitalIs for&al do&ination,
cities such as @ondon or !enice, the %reatness of Barcelona, Bru%es and ;lorence rested on
the achieve&ents of this historical &o&ent.
Barcelona stood at the center of one internal trade and three trans9Ierian routes, the latter
three all of conte&porarily continental si%nificance,
2
and all of (hich Barcelon &erchants
e'ploited to the fullest e'tent, recreatin% the&selves as a (ealthy, po(erful stratu& in the
co&&erce of the 6editerranean and (estern Europe. >n the asis of the (ealth and po(er
that accrued to the& throu%h this trade, as in ;lorence the %reat Catalan &erchants
transfor&ed the&selves into &erchant oli%archs. 0hey assi&ilated 4throu%h &arria%e5 the
Barcelon count9"in%Is court aristocracy to the&selves, patroni=ed Catalonia.s e&er%in%
national literature of chronicles, *raic translations, poetry, prophecy, and theolo%y and
co&&issioned palace construction (ith a distinctively ?othic architectural style. Politically,
they do&inated the Catalan Corts and the Barcelon Consell, preventin% s&aller &erchants
and artisans fro& en1oyin% an institutional presence.
D
$ere as in ;lorence a hi%h culture of the
early our%eoisies (as orn, and the si%nificant ele&ents of an endurin%, later national
tradition first appeared.
In ;lorence, (oolen &anufactures e&ployed D0,000 (o&en and &en, and lar%ely supportin%
perhaps the lar%est concentrated populations in Europe and the 6editerranean 4120,000 in
;lorence and its contado5E faulously (ealthy &erchant9an"ers lin"ed, lar%ely financin%, all
the circuits of for&al capitalIs &ove&ent, fro& the Cistercian aeys of the En%lish
countryside, and those of *rtois, Cha&pa%ne and the ;ranc of Bru%es, throu%h @ondon and
Bru%es to various sites, Barcelona, Ro&e, ?enoa, ;lorence and !enice and fro& all these
points into the Baltic, the European east and center, into 3orth *frica 40unis, 0ripoli,
*le'ander5, the @evant, Constantinople, Cyprus, Crete and the *driatic and its eastern interior,
and then ac" throu%h the sa&e circuits co&pletin% the&E the &erchant oli%archs of ;lorence
supported the construction of architecturally hi%h9?othic rid%es, churches, pla=as and
residential palaces and in this vein the architecture, sculpture and paintin% of ?iottoE
patroni=ed, a%ain financially supportin%, the %reatest literary achieve&ents of the era, the (or"
of Boccaccio, Petrarch and :anteE and they created an e'e&plary co&&unal self9%overnance
4thou%h its &ost e'pansive, %enuinely repulican institutions (ere the outco&e of fierce
1
8ohn 6unro, ,Chan%in% ;ortunes of the ;airs,/ 1C91O.
2
In relationships (ith the interior, *ra%onese to(ns depended on Barcelona for finished products, (hile Castilian
to(ns provided unfinished &erino (oolE %rains 4(heat and arley5 (ere shipped overland fro& the latifundia
a%riculture of *ndalusiaE and Catalonia, *ra%on, Castile and @eon (ere sources of furs 4fo' and (olf pelts5.
Beyond the Ierian Peninsula to the north, there (ere the cities of Provence 46arseille, *vi%non, etc.5, Paris, the
Cha&pa%ne re%ion and, eyond the&, Bru%es and @ondon, trade (ith (hich (as lar%ely for northern ;rench, ;le&ish
and En%lish cloths that (ere finished in Barcelona and redistriuted across the 6editerraneanE to the south, 0ripoli
and 0unis &erchants e'chan%ed %rains for linen cloth, oil, lacE and to the east often y (ay of Sicily 4(hich (as the
European 6editerraneanIs %ranary5, Catalan &erchants traded (ith their counterparts in Pisa, ?enoa and ;lorence
(here finished %oods (ere e'chan%ed5, and in Crete and Cyprus and the cities of the @evant all of (hich accepted
finished (oolens and (hich (ere i&portant sources of spices, pepper, %in%er, lac, &astic, linseed oil, and lac.
D
,Political Conditions for the E&er%ence of a Catalan 0radin% E&pire/ in Catalan and Castilian 7ntagonis$ in ,&erian
Histor%+ HEditorIs note+J
conflict (ith and incorporation of pleeian ele&ents5.
In their develop&ent and do&inance in e'chan%e, in their institutional political elaorations, in
their e'pansion of *solute Spirit, these t(o %reat cities at their hi%hpoints &ar" the
efflorescence of this era.
0he entire hi%h culture of the era (as underpinned not 1ust y &erchant 4or &erchant9
an"in%5 activity ut y a specific for& of production to (hich this activity (as inti&ately tied. It
(as production of a (ide variety of cheap and li%ht (orsted or se&i9(orsted farics. 0hus, in
;lorence for nearly t(o centuries, it (as the arte di cali$ala, the %uild of dyers, dressers and
finishers and the &erchants (ho, headin% the %uild, en%a%ed in i&portin% ;ranco, ;le&ish
and En%lish unfinished cloth and refinishin% it and then 4re5e'portin% around the
6editerranean asin, that held pride of place in the flourishin% ;lorentine econo&y.
0he production of cheap, li%ht and coarse (oolens (as an early type of &ass production of
te'tiles carried out in a for& of production characteristic of capitalIs for&al do&ination 4i.e., as
artisan production in separate shops or d(ellin%s, e'pressed ne%atively, (ithout a factor%
character5. 0he decisive feature here (as $ass production, &eanin% that in this era it did not,
contrary to (hat is often thou%ht essential to capitalIs for&al do&ination 4crudely, ,&ercantile/
capitalis&5, entail a vast array of protectionist &easures 4perhaps ecause princes stron%
enou%h to i&pose the& as a rule had yet to e&er%e5, &erchants concerned only to uy cheap
and sell dear and, thus, aove all pursuin% hi%hly restricted production in order to construct
lu'ury &ar"ets. *ll of (hich &eans that production in this specific era in the epoch of capitalIs
for&al do&ination &ediately rested, after 1000, on the the appearance of to(ns, their %ro(th,
the transfor&ation of laor services into &onetari=ed rests and the partial e&ancipation of
peasants in the countryside, in a (ord, feudal decadence, and especially population %ro(th
that really ta"en off e%innin% circa 1100.
:e&o%raphically, that %ro(th had e%un to falter then sta%nate after 1D00, and perhaps
decline circa 1D1091D20 in re%ions such as Provence and 0uscanyE et(een 1D10 and 1DD0,
this historically specific for& of &ass production 4of the production of cheap, li%ht and coarse
te'tiles5 disappeared, its li&its perhaps already reached thou%h, &ore li"ely, as a
conse)uence of population decline. If so, population sta%nation and decre&ent (ere proaly
rooted in (arfare, its death, pilla%in% and destruction, thou%h none of this is little etter than
speculative. But, if so, the ,effects/ (ith a vie( to production and the &aterial culture of the
nodal sites of capitalIs for&al do&ination in this era did not appear until 1DDF.
)or$al Do$ination, ,, 03inea$ents5
Contraction and Depression in the 2ra of the Blac! Death 0Third N4hase>5, ,
Cu$ulative Da$age of "arfare, 4lague and De$ographic Collapse and its Consequences
4opulation Contraction, Transfor$ation of 4roduction and Reorientation
toard 3uxur% Mar!ets
In ;lorence, (arnin% si%nals of possile effects on production and the &aterial culture of daily
life &i%ht have een apprehended y 1DDO. War (a%ed for territorial a%%randi=e&ent (as
crushin% ;lorence+ *s (e have already hinted, co&&unal det had eco&e enor&ous and
(as still %ro(in% 4in 1DDF it (ould stand at #C0,000 florins5 and &aintainin% a lar%ely 4thou%h
not entirely5 $ercenar% force in the field (as no( costin% 100,000 florins a year 4%old, not
silver, florins5. By 1DDF, after ei%ht years of (ar total costs (ould run to O00,000 florins. -et it
(as not 1ust the (ar+ Bet(een 1DDO91DDF, the years (hen the five &ost i&portant ga&elles
%enerated the %reatest revenue in co&&unal history to date 4actually, they (ould never e
this lar%e a%ain durin% the life of the Repulic, do(n to 1CD05, they rou%ht in only 17G,000
florins in revenue a &onth in the very est of &onthsE ut tolls and ga&elles re&ained
une'acted. 0hat (as 1ust the e%innin%+ 0he re%i&e had failed to collect ta'es on the old,
%reat oli%archical fa&ilies for years, and the prestan/a 4forced loans levied to (a%e (ar5 (ere
also uncollected. 0he co&&une (as controlled y precisely these fa&ilies a&on% (hich in
po(er there (as a lar%e proscried 4$agnati5 co&ponent...
>ne non9&ilitary aspect of the cu&ulative da&a%e of (ar (as, then, )uite visileE here it (as
&ediated y the re%i&e in po(er...
Re&e&er no( that at this historical 1uncture ;lorence stood at the center of for&al capitalist
do&ination in the 6editerranean and (estern Europe. ;or it (as precisely at this &o&ent that
the Bardi and Peru==i e%an to have prole&s of pay&ents 4via the (oolens custo&5 (ith
Ed(ard III. >n O 6ay 1DD7, Ed(ard suspended det repay&ents to the t(o financial houses.
0he effect (as al&ost i&&ediate as the failure to &a"e pay&ents to the Bardi and Peru==i
revererated throu%h the ;lorentine econo&y+ Within &onths, a series of an"ruptcies hit the
s&aller fir&s, artisan &anufactures and s&aller &erchants first, associated &erchant an"ers
and then the construction ,industry,/ ta"en to%ether the &ainstays of the ;lorentine econo&y.
*t this point, co&&unal revenues e%an to decline sharply. In Septe&er9>ctoer 1D#0, they
fell to 1ust G0,000 florins. 0he precipitous collapse of ;lorence as a (hole no( resounded
throu%hout the re%ion, as the inaility to &a"e pay&ents &oved throu%h the circuits of
&erchant capital li"e electronic i&pulses &ovin% alon% an inte%rated circuit. 0his &ay have
constituted the first slu&p in the history of capitalis& 4the closer to ;lorence alon% those
circuits, the deeper the depression5. By the end of the decade 4of the 1D#0s5 sufficient
,e'cess/ had een sha"en out of the reified o1ectivity, the continental econo&y+ * &ore
sustained lon%9ter& recovery &ay have een in the offin%, ut a see&in%ly contin%ent event
vastly deepened the depression, e'actin% conse)uences of historical di&ensions y
undercuttin%, then destroyin% the &ost &ediate, and induitaly funda&ental pre&ise of the
(hole period of for&al capitalist e'pansion datin% ac" to rou%hly 12G0.
*ppearin% first in the Cri&ea in 1D#O, uonic pla%ue spread to Italy y ship, i.e., as a function
of 6editerranean trade. 4Startin% fro& hu&an de&o%raphic densities, e%innin% (ith rats
carryin% the flea (hich carried the acteriu&, this ,naturally/ occurrin% disease, li"e coin, ills
of e'chan%e and co&&odities, too &oved alon% the circuits of &erchant capital. Rats only
con%re%ate and for& colonies under the %rounds of lar%e hu&an con%re%ations, i.e., cities,
and, as is (ell9"no(n, the reproduction and e'pansion of their population is i&&ensely
assisted y food sources provided y %ara%e and trash, foodstuffs particularly.5
0he ruinous lo( struc" y the Blac" :eath on the societies of Europe really (as not a
)uestion of &odern &edical treat&ent, (hich, at any rate, lay O00 years in the future. 0o the
contrary, that i&pact (as &ore than anythin% else 4as even today (here &odern capitalist
&edicine is availale, pla%ue in the %reat cities of the (orld de&onstrates5 the result of the
%ro(in% sava%e ine)ualities of Europe.s class divided societies as they eca&e &ore uran,
as the spheres and volu&e of petty co&&odity production under(ent a &assive enlar%e&ent
y the end of the lon% oo&, the e'tre&es of (ealth eca&e dra&atically polari=ed 4(ith the
e'traordinarily rich &erchant oli%archs across Europe sittin% atop this (hole pile of shit5,
i&poverished hu&an populations eca&e densely concentrated (ith their acco&panyin%
uran s)ualor. It (as all that &ade uonic pla%ue so virulent, its spread so rapid, its reach so
e'tensive as it &erely follo(ed those circuits of the &ove&ent of &erchant capital.
0he %reat &erchants could retreat to the rural estates (here their chances of survival,
assu&in% food stora%e and li&ited contact (ith the to(ns, (ere sli%htly etter. But even (ith a
cellar, for ho( lon%2 0he sharecropper and the peasant had a (ife, a dau%hter or a son (ho
(or"ed on the country estate for the lord. ?rains, ve%etales, %rapes, (ool and hides, and
slau%htered cattle, sheep and %oats (ere all rou%ht to &ar"et in the to(ns+ 0he contado and
countrysides (ere devastated also, as pla%ue 1ust &oved do(n the circuits of capitalIs for&al
&ove&ent. >nce the pla%ue ran thou%h, spreadin% deeply into, the popular classes &ost
often y (ay of (or"shops and &ar"etplaces, it attac"ed all social strata indiscri&inately via
hu&an &edia, servants, laorers, tenants, apprentices, etc., in face to face contract (ith,
(hile servin% or laorin% for, their ,social etters./
* ;lorentine population of F0,000 (as reduced y C0,000. 40his does not include the
contado.5 In Catalonia, perhaps #0Z of the population died.
1
In sprin% 1D#0 ;lorence had also
een hit y pla%ue 4li"ely s&allpo'5, (hich had reduced it population fro& 70,000 to GC,000.
40here had een a &ar"ed de&o%raphic recovery in the ei%ht intervenin% years, C,000 souls.
It (ould not occur a%ain.5 It (as follo(ed i&&ediately y a disastrous harvest and fa&ine in
the city. In Catalonia, there had een fa&ine in 1DDD follo(in% failure of the (heat crop. ;or a
decade, there had een no surplus production. By the &id91D#0s, the situation in a%riculture
(as e%innin% to i&proveE then the Blac" :eath hit.
In the cities alon% the (estern 6editerranean, in ;rance 46arseille, 6ontpelier5 and its near
eastern interior 40oulouse5, Spain 4Barcelona, Seville5 and 0uscany 4Siena, Pisa, etc.5, a third
to t(o9thirds of uran inhaitants died.
2
Bet(een 1D#F and 1DC1, the situation (as little
different fro& Constantinople to :ulin, fro& 0ripoli to Copenha%en.
;or centuries, pla%ue and fa&ine (ere to recur over and over and not in Europe alone, ut
around the 6editerranean, and to recur (ith the &ost devastatin% outco&es alon% the circuits
of &ercantile capital, (herever petty co&&odity e'chan%e had penetrated.
D
*n on%oin% shift in the nature of production fro& li%ht, coarse and cheap (oolens to heavy,
fine and e'pensive cloth (as accelerated y contraction and depression, and per$anenti/ed
y epide&ic disease9induced, population collapse. 0his shift characteri=ed all the &a1or sites
of &anufacture, 0uscany, @o&ardy, Provence, Catalonia, ;landers, Braant, eastern
En%land, etc., and included shifts in that production 4e.%., fro& the eastern counties to the
En%lish 6idlands5. 6ore roadly and at the sa&e ti&e, the contraction and depression in the
continental econo&y (as characteri=ed y a lon%9ter& shift of its locus, a(ay fro& the Italian
Peninsula to the @o( Counties. 40his shift too (as cause and effect of another, this ti&e in
oth for& of transportation and the course alon% (hich trade (as carried. Seaorne lanes
%ave (ay to overland routes, and the road (hich they routes traversed chan%ed after 1DF0.5
*nd, here too a shift too" place, all ut a handful of the sites of production in the era of the
Cha&pa%ne ;airs disappeared as old ones shifted e&phasis and ne( ones &anufacturin%
e'pensive draperies appeared+ In En%land, Brid%e(ater, 3e(ury and Stroud to na&e 1ust a
fe(E in ;landers, :ender&onde and >udenaardeE in Braant, :ierst, @ier and 0ienenE in
$olland, @eiden and :en $aa%E and in 0uscany, Co&o, Cre&ona and Brescia a&on% &any
others+ With a handful of e'ceptions, these (ere all s&all to(ns.
0his for& of production (as (ell ,fitted/ to its underlyin% &erchant character+ Relative to this
early era of capitalis& in its for&al aspect, the &ass character of &anufacture, especially of
cheap and coarse (oolens &ade price the deter&inant issue in e'chan%eE it enhanced the
co&petitive nature of distriution, and it forced the co&&odity character of %oods si&ply as
co&&odities to co&e to the fore. Steep de&o%raphical decline and (ith it this hu%e shift in the
nature of production (or"ed to the &erchantIs advanta%e+ Sold to other (ealthy &erchants, to
country lords, to aristocratic ele&ents of rulin% classes, finer %oods (ere sold less (ith a vie(
1
?ene Bruc"er, )lorentine 4olitics and Societ%, 7E Roert $u%hes, Barcelona, 1#2.
2
Barara 0uscan, 7 Distant Mirror, 7O.
D
In 8apan, s&allpo' and &easles recurred periodically after C00 in the co&&on era 4and perhaps uonic pla%ue
after F005. See Willia& 6c3eill, 4lagues and 4eople, 1C291C#. 4;a&ine recurred too continuously throu%h the history
of the islands.5
Population densities, ine)uality and cro(din% (ere all present in 8apanese cities even prior to the rise of the $eian
court aristocracy 4prior to GF#5, yet, disastrous, they do not appear to have een as utterly devastatin%. 0he point is
that under conditions of social division, hierarch% and great inequalit% it (as alon% the circuits of capital 4here
&erchant capital5 that epide&ic disease spread so rapidly and catastrophically.
to price and &ore of a vie( to )uality, to feel and te'ture, finish, color, etc. It, &oreover,
reinforced the relation of &erchants to princes, as the for&er sou%ht &onopolistic protection to
defend their &ar"ets. !olu&e, to e sure, sharply declined.
In all these respects, this reorientation to(ard lu'ury trade si%nified there (ould e no )uic"
return to the era of rapid econo&ic e'pansion. *t the sa&e ti&e, it (as fully consonant (ith,
constitutin% an indicator of on%oin% centrali=ation and )ualitative e'pansion of "in%ly
%overn&ent, oli%archical po(er and the Ktyranny of the >ne.K
)or$al Do$ination, ,, 03inea$ents5
Contraction and Depression in the 2ra of the Blac! Death 0Third N4hase>5, ,,
Cu$ulative Da$age of "arfare, 4lague and De$ographic Collapse and its Consequences
Consolidation of the Regi$es of the 2arl% Merchant Bourgeoisie and Centrali/ed Monarchies
over the Corpses of Suppressed 4opular Hprisings
0he on%oin% shift in te'tile &anufacture fro& production of cheap, li%ht and coarse farics to
heavy, fine and e'pensive (oolens, perhaps ori%inally and si&ultaneously the upshot of
de&o%raphic sta%nation con1oined to &ar"et saturation flo(in% fro& increasin% co&petition
a&on% a vast array of &anufacturers across the continent 40uscany, @o&ardy, Catalonia,
Provence, Cha&pa%ne, ;landers5 and 4eastern5 En%land, eca&e irreversile follo(in%
continent9(ide contraction and then the outrea" and s(ift spread of pla%ue. :epression
conditions crushed far &ore pleeians and artisans than (ealthy &erchants 4(hich is not to
say that pla%ue itself (as so&ethin% other than aritrary in ,its/ ,choice/ of victi&s5, so that
&ass purchasin% po(er disappeared and, then, collapsed (ith precipitous population decline.
0hese interconnected crises 4oth in historical ti&e and in outco&es5 %enerated enor&ous
social and political instaility, in particular in those nodal sites (here social relations of for&al
capitalist do&ination (here thic"est. 0hose sites (ere the south half of central and eastern
En%land, ;landers and 0uscany, aove all ;lorence.
In ;lorence, the su&&er 4especially the &onth of *u%ust5 of 1DGF (itnessed a revolution in
(hich the lo(liest orders of society, a )uasi9proletariat in the artisan (oolen shops called the
sottiposti, overthre( the &erchant oli%archical re%i&e and installed itself in the co&&unal
%overn&ent. Bet(een early 8une and the end of *u%ust, first the artisan %uilds 4il popolo
$inori5, then the (hole pleeian &ass of politically disenfranchised 4il popolo $inuto5 and
finally the latterIs &ost oppressed and e'ploited ele&ent, the eaters and corders of the
shops, in turn held po(er. 0hese (ere, in turn, overthro(n in early Septe&er y a %uild
alliance of lar%e and s&all property holders. 0he %uild artisans returned to po(er for 1ust
under three years 4until 1DF25, at (hich &o&ent they (ere overturned and the &erchant
oli%archy resu&ed po(er, consolidatin% it until 1D72. ;or the ne't 10D years, the ;lorentine
polity (as riven y internecine oli%archical rulin% class stru%%le, in the course of (hich
repulican institution (ere %utted and dis&antled.
In En%land, at the sa&e historical, nearly identical &o&ent, an e'9soldier na&ed Wat 0yler led
an uprisin% often called the PeasantIs Revolt.
0he conditions that spa(ned the revolt reached ac" to the Blac" :eath, and hi%hly &ediated,
(arfare, pla%ue and de&o%raphic collapse (ere all deeply i&plicated in it. * vast nu&er of
rural fol", peasants, laorers, villa%es artisans, startin% fro& the southeastern counties 4Esse'
and Lent5, &arched on @ondon, &et (ith the youn% "in% 4Richard II5 and put forth de&ands
4aolition of unfree laor, serf li"e conditions and a poll ta'E handin% over royal officials to the
reels for 1ustice, i.e., e'ecutionE a&nesty for insur%ents5 and (as repressed.
0he revolt, ho(ever, revererated across En%land, en%a%in% countless unna&ed villa%es as
(ell as the lar%er to(ns. It too" (ee"s and, in so&e locales, over a year to finally suppress
the reellion.
In the end none of the de&ands, e'ceptin% the eli&ination of the poll ta' that Parlia&ent
)uietly aandoned, (ere &et.
0he lar%ely artisan inspired ,PeasantsI/ Revolt (as one of three events in En%lish history that
shoo" Po(er to its foundations, and (ith the possile e'ception of the :i%%ers in 1D#7 4(ho
rou%ht forth a far, far less (idespread revolt5 (as far &ore radical than the @evellers in 1O#G9
1O#F and the Chartists at the end of the 1FD0s.
Revolt in ;rance, that of the peasants N the 8ac)ueries, did not, li"e that in ;landers 4elo(5,
share the sa&e i&&ediate ti&e fra&e. 6ediated and shaped y the sa&e conditions,
&ercenary and decadent nole ri%anda%e in the after&ath of the Battle of Poitiers effectively
ended the first phase of the $undred -ears War. Pushed to the (all y pilla%in%, roery, rape
and &urder, and destruction of ho&es, villa%es and fields, peasants rose a%ainst the
&ercenaries, aristocrats and lords 41ust as in En%land5 for t(o (ee"s in 8une 1DCF. Eventually
1oined y the s&all our%eois of the to(ns stru%%lin% a%ainst the sa&e deprecations, and
even supported y the provost of Paris 4e)uivalent of the lord &ayor of @ondon5, Etiennne
6arcel, this risin% too" on the further character of an Estates reellion a%ainst aritrary "in%ly
po(er. It (as sava%ely suppressed y the sa&e lords.
Revolt in ;landers (as very unli"e that in En%land, (here reellion, occurrin% over a vastly
&ore len%thy ti&e fra&e 41D0291DFC5. In the &ost radical for& 4transpirin% et(een 1DDG and
1D#75, it (as led y a &ercantile our%eoisie (ith aristocratic ties. In these events, the radical
party consisted in (eavers (ho (ere si&ultaneously &aster artisan e&ployers and &erchant
e&ployees. 0he situation in ;landers involved the (oolen trade (ith En%land, and (arfare,
aove all, (as oth its cause and effect. @ead y ?hent, three cities (hich included Bru%es
and -pres, pushed the count of ;landers fro& his rei%nin% hei%hts, &ade their o(n policy,
openly ro"e (ith the countIs ;rench alliance 4for the En%lish5, suppressed resistance in the
countryside (ith ar&ed &ilitia constructed for the occasions, and ruled in the interests of a
cloth &erchant9&anufacturin% oli%archy y leanin% heavily on the artisan (eavers. 0he
re%i&es (ere finally suppressed in open fi%htin% y an alliance of the ;rench "in%, the count
of ;landers, a very (ea" indi%enous noility, support fro& a&on% the uran classes especially
the fullers and peasants in the countryside a%ainst the ac"%round of the rea"do(n of the
En%lish alliance.
In all case, the final eatin% ac" of the revolts %reatly stren%thened the forces of centrali=in%
&onarchies 4especially the ;rench, En%lish and Bur%undian5.
)or$al Do$ination, ,, 03inea$ents5
4opulation and 2cono$ic Sta&ili/ation
7 Ne 0)ourth5 N4hase> of the Continental 2cono$% in the 2ra of ,ncreasing Territorial 8roth
of Centrali/ing D%nastic Monarchies
*%ainst the ac"drop of pla%ue and on%oin% depopulation, the late 1DG0s and early 1DF0s
had een a ti&e of especially severe recession in continental trade, i&&ediately rou%ht on
y social conflict in ;lorence, ;landers and En%land 4and ;rance as (ell5.
1
0he shift in the te'tile econo&y fro& li%ht, coarse and cheap cloths to heavy, fine and
e'pensive (as co&pleted prior to the En%lish PeasantsI War and the Cio$pi revolution in
;lorence. *s &erchant oli%archies and dynastic princes re%ained and e%an to vast e'pand
control over the societies of Europe, the te'tile econo&y, startin% fro& a far lo(er level of
population density, (as ale to staili=e at a lo(er level of activity 4production and trade5
1
Indeed, (hile conditions of dra&atic population decline and the shift to lu'ury cloth production are oli)ue social and
historical &ar"ers of &ass deprivation and &isery and led to the revolts riefly recounted aove, it (as these revolts
that %enerated a continental depression, and not the other (ay around. 0his is another (ay of sayin% that the
&ove&ent of capital under conditions of its for&al do&ination never achieved autono&y.
lar%ely ecause of a resu&ption of re%ular e'chan%es 4nor&ality so9called5 and &uch hi%her
profit &ar%ins.
0his dra&atically lo(er volu&e did not in any sense herald a rea"9up of the circuits of for&al
capitalIs reified and reifyin% &ove&ent or the continental econo&y constituted in and throu%h
that &ove&ent+ With so &any populations, and not 1ust uran ones, e&edded in the &atri'
of for&al capitalist social relation and dependent for life and livelihood upon e'chan%e
operatin% at %eo%raphical distances, there (ould e no return, and there could e little
possiility of a return, to the feudali=ed &anorial autar"y, to self9sufficiency at the villa%e level
or even to locali=ed e'chan%ed ased on s&all to(ns. We can &ar" the outset of this phase,
e&phasi=in% a%ain staili=ation not recovery, fro& the ascendancy of 6aso de%li *li==i in
;lorence 4say, 1D725 or, &ore precisely, fro& the last revolt of the period, that of Bru%es
(eavers suppressed y Philip the Bold as count of ;landers in 1D71.
What (as characteri=ation of this phase (as, first, a return of &erchants to a &ore ,classical/
approach to the &ar"et, that, if it did not entail restrictin% production to insure profitaility,
ai&ed at &onopoly. 0his (as necessitated not 1ust y contracted &ar"ets ut, in the face of
this reality, the rise of so &any s&all to(ns (ith the capacity for (oolen production. Second,
eyond lu'ury (oolens, &erchants sou%ht to discover ne( hi%h profit lu'ury %oods. In this
respect, sil" stood out, (hile, third, at the sa&e ti&e these &erchants searched for ne(
or%ani=ational for&s to carry forth their activity. ;ourth, the entire period (as decisively
deter&ined y the increasin% territorial %ro(th of centrali=in% dynastic &onarchies, and the
crystalli=ation out of the &ost po(erful ones 4En%land, Castile, ;rance, ?er&any and perhaps
S(eden5 (ho (ould do&inate the affairs of the continental for the re&ainin% five centuries of
the epoch of capitalIs for&al do&ination of laor in production. We can very riefly consider
each of the 4first three5 ,purely econo&ic/ characteristics in turn y reference to the &ost
developed re%ions in (hich they first appeared.
In En%land, ;landers and on the Italian Peninsula, s&all to(ns en%a%ed in (oolen
&anufacture proliferated fro& as early as 1D20, and certainly after 1DF0. I&portant centers of
cloth production (hich predated the decline of coarse, heavy and cheap (oolens 4say 1D109
1D205, such Coventry, ?loucester, @ondon, @eicester, Winchester and -or", no( faced
co&petition fro& s&aller to(ns, for instance, in (est, &ostly rural settin%s+ Barnstaple, Bath,
Bradford9on9*von, Brid%(ater, Castle Co&e, Chalford, Cullo&pton, :ursley, 6al&esury,
3e(ury, Stroud, 0aunton, 0iverton, 0otnes, 0ro(rid%e, Wic"(ar and Wotton9under9Ed%eE in
the south, Salisury and SherorneE and, too nu&erous to &ention the risin% cloth to(ns of
East *n%lia.
In ;landers, they included Ee"lo, Lapri1"e, @e&e"e northeast of Bru%esE *alst,
?eraardser%en, :ender&onde, >udenaarde and 3inove east of ?hentE even further east 4in
Braant5, the to(ns of :iest, @ier, $erentals and 0ienen, and &ore i&portantly a host of
to(ns and villa%es in the south(est near and aout -pres, and Wervi", Lortri1", 6enen,
Warneton, and Co&ines 4Co&en5 in the @eie !alley. *lon% (ith Poperin%e, already (ell
estalished, a nu&er of these to(ns especially the latter, captured and held 6editerranean
&ar"ets in the lon% period of oli%archical and princely recovery and retrench&ent.
;lorence, Pisa, @ucca and other centers also faced ne( co&petition. En%a%ed in (oolen
&anufacture, they included Co&o, 6on=a, Cre&ona, Par&a, Ber%a&o, Brescia, !erona,
Padua, !icen=a, 0reviso, and 6antua, and Prato, Siena, @ucca, Bolo%na, and Peru%ia, in
@o&ardy and 0uscany, respectively, and not 1ust here ut in southern ?er&an spea"in%
centers 4e.%., Rl&, *u%sur%, Ravensur%, Constance, and Basel5 also, once a%ain e'hiitin%
the depth penetration of for&al capitalist do&ination and the net(or" it had created.
*%ainst this do&estic co&petition, the %reat centers of te'tile &anufacture defended
the&selves in different (ays. In ;landers, the effort (as &ost forceful and (ent ac" half a
century. 0he %uild re%i&es of the three cities, ?hent &ost effectively then Bru%es and less
effectively -pres at first atte&pted to restrict and eli&inate risin% villa%e and s&all to(n
&anufactures settin% up e'clusion =ones around the&selves, then to destroy the& y sendin%
out &ilitia to confiscate, or preferaly to s&ash and, or, urn loo&s. 0his effort %ave (ay y
the 1D#0s to efforts to le%islate, re%ulate and penali=e co&petition fro& the countrysides
en%a%ed in i&itation of their upscale farics. *fter 1DFC, ho(ever, these endeavors collapsed
as the Bur%undian count of ;landers, Philip the Bold, refused to sanction such efforts,
proaly for the sa&e reason that he repressed (eaversI uprisin%s, i.e., to consolidate control
over ;landers in full "no(led%e that, ased on their (ealth, the autono&y of the three cities
4drie steden5 had (ea"ened his :a&pierre predecessors. 0heir (ealth he re)uired, ut their
autono&y he loathedE and he did everythin% he could to circu&scrie and reduce it.
1

Confrontin% the princely &ediation of capitalIs for&al do&ination, the ;le&ish road (as a
dead9end. 3ot so in ;lorence.
In ;lorence, the consolidation of oli%archical po(er 41DF291D705 over the corpse of the artisan
re%i&e (as an effective first step in the restoration of nor&ality, ut on this asis alone
;lorence (ould never return to the hei%hts of its continental status and po(er. >f course, it
never did, achievin%, as else(here, only staili=ation. 0he consolidation of oli%archical po(er
(as only one of three le%s of the tripod on (hich this staili=ation rested. 0he other t(o (ere
the diffusion of resistance at the point of production y (ay of the reco&position of the
pleeian and )uasi9proletarian ele&ents en%a%ed in te'tile production, and the incorporation
into the te'tile econo&y of a ne( product ased on a different 4or ,leaner/5 production
process. 0his (as sil" and sil" production.
;a&ine and aove all pla%ue9induced, dra&atic population decline, the rava%es of (arrin%
and the asence of social po(er accruin% to the underlyin% classes in production all favored
the &anufacture of and trade in sil"en farics of all "inds, velvets, satins and velours. >n the
Italian Peninsula, sil"s (ere first e'tensively &anufactured 4y 1DC05 in @ucca and Bolo%na,
ut had appeared &uch earlier as i&ports fro& the By=antiu& and the @evant. It (as not
coincidence that sil" &anufacture did not eco&e si%nificant in ;lorence until after the
4re5consolidation of oli%archical po(er (ith the rise of the *li==i. 40hou%h sil"s eca&e
si%nificant do&estically aout this ti&e, the sa&e cannot e said of 6ilan (here, in repulican
ter&s, a !isconti ,tyranny/ had een in place since &id9century, or !enice (here an
oli%archical repulic had institutionali=ed the rule of ,>ne/ for centuries.5
Sil"s production, it appears, (as &ore i&portant to the ;lorentine econo&y y the ti&e the
6edici assu&ed control of the ;lorentine state 41#D#5. In capitalist ter&s, fully con%ruent (ith
a de&o%raphic s&aller ase even thou%h Europe 4thou%h not ;lorence5 had under%one a
&odicu& of population %ro(th since the pla%ue devastation of 1D#F91DC0, and (ith it an
orientation to(ard lu'ury production, sil" production re)uired fe(er (or"ers, and its production
process (as less co&ple'... 0he &ost i&portant sta%es (ere thro(in%, oilin%, dyein%, and
(arpin% and (eavin%... *nd li"e (oolen &anufacture, as (as the case (ith all &anufacturin%
production under conditions of for&al capitalist do&ination, the different sta%es involved
different artisans operatin% under different roofs. In fact, not all production (as even
perfor&ed in the to(n, ut so&e in the near countryside, the contado+ *t least in the era of
6edici supre&acy, sil" production (as, &oreover, far &ore profitale.
2
1
$ere see t(o (or"s y :avid 3icholas, Ton and Countr%side and Medieval )landers+
2
8ac"s and Caferro, The Spinelli of )lorence, FD 4sta%es5, F1 4profitaility5.
0he sil"en production processes can e co&pared (ith those of (oolens in order to see the far %reater co&ple'ity of
the latter involvin% so&e t(enty9si' sta%es. See ,&id, F19F2. !an $outte, 7n 2cono$ic Histor% of the 3o Countries,
D#, refers to thirty sta%es, half of (hich (ere indispensale, and then lists preparatory sortin% and spinnin%, follo(ed
y co&in%, cartin%, dyein%, (eavin%, fullin%, stretchin%, shearin% and finishin% as the &ost i&portant.
In En%land, an enor&ous proliferation of s&all to(ns en%a%ed in (oolen &anufacture after
1D00, and then a%ain in the ne't century, too" place a%ainst the ac"%round of the $undred
-ears War. 0he first Ed(ardian phase 41DDG91DO05 (as not short9lived, thou%h enor&ously
successful 4Ed(ardIs son, Ed(ard, Prince of Wales, called the ,Blac" Prince/ had captured
8ohn II, "in% of ;rance, at Poitiers (here the ;rench cavalry (as decisively defeated a second
ti&e y the En%lish infantry ar&ed (ith lon% o(s5. 0hat success 4(hich, ac"no(led%ed in the
Peace of BrUti%ny of 1DO05 included ;rench cession of *)uitaine and 1ustified the costs of (ar
4or, it certainly did to the cro(n and, as on%oin% success, had &ade i&positions easily to levy
and collect5, ut after a second phase 41DO791DF75, a%ain initiated y the ;rench, the drain on
the resources of the country had eco&e enor&ous. 40he cost of transportin% troops to fi%ht
across the Channel and ocean, and supplyin% a field ar&y fro& En%land (ere eyond the
triute and revenues e'tracted y the cro(nE to oot, the En%lish could not supply the&selves
si&ply y ,livin% off the land,/ i.e., se)uesterin% castles and d(ellin%s, ta'in%, and
appropriatin% and confiscatin% foodstuffs5. En%lish (ealth still lay pri&arily in (oolen e'port,
and it (as for reasons of provisionin% an ar&y that the duty i&posed at the cro(n &onopoly
4called a staple5, &oved to Calais in 1DOD, (as douled and a &erchant %roupin%, the
Co&pany of the Staple, (as for&ed to i&prove efficiency and thorou%hness of custo&s
collection.
Especially as a for& of financin% the households and (ars of princes, &erchant an"in%,
thou%h not disappearin%, had %reatly di&inished and (as no lon%er a viale, effective (ay of
or%ani=in% trade after the Bardi and Peru==i an"ruptcies. 0he &erchant Co&pany
represented a ne( develop&ent that or%ani=ationally &ediated e'chan%e, in particular the
re%ional for&s of trade on (hich that reified o1ectivity, the continental econo&y, so
depended. It (as carried for(ard y princely ,charterin%/ of &erchant co&panies. 0he En%lish
(ere in the van%uard of this develop&ent, as the Staple Co&pany attests. 40he 6erchant
*dventures first appeared circa 1#21. It (as a susidiary of the 6ercers Co&pany (hich, li"e
the Staple, dated to the last century5. By the e%innin% of the third and final phase 41#1C9
1#DC5 of the $undred -ears War, these ne( or%ani=ational for&s and the &onopolies 4the
staple and the co&panies5 &erchants and princes created, the&selves restin% on the &ost
hi%hly developed sector of the te'tile econo&y in the Europe and the 6editerranean (orld,
sustained the tre&endous e'penditures en%endered y the (ars and e'trava%ance of the
En%lish cro(n.
*s the En%lish rulin% class itself splintered a&on% potential Planta%enet heirs to the En%lish
cro(n, and 6ar%aret of *n1ou 4(ife of Ed(ard I!, one of the clai&ants5 in 1#CC e%an to raise
an ar&y to defend Ed(ardIs clai&, therey threatenin% rene(ed disruption of co&&erce, a
rivalry in overland, transcontinental trade routes, for e'a&ple et(een Italy and the @o(
Countries, havin% e%un after rou%hly 1#20 (as no( (ell under(ay. 0he routes this trade (as
ased on already ypassed the areas of heavy fi%htin% y the end of the $undred -ears War,
e%innin% fro& the rene(ed @o( Countries trade fairs 4those in Braant5, south alon% the
Rhine across the Brenner Pass into @o&ardy. 0hey (ere ased on several transport lin"ed
innovations that included the appearance of dedicated co&&ission houses, transport and
carta%e fir&s and a ne( lar%er, lo(er cost cart 4$esse (a%ons5 travelin% in convoys. 0hese
ne( routes, and on the& the nu&erous s&all to(ns and lar%e villa%es that %re( (ith the
co&&erce they carried, constituted the avenues alon% (hich for&al capitalist penetration and
rationali=ation too" place, for&in% a ne( deeper infrastructure for that penetration, the veins
and capillaries in and throu%h (hich capital insinuated itself into the ody social.
But even (ith revival, it (ould e decades efore te'tile &anufacture, li"e an"in%, reached
the hei%hts that it did in an earlier e'pansive period of econo&ic %ro(th. 6ar"ets the&selves
in traditional areas (ere s&aller. 0his (as not 1ust the case on the continent. 0he @evantine
&ar"et itself, havin% (itness dra&atic de&o%raphic contraction as a conse)uence of death
fro& the sa&e pla%ue 41D#F91DC15 that devastated all of Europe, declined still further in the
course of the fifteenth century, especially in 6a&lu" E%ypt and Syria.
*t this &o&ent develop&ent had, at any rate, shifted north(est to *nt(erp, (here the dyein%
and finishin% of En%lish (oolen cloth &anufacture no( centered. It (ould continue to e
ased here as this final phase of the earl% epoch of the for&al do&ination of capital over laor
in production ca&e to a close. 0he phase can e said to have variously ended (ith the
conclusion of the internecine En%lish rulin% class stru%%le, other(ise "no(n as the War of the
Roses, in 1#FCE or the triu&phant entry of the Charles !III into ;lorence in 3ove&er 1#7#
4and the si&ultaneous dis%raced e'ist of the 6edici5 announcin% ;rench po(er on the Italian
Peninsula.
-et these dates do not even &ediately connect the end of this early epoch to the te'tile
econo&y (hich (as dead heart of this o1ectified, thin%ly net(or" of social relations. We can,
then, su%%est one further deter&ination+ Bet(een 1#FC and 1#72, ;ernando of *ra%on, the
Castilian "in% y virtue of his &arria%e to Isaelle of Castile in 1#O7, co&pleted the
,recon)uest/ of once 6oorish Ieria as the cities of Ronda, 6ala%a, *l&eria and ?ranada fell
to his ar&ies in a sei=ure of land, peoples 4sold as slaves5 and (ealth 4coin5 that stretched
ac" to the fall of %reat *ra cities of Cordoa and Serville over t(o hundred years earlier
412DO and 12#F respectively5. 0he cycle of con)uest that ;ernando co&pleted (as
responsile for the appropriation of vast tracts of land %ranted to lords in the entoura%es of
various Castilian rulers. 0hese lands provided the asis for a &ove&ent fro& cereal
a%riculture in @eon and old Castile to transhu&ant sheep far&in% on and et(een these %reat
estates as herds in the hundreds of thousands passed seasonally fro& the central Castilian
plateau' to Estre&adura and northern *ndalusia. 3o( an intricate co&&ercial net(or" had
survived Catalan collapse, itself startin% fro& the uonic pla%ue 41D#F5, and tied these (ool
producin% estates to the %reat te'tile centers, especially *nt(erp, of the @o( Countries y (ay
of Castilian to(ns and, to far northern Ierian 4Biscayan5 shippers. 4;iner &erino (ools e%an
to appear in sites of te'tile &anufacture fro& 1#2091#2CE their use eca&e %enerali=ed after
1##0, ut had not eco&e pree&inent until rou%hly 1C20.5 ;ro& the ti&e of the %ro(in%
*li==i and 6edici stru%%le in ;lorence, it (as the revenues that &erino (ool e%ot (hich
enaled Castile to insert itself in the circuits of the for&al &ove&ent of capital, %eneratin% the
initial asis of its rise as a %reat po(er, all the (hile steadily evolvin% as a, na% the,
counterrevolutionary van%uard counterposin% itself to ne( centers of &ercantile capitalist
(ealth, En%land and the :utch @o( Countries, in a vast, len%thy stru%%le that (ould do&inate
continental Europe do(n to 1O#F91O#7.
So letIs date the end of this final phase in the early epoch of for&al capitalist do&ination fro&
that &o&ent (hen the cycle of Castile recon)uest on the Ierian Peninsula ended in 1#72.
)or$al Do$ination, ,, 03inea$ents5, Conclusion
The )or$al Do$ination of Capital over 3a&or as an 2poch in the Histor% of Capitalis$
0he production of capital in the transfor&ation of &oney into &oney capital has its historical
pre&ises, first, in develop&ents that reached ac" to the ori%ins of feudalis& in Europe,
na&ely, the Saracen closure of the (estern European interior to the 6editerranean (orld of
very late anti)uity, the loss of Baltic trade to ;rancia, the suse)uent collapse of co&&ercial
e'chan%e, then the invasions of the (estern =one 4En%land, ;rancia, the su9*lpine plain, the
re%ion north of the *lps (here several %reat rivers, e.%., the Rhine, rise5, and the evolution of
the autar"ic estate shaped y and predicated on social relations of personal dependencyE
second, develop&ents that occurred at the end of the feudal era proper, the transfor&ations of
laor services on the land into &oney rents, and the rise of to(ns in the interstices created y
fra%&entary political authority, ut to(ns of a peculiar sort, those estalished on the asis of
&unicipal lierty entailin% the rediscovery of Ro&an la( and on this asis elaoration of a
&ercantile le%al code (hose funda&ental ele&ent (as a concept and practice of asolute
and unconditional property. 0he develop&ent 4of capital as &oney capital5 (as at the sa&e
ti&e the historical process in and throu%h (hich the social realit% of "estern 2urope as
fixed, so that Western Europe eca&e the pri&ary =one and locus of the epochal
develop&ent of the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in production.
0he &onetari=ation of rents (as the other side of the aandon&ent of estates, escape to
to(ns and occasional e'propriation of peasants, the recreation of a lar%e stratu& as laor (ith
li&ited property 4e.%., co(, plou%h5 in the countryside 4and the city (here the peasant9
eco&e9apprentice no( &ay have possessed tools ut did not o(n his o(n shop5, so that the
laorer 4the peasant fa&ily5 (as divorced fro& the soil he, she, it (or"ed. >(nership of the
land, no lon%er &ere possession 4seisin5, and, in &ore than a fe( cases, instru&ents fell to
the &erchant as appropriator. >nce he reunited the laorer (ith that land 4say, leased to hi&
for shares5, the for&s, rhyth&s, te&pos and instru&ents deployed in production re&ained
unchan%ed and proceeded 1ust as efore, all the conditions for the estalish&ent and
develop&ent of the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in production, and as an epoch in
the history of capitalis&, had co&e into ein%.
0he typical relations of social %roups to one another in production, call it the class structure,
then, consisted in the countryside in a s&all stratu& of freehold peasants, the &ass of
peasants (or"in% the land under ter&s of a lease 4in central Italy in particular, this too" the
for& of sharecroppin%5 (ith a thinner layer of landless laorers suordinate to the& 4perhaps
for a (a%e, &ore li"ely for susistence5 especially durin% pea" seasons 4plantin%, harvestin%5.
0he landlord (as not en%a%ed in far&(or", in a%ricultural production. In the cities, (e find a
&ass of artisans of various si=es (ho e&ployed so&e apprentices, &erchants (ho provided
ra( &aterials to these artisans 4else(here as in ;lorence, pri&arily (oolen cloth5 and
collected the finished product (hile payin% contractually stipulated a&ounts in coin 4deased
silver, not %old5E here in the artisan shops there (ere a couple or three cate%ories of (or" that
e&ployed a layer of (a%ed laor 4paid contractually5, at the hi%h(ater &ar" of ;lorentine
&erchant &anufacture far lar%er than the artisanate as a (hole, at other ti&es proaly not as
lar%e a stratu&. * si&ilar situation e'isted (ith the uildin% and construction %uilds. * &ass of
retail shop"eepers the&selves s&all &erchants occupied and provisioned the entire
population (ith services oriented to(ard i&&ediate consu&ption 4a"ers, utchers, apparel
&erchants, etc.5. @ordin% over these relations, (ere a handful of truly %reat &erchants (ho
(ere also an"ers, (ho (ithin the to(ns9eco&e9cities had (arehousin% facilities for the
stora%e of ra( &aterials and finished products and (hose %eo%raphical reach, no( as
an"ers, (ent eyond the city and re%ion and (as continental. 0hese &erchant9an"ers
unified the respective structures of countryside and city, for they (ere at the sa&e ti&e
invested in rural holdin%s, and thus appeared a&on% the lar%est of the landlords leasin% far&
lands. 0his (as the asic situation (ith respect to for&al do&ination at the hei%ht of its early
epochal efflorescence.
We can no( restate the characteristic features of for&al do&ination of capital over laor in
production... this is a develop&ent of capital in its transfor&ation fro& &oney into &oney
capital... as it has historically for&ed, risin% fro& this history to its for&al conditions and
features.
;irst, a lon% historical develop&ent had transpired in a%ricultural (or", laor of so&e de%ree
of servility 4never &ore than for&ally free5, &ar"ets that (ent eyond i&&ediate locales and
&oney as a universal e)uivalent of e'chan%e (ere all already constituted conditionsE second,
already noted, the separation of a%ricultural laor fro& its &ediu& of production had
developed, reunification of that laor (ith the soil no( the property of another 4a &erchant
(ho provisioned that laor and retained it, e'ercised o(nership ut not actual control5 had
een effected, so&e freeholds (or"ed for fa&ilial self9sufficiency, and laor that (as landless
4ut not entirely propertyless5 (or"ed for another and (as re&unerated in "ind 4and perhaps
so&e (a%es ostensily to satisfy socially reproductive re)uire&ents throu%h &ar"et
purchases5E and, third, the laor process itself (as in )uestion+ While for&al do&ination is
activity underta"en fro& outside the production process proper usually y this &erchantE (hile
he siphons off surpluses in e'ploitin% laor and does so (ithout either reor%ani=in% those
productive activities or %eneratin% ne( technical inputs to the&E (hile the producers are
,si&plyK suordinated to e'chan%e, the &ar"et and the &erchant, ut not to the production
process itselfE
1
(hile the &erchant effects no transfor&ation in the laor process, this does not
&ean that ,techni)ue/ sta%nated, that there (as no develop&ent of inputs to laor+ It, the
laor process to spea" astractly, did not 1ust continue as efore 46ar'5, &erchant capital did
not &erely attach itself to an e'istin% laor process, to e'istin% for&s of productive activity or
to various distinct ,&odes of production/+ 0he &erchantIs presence created a situation, one he
&ediated, in (hich technical innovation in a narro( ran%e of productive activities (as
accelerated 4and in (hich he (as directly involved in innovation in finance5. 0hese innovative
activities (ere lar%ely, if not e'clusively 4there (ere ,spillovers,/ if you (ill, such as telescopes
used in (ar and ta"en over in our%eois theory, science5, to e found in construction of (alls,
uildin%s and, in particular, fortifications and in the accoutre&ents of (ar, personal apparel
4ar&or5, hand (eapons 4s(ords, o(s, shields, lances, &us"ets5 and, aove all, &ilitary
ar&a&ents 4cannon, (eapons carria%es5.
2
0echnical innovation, &oreover, appeared
,spontaneously/ or, historically spea"in%, sporadically at est, not syste&atically and certainly
not ceaselessly 4(hich only occurs as the &odern science of nature and, inseparaly, its
technolo%y eco&e continuous inputs to production, a science and technolo%y that had yet to
co&e into ein%5. 0he &erchant &ediated the relation of the social class atop the entire
societal or%ani=ation and structure, the prince, "in%, the individual tyrant, the ,>ne,/ to
production, a relation in (hich the de&and for dynastic and territorial a%%randi=e&ent (as
o1ectified and &ateriali=ed in (eapons of (arE in (hich ne( or%ani=ational for&s of (arfare
developedE in (hich territorial states for&edE in (hich continental &ar"ets e&er%edE in (hich
the %reat &erchant as an"er accu&ulated vast a&ounts of &oney capitalE in (hich this ne(
societal ,&odel,/ the su1ective desire to accu&ulate 4dynastic holdin%s, &oney (ealth5, too"
hold of a thin layer of lease holdin% peasant9far&ers, (hich differentiated itself out fro& the
rest 4of the peasantry5, forced the rest to %ive up its holdin%s and e&ployed the& as (a%ed
laor. 0he prevailin% e'istin% for&s of productive activity, characteristically petty co&&odity
production, did not re&ain ,1ust as they (ere efore/E instead, the social and &aterial
pre&ises for the inau%uration of capitalist production 4capital as capital, real do&ination,
production for productionIs sa"e, the self9valori=ation of value5 (ere created...
1
0hus in ;lorence (here for&al do&ination otained, a%ents of the &erchant o(ners &ade a re%ular circuit throu%h
(or"in% class nei%horhoods, delivered (ool for ho&e (or", settin% the pay rates and a schedule for co&pletion, and
returned to collect the yarn and pay the spinners 48ohn 3a1e&y, 7 Histor% of )lorence, 1025. In no &anner, ho(ever,
did the &erchant or his a%ent actually underta"e to or%ani=e ho( the (or" (as perfor&ed or provide novel &achines
that hastened its co&pletion.
2
Innovation (as, as (e said, lar%ely ut not e'clusively &ilitary+ I&portant instances of non9&ilitary innovation can e
found in the En%lish 4and continental5 invention of (ater9po(ered fullin% &ills in cloth &anufacture 4on the continental
D9# fold productivity %ains (ere &ade5E and in southern ?er&any (here flood free, deeper &ine shafts (ere &ade
possile y novel e&ploy&ent of po(ered (ater pu&ps and draina%e adits, and (here a s&eltin% process separatin%
silver fro& ar%entiferous9cupric ores (as invented 4the processes %enerated a five fold increase over seven decades
in &ined silver and copper5. 8ohn 6unro, ,Western European Woollen Industry,/ CO9CG, C7, F#.
*ll innovations ca&e aout three decades efore the close 41#725 of the era of &onarchical centrali=ation and
elaoration of "in%ly for&s of la( and civil ad&inistration.
Met for&al do&ination never achieved an autono&y as a lo%ic of econo&ic develop&ent, as
does capital under conditions of real do&ination 4risin% fro& historical practice and defined in
the sa&e ter&s (ith the sin%ular i&portant transfor&ation of the &erchant into an industrialist,
i.e., one (ho intervenes in and reor%ani=es production (ith the sin%ular o1ective of increasin%
production, productivity or accu&ulatin% capital, a practice that eco&es irreversile (ith the
socially %enerali=ed, syste&atic inputs of science and technolo%y into that production5, and, it
thus never set in &otion an autono&ous lo%ic and &ove&ent that enco&passes the (hole of
society, the industrialist and his or%ani=ation, the state, included, &ediately suordinate all to
itself. 0his &uch said, the (ei%ht of for&al do&ination in and on ordinary, or daily, life (as
enor&ous, or over historical ti&e it %re( increasin%ly soE for, it (as only in the in%ression of
e'traordinary events N &ost often (ar, ut infre)uent yet trau&atic occurrences such as a
pla%ue outrea" N into that daily life that other deter&inants ore do(n on it (ith %reater
force...
If (e &o&entary reflect on the actuall% historical &eco$ing of feudalis& at its ori%ins, and thus
on the contrast et(een t(o ori%inatin% for&s as they appeared in (estern Europe and
8apan, (e can elaorate a sche&a that (ill further facilitate an apprehension and %rasp of
for&al do&ination.
1
In the divided societies of (estern Europe and 8apan, (here o1ective, societal division has
for t(o &illennia een ased on social laor and fi'ed positions in production, social hierarchy
and the diversion of those surpluses a(ay fro& the producers to those at the top of that
hierarchy, there (as a funda&ental difference et(een the respective &odalities of po(er and
(ealth. In (estern Europe, po(er 4i.e., all ut the %reatest, %reat po(ers, for they also rou%ht
lar%e9scale finance into ein%5 (as suordinated to (ealth, (ealth appeared as the asis of
po(er that (as e'ercised indirectlyE in 8apan, (ealth (as suordinated to po(er, po(er
e'ercised directly appeared as the asis of (ealth.
In (estern Europe, the practices of (ealth pursuit and accu&ulation uild up a net(or" of
o1ective institutions (ith a (ei%ht and li&ited independence of their o(nE in 8apan, the
practices of a&assin% po(er uild up a net(or" of personal dependents restin% on the control
of laor, on creation and &aintenance of a ri%id hierarchy of retainers at the otto& of (hich
(ere those for&ally supervisin% laor.
In (estern Europe, (ealth accu&ulation re)uired the creation of for&al institutions 4ori%inally
those of &unicipal lierty, the co&&une5 (hich only prospered on the asis of fra%&ented
political authorityE in 8apan, as else(here, control of laor as rural laor (as created and
&a'i&i=ed only on the asis of %rain a%riculture and po(er al(ays tended to(ard
centrali=ation, even as it under(ent enor&ous fra%&entation.
In (estern Europe, fra%&entary political authority as a condition (as itself inade)uate to
secure uninhiited (ealth accu&ulation, for further develop&ent of &ercantile le%al codes
and, aove all, a concept of asolute, unconditional property %irded that accu&ulationE in
8apan, %rain a%riculture &ade possile lar%e populations, a division of laor fro& (hich a
class of &erchants possessed of %reat (ealth sprun% ut re&ained suordinate to po(er.
In (estern Europe, the relations and interrelations et(een various layers and an e'pandin%,
speciali=ed division of laor %re( in si=e and co&ple'ity, these 4inter5relations re)uired po(er
4once a%ain, only the %reatest of %reat po(ers, the risin% &onarchies5 to set ter&s of
production, e'chan%e and distriution across the vast spaces, different cultures and distinct
societies (hich this si=e and co&ple'ity e%an to enco&passE in 8apan, siphonin% off (ealth
(hile servicin% the enlar%ed populations led to a fantastic %ro(th in si=e, layers and
speciali=ed activities (ithin the class of &erchants, and co&pelled po(er in the interests of
itself 4its o(n reproduction and enhance&ent5 to re%ulate and re%i&ent &erchants and the
1
See the Epilo%ue to The Histor% of )lorence fro& (hich the follo(in% is adapted. HEditorIs note.J
&ercantile econo&y to prevent its uninhiited enlar%e&ent, a condition sty&ied y the
asence of %enerali=ed, astract universal e)uivalent 4&oney, coin, (hereas rice functionin%
as such an e)uivalent lac"ed astractness5, to the point (here its autono&ous develop&ent
(ould e the &ost li"ely outco&e.
*nd, in (estern Europe, (here 4all ut %reat5 po(er started fro& a relation of suordination to
4&erchant or &erchant9an"er or &erchant &anufacturer5 (ealth, (ealth no( confronted
po(er 4i.e. the %reatest of the %reat po(er &onarchies5 (hich incessantly pursued its o(n
self9a%%randi=e&ent. In its e'pansive develop&ent this (ealth estalished a vast se&i9
autono&ous net(or" of relations that (as eyond its control, and no( confronted a fait
acco$pli, the o1ectified, reified product of its o(n activity+ Without turnin% to po(er to fi' and
enforce the ter&s of production, e'chan%e and distriution, (ealth 4co&petin% centers of
&erchant or &erchant9an"er or &erchant &anufacturin% (ealth5 could not &onopoli=e the
products that flo(ed throu%h all these circuits and au%&ented itself throu%h their e'chan%e. *t
the orders of the lar%e territorial &onarchies this (ealth had to levera%e its econo&ic reach
to persuade these po(ers to accept &onopoli=ed control, or at least privile%ed conditions of
e'chan%e. It (as po(er, that is, these %reat po(ers, that could (rec" the (hole net(or", not
fre)uently ut (hen it occurred usually as it (as itself in the process of self9destructin%, as in
(ar 4of (hich dynastic stru%%le (as the &ost da&a%in%5, y &odifyin% the ter&s of &onopoly
or privile%e, i.e., y refusin% to fulfill the oli%ations it assu&ed in enterin% the net(or" of
relations throu%h (hich 4&oney9capital as5 (ealth (as %enerated. Such (as the situation of
the Bardi and Peru==i in 1DDF as Ed(ard III failed to &a"e loan repay&ents to their an"s
therey under&inin% their operations and the econo&ies 4&ost of all, ;lorence5 that depended
on the&. Met as the epoch of capital#s for$al do$ination full% $atured even the causation that
ran fro$ the 0greatest great5 poer to the ealth &egan to give a% to entangle$ent and
reciprocal deter$ination so that Ncause> and Neffect> &eca$e insepara&le, dialecticall% circular
and indistinguisha&le+ 0hus (as the case (ith the En%lish "in%, Ed(ard I!, and the
Bur%undian du"e, Philip 4Philippe le Bon, Bur%undy ein% the (ealthiest of all states at this, its
starried &o&ent in European history5, (ith re%ard to the the Calais Staple and En%lish ullion
policies circa 1#2291#GF.
1
;ro& 12C2, a &o&ent at once &ar"in% the &intin% of the ;lorentine %old florin and the
institution of an"ers to the papacy, until 1O#F91O#7, desi%natin% the Peace of Westphalia
4si%nifyin% the victory of the Stadtholder our%eoisie over the Castilian cro(n5 and the
e'ecution of Charles I 4the &o&ent at (hich in effective historical ter&s the En%lish
Co&&on(ealth (as orn5, it (as this (hole epoch in (hich those characteristic features of
the s(ay of capitalIs for&al do&ination in production enu&erated at the outset of this
discussion otained, and in (hich the relation of (ealth and po(er and the funda&ental
situation 1ust descried held+ In this epoch the &ove&ent of (ealth accu&ulation slo(ly
created in production a separate sphere of social life, and tended to(ard ut never fully
achieved autono&ous develop&ent, a lo%ic of such (as never entirely constituted. -et in the
,space/ created y this epoch, and fro& out of the classes (ho rose on its 4for&al
do&inationIs5 foundations, an intellectual layer (ould split off, a reflection (ould arise, a
theori=ation (ould for&... a &echanics, call it the &odern science of nature... that (ould
for&ulate and articulate the conditions in nature in (hich capitalist develop&ent uni)uely (as
at ho&e 4hei$lich5, and this theori=ation (ould co&e to &ediate throu%h its syste&atic
in%ression into production, the freein% of (ealth fro& its &ediate suordinate to po(er, (ould
set in &otion the autono&i=ation of capital.
2
1
6unro, ,Iid,/ GO9GF.
2
See the Second Interlude, ,Real :o&ination and the *utono&i=ation of Capital,/ elo(.
In distin%uishin% the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in production as an epoch in the
history of capitalis&, this &ove&ent e%an fro& the rise of to(ns, the &onetari=ation of rents,
the ,proletariani=ation/ of peasant layers 4in the sense of creatin% a li&ited condition of
landlessness5, and received crucial elaoration in creation of a for& of &erchant9an"er
partnership (ith unli&ited liaility operatin% across the continent en%a%ed in lendin% vast
su&s to the historically si%nificant &onarchies 4;rench and En%lish5, as these &onarchies
rose all of it &ased on a full% for$ed pett% co$$odit% producing activit%. 0he accu&ulation of
&oney (ealth, capital as &oney capital, (as called into ein% y the financial needs of the
papacy in its stru%%le a%ainst the $ohenstaufen, and its (as circu&scried y the si&ilar
needs of those &onarchies 4no( includin% the ?er&an e&peror, the En%lish and the *n%evins
and other s&aller cro(ns (hose e'istence (as also far &ore transitory5 into pursuit of
dynastic and territorial a&itions. *n autono&ous lo%ic of econo&ic develop&ent never
developed. 3onetheless flo(in% fro& the activities of our%eois classes in production the
circuits of &oney capital and its accu&ulation %ave rise to a &assive thin%ly 4reified5, pseudo9
concrete o1ectivity, the econo&y, that (ei%hed do(n in an increasin%ly heavy &anner on
social relations and societal develop&ent+ It, in turn, recreated (hole stratu&, %enerated ne(
classes 4e.%., a lar%e proletariani=ed peasant stratu&, the capitalist far&er, the %entry lord5,
(hose e'istence and ein% (ere inseparale apart fro& the &ove&ent of &oney capital and
its accu&ulation as (ealth 4ever if in part in the for& of land, landed (ealth5. 0his fantastic
e'crescence on the social ody enco&passed and en%ulfed it to the point at (hich the (hole
social order ruptured. 0his (as the our%eois revolution. In the reor%ani=ation of society that
follo(ed political institutions (ere for&ed (hich created a fra&e(or" (ithin (hich, and
classes estalished and pursued alliances and activity in and throu%h (hich, all the necessary
historical pre&ises of such an autono&ous lo%ic (ere laid do(n. $o(ever tentative at the
outset 4the Industrial Revolution so9called5, the lo%ic, the autono&i=ation of capital as capital,
had co&e into ein%.
)or$al Do$ination, ,,,
Social, then Class Struggle and the ,nauguration of Capital.s Do$ination in 4roduction
The Capitalist 2cono$% in the 4enulti$ate N4hase> of the )or$al Do$ination of Capital over
3a&or in 4roduction in the 2pochal Sense, *A'(-*QD(, ,
Stru%%le on the %round a%ainst the for&ation of capital is of para&ount i&port, even if it
appears here in this presentation to this &o&ent as little &ore than a di%ression and
contravenes the sense of the i&&ediately fore%oin%+ It %oes strai%ht to the heart of the &atter,
first, in the historical sense that social stru%%le a%ainst this ne(, na"ed for& of e'ploitation
and the oppression that peasants 4villeins, copyholders, tenants, etc.5 fou%ht a%ainst created
classes in the strict socio9econo&ic sense 4as opposed to their lar%ely politico91uridical sense
early in the era of capitalIs for&al do&ination, for instance, throu%hout the history of the
;lorentine Repulic5,
1
and, second, in the profound sense that capital.s do&ination in
production< and thereafter specific for&s of that do&ination< have never een estalished
(ithout resistance, (ithout enor&ous stru%%le a%ainst e'ploiters (ho (ould further ro those
(ho actually (or"ed the land of proprietorship 4or control over the land or oth5 of their natural
conditions of production 4that land, soil5, and the &eans and &aterials of laor< In this
re%ard, (e can unreservedly affir& (here the stru%%le of the oppressed and e'ploited has
een successful that do&ination has not een instituted<
1
$ere see The 4ro&le$ of )eudalis$, :ivision I, ,Rnreflected 0heoretical Pre&ises/E The Histor% of )lorence,
Prolo%ue, ,Status of the Co&&une/E and the footnoted discussion in ,:ecline of Catalonia/ in Catalan and Castilian
7ntagonis$ in ,&erian Histor%+ HEditorIs note.J
If (e turn to the &o&ent at (hich the social and productive foundations of capitalis& at is
ori%ins, and thus to its %eo%raphical ho&e in En%land,
1
(e can note that the period fro& that
ti&e at (hich to(ns in the @o( Countries, havin% already under%one several periods of
e'pansive capitalist develop&ent on the asis of for&al do&ination, had een lon% asored
into the Spanish 3etherlands 4say, 1C205 do(n to the onset of the En%lish Civil War 41O#05
(as crucial. *&on% other thin%s, in this period the population of En%land douled. 0his
enor&ous de&o%raphic pressure provided an i&petus to a%ricultural production, (hich, in
turn, disrupted estalished, not ,traditional,/ social relations et(een lord and tenant peasant
in the countryside,
2
(hile %ivin% %reat i&petus to the lordly assault on free peasants
4especially the copyholders5. 3o( ,traditional/ (ould e a &isno&er, for (hat (as already
estalished as pervasive a%rarian social relations had the&selves een for&ed on the asis
of prior disruption of social relations of personal dependency that included rents in "ind and
laor services provided to the lord gratis 4plou%hin%, plantin% and harvestin% his fieldE
provision of foodE %atherin% (ood for fuelE etc.5, a&on% other activities.
D
*t any rate, the
historical outco&e (as threefold+ 4i5 a%riculture under(ent concentration as s&all far&s e%an
1
,Capitalis&/ here refers to a social for&ation estalished on its o(n foundations as self9valori=in% value.
0he specific historical &o&ent noted in the te't aove is descried in R. $. 0a(ney, The 7grarian 4ro&le$ in the
Sixteenth Centur%+ HSee also the Introduction to The 2nglish Civil "ars and the Birth of )reedo$. EditorIs note.J
2
0hose social relations (ere no lon%er ,feudal./
0he i&port of the fore%oin% in its entirety has een to understand the entire epoch that spans the period of feudal
decadence in (estern Europe 41100912C05 do(n to the e&er%ence of capitalis& 4the Industrial Revolution so9called5
in ter&s of various social for&ations or%ani=ed on the asis of the for&al do&ination of capital over laor in
production.
D
0hese &ay indeed have een feudal social relations in the strict sense deployed here.
In the hyrid, astard for& that ste&&ed fro& state centralis&, En%land, circa 10OO91#FC, (as ,feudal/ in the sa&e
(ay that 8apan (as durin% the *shi"a%a sho%unate 41DD#91O015+ If feudalis& is authentically apprehended, i.e.,
co$prehended, it is in ter&s of those for&s 4;rancia and 8apan5 (here it ori%inally appeared in history and (hich
serve as e'e&plar and &odel of latter appearances. ;eudalis& in this sense is characteri=ed y autar"ic production
ased on self9sufficient estates 4&anors in En%land5 risin% fro& social relations of personal dependency or, (hich at a
%reat re&ove says &uch the sa&e thin%, y fra%&ented political authority, each %reat lord is his o(n political
authority. !assala%e, the for& that the social relation of personal dependency ta"es (ithin a rulin% class of %reat
lando(ners, is effectively an effort to cur the conflict that necessarily e&er%es fro& this funda&ental situation.
En%land (as one of three case of feudal ,&i%ration/ (hich occurred et(een 10D0 and 1077. 4Sicily fro& 10D0 and
Syria e%innin% in 1077 (ere the other t(o.5 It (as i&posed y con)uest 4as (ere the other t(o cases5. But the
orientation to(ard con)uest (as ori%inally of 3orse, and not ;ran"ish feudal, character.
When Rollo, as leader of the occupyin% 3orse&en 4proaly :anes5 s(orn alle%iance to a ;ran"ish "in%, Charles III
4"no(n as the Bald5, in 711, he and his %roup of settlers (ere %iven the land, held in fief, that ca&e to e "no(n as
3or&andy. 0he&selves si&ultaneously fi%hters, free peasants and traders, this (arrior %roup assi&ilated the custo&s
of the ;ran"ish rulin% class. 4*ctually, the 3orse did the sa&e (herever they settled5. 0hose custo&s and the social
relations underlyin% the& (ere feudal. 0hey (ere also, accordin%ly, hierarchical.
Rollo (as a leadin% e)ual a&on% e)uals, a chief ut one (ho could not co&pel his co&patriots to follo( hi&. *&on%
the 3orse invaders, the institutional fra&e(or" for this "ind of force did not e'ist. *nd, (hile feudal social relations
(ould provide it, the e%alitarianis& a&on% the 3orse did not e'tend eyond the free peasant cadre, e.%., (arrior9
peasant households (ere "no(n to have slaves.
Rollo, in turn, a(arded lar%e tracts of land as fiefs on the ;ran"ish ,&odel/ to each of his (arriors, as they
i&&ediately raised the&selves over a re%ion thinly populated y ;ran"ish peasants, &a"in% the&selves lords over
these peasants on the asis of relations of personal dependency e'hiited in %rants of tene&ents fro& (hich rents in
"ind (ere due. 0he relation (as further characteri=ed y laor services 4y a division of peasantsI ti&e et(een their
o(n susistence and (or" on the lordIs de$esne5, and y the array of %ifts 4our ter&5 such as (ild fo(l, chic"ens,
&il", cheese, sheaves of (heat, (oven cloth and so on that (ere e'tracted fro& the& as the lordIs dependents,
By the ti&e Willia& 4also "no(n as the Bastard5 estalished hi&self and the descendants of Rollo in En%land after
the attle of $astin%s, and after crushin% opposition in @ondon, a (ell9developed "in%ly centralis& already e'isted
a&on% the 3or&ans. Basin% itself on vassala%e, "in%ly centralis& 4(e hesitate to call it state centrali=ation5,
e&phasis on centralis&, co&ined (ith con)uest as a feature of the 3orse herita%e, (as the (ay sociall%, structurall%
and institutionall% in (hich the do&inant social %roup, the 3or&an rulin% class, ca&e to %rips (ith the internal, and
necessary, conflicts that for&ed on the asis of a situation in (hich each lord (as at once ad&inistrative, political and
1uridical authority of a productively self9sufficient 4autar"ic5 estate or, as in En%land, &anor.
to disappear and lar%er units of a%ricultural production e&er%ed,
1
thus peasants (ere
dispossessed and proletariani=ed en $asseE 4ii5 capitalist private property in land created on
the asis of this first develop&ent (as &assively enlar%ed throu%h enclosures of K(aste/ and
co&&on land and eca&e %enerali=edE and 4iii5 (hat had already e&er%ed in En%land
previously 4startin% fro&, say, 12C0 to 1D005, na&ely, social relations of (a%ed laor, &ore
and &ore eca&e characteristic until they (ere ui)uitous. 0hus, at once pre&isin% and
developin% on the foundation of a &ar"et econo&y ased, prosaically spea"in%, on
&a'i&i=in% profitaility in e'chan%e, the continuous creation, rene(al and e'pansion of the
(a%ed relation had y the end of the period 41O#05 set in &otion the historical process of the
for&ation of capital (hich over the course of the ne't century and a )uarter (ould institute
capital on its o(n foundations.
In this period 41C2091O#05, En%land under(ent &assive a%ricultural and uran develop&ent in
con1unction (ith a perhaps &ore (ell9"no(n, ut nonetheless profound reli%ious
transfor&ation, the e&er%ence and consolidation of a popular Puritanis&. 0his develop&ent
put a final end to all sei%niorial and paternalistic social relationships in the countryside as
decisive 4deter&inant5 social relations, (itnessed the further differentiation of the peasantry
and reconfi%ured e'istin%, anta%onistic social classes 4the &ost productively si%nificant of
(hich (as the capitalist far&er5, and sa( the %ro(th of one of the lar%er &etropolis in the
(orld,
2
one ased upon oth historically lar%e units of artisan and craft production and on a
oo&in% &ercantile9protectionist e'port trade and one for&in% the ne'us of a ne(ly e&er%in%
inte%rated national &ar"et, itself a &o&ent in the continental econo&y to (hich it (as central.
* yeo&anry en%a%ed in %rain production and sheep %ra=in% and dairy far&in%, the crafts&en
and &asters en%a%ed in (oolen production, a &ultiplicity of KentrepreneursK
D
4i.e., petty
capitalists en%a%ed as s&all scale &anufacturers5, and traders 4the ,tradin% people/5 and
s&aller &erchants en%a%ed in the do$estic distriution and e'port of (ool ta"en to%ether
for&ed the central classes in the rise of capitalis&, "no(n in their o(n ti&e as a K&iddlin%
sort,K
#
(ith the &ass of doc" and uildin% laorers, itinerant crafts&en and co&&on laorers
see"in% (or" appearin% as ad1uncts, and peddlers and )uac" doctors, &instrels and players,
va%aonds and tra&ps, ro%ues and thieves
C
appearin% as societyIs refuse, all thro(n off y
capitalist develop&ent, i.e., y e'propriation of the s&all peasantry and appropriation of the
co&&ons y lords, %reat and s&all.
0hese, the ,&iddlin% sort/ ta"en to%ether (ith those lords, the %entle&anly %entry and %reat
lando(ners, the lar%e co&pany &erchants en%a%ed in e'chan%e of all sorts 4of (hich
In En%land, 1ust as in 8apan, social life (as riven, torn apart, destroyed and reconstructed, y internecine rulin% class
stru%%le. 0hus, fro& the &o&ent Willia& Rufus 4Willia& II5 ascended to the En%lish cro(n until the end of the War of
the Roses in 1#FC, "in%s (ere &ade and un&ade... held captive, usurped, &urdered... in En%land. 0he particular
dra&as of $enry I and his older rother Roert, oth sons of Willia& 4the Con)ueror so9called5 fro& 11009110OE the
civil (ar of 11DC911C# that involved Stephen of Blois as "in% a%ainst 6atilda 4dau%hter of $enry I5 and the aronsE
8ohnIs stru%%le a%ainst the sa&e %reat lords 4or their pro%eny5 fro& 120# to 121C 4endin% (ith the si%nin% of the
6a%na Carta in 121C5E $enry III in 12C#912CC and 12OC912OO, Richard II in 1DFG91DFF and 1D77E and the final civil
(ar of this epoch involvin% the @ancaster and -or" heirs of the Planta%enets, $enry !I in 1#O1 and 1#OC, Ed(ard I!
in 1#G0 and Richard III in 1#FC (here &erely hi%hpoints 4a nu&er literarily &e&oriali=ed, and at least one, Henr% ,L,
4art ,, i&&ortali=ed, y Sha"espeare5 in this centuries lon%, &urderous and ruinous internal rulin% class stru%%le.
Ruinousness should e stressed, for (hat (as ,feudal/ in these social relations (as destroyed y internecine stru%%le
that at all ti&es threatened to and &ore than once did spill over into civil (ar and (as often only diverted y territorial
a%%randi=e&ent 4(here successful5.
1
@a(rence Stone, The Causes of the 2nglish Revolution, OG9OF.
2
>ne of the lar%est, for it (as d(arfed else(here+ It is a safe et that Edo 40o"yo in the 0o"u%a(a era5 (as the
lar%est, for circa 1G00 it nu&ered aout a &illion souls. 8ohn $all, Gapan, 210.
D
8oan 0hirs", 2cono$ic 4olic% and 4ro9ects, 2, O9G.
#
See the Introduction to The 2nglish Civil "ars and the Birth of )reedo$+ HEditorIs note.J
C
Christoper $ill, The "orld Turned Hpside Don, #F9#7.
(oolens, still predo&inatin%, (as rapidly eco&in% only one a&on% others5, and the retainers
and royal entoura%e attached directly to the "in%, constituted the pri&ary classes in this, the
penulti&ate, one of t(o final, &ature ,phases/ in the epoch of the for&al do&ination of capital
over laor in production. 4*lready hinted at, the final or last full ,phase/ in the epoch of for&al
do&ination, circa 1O#091GO0, (as that in (hich the classes that (ill prevail at the outset of
epochal onset of the real do&ination of capital over laor in production, an industrial
proletariat and the capitalist, (hether startin% fro& the persona%e of the &erchant, crafts&an,
i% far&er or %reat lando(ner, appear and tend to occupy center sta%e in society (ith a vie(
to co&prehendin% the dyna&ics of its develop&ent.5
*t rou%hly the &o&ent Castilian po(er reached its =enith 41CC05, (ool, still the chief En%lish
e'port, and %rain (ere the t(o &ain co&&odities in En%lish trade.
1
Wool production (as still
decisive ecause it %ave rise to a characteristic develop&ent of the division of laor< the
non9rentier, landed classes o(nin% sheep, poor (or"ers, their (ives and children spinnin% it,
artisans (eavin% it, clothiers handlin% it, and &erchants e'portin% it.
2
In the countryside,
sheep %ra=in%, the &aterial pre&ise of (oolen &anufacturer and processin%, (as carried on
y the En%lish yeo&anry, (ho at the end of this (hole ,process/ transfor&ed itself into i%
capitalist far&ers
D
and (ho also en%a%ed in the other central econo&ic activity of the entire
period, na&ely, %rain production. -eo&an far&ers (ere, historically, pri&arily responsile for
actually perfor&in% enclosures of co&&on pasture lands, (ooded areas, (astes, fens and
hillsides as (ell as the destruction of forests and the drain of &arches.
#
*s the stru%%le
developed and %re( &ore vicious, they also, (e &i%ht &ention, pursued the specific
e'ploitative practices of forcin% s&all copyholders to the %round throu%h rac"9rents, the
resurrection of ancient feudal fines, sudivision of landholdin%s, le%al challen%es to copyhold
title.
C
*chieved in and throu%h these for&s of stru%%le, enclosures rou%ht ne( acrea%e under
cultivation and &ade an enor&ous increase in %rain production possile, a ,necessity/ at once
%ro(in% out of and supportin% population %ro(th. 0he enclosures pitted an e&er%ent capitalist
far&er a%ainst the s&all tenant peasantry. Every peasant %eneration fou%ht this
encroach&ent, enclosure and e'propriation, so that y the 1O#0s, there (as personal,
cooperative and historical continuity in resistance to not 1ust landlord destruction of co&&ons,
to atavistic efforts to i&pose archaic laor9services and rents, ut, since the reli%ious9cultural
stru%%le (as si&ply inseparale fro& the socio9productive fi%ht, also to tithes.
O
Capitalist
1
Stone, ,&id, G0. With the century9lon%, de&o%raphical e'plosion datin% fro& this ti&e, %rain (ould eco&e &ore and
&ore i&portant.
2
Stone, ,&id, OF9O7E :avid $ac"ett ;ischer, 7l&ion#s Seed, #D.
D
Brian 6annin%, The 2nglish 4eople 7nd The 2nglish Revolution, 11D.
#
Barrin%ton 6oore, 8r., Social 1rigins of Dictatorship and De$ocrac%, 7911E 6annin%, ,&id, 11C912#. ;or a nuanced
vie( of the enclosure the&selves, see 8oan 0hirs", Tudor 2nclosures.
C
Copyholders (ere, as far ac" as the thirteen century, En%lish peasants (hose security of tenure or hold on a plot of
land (as custo&ary and %uaranteed y &anorial courts, (here they &ay or &ay not have had docu&entation of their
tenure, and &ay or &ay not have had e'plicitly a tenure at (ill, at the pleasure of the &anorial lord. 0he enor&ous
effort in the historical sense to dispossess En%lish copyholders< to reduce the si=e of their hold, to ra&p up rents, to
force the& off the land alto%ether since a novel conception of the purpose of the land and the tenant occupyin% it
%ripped the yeo&an far&er, no lon%er, as 0a(ney 4,&id, #5 su%%ests, concerned (ith the provision of ,services/ ut
(ith ,pecuniary %ain,/ i.e., the accu&ulation of &oney as &oney9capital< especially in the chronolo%ical si'teenth
century 4thou%h this stru%%le stretched ac" (ell in the previous century5, is the precise historical analo% of 6ar'.s
discussion 48rundrisse, M;or&en</5 of the ideal %enesis 4i.e., the lo%ical re)uire&ents as they have een e'tracted
fro& actual social and historical develop&ent5 of the for&ation of capital. ;or a taste, a sense of this stru%%le, aleit
dry, re&oved and le%ally focused, see 0a(ney, ,&id, #G, C29C#, 2FGf.
0he rac"9rent (as a practice, perhaps invention, of the En%lish yeo&an9eco&in%9capitalist landlord. It refers to the
practice on i% far&s and estates of sustitutin% short leases (ith reduced entry fees ut hi%her annual rents for,
replacin%, lon% leases (ith hi%h entry fees and lo( annual rents. 6annin%, ,&id, 11G. 0hese hi%her annual rents often
reached the value of the property. ;or the entire )uestion of peasant e'ploitation, see 6annin%, ,&id, 11291DF.
O
$ill, ,&id, G7.
far&ers created %reat &isery in disposin% the s&aller peasants and recreatin% the& as
landless laorers and va%aonds (ho s(elled the uran areas 4especially @ondon5, i.e., as
actual and potential 4rural and uran5 (a%ed laor, for, to repeat, in dispossession 4separation
of the peasant fro& the soil and his instru&ents of production5 and free laor the conditions
for the for&ation of capital and the syste& of social relations (e call capitalis& too" shape.
In su&&a, a ruthless stru%%le (as inau%urated y lando(ners and ended successfully in the
violent e'propriation of poor freeholders and copyholders 9 &ost (ith only a falterin% %rip on a
tiny plot. 0his stru%%le proceeded y &eans of enclosures, recla&ation pro1ects, lyin%,
cheatin%, theft, fraudulent &eans of all sorts, le%al and other(ise, ut al(ays (ith Po(er
4here, the force of la(5 in the persona%es of the sheriffs and 1ustices of peace sanctionin% or,
and, carryin% out the action. 0he stru%%le produced a sharp differentiation of the peasantry,
creatin% a tiny stratu& of successful capitalist far&ers (hen &easured a%ainst the si&ilarly
created &ass of tenants and a%ricultural (a%e laorers. 0his %i%antic class stru%%le, (hich
retrospectively appears as a hundred and fifty year lon% historical KprocessK of violent
e'propriation, created, in En%land, those t(o central conditions for the appearance of capital
in sociall% generali/ed for& 4and not sporadically, not occasionally and not in locali=ed for&5.
We stress the &ore than century lon% differentiation of a class of capitalist far&ers out of a
peasant &ass ecause (e thin" an autono&ous a%ricultural transfor&ation has historically
de&onstrated priority over the uran transfor&ation, and is accordin%ly the reall%
revolutionar% road 4i.e., it has produced specifically capitalist social relations in their &ost
unadulterated for&5, in the develop&ent at the ori%ins of capitalis&. 0his can e seen in a
contrast et(een En%lish 6idlands fro& 1#G0 to 1O#F
1
(hen and (here capitalis&
irreversi&l% too" root to one side, and to the other ;lorence fro& 1270 to 1#FC
2
(hen and
(here the uran &erchant oli%archy, heirs to an ancestral victory over the sei%niorial lords of
the surroundin% countryside, introduced &oney9rents, en%rossed land and reduced peasants
once suordinate to those lords to sharecroppin% tenants, (hile these sa&e %reat &erchant,
&erchant9&anufacturers and &erchant an"ers 4efittin% their presti%ious standin% in
;lorentine society5 retired to their country estates to en%a%e in a %rand, %entle&anly display of
(ealth, and thus played a &a1or role in the loc"a%e of the further develop&ent of capitalis&
4eyond its for&al nature5 in 0uscany, once the heart of the continental econo&y early in the
epoch of for&al capitalist do&ination.
)or$al Do$ination, ,,,
7dvance and Decline in the 3ocus of 4roduction and its Shifting Center
The Capitalist 2cono$% in the 4enulti$ate N4hase> of the )or$al Do$ination of Capital over
3a&or in 4roduction in the 2pochal Sense, *A'(-*QD(, ,,
In the four centuries efore a Ste(art na&ed 8a&es !I ascended the En%lish throne in 1O0#
as a Stuart na&ed 8a&es I, a continental econo&y connected to 3orth *frica, the @evant, the
Caspian asin and the Liev96oscovy trade routes, Central *sia into China all y (ay of
e'chan%e lar%ely of cloth and spices, %loal capitalis& in the era of its for&al do&ination, (as
fully for&ed. In 1O0#, its centers (ere in @ondon and the eastern and southeastern countries
in En%land, Bru%es and *nt(erp in the @o( Countries and ?enoa, !enice, perhaps 6ilan and
a si%nificantly enfeeled ;lorence on the Italian Peninsula, and in cities such as 6arseilles
and a si&ilarly si%nificantly enfeeled Barcelona &ediatin% the passa%e of %oods fro&
interiors and re%ions to the &a1or centers. By 1OC0, for&al do&ination had eco&e fir&ly
1
0he era of CastileIs rise and its decline, the latter 41C7091O#F5 neatly, and causally, dovetailin% (ith the victory of the
Puritan and Stadtholder our%eoisies over Castile and the ChurchIs Counter9Refor&ation.
2
0he era of Co&&unal rise and decline, the latter 41D7091#FC5 neatly, and causally, dovetailin% (ith the political rise of
centrali=ed &onarchies.
entrenched and do&inated the advanced =ones of capitalist develop&ent, as its deter&inate
presence in these very &ost advanced centers 4eastern and southeast En%land, the :utch
Repulic5 at this &o&ent had no &eco$e irreversi&le+ It should e clearly stated that,
thou%h, until this &o&ent 4that is, (ithout the revolutionary overthro( of old order "in%ship
and the risin% a%ricultural productivity %enerated on the asis of staili=ed relations of for&al
capitalist do&ination5, (ar (rou%ht destruction 4the 0hirty -ears War on the continent5,
epide&ics, crop failure and fa&ine all threatened a &assive re%ression of achieved o1ective
sustance in the narro( &aterialist sense 4productive forces, uilt environ&ent, social (ealth
in the for& of co&&odities5.
1
By 1OC0, for&al do&ination reached throu%h and far eyond the >tto&an territories of the
eastern 6editerranean, thou%h in this reach it (as ased lar%ely on lu'ury tradeE it reached
(est to the British planter colonies of !ir%inia and South Carolina, Barados and 8a&aica in
the West Indies (here it (as fir&ly i&planted and even anticipated so&e of the features of the
real do&ination of capital over laor in production in the for& of plantation a%ricultural
productionE
2
and it reached south to coastal West *frica. Where the social relations of for&al
capitalist do&ination (ere thic"est, its econo&y (as ased on te'tiles and on the production
of a%ricultural staples such as corn, (heat and arley, ut also on livestoc" such as ho%s and
cattle, and increasin%ly on lu'ury ite&s such as toacco and su%ar (hile in %ood &easure in
its (estern reaches the slave trade (as eco&in% si%nificant. While e'pensive (oolens and
sil" (ere i&portant te'tiles, thus lu'ury production (as a co&ponent of this econo&y,
production had e%un to have the character of &ass production... thou%h oviously not on an
industrial asis... for consu&ption of ,non9essential/ co&&odities e'tended far eyond the
rulin% class and deeply penetrated into all layers of the ,&iddlin% sort./ 0he e'pandin% nature
of this production (as visile in this+ >nce the do&inant fi%ure in this econo&y, the &erchant
en%a%ed in trade had lon% %iven (ay to the forerunners of the industrialist, the capitalist
far&er, &aster crafts&en and the &erchant9&anufacturer all en%a%ed in production, not trade,
and e&ployin% (a%ed laor. *t the sa&e ti&e, the li&ited nature of this production (as visile
in this+ States played decisive roles in affordin% e&er%in% national econo&ies and the old
class cores, &erchant traders, &ercantile protections a%ainst co&petition fro& other %roups of
&erchants, nationals of other nation9states in the very process of for&ation.
Co&petition, as in all phases of capitalist develop&ent, (as fierce+ Within the nascent syste&
of social relations, specific for&s of productive activity provided co&petitive advanta%e, first,
(ith a vie( to the &anner of inte%ration of the city (ith the countryside and, second, in ter&s
the for& of that activity itself too". 0he latter %overned the for&er so that the puttin% out
syste& (hich (as co&in% to do&inate in En%land fully inte%rated @ondon.s rural hinterland
precisely ecause centers of production (ere dispersed to the d(ellin%s of far&ers, laorers
and the ,villa%e poor/ as &erchants provided &aterials and &ar"ets in return for the (a%ed
laor that produced (oolens as ra( &aterials.
;ro& the standpoint of the develop&ent of capitalis&, the puttin% out syste& (as historically
advanta%eous relative to %uild do&ination of production and the restrictions it i&posed that
survived on the Italian Peninsula throu%hout the era of the rise of Castile. *t the sa&e ti&e, in
the 6editerranean countryside laor services 4thou%h increasin%ly insi%nificant5 re&ained
intert(ined (ith (a%es, ut far &ore i&portantly landlords tended to e'ploit peasants throu%h
share leases 4sharecroppin%, $e//adria, the $Ita%er5 so if the purely financial relation had
triu&phed 4as in 0uscany and parts of @o&ardy5, the state still often prohiited or li&ited the
1
See the discussion of the si%nificance of the our%eois revolution and its relation to Castilian decline in the ;irst
Study, Part II, ,Castilian E&pire in Early 6odern Europe, Capitalis& and ;or&al :o&ination,/ aove.
2
See Part II, ,3e( 6erchants and the :istinctively, 6odern Capitalist 3ature of Production/ in the Preface to Civil "ar
and Revolution in 7$erica+
develop&ent of industries in its hinterlands to preserve the uran center 4as (ith !enice5.
:ecline, so9called de9develop&ent or 4conceptually spea"in%, (orse5 ,refeudali=ation,/ did
occur (ithin Italy ut only relative to the advanced for&s of production in the other %reat
centers, i.e., these (ere all develop&ents ithin capitalis$ as can e seen fro& @o&ardy
(here the puttin% out syste& had first e%un to ta"e shape at the end of the historical 4not the
chronolo%ical5 seventeenth century, (hich (ould on the asis of its advanced productive
co&ple' 4relative to the rest of the Peninsula5 ta"e the lead in the nineteenth century stru%%le
for unification. 4Before @o&ardy had ever e&er%ed, ho(ever, the entire locus of this ,(orld
syste&/ had shifted to the *tlantic centered on @ondon, the planter colonies of !ir%inia and
South Carolina and coastal West *frica, (ith its central products toacco, su%ar and slaves
and, as the previously &entioned, its incipiently appearin% for& of &ass production5.
1
It (ithin
this actual historical conte't that (e situate the $ature develop&ent of (hat (e have
theori=ed as for&al do&ination<
)or$al Do$ination, ,L
,deal 8enesis and Develop$ent of Capital
0he first shape, lo%ically spea"in%, in (hich the for&ation of capital develops occurred as the
uyer of laorers. capacity to laor confronted those laorers. 0he for&er provided the ,&eans
and &aterial of laor/ N land and i&ple&ents (ith (hich to (or" in the case of a%ricultural
laor, tools and &aterial to (or" on in the case of craft laorE the latter provided their capacity
to laor in e'chan%e for a (a%e in a &ultiplicity of for&s 4piece9rate, contract restricted to
(or"in% up &aterials provisioned, hourly5, and the uyer of this capacity to laor clai&ed the
products of laor as his o(n, ,ta"in% the& to &ar"et./ 0hese are the actual historical pre&ises
for for&al do&ination of laor y capitalE nothin% &ore+ ;or the production processes
continues 1ust as efore, 1ust as they (ere conducted efore serfs, peasants, crafts&en, etc.
lost their proprietorship in land, craft and tools, etc. 0he uyer of laor, &ore ade)uately of
capacity to laor, the e&ployer or capitalist &ade no atte&pt to reor%ani=e the (or" processes
4e.%., y housin% a lar%e nu&er of (or"ers under the sa&e roof, y assi%nin% partial tas"s to
each (or"er in the production of the outco&e, the product, a co&&odity that the e&ployer (ill
ta"e to &ar"et (ith the intent to sell5, nor did he &a"e any effort to deploy novel &eans of
production, tools, instru&ents, &achines, or even natural sustances to accelerate production.
0he production process re&ains 1ust as it (as efore, it is for&ally the sa&e even as
proprietorship has shifted. *s (e have had occasion to e&phasi=e,
2
this does not &ean there
is no technical innovation in productionE &erely than the a%ent (ho ,controls,/ i.e., for&ally
o(ns, the &ediu&, &eans and outco&es of production, is not the a%ent of innovation (hen
and (here it occurs. $istorically, then, the initial for&ation of capital occurred 4and continues
for a len%thy historical period5 under conditions of the for&al susu&ption of laor under
capital, for&al do&ination.
What is different no( is threefold. ;irst, the laorer confronts the &aster crafts&an, capitalist
far&er, landlord or &erchant as a co&&odity o(ner, possessor of a capacity to laor, (hile
the crafts&an, capitalist far&er, landlord or &erchant si&ilarly confronts the laorer as
co&&odity o(ner, possessor of instru&ents and &ediu& of production. 0his is not ovious,
ut o1ectively it is decisive, that is, it is a purel% econo$ic relation 4et(een e&ployer and
laorer5 that no( structures the production processes as a (hole+ 0he laor process as a
1
;or !enice, Ciriacono, ,6ass Consu&ption ?oods and @u'ury ?oods,/ esp. #29##.
0he pre&ise of this shift (as the victories of the En%lish in the *n%lo9:utch (ars, the third and last of (hich ended in
1OG#. ;or the ne(, incipient for& anticipatin% the factory syste& y a century and industrial &ass production y t(o,
see the reference provided in the previous footnote.
2
See ,;or&al :o&ination, II 4@inea&ents5, Conclusion,/ aove.
valori=ation process increasin%ly ad&its of no other deter&inants (hether reli%ious,
patriarchal or social, thou%h, as (e have seen in historical fact 4and in this para&ount respect,
6ar'Is theori=ation did not ade)uately ase itself on historical contents5
1
a political
deter&ination, princely po(er, can and has entered into the relation, e.%., can and has
transfor&ed it, redirected it, ter&inated it, can and has severed the laor process fro& the
valori=ation process, the susu&ption of the for&er y the laor, disruptin% the &ove&ent of
capital, su&su$ed it and its circuits to the require$ents of poer+++ 0he second difference is in
the scale on (hich production operates, oth as re%ard to the nu&ers of laorers en%a%ed
y a sin%le e&ployer and the )uantity and &assin% of &eans of production necessary to
sustain operations. In this respect, co&pare a lord that can dispose of the laor of five, ten
even t(enty peasants or, etter yet, even a lar%e crafts&anIs shop (ith one or t(o
apprentices and three, &aye four or five 1ourney&en, (ith the ;lorentine (oolen &erchant9
&anufacturer (ho puts do=ens of artisans to (or" in dyein%, dressin% and finishin% ra(
(oolen i&ported fro& En%land. 0hird, &erely tendential, and contradictorily 4relative to the
first point5, ut over historical ti&e of increasin% force and efficacy there is the suordination of
the laor process to the valori=ation process, of the de&and of the capitalist confrontin%
laorers that only that laor ti&e (hich is socially necessary e incorporated into the product,
that every product only ,represents,/ as it (ere, socially necessary laor ti&e or as 6ar'
parenthetically notes, less than it.
2
Co&prehendin% the actual historical conditions (ithin (hich the for&al susu&ption of laor
under capital occurred
D
has re)uired that (e reconstruct the for&ation of capital, &eanin% the
&ove&ent of capital at its ori%ins. Rnli"e the situation in ;lorence in the era of Co&&unal
decline and initial &onarchical centrali=ation, this e'a&ination has t(o pre&ises. ;irst, as (e
have sho(n, only that historical develop&ent (hich proceeds only in a syste&atic (ay did,
can and (ill %ive rise to capitalis& as a totality of social relations deter&inant for all of society.
0he occasional and sporadic appearance of capital on the &ar%in of social for&ations (hich
as a (hole e'hiited li&ited or restricted &ar"et characteristics has, can and (ill not. Second,
at its outset it is necessary to consider only develop&ent (hich (as Kspontaneous./ Capitalist
develop&ent (hich has ta"en shape as the central &o&ent of a statistNpropelled conscious
effort to K&oderni=eK 4e.%., 8apan fro& 1FOF for(ard5 or as efforts y statist politicians of one
society to co&pel the transfor&ation of the asic productive relations of another society durin%
1
;or this and the second point 4elo(5, 6ar', ,Resultate des un&ittelaren Produ"tionspro=esses.,/ #O79#GC.
6uch rides on this. 6ar' did vie( the laor process a&stractl%, as (e said, strictly as a technolo%ical process+ ,In der
Produ"tions(eise selst findet hier noch "ein Rnterschied statt. :er 7r&eitspro/ess, technologisch etrachtet, %eht
%rad vor sich (ie frAher, nur 1et=t als de& Lapital untergeordneter *reitspro=ess/ 4,Iid,/ #GD, e&phases in ori%inal5.
It is this ,vie(point/ that is untena&le+ It rests, theoretically and philosophically, on an ontolo%y of laor, one that
cannot e sustained. 4,:ie all%e&einen 6o&ente des *reitspro=esses... die :ire&tion der %e%enstQndlichen
Bedin%un%en der *reit in 6aterial und 6ittel %e%enAer der leendi%en 0Qti%"eit der *reiter selst us(., sind von
1ede& historischen und spe=ifisch %esellschaftlichen Chara"ter des Produ"tionspro=esses unahQn%i%e, und fAr alle
&c%lichen Ent(ic"1un%sfor&en desselen %leich (ahr leiende Besti&&un%en, in der 0at unverQnderliche
3aturedin%un%en der &enschlichen *reit,/ ,Iid,/ #G15. It is an e&inently &etaphysical position (hich contradicts
&assive anthropolo%ical evidence to the contrary, that underpins a sta%ist account of hu&an, historical develop&ent
in its entirely, and, that is invarialy invo"ed as the theoretical asis for advocacy of the refor& of capital, i.e., its
accelerated technolo%ical rationali=ation. In due ti&e, (e shall de&onstrate each of these points. HSee 4roductivis$
and the Metaph%sics of Negentrop% and 2xpanded Reproduction: 7 Modest Critique of 4resuppositions, Contents
and Method in 3%n Marcus. Dialectical 2cono$ics in its entirely, ut especially Part II, appearin% in 1rigins and
2ndings. EditorIs noteJ. ;or no(, (e refer the reader to Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ in the 2poch of ,$perialist "orld
"ar and 4roletarian Revolution, ;irst Study, Part I!, Section !II, and 0heoretical 3ote 2, Lalue 7ccu$ulation and
Nature Do$ination, ,6ar'is& and Science, >ntolo%y of @aor./
2
,Iid./
,...inde& alles auf%eoten (ird, da&it das Produ"t nur gesellschaftlich notendige 4oder rather noch (eni%er5
7r&eits/eit darstellt.../ 4e&phases in ori%inal5.
D
Co$$unit% and Capital, ]70977.
or in the after&ath of a (ar 4e.%., Rnited States &ilitary occupation of and (ar (ith !ietna&,
17OC917G25, already presupposes the entire historical &ove&ent s"etched out aove that
created capitalis& as contradictory, irreversily estalished yet unstale, %loal syste& of
social relations.
In the historical sense, its %enesis occurred on the asis of to(ns (herein &erchants of
various sorts cohered into an identifiale social %roup and eca&e the first social layer in
history to e'clusively pursue the accu&ulation of &oney (ealth 4not con)uest or plunder, not
honor or %lory5 for its o(n sa"e.
1
We (ould note that, %roundin% this, the life activity of the
our%eoisie 4as in countin% its hoard5 (as already %iven over to a purely and si&ply
)uantitative understandin% of &an, society and the cos$os. 0hus, (e (ere re)uired to, as (e
have, specify the historical, contin%ent conditions under (hich capitalis& first e&er%ed. 0his
returns us to the KspontaneousK e&er%ence of capital as it first occurred in era of feudal
decadence 41100912C05 in the social for&ations of north(estern Europe, includin% its
astardi=ed ecause centrali=ed for& in En%land<
Within the circle of this total develop&ent, t(o epochs of capital.s historical &ove&ent can
retrospectively e distin%uished (ith a vie( to for&s of do&ination in production.
Initially, in the historical sense, the capitalist &erely ta"es over an e'istin% laor process 4e.%.,
peasant or %uild production5 (ith the proviso, of course, that laor, (hile Kfree,K is no lon%er
independent 4in those cases (here it had een5. In this sense, politically &ediated personal
relations of do&ination and dependency 4as in the cases of slaves or serfs5 &ore or less
disappear, &ore than less (here capitalIs do&ination (as fir&ly estalished. In fact, thou%h a
ne( for& of supre&acy and suordination develops in the (or" process, at first it appears, on
the asis of a KfreelyK en%a%ed transaction et(een co&&odity Ko(nersK 4proprietors of
&eans and instru&ents of laor, on the one side, and the capacity to laor, on the other5, that
do&ination and dependency have een dissolved into a purely financial relation. Based on the
supervision and direction of the (or" process y the capitalist, this ne( for& of supre&acy
e'hiits its li&its. It is restricted y the &ere for&al control the capitalist e'ercises over laor.
E'ploitation, the e'traction of surplus value, is achieved asolutely, only y the %reater
continuity of production e'pressed in the len%thenin% of the (or"in% day, i.e., y increasin% the
)uantu& of co&&odities produced, (ithout any correspondin% co&pensation of laor.
Increased production is at all possile ecause, unli"e peasant production (hich is lar%ely for
self9sustenance or artisan production (hich depends upon the va%aries of a li&ited,
personally ac)uired clientile, production no( is for the &ar"et 4a &uch enlar%ed ase5 and is
driven y the capitalist desire to reduce laor costs to the socially necessary &ini&al ti&e, a
pro1ect (hich can only e achieved y e'pandin% the )uantity of co&&odities produced
throu%h len%thenin% each period or stint of (or". 0he revolutionary character of this, aleit
li&ited, capitalist ta"eover of the (or" process is visile in the fact that it, a%ain, &ore or less
,eli&inates all patriarchal, political or even reli%ious connections to the relation of e'ploitation/
4our translation5
2
such as personal fees, corvUes, ecclesiastical services, etc.
0he epoch that can e characteri=ed y this first for& of the do&ination of laor y capital, the
for&al susu&ption of laor under capital 4a%ain, 6ar'5, for&al do&ination, is, then,
deter&ined y activity underta"en fro& outside the production process proper, lar%ely y
&erchants (ho provide &aterials and productive instru&ents to, e.%., a situation that
1
In the actual course of history, the for&ation of to(ns and &erchants in this sense (as dialectically pre&ise and
presupposition of the appearance of &oney, coin, as a universal e)uivalent, thus, in part distin%uishin% develop&ent
on the Italian Peninsula, and the entire 6editerranean, Baltic and (estern European (orld, fro& an other(ise for&ally
si&ilar develop&ent in 8apan. HSee The 4ro&le$ of )eudalis$, :ivision II, Part !, ,0he Spread of 6ar"ets and the
Rise of 0o(ns E&er%ence of *rtisan and 6erchant Classes durin% the *shi"a%a Supre&acy./ EditorIs note.J
2
M...das E'ploitationsverhQltnis von allen patriarchalischen und politischen oder auch reli%icsen !er)uic"un%en
ausscheidet+N 6ar', MResultate des un&ittelaren Produ"tionspro=esses., E&phasis in ori%inal.
pervasivel% characteri/ed (or" under conditions of the do&estic syste& of production fro&
rou%hly $enry !III.s &eetin% (ith ;rench "in% ;rancis 41C205 do(n to the Industrial Revolution
so9called 41GO05 in En%land.
1
While technical innovation prior to and durin% this period
aound, no technolo%ical transfor&ation or reor%ani=ation of that process itself is underta"en
y the &erchant proprietor.
2
Rather, ecause, as (e have indicated, the producers are
K&erelyK su1u%ated to e'chan%e, the &ar"et and aove all to the capitalist, and not to the
production process itself, the co&&unity re&ains distinct fro& an econo&y in the process of
for&ation, the deter&inants of the for&er.s structure are not even tendentially reducile to
those of the latter. In the entire historical epoch in (hich capitalist activity initially developed,
capitalist production 4if ever, it is not per&issile to %o so far as to spea" here of a ,capitalist
&ode of production/5 (as of susidiary si%nificance for the entire social for&ationE at least at
the outset 4say 11705 do(n to rou%hly 1C20, it constituted a suordinate productive for&, a
lar%ely &ercantile &o&ent in a vast social for&ation consistin% %enerally in various for&s of
landlordis& throu%h (hich diverse noilities and aristocracies, the social asis of a &uch latter
reconstitution of principalities throu%h for&ation of territorial "in%do&s in (estern Europe,
e'tracted surpluses for& various for&ally free and unfree peasantries.
)or$al Do$ination and the Bourgeois Revolution
The Triu$ph of the Bourgeoisie and Sta&ili/ation of )or$al Capitalist Social Relations ithin
the Social )or$ations of 2urope
D
0he political settle&ents achieved as outco&es of the En%lish Civil Wars and the defeat and
e'pulsion of the Spanish occupation in the @o( Countries y the Rnited Provinces, i.e.,
victorious &ourgeois revolutions, for$ed the &asis of political nor$ali/ation of &ourgeois social
relations, that is, the triu$phant institutional sta&ili/ation of the for$al do$ination of capital
over la&or in production+ 0o de&onstrate this, (e shall riefly consider the contours of the
after&ath of the En%lish Civil Wars.
0he final defeat of the @evellers at Burford in 6ay 1O#7 did not set loose vast repression,
terror as (e have co&e to "no( it, on the various revolutionary tendencies that had %athered
under the @eveller anner. 0hese (ere the sectarians (ho had &oved consideraly to the left
of the %athered churches over the past three years 41O#O, 1O#G, 1O#F5, and (ho (ere not
(illin% to accept the settle&ent i&posed y the 3e( 6odel *r&y ?randees, aove all,
Cro&(ell, Ireton, S"ippon and ;airfa'. Instead, it opened the flood%ates, as aleit
increasin%ly chiliastic effort upon effort (as &ade 4&ost i&portantly y :i%%ers, See"ers and
Ranters, ;ifth 6onarchists and Sua"ers5 over several years to reach a settled situation in
social life in (hich reli%ious9political oppression, ine)uality and hierarchy, and e'ploitation
(ould no lon%er shape the e'perience and truncate the life possiilities of the &ass of
pleeians. In this re%ard, the follo(in% is note(orthy+
;irst, the *r&y (as the or%ani=ational e&odi&ent of the unity of a our%eoisie as it (as
for&in% in history, its soldiery &ade up of the ,&iddlin% sort/+ It re&ained the institutional and
or%ani=ational fra&e(or" throu%h (hich the %entry our%eoisie achieved historical chan%e.
>utside it, chan%e (as not achievale. 0he @eveller N *r&y a%itator ne'us incarnated the only
sustained, $ass-&ased challen%e to ?randee leadership. When it failed, ho(ever real they
&i%ht have een, orne y the pleeian sectarians the possiilities for %oin% eyond
our%eois property in production disappeared.
1
?eor%e Rn(in, ,ndustrial 1rgani/ation in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries.
2
0he contours and outstandin% features of daily life under conditions of for&al do&ination as it first developed in
En%land, thou%h not descried in the ter&s aove, are recounted (ith a vie( to uran, craft (or" in Rn(in.s (or"
cited i&&ediately aove and (ith a vie( to rural a%ricultural activity 4especially (ith the develop&ent of rural industr%5
in 0hirs", ,&id+
D
0he follo(in% ased directly on the Conclusion to The 2nglish Civil "ars and the Birth of )reedo$+ HEditorIs note.J
Second, the firs effort, that of the :i%%ers, (as the &ost secular, the &ost attuned to the
necessity of transfor&in% production. -et even those co&&itted to e%innin% life ane(, as it
(ere, in the countryside in ,pri&itively co&&unist,/ co&&unal far&in%, affir&in% specifically
hu&an naturalness, had essentially aandoned a confrontation (ith e'istin% Po(er and opted
to fore%o an orientation to chan%e fro& (ithin the do$inant for& of productive activity. 4>f
course, the dire prospects of (or" had &uch to do (ith thisE to oot, it (as entirely consistent
(ith the type of a(areness that had een elaorated fro& (ithin the Puritan oppositional
culture (hich the sectarians too" as their point of departure. ;or e'a&ple, recall that startin%
fro& the crisis of 1O27, a handful of aristocrats, %entry lords and, far &ore nu&erous, far&ers,
crafts&en and traders undertoo" the first efforts to found or further coloni=e ,%odly/
co&&unities, in 6assachusetts, Rhode Island, Ber&uda, Providence Island, Rlster.0
1
*sent
any ar&ed force or &oili=ation of its adherents, :i%%er colonies (ere easily dispersed.
0hereafter, all oppositional %roups %roups as they appeared over ti&e (ithdre( fro& a &ass9
ased pro1ect of societal chan%e, (hile eco&in% increasin%ly &illenarian.
0hird, althou%h a for&al, institutional settle&ent (as not achieved until 1OF7, the various
for&s throu%h (hich the our%eoisie ruled, (hether day to day %overnin% (as carried out y
the 3e( 6odel *r&y Council of State, y Cro&(ell as Protector, or y restored "in%ship
4Charles II and 8a&es II, Stuarts5, effectively achieved a staili=ation of our%eois property in
production 4for&al do&ination of capital over laor5 as the do&inant &anner, increasin%ly
deter&inant for the (hole of society, in (hich productive activity (as carried out. "hile it as
ple&eian de$ocratic groups ho consciousl% sought to esta&lish an institutional fra$eor! for
political sanctioned Nli&ert% of conscience,> uninhi&ited speech, free asse$&l% and a free
press, freedo$ fro$ i$press$ent and equalit% &efore the la 0all in pursuit of an autono$ous
livelihood &% a% of proprietorship in production, entailing onership and control of $eans of
production to the extent that the activit% of producing itself provided $eaning and a living,
ithout penur%, to the proprietor and his fa$il%5, ho, in other ords, pursued a historicall%
li$ited vision of freedo$, the great landoners, ealth% co$pan% $erchants and the large
crafts$en e$plo%ing for$all% free la&or, i+e+, e$erging &ourgeoisie, re$ained inti$atel%
lin!ed to surviving aristocratic and seigniorial social strata in a desperate effort to preserve a
&astard social order, one that as no longer rooted in the old order &ut not %et full% capitalist+
Thus, it as re$oval of Church and state restrictions on and regulation of propert%, its ra
$aterials and products and their exchange 0ages, prices5, the lifting of restraints on $ar!ets,
the eli$ination of guild regulations, the a&olition of a religiousl% sanctioned cultural
at$osphere dictating the o&ligations of the lord as $aster of la&or and li$iting exploitation of
that la&or, it as li&ert%, i+e+, institutionali/ed political sanctions of propert% rights in production,
not freedo$ that triu$phed: The &ourgeois revolution as, then, the historicall% significant
outco$e of the 2nglish Civil "ars: 0his is no(here &ore apparent in the le%islation of the
Ru&p Parlia&ent 41O#791OCD5, the Bareones Parlia&ent 41OCD5, and the ordinances decreed
y the Council of State under the Protectorate 41OCD91OC75 (ith its t(o Parlia&ents 41OC#9
1OCF5. Consider the %eneral tendencies of these enact&ents.
;irst, Cro(n paternalistic social policies (ere aandoned. 4Reports (ere prepared, often
never presented to the Co&&ons. 3o le%islation (as forthco&in%.5 * national policy of
support for the ,poor/ %ave (ay to local 4county5 efforts. 0he re%ulation of corn, arley and
coal prices, of the &eal trade, of &altsters and en%rossers in order to hold do(n the costs to
the ,poor/ of necessities (as slo(ly lifted.
2
1
,Plantin%/ efforts (ere underta"en y ne( &erchants and Puritan &inisters throu%h )uasi &ercantile ventures,
respectively, those of the 6assachusetts Bay Co&pany, the Rhode Island Co&pany, Ber&uda Co&pany, Providence
Island Co&pany and *dditional Sea *dventure Co&pany.
2
8.P. Cooper, ,Social and Econo&ic Policies under the Co&&on(ealth,/ 12G.
Second, the orientation to(ard the ,poor,/ i.e., the uran and especially the rural laorin%
classes 4those &en and (o&en under%oin% proletariani=ation, thou%h not yet propertyless
and entirely dependent upon the &ar"et5, shifted fro& an e&phasis on findin% (or" to
suppressin% va%rancy.
1
@etIs us state si&ply that, in oth cases, the tendency (as to(ard constitution of a reserve
pool of ,free/ laor su1ect to va%aries of the capitalist &ar"et.
0hird, the statesI finances, the civil ad&inistration of revenue e'traction (ere centrali=ed,
especially under the Protectorate.
2
;ourth, specifically capitalist a%riculture (as %iven an enor&ous oost durin% the 1OC0s 4i.e.,
under the later Ru&p Parlia&ent and the Protectorate5 y the accelerated pace of enclosures
of co&&on lands 4co&&on pastura%e (ooded areas, (astes and hillsides5 in the for& of
cuttin% do(n forests and drainin% fens and &arches.
D
0his undercut the several ases of
support for really s&all lando(ners and rural laorers, deprivin% the& of %ra=in% lands for a
fe( co(s or sheep, of stule for feedin% that livestoc", of (ood for fuel and certain plants as
food. 0hat is, it accelerated the si&ultaneous concentration and en%ross&ent of
lando(nership, and the proletariani=ation of a vast rural strata livin% strata livin% on the ed%e
therey deepenin% the reserve pool of laor for e'ploitation as (a%ed (or"ers...
Without %raspin% that it (as precisely this that (as at sta"e 4his o1ectivistic analysis and
pre1udices loc"in% %enuine insi%ht5, the central historical issue in the entire Civil War and the
revolution it effected, Roert Brenner nicely captures this overarchin% develop&ent (ith
reference to the situation of ne( &erchant9planters in West Indies.
$e notes the West Indies isles (ere a royally chartered Co&pany coloni=in% pro1ect. 0he
%overnor ruled in the ti&e honored &ercantile &anner+ $e sou%ht only to insure the
i&&ediate returns of Co&pany investorsE he sa( ,the islands &erely as a source to e
&il"ed,/ and thus ruled y decreeE he per&itted no political representation of our%eois
interests, ut instead ,violently suppressed/ all opposition. $e ai&ed only to e'tract ,for his
o(n and the proprietorIs enefit a &a'i&u& return y any &eans that could e &ade/IE and,
eyond e'ploitin% laor, this (as achieve y su1ectin% ,colonial &erchants and planters/ to
,an endless variety of poll ta'es, transfer fees, levies on production, and custo&s on trade/ all
the (ay up to the ,outri%ht e'propriation of their land./
#
Brenner su&&aries+
,Rnder such conditions neither persons nor proprietary (ere entirely safe, and the lon%9ter&
invest&ents re)uired for su%ar plantations (ere a duious proposition at est.
Rnderstandaly, the Baradian &erchant9planters (anted security fro& proprietary caprice
efore fully i&&ersin% the&selves in all phases of the ne( West Indian econo&y. 0hey
sou%ht, therefore, a ne( political order in (hich ulti&ate control of the land and its uses (ould
lie in the hands of the planters the&selves./
C
*s the ,first co&er,/ at the outset of capitalist &odernity a ne( En%lish rulin% class in the
process of eco&in% had to confront neither of the %reat hurdles that the lateco&ers 4a&on%
the %reatest, ?er&any and 8apan5 faced. 0hese included, first, rapid, &assive a%rarian
capitali=ation in order to revolutioni=e productivity in a%riculture 4to si&ultaneously create a
1
6ar%aret 8a&es, Social 4ro&le$s and 4olic% during the 4uritan Revolution, *QD(-*QQ(+ @ondon, 17D0+ 277.
2
van Roots, ,Cro&(ellIs >rdinances,/ 1CD91C#.
D
Civil "ar and Revolution in 7$erica, Preface, Part I, ,* 3ote on the Creation of Surplus En%lish Populations/ and the
sources cited thereinE also Barrin%ton 6oore, Social 1rigins of Dictatorship and De$ocrac%, 10, and $.3. Brailsford,
The 3evellers and the 2nglish Revolution, #C2.
#
Roert Brenner, Merchants and Revolution, 1OC91OO 41OO, citations5.
C
,&id, 1OO.
Brenner thin"s this issue had to e deferred to the end of the second Civil War at (hich ti&e it (as e'plicitly ta"en up
in Parlia&ent 4,&id5+ Met it as precisel% this issue ritten large that hung over and deter$ined in the socio-
historicall% effective sense the entire course of the Civil "ars, i+e+, secured their revolutionar% outco$e+
surplus and proletariani=e the peasantry in the face of fierce co$petition a&on% e'istin% %reat
capitalist po(ers 4a&on% the&, ?reat Britain itself5 (ho had already e%un to industriali=e that
a%ricultureE and, second, overco&in% the si&ilar disadvanta%es do&estic industrial capitals
confronted in the stru%%le for resources and &ar"ets in the arena of the (orld. In oth cases,
in (hat later (ill e called for&erly ,ac"(ard/ countries the historical response has een
&ediated y the state as the drivin% force of capitalist develop&ent.
1
-et at the outset of
capitalist &odernity, in En%land it (as &erely poer in the state itself 4ho(ever it (as
constituted5 that per&itted various our%eois strata to set aout the &undane tas"s of
accu&ulatin% capital and &a"in% &oney (ith the appropriate le%al sanctions and %uarantees.
2
0his (as (hat the final conclusive victory at Worchester of the 3e( 6odel *r&y achieved,
and its historical si%nificance+
D
0he Scottish threat once and for all s)uashed, the Civil Wars
no( successfully concluded, &onarchist and restorationist, counterrevolutionary opposition
definitely defeated, this victory secured our%eois accu&ulative practices on the asis of the
institutions it re)uired to insure its social reproduction as a class 4specifically, that political
for& and a civil code (hich le%ally assured heritale private property in production and
prohiited aritrary infrin%e&ents, appropriations and ta'ations, and e'propriationsE %enerally,
(hich aolished all restrictions on e'chan%e includin% &onopolistic &erchant and %uild
privile%e that elon%ed to the old order, dis&antled li&its such as usury, prosaically, on
profitaility, that is, on capital accu&ulation or &erely sanctioned all these (here they (ere
already present in the social practice of daily life, yet contested5.
0he he%e&oni=in% estalish&ent of a repulican political for& effectively constituted the
historical &o&ent at (hich the our%eoisie as a class triu&phed in historyE at (hich capitalist
social relations (ere finally, and fir&ly, staili=ed, if only in one 4or t(o5 country 4countries5
and the colonies it 4they5 controlled. It (as at the sa&e historical &o&ent, and the t(o havin%
(arred this (as no coincidence, that counterrevolutionary Catholic, Castilian Spain as the
%reatest of old order "in%ships in Europe effectively collapsed.
#
0here (ere t(o transcendently si%nificant develop&ents in the historical sense here.
;irst, it (as this triu&ph (hich in the social practice of daily life rendered the our%eoisieIs
tas", endless e'pansion of the productive forces, o1ective and historicalE and it (as at this
&o&ent that a si&ilarly o1ective, social and historical, aleit only nascent, lo%ic e%an to ta"e
shape 4the lo%ic of capital5 that, in turn, as it (as elaorated in production (ould eventually
eco&e e'plicit, (ould de&and suordination of the classes in production y (ay of the
our%eoisieIs co&&it&ent to transfor&in% production itself 4&achine inputs, on%oin%
reor%ani=ation of laor in production, thus production itself5, its recreation as production solely
for the sa"e of production 4real do&ination5.
1
;or this, see The 8er$an Road to Reneed ,$perialist "orld "ar, *ppendi' II, ,* Perspective on Capitalist
:evelop&ent./
2
Bour%eois political settle&ent of social life have historically had t(o pri&arily shapes, a repulic and a
constitutionally li&ited &onarchy. In either case, the stateIs central institutions include distinctive, separate a%encies
of 1udiciary, a representative le%islature 4re%ardless of ho( unrepresentative or ,virtual/ it &ay actually e5 and an
e'ecutive 4"in%, president, pri&e &inister, etc.5.
D
* Covenanter ar&y (as decisively defeated at Worchester in the West 6idlands 42C &iles southeast of Bir&in%ha&
on the Severn River5 in Septe&er 1OC1.
the Severn River5,
#
Rulin% fro& 1CCO to 1C7F, ;elipe 4Philip5 II involved Castile in a ei%hty year9lon% atte&pt to sudue the reellious
@o( Countries. :urin% this &e%alo&aniac pursuit, Spanish and forei%n &ercenaries in the pay of the Castilian cro(n
in the period until 1C70 fi%htin% (as carried on in s&all s"ir&ishes, %uerrilla and irre%ular fi%htin% y countless
independent co&&ands (hich plundered, urned and looted relentlessly in order to live off the countryside. 0his
activity, and a )uite different for& of fi%htin% (hich follo(ed and continued do(n on the 1OC0s repeatedly destroyed
the flourishin% to(ns of the 3orth(est. ;or this and its conse)uences, see the ;irst Study, Part II, ,Castilian E&pire in
Early 6odern Europe, Capitalis& and ;or&al :o&ination,/ aove.
Second, the triu&ph of the our%eoisie and, in particular, its staili=ation in and throu%h
ascendancy and control in the state preserved a duious, central achieve&ent, na&ely, hi%hly
stratified, divided societies 4a hu&anly re&ade nature in a%ricultural fields and the i&ple&ents
to (or" the&, uran landscapes and structures, li&ited circulation of coin and an"in%
institutions, fleets of ships and ar%es as &eans of transport and co&&unication, and a vastly
ine)uitale distriution of fi'ed and portale (ealth5. It did so ri%ht at the &o&ent that, as (e
have already noted and (e repeat,
1
Castile#s ongoing collapse signified the endpoint of the
a&ilit% of the rural aristocraticall%-&ased social for$ations fro$ the Mediterranean to the Baltic
to organi/e social life of 2urope as a hole+ 7&sent victorious &ecause political sta&ili/ed
capitalis$ in the 3o Countries and 2ngland s%$&oli/ed, a&ove all, &% the triu$ph of the
Stadtholder and 4uritan &ourgeoisies in ar and revolutionar% civil ar, and then &% the ne
science of nature at nodal sites in 2urope, the achieved levels of culture, socialit% and
production ould have fallen &ac! to or &elo those levels that characteri/ed the Ro$an
Mediterranean and its hinterlands 9ust prior to the e$ergence of Merovingian !ingship in (hich
state, e'tended fa&ily and "in %roups, co&&unities and to(ns could not lon%er sustain a civil
sociality.
2
)or$al Do$ination, L
Beteen N)eudal> )or$ation and Capitalist Modernit%
Scottish 3olands and Borderlands in the 2ras of Castilian 7scendanc%, Tudor 02ngland5 and
Steart 0Scotland5 :ingship
We have atte&pted to develop a deter&ination of the %loal onset of capitalis& in ter&s of the
for&al do&ination of capital over laor in production and the princely &ediation that, even as
in the &ost advanced re%ion it developed irreversily, rendered its reality fra%ile and insecure.
We no( shall underta"e to instantiate in a far &ore detailed &anner its actual historical
constitution.
$ere (e should stress the te&poral fra&e(or" for&ulated aove, its ade)uacy, its very
validity, i&&ediately enco&passes only the early dyna&ic centers of capitalist develop&ent
particularly in its for&al epoch 4call it in the &ystifyin% our%eois idio&, if you (ish,
,&ercantilis&/5+ In re%ions that ca&e to capitalis& ,late/ 4&ost notaly 8apan and ?er&any in
the era of &odern i&perialis& e%innin% circa 1FG05 as (ell as in re%ions that (ere
,ac"(ard/ as for&al do&ination first appeared, the chronolo%y su%%ested here, thou%h
neither the inner historical sche&ati=ation nor perspective, is not fully ade)uate. Within the
epoch of capitalIs for&al do&ination in different re%ions of the (orld there have een different
te&pos, different rhyth&s, different historicities in and throu%h for&al do&ination has
developed.
0his &uch said, (e (ould add that these differences have een increasin%ly synchroni=ed,
until they have disappeared deep in the era of real do&ination.
D
But &ore to the point,
precisely in the (hole epoch of for&al do&ination the relation of those ,ac"(ard/ re%ions to
re%ions (here capitalist develop&ent had %one the furthest (as co&ple'ly &ediated, the
for&er tied to the latter and dra(n in its (a"e. So that (ithin the %eneral productive fra&e(or"
of Europe, the British Isles and the eastern seaoard of 3orth *&erica and the Cariean, the
,ac"(ard/ re%ions of Scotland and Ireland (ere nonetheless inte%rated into the historically
chan%in% center N eastern and southeastern En%land 9 y a series of &ediations ased on
1
,Iid./
2
*n e'ploration of Ba1io 46e'ico5 silver &inin% in its relation to Spanish an"ruptcy thro(s further li%ht on the (hole
situation of Castilian collapse. See Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ 0Hrgeschichte5, the Perspective, Part III, ,0he Colonial
Era. ;or&al of a 3ovel Production Co&ple' HI9I!J+ Co&&ercial *%riculture, 6inin% and 0e'tile 6anufacture in the
3ear 3orth 4Ba1io5. *ppearance and Institution of ;or&al :o&ination in Colonial 6e'ico.I
D
See the Second Interlude, elo(.
e'chan%e, therey shapin% these re%ions and societies and their different historicities and
lin"in% the& to develop&ents unfoldin% at the center.
0hou%h not as such, under the specifically historical conditions otainin% in the ,advanced/
(estern European core, in En%land, price can e considered a ,&easure,/ aleit crude, of the
e'tent of the penetration of the social relations of for&al capitalist develop&ent.
1
In Scotland, a sin%le price for arley 4&ore precisely a pri&itive for& called ,ere,/ ui)uitous
ecause it (as used to re( ale5, corn, oats, hay, co(s, pi%s, sheep and chic"ens, etc., i.e.,
the &ost co&&on ,%oods/ %iven up as rents in "ind, cannot e constructed. 0he sa&e can e
said aout &ost co&&on, locally e'chan%ed %oods, tallo(, candles, read and ale, thou%h in
these cases e'chan%e (as lar%ely in coin. 46onetary e'chan%e for %oods purchased in local
&ar"ets developed in Scotland et(een 1100 and 1D00,
2
reco%ni=in% that fro& the standpoint
of penetration of &oney in this era ,Scotland/ (as confined to the coastal east and the
@o(lands.5 >ne prole& (as the (ei%hts and &easure in use in Scotland differed not only
fro& those in use in En%land, ut fro& re%ion to re%ion (ithin Scotland.
D
3o( as soon as price
appears in a %enerali=ed (ay, &onetary deter&inants have e%un to shape e'chan%e and the
social relations underlyin% it. In Scotland li"e any other ,ac"(ard/ re%ion, the presence of a
%enerali=ed price 4i.e., price of %oods that are unifor& over a re%ion, not 1ust a locality5 is
indicative of the pull of the centers of for&al capitalist develop&ent. It loo"s li"e price in this
for& did not e'ist in Scotland even as late as the era of Castilian ascendancy. But did it2
0he ans(er is ,yes/ and it has three co&ponents. ;irst, local indices of prices for as lon% as a
)uarter century can and have een constructed.
#
While re&ainin% local, they all indicate a
%eneral up(ard price trend. 0hese could e utili=ed as a rule of thu&, say, y &erchants
&ovin% fro& re%ion to re%ion, or in e'chan%es en%a%ed in trade at a sin%ular point
4Edinur%h, *erdeen, etc.5. 0his price decides for a %iven &erchant (hat he is (illin% to pay
the lord or peasant fro& (ho& he purchases 4corn, (ool, hides, s"ins, fish especially sal&on5.
But underlyin% this, second, (ere the ,fiars,/ the &onetary e)uivalent of %rain fi'ed accordin%
to a yearly corn price that appeared first a&on% traders in the east coastal to(ns. 0his, (e
thin", functioned as an e)uivalent of sorts (ithin Scottish orders, one that (as fairly
%enerali=ed. In an aleit astract, sche&atic reconstruction of the develop&ent of &oney, this
pheno&enon is stron%ly su%%estive of a precedin% situation 4one &i%ht call it a ,phase/ thou%h
(e (ould not5 1ust prior to the %enerali=ed appearance of &oney, (here &oney functions as a
universal e)uivalent in e'chan%e 4(hich, once (a%e laor appears and eco&es socially
%enerali=ed, is, in turn, a historical pre&ise of the constitution of capital5. 0hird, this
e)uivalence itself (as further &ediated, for the ,value/ of Scottish coin (as not itself
deter&ined internally, ut in relation to En%lish sterlin%+ In 1CG1, the Scottish pound (as
1
It is crude, first, ecause it is )uantitativeE &ore i&portantly and second, ecause it provides at est &odest 4at
(orse no5 insi%ht into the structure and or%ani=ation of society as a (hole. 0he latter is a function of value analysis as
it is articulated fro& the perspective of the criti)ue of political econo&y. 4So, it is crude, third, ecause no re%ion, not
even the &ost ,advanced,/ (here for&al capitalist social relations held s(ay constituted the type of society, one in
(hich capitalis& evolved on its o(n foundations, for (hich value analysis is fully relevant.5 0he one, price, cannot e
translated into the another, value, say, y (ay of so&e &athe&atical for&ula since, as a deter&ination of access to a
specific o1ect, price 4e.%., the &easure of a particular co&&odity5 is &erely a particular shape of reified social
relations in their %ivennessE (hile value is accessile only fro& the standpoint of the aolition of those social relations
(ith a vie( to the transfor&ation of society in its entirety. 0hus distinct, they are nonetheless inseparale. 0heir
relation, thou%h, can only e co&prehended fro& the perspective of that total transfor&ation. Price, (e &i%ht say, is
the out(ard e'pression of the value for& 4here in the historical process of its initial for&ation5.
So here, a%ain, price is only an ,indicator/ 4adoptin% the &ode of our%eois e'pression5, a co&ponent in the analysis
of the tendential direction of capitalis& and its constitution in the early, for&al sense in (hich it first appeared in
En%land and else(here in (estern Europe.
2
6ichael @ynch, Scotland: 7 Ne Histor%, CC, CO.
D
6. Perceval96a'(ell, The Scottish Migration to Hlster in the Reign of Ga$es ,, D#.
#
See the charts in ,&id, DC, DO.
rou%hly e)ual to 20Z of a pound sterlin%E yet y 1O01, it had dropped to F.CZ.
1
0he
deter&ination is ased on a reduction of ullion content, so it appears &erely relational 4not
sustantive5E thou%h, (e (ould add, that in En%land &oney did function as a universal
e)uivalent, that proletariani=ation had y 1O00 een e'tensive, that in oth a%ricultural
production and rural industry socially necessary laor ti&e forcily entered into the
deter&ination of price.
2
In the e'chan%e of Scottish %oods for En%lish sterlin%, these relations
also entered into that e'chan%e+ 0he &erchant purchasin% these %oods for resale in En%lish
4or other5 &ar"ets did or did not pay such and such a price since he "ne( (hat ,his/ &ar"ets
,(ould ear,/ i.e., ho( &uch socially necessary laor ti&e (as re)uired to produce this %ood 9
for the social relation it rested on (as e&odied in the sterlin% itself. 0he Scottish &erchant, in
turn, refused to offer the i% peasant or the laird 4see elo(5 any &ore than such and such a
price less his return 4&erchantIs profit5. With the &erchant in &ind the laird, in his turn,
insisted on so &uch in rents in "ind (ith a vie( to this situation (hich he confronted (ith ,his/
tenants.. Relations in the En%lish countryside, say in East *n%lia, therey shaped those in the
Scottish @o(lands and Borderlands.
0his is all astract, co&ple' and rather re&ote, so (e shall offer a rief de&onstration of the
sa&e in social, historical and class ter&s.
Start fro& the &o&ent that a Scottish ,people/ appeared. ,People,/ of course, is &eant and
intended here in the non9national, preour%eois and pre9&odern sense, (here a social
su1ectivity thou%h ridden (ith class, estate or caste differences is nonetheless ased on a
co&&on lan%ua%e and territory, interconnectedness in productive activity, and a shared
consciousness of cultural unity. So that in the area (e reco%ni=e today as Scotland, this
,people/ understood their unity as su1ects of ,their/ "in% 4here Roert de Bruce, circa 1D105.
;ro& this &o&ent Scottish history diver%ed tendentially fro& the direction of En%lish
develop&ent, and it did so even as the En%lish cro(n atte&pted to suordinate Scotland to
En%lish he%e&ony for the ne't one hundred and forty years, even as that cro(n (as unified in
the person of 8a&es Ste(art 4Stuart5 in 1O0#, even as Covenanters and En%lish
Parlia&entary Puritans fou%ht 1ointly a%ainst Charles I in the first En%lish Civil War. *nd, it did
not re1oin that develop&ent until after 1G#O, after the Scottish $i%hlands 4fro& (hich the
%reatest ele&ents of resistance to En%lish control spran%5 (ere ,cleared,/ 8acoite efforts to
put a Ste(art "in% ac" on the throne (ere once and for all finally throttled, and thereafter
Scotland e%an to under%o its o(n ,Industrial Revolution/ (ith a &odern proletariat for&in%,
all the (hile Scotland, su1ect to essentially colonial do&ination, (as dra%%ed directly and
i&&ediately into the En%lish orit.
0he diver%ence, then, (as precisely in the shape of social for&ations, in particular in the
relations of tenure and productive relations on the land underlyin% the&. In the era (e are
e'a&inin%, En%land eca&e increasin%ly capitalist, (a%e laor eca&e the funda&ental
social relation on the land and in the cities and to(ns (here nascent industries developedE
Scotland, thou%h, re&ained over(hel&in% rural and a%ricultural+ Rnder the i&pact of the
devastation created in a century and a )uarter of (ars of independence a%ainst the En%lish
cro(n, Scotland under(ent a devolution, rural develop&ent eca&e increasin%ly ,feudali=ed,/
and e'ploitation too" the for& of the e'traction of rents in "ind. 4While no %enuine cities
e'isted, in the to(ns crafts had appeared on a li&ited asis, coin still circulated and (a%es
(ere %uild controlled.5
So (hile politically, the relation of Scotland to En%land is ovious 4at least (hen (e fa&iliari=e
ourselves (ith the local history of the era5, this (as not the case in ter&s of do&inant social
relations and the respective societal for&ations (e are discussin%. Where, then, did the pull of
1
,&id, D#, and n. #C and the sources cited therein.
2
0here (as a %ood deal of rural industry in the sense of handicraft 4the puttin% out syste&5.
En%land, or the center of capital in its early epochal for& itself, on Scotland lie2 We are
loo"in%, perhaps narro(ly, for those co&ple'ly &ediated lin"a%es strictly in ter&s of features
of for&al do&ination.
Recall the %eneral deter&ination offered aove+ ;or&al do&ination is activity underta"en fro&
outside the production process proper usually y a &erchant. $e siphons off surpluses in
e'ploitin% laor and does so (ithout either reor%ani=in% those productive activities or
%eneratin% ne( technical inputs to the& 4(hich does not &ean there is technical sta%nation5.
0he &erchant hi$self underta"es no technolo%ical transfor&ation or reor%ani=ation of that
process (hich in the event dra&atically increase the productivity of laor 4at this historical
&o&ent &easured in ter&s of a%ricultural output5< Rather, the producers are ,si&plyK
suordinated to e'chan%e, the &ar"et and the &erchant, ut not to the production process
itself.
It is only as the conditions of laorers, stripped of their control or proprietorship over oth
instru&ents of production and property in production eca&e socially %enerali=ed, and, %iven
this, (hen these laorers &eet another (ho possesses oth and (ith (ho& the laorers
e'chan%e their capacity to laor in return for the KopportunityK to earn the &onetary &eans to
provide for their vital needs 4(hile that other, no( a capitalist, retains possession of the
product as his property5, that the valori=ation process, and hence the creation of capital, can
e instituted.
0hus, even here the diver%ence reappeared+ In the period under consideration, this had not
fully occurred in Scotland+ 0here (ere only li&ited &onetary e'chan%es, and the relation of
laorer to an o(ner (as that of peasant tenant to landlord, (here the e'chan%es (ere in "ind.
4In the @o(lands and Borderlands, these (ere %enerally corn, oats, arley, and perhaps
chic"ens and &aye a calf irthed in year the rent (as paid.5
In (hat sense, then, is it possile to spea" (ith 6ar' in his %eneral for&ulation of the relation
in )uestion2 >n the face of it, a situation in (hich ,...the very relation et(een the o(ner of
the conditions of laor and the (or"er is dissolved into a pure relation of uyin% and sellin%, or
a &onetary relation/ does not otain. 0his is one of the essential features of the relation. -et,
(ithout a &onetary relation, the other essential feature, the eli&ination of ,all patriarchal,
political or even reli%ious connections to the relation of e'ploitation/ such as personal fees,
corvUes, ecclesiastical services, y and lar%e nonetheless did otain. 0his is an e'pression of
the contradictory situation in Scotland in the era of Castilian ascendancy, of a situation in
(hich the old re%i&e in production out(ardly still &ay have appeared to prevail ut in (hich
the characteristic feature of for&al do&ination had eco&e deter&inate, thou%h not
i&&ediately and directly. While not pervasive, those &onetary relations did, in fact, e'ist as
(e have the& recounted aove. $ere (e descriptively e'plain, aleit very riefly (hy this (as
possile, i.e., (e (ish to e'hiit those co&ple' &ediations.
We can identify four specific trends after 1#F0 that &ore than less put an end to the partial
feudali=ation that the @o(lands and Borderlands had under%one since 12FO.
1
;irst, fro& rou%hly 1#70 to 1C1C a relation "no(n as ,feufer&e/ or feu9holdin% appeared. It
consisted in the purchase of tenure, involvin% a cash do(npay&ent (ith annual fi'ed rents in
"ind on leases that (ere lon%er, t(enty years, occasionally for life and, rarely in so&e parts of
the country in perpetuity.
2
0his develop&ent affected s&all ut i&portant strata, involvin%
1
See Scotland and the Highlands in the 2ra of Steart :ingship and the "ars of Three :ingdo$s, in particular, the
section entitled ,Scottish ;eudalis&2/ HEditorIs note.J
2
I.;. ?rant, The Social and 2cono$ic Develop$ent of Scotland &efore *Q(B, 2#G92C2+
?rant states 4,&id, 2OO5 the feu9holdin% first appeared a&on% the reli%ious orders in 1DO2. $e su%%ests the cash
pay&ent &ade for alienated Church lands (as de&anded y Ro&e in the pri&ary conte't of &eetin% the e'penses of
liti%ation involvin% other reli%ious houses 4locales not &entioned, ut presu&aly so&e had to have een En%lish
since the stru%%le for Scottish Church autono&y in relation to Canterury had not ended.5 0he docu&ents presented
relations et(een the i% peasant and %entry %entle&an 4that is, a laird, lando(nin% lord5, i%
peasant and %reat nole or laird and a %reat nole. 0here (as in Scotland, aleit li&ited,
circulation of coin. >viously it (as those (ith &oney in the first place, (ealthy ur%hers,
%reat lords, and really i% peasant tenants (ho (ere ale to advance cash for purchase.
Second, noticeale to conte&porary oservers y 1C20, there (as a class differentiation
(ithin the peasantry, a relation (ithin (hich e'ploitation (as lar%ely stripped of its feudal
,essence/ 4i.e., personal dependence5+ * stratu& of sustantial peasants for&ed, those, (ho
(hile rentin% land fro& a laird, derived their inco&es fro& poor peasants, their tenants, (ho
actually cultivated the land (hile these sustantial &en en%a%ed in other pursuits.
1
40he poor
peasants suleased. 0hey (ere the crofters, cottars and %rass&en, holdin% a hut and a
ve%etale %arden, and differentiated y an increasin%ly di&inishin% nu&er of do&estic
ani&als they held, fro& a handful do(n to a sin%le co(. ,Beneath/ the&, the crofters, cottars
and %rass&en had servants and laorers, &en and (o&en, (ho received re&uneration in
&oney (a%es 4rarely5 and in "ind 4oats5 and (ho (ere landless. * servant or laorer &ay
have resided (ith the cottar, for e'a&ple, or &ore li"ely he &ay have een a son (ithin his
fa&ily. 0hey perfor&ed the &ost &enial tas"s, say, s(eepin% a arn.5 *ll those strata (ho
assu&ed a feu9holdin% had access to coin. 0he poor peasantry did not 4at least not in the for&
of savin%s that could e used as &oney capital to, e.%., purchase a co( or a etter plou%h5.
;or this is (hat is &ore i&portant+ Class differentiation and e'ploitation, (hile in "ind, had
nothin% ,feudal/ aout it.
0hird, throu%hout the si'teenth century a %eneral inflationary tendency (as at (or". It (as
evidenced y the rise in the price of arley, in the cities y read, ut it (as visile, aove all,
in the &onetary depreciation of the value of alienated land+ >ver ti&e this aetted, perhaps it
lar%ely %enerated, land concentration ecause, (ith fi'ed rents (hose &onetary value (as
over the sa&e ti&e effectively depreciated, it encoura%ed those (ho could &a"e cash
purchases to uy &ore land in the elief that the inflation (as per&anent. I.e., it &ade for
opportune a%%randi=e&ent y the old noility, the laird, (ell to do uran &erchants and
la(yers as (ell.
2
;ourth, y 1O20, ,fiars,/ the &onetary e)uivalent of %rain fi'ed accordin% to yearly corn price,
e%an to appear especially in the eastern coastal @o(lands, in ;ife and East @othian.
D
We
have already discussed this. What all these develop&ents pointed to, a&on% other thin%s,
(as a li&ited yet active &ar"et in alienale land and the %ro(in% circulation of coin in
Scotland.
#
?enerally, (e &i%ht also note that it (as et(een 1O00 and 1OC0, the ,feudal/
pheno&enon of a laird or nole providin% &ilitary protection disappeared ceasin% to e'ist
su%%est that at this &o&ent this (as not a co&&on occurrence.
$e also indicates that it appeared in the sale of Cro(n lands in the first half of the fifteenth century durin% the rei%ns
of 8a&es I and 8a&es II, ut sporadicallyE and then only to virtually disappear in the the rei%n of 8a&es III 41#O09
1#FF5, co&in% into co&&on use durin% the rei%n of 8a&es I! 41#FF91C1D5. ,&id, 2OG92OF.
?rant calls feu9holdin% a develop&ent of feudal tenure, ut his presentation of oth indicate it constituted a clean
rea" (ith feudal social relations, a chan%e that is clearer in 6ichael @ynch, Scotland: 7 Ne Histor%, 1F291FD.
1
0.C. S&out, 7 Histor% of the Scottish 4eople, *AQ(-*CB(, #1.
0he conte&porary oserver &ost often cited (as 8ohn 6a1or. $is (or", 7 Histor% of 8reater Britain as ell 2ngland
as Scotland, (as pulished in 1C21.
2
Perceval96a'(ell, ,&id, D#. specifies and restricts the inflation, indicatin% it ran fro& 1C#0 to 1O00.
6erchants had %ro(n up lar%ely in the east coast to(ns, ori%inally founded under royal charter t(o hundred years
earlier, ut ased on trade, on &erchant activity that included e'chan%e (ith the i&&ediate hinterlands and activity
aroad 4such as e'chan%in% s"ins fro& the Scottish interior for (ines and clarets (ith ;le&in% or ;rench &erchants5.
@a(yers e%an to appear fro& the ti&e of the "in%ship of 8a&es !, 1C1D91C#2, on(ard as ad1uncts to the royal
courts. 0heir e'istence (as %iven a hu%e oost in defendin% the lairds in the aronIs courts a%ainst co&plaints and
petitions of peasants under%oin% forfeiture.
D
,&id, 1D7.
#
,&id, 1#7, 1#0.
every(here e'cept in the $i%hlands 4(here it re&ained in place until the after&ath of the
En%lish suppression of the last 8acoite risin% in *pril 1G#O5.
0here (as one further, rarely &entioned develop&ent that accelerated the circulation of coin
in Scotland+ It (as another "ind of circulation, that of &en as (arriors and fi%hters. *&on% the
Scottish $i%hlanders productive relations (ere not ased on private property in land ut on
the triutary e'action of rents fro& an e'tended fa&ilial 4,clan/5 co&&unity y a %reat lord, a
clan chief. 0he underlyin% co&&unities further %enerated enou%h surplus to support a stratu&
of (arriors 4defendin% the chief and his appropriation, en%a%ed in fi%htin% a%ainst other clans
to a%%randi=e clan lands5 (ho did not (or".
1
4* si&ilar situation otained in Ireland,
particularly in Rlster5. Both Irish and Scot $i%hlands (arriors fou%ht for Catholic Spain in the
3etherlands. 3oles as officers throu%hout Scotland also fou%ht ut opposite the ?aelic
fi%hters, i.e., the t(o social layers fou%ht for and a%ainst the Protestant ar&ies of the %reat
ur%hers of the @o( Countries in the rou%hly ei%hty years of the Castilian effort to sudue
open revolt. >thers, so&e of the& later %enerations of fi%hters and (arriors, (ould provide
their services to the $apsur%s, to Wallenstein and 0illy and the counterrevolutionary Catholic
side, and to the ?er&an princes and 4after 1OD05 to the S(edes and ?ustavus 4*dolphus5 on
the Protestant side. *ll these &en (ere co&pensated, as $ercenaries+ The% ere paid in
coin+ 7ll these $en 4those that survived the fi%htin%5 returned to their ho$elands ith coin in
hand+ It is should not need to e said, ut (e shall+ 0hey did not thro( this &onetary
co&pensation a(ay, discardin% itE instead, it entered Scotland 4En%land and Ireland5 and
circulated there. While no one can say ho( &uch it (as, it (as in all li"elihood e'tensive. 0his
circulation of &en as &ercenaries, then, enhanced the circulation of silver and %old coin in
Scotland.
Return to those four co&ponents.
Su&&arily, as 8a&es !I of Scotland assu&ed the En%lish royal cro(n 4as 8a&es I5 very early
in 1O0#, the country he left ehind (as co&pletin% a vast rural chan%e that had een on%oin%
for nearly a hundred years+ 3ever nu&erous, those peasants (ith security of tenure (ere
transfor&ed into tenants at9(illE a pronounced class differentiation (ithin the peasantry had
een occurrin%, still on%oin%E and, &oney e%an to si%nificantly penetrate the rural econo&y
4(hich outside a fe( uran enclaves constituted far and a(ay &ost of Scottish productive
activity5 especially (ith a vie( to the alienation of land. *ll of these develop&ents (ere
related+
Startin% fro& the i% peasant 4effectively, a far&er5 (ho did no actual cultivation, all the
s&aller &en (ere su1ect to ferocious e'ploitation in the for& of rents. While little appears to
have chan%ed (ith respect to this e'ploitation over the %reatest stretch of ti&e, as ?rant
recounts, fro& the rei%n of the early Ste(arts 41#0O91C1D5 in a period that e'hiited so&e
feudal characteristics do(n to the ti&e of the ascendancy of 8a&es !I 41CF15, increasin%
nu&ers of poor peasants su1ect to land loss appeared in the aronsI courts+ Witness to this
and fearin% a deep rent in the social faric, the &onarch re)uests la(s (hich (ere enacted to
a&eliorate peasant conditions.
2
0hese (ere &eanin%less pleas to ease the conse)uences of
forfeitures, of a failure to &eet see&in%ly ever increasin% rents. 0hey did nothin% to &iti%ate
those conse)uences. *cross the country fro& ?allo(ay to *n%us, leases for the %reater
tenants (ere often five years, so&eti&es seven, occasionally ten and rarely t(enty or for a
lifeE ut, for the s&all tenants, the ,co&&on fol",/ leases ran a year, or three.
D
:ra(n y the
1
See ,0he 0riutary $i%hland and the Issue of Stratification/ in Scotland and the Highland in the 2ra of Steart
:ingship and the "ars of Three :ingdo$s+ HEditorIs note.J
2
?rant, ,&id, 2CD92CF. Chan%e (as clearly occurrin% as his citation of acts and passa%es ai&ed at protectin% s&all
&en that date fro& 1DGO, 1#O7, 1#71, 1CCC and 1COF all testify to.
D
,&id, 2C#, 2CC, 2O292OD.
lure of co&&odified %oods 4hi%hly finished (oolen clothin%, oots, ho&e decor such as
draperies, upholstered chairs, silver drin"in% %olets, earthen(are, etc.5 availale in neary
En%lish &ar"ets such as 3e(castle or the sa&e En%lish (ares, as (ell as those fro& ;le&ish
availale fro& a Scot &erchant in far s&aller do&estic to(ns 4?las%o(, Edinur%h, @eith5, in
an era in (hich land values steadily increased, the laird and his i&&ediate tenant, that i%
far&er, pursued &a'i&i=ation of their rents (ith a ven%eance y ad1ustin% it to &onetary
depreciation 4or its very rou%h in9"ind e)uivalent5 &ore fre)uently. 0his they did, (ith the
resultin% increasin% fre)uency of forfeitures. 6oreover, the lar%e entry fee 4,%rassu&/5
acco&panyin% a feu9holdin% encoura%ed the lairds to &a"e their rents &ore onerous to rid
the&selves of s&all at9(ill tenants in order to cash in on the feus. ;or us, the &ost
si%nificance outco&e (as %ro(in% dispossession of the peasant 4su5tenantcy.
What (as characteristic of Scotland in the rei%n of 8a&es !I 41CF191O0D5 (ell into his rei%n
holdin% a unified cro(n 4Scotland and En%land, 1O0#91O2C5, a&on% other thin%s, (as a si&ply
enor&ous surplus population of dispossessed and e'propriated &en 4(o&en and children5
(ithout (or", va%aonds and e%%ars, (ho could not e acco&&odated on the land on the
asis of the social relations that no( prevailed in production+
1
*t the &o&ent of 8a&esI ascendancy, there (ere 1ust less than a &illion Scots+ 8ust C,000
(ere lando(ners, &aye a 1C0,000 (ere s&all noles, lairds and i% peasants includin% their
fa&ilies, of course.
2
In other (ords, relatively spea"in% there (ere a vast &ass of peasant
tenants 4includin% servants and laorers (ho for&ed a s&all part of this &assive population.5
If de&o%raphically 10Z91CZ lived in the to(ns, then the rest for&ed the population of the
countryside 4say FCZ5, half of all of (hich lived aove the 0ay River.
D
Rou%hly, then, (e can
put the @o(lands population at #2C,000 circa 1O0#, (ith aout GG,C00 %reat noles, lairds and
i% peasants a&on% the& 4i.e., half of their population also elo( the 0ay5, the rest that vast
&ass of peasant tenants. Citin% the 2din&urgh Revie 41F775, 0eddy *llen states
#
that at the
&o&ent of 8a&esI ascension to the En%lish cro(n, &asterless &en and (o&en ithout (or"
nu&ered nearly a 100,000 of that &illions soulsE etter than one in four 427Z5 of that vast
&ass (ere, then, concentrated in the @o(lands+ 6ediated y the entry of la(yers and
&erchants into the land ,&ar"et,/ the disappearance of the ,"indly/ tenant 4one (ith security5
and its replace&ent y tenantcy at9(ill, the e&er%ence of the i% peasant (ho hi&self did not
(or" the land and distillation out fro& an once relatively ho&o%eneous peasantry of an
enor&ous, layered stratu& of poor peasants and landless laorers, the conse)uences of the
penetration of &oney (ere vividly &anifested in a &assive surplus population in the @o(lands
and Borderlands (here for&al capitalist develop&ent in a%riculture (as first appearin%.
0he fore%oin% as a (hole, (e su&it, constitutes a de&onstration of the series of co&ple'
&ediations that lin"ed Scotland in a horrendous (ay to the centers of for&al capitalist
develop&ent, and thus further e'hiits the productive unity constituted throu%h for&al
do&ination a&on% different re%ions (ith other(ise different historicities.
1
@and tenure in the hi%hly stratified $i%hlands had a different asis+ 0he co&&unal nature of (or", the asence of
private property in land and, aleit attenuated, the clan chiefs. co&&it&ent to "in and clan culture prevailed over this
"ind of outco&e. See Scotland and the Highland in the 2ra of Steart :ingship and the "ars of Three :ingdo$s, the
section entitled ,0he 0riutary $i%hland and the Issue of Stratification./
2
S&out, ,&id, 117E Perceval96a'(ell, ,&id, 2O.
D
S&out, ,&id, 117.
0he 0ay is a convenient %eo%raphical &ar"er that separates the @o(lands around *erdeen, Perth, Stirlin%,
Edinur%h and ?las%o( fro& all to the north, especially the $i%hlands.
#
0heodore *llen, The ,nvention of the "hite Race, ,: 120, and n. #1.
?rant 4,&id, 2CO, 2CF92C7, 2O292OD.5 provides evidence of a very hi%h rate of eviction 4evidenced y the turnover of
surna&e affi'ed to leases as they (ere rene(ed over ti&e, and the addition of ne( na&es to 1oint tenancies5, as
peasants, tenants lac"in% all security of tenures, (ere forced off the land they (or"ed.
First Interlude
Biblio#raphical Sources
*ulafia, :avid. ,Corneto90ar)uinia and the Italian 6erchant Repulics+ 0he Earliest
Evidence./ 4apers of the British School at Ro$e [3,,+ @ondon, 17G#. Reprinted in
the authorIs ,tal%, Sicil% and the Mediterranean, **((-*D((+ @ondon, 17FG. 40he
ori%inal pa%ination of the article appears in the reprint.5
*llen, 0heodore. The ,nvention of the "hite Race, Lol+ , 0Racial 1ppression and Social
Control5. @ondon, 177#
*nderson, Perry. 3inea$ents of the 7&solutist State+ @ondon, 17G#
Bar"ey, Laren. Bandits and Bureaucrats: The 1tto$an Route to State Centrali/ation+ Ithaca
43-5, 177#
WWWWWWWWWWW and Rudy Bat=ell, ,Co&parisons *cross E&pires+ 0he Critical Social Structures
of the >tto&ans, Russians and $asur%s durin% the Seventeenth Century/ in Peter
;ii%er Ban% and C.*. Bayly 4eds.5, Tri&utar% 2$pires in 8lo&al Histor%+ @ondon,
2011
Barnes, Will. The 4ro&le$ of )eudalis$: Historical 1rigins, )or$s and Significance,
Boo" I of Revolutionar% 1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch of Capital#s )or$al
Do$ination of 3a&or in 4roduction+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5.
WWWWWWWWW. The Histor% of )lorence and the )lorentine Repu&lic fro$ the fro$ the 2ra of
)eudal Decadence 0**((-*'A(5 to in the 2ra of the Rise of 1ligarchical 4oer,
:ingl% 8overn$ent and ,ndividual T%rann% 0*BC(-*DCA5: ,nstantiating the Historical,
4roductive and Class Struggle Matrix of the 2pochal Rise of Capital#s )or$al
Do$ination, Boo" II of Revolutionar% 1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch of
Capital#s )or$al Do$ination of 3a&or in 4roduction+ St. Paul, 201#
4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWWW. The 2nglish Civil "ars and the Birth of )reedo$, Boo" III of Revolutionar%
1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch of Capital#s )or$al Do$ination of 3a&or in
4roduction+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWWW. Scotland and the Highlands in the 2ra of Steart :ingship and the "ars of
the Three :ingdo$s, $istorical 3ote D of Revolutionar% 1rigins of )reedo$ in
the 2poch of Capital#s )or$al Do$ination of 3a&or in 4roduction+ St. Paul, 201#
4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWWW. NNor$an> 3a 07ppropriations of Ro$an Civil5 3a, Custo$ar% 3a and Social
Gustice: The 3eveller Struggle against Hn9ust 3egalit%, $istorical 3ote 11 of
Revolutionar% 1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch of Capital#s )or$al Do$ination of
3a&or in 4roduction+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWWW. Catalan and Castilian 7ntagonis$ in ,&erian Histor%+ Rise and )all of Catalonia
as a Sea&orne Mercantile 4oer: ,sa&elle, )ernando and the 7scendanc% and
Decline of CounterRevolutionar% Castile, $istorical 3ote 12 of Revolutionar%
1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch of Capital#s )or$al Do$ination of 3a&or in
4roduction+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWWW. Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ in the 2poch of ,$perialist "orld "ar and
4roletarian Revolution+ Hrgeschichte+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous revision5
RRRRRRRRR+ The 8er$an Road to Reneed ,$perialist "orld "ar, *CS(-*TBC+ St. Paul,
200F
WWWWWWWWW. Co$$unit% and Capital+ St. Paul, 2001
WWWWWWWWW. Civil "ar and Revolution in 7$erica+ St. Paul, 1777
WWWWWWWWW. Bautier, Roert9$enri ,0he ;airs of Cha&pa%ne/ in Rondo Ca&eron 4ed.5,2ssa%s
in )rench 2cono$ic Histor%+ $o&e(ood, I@, 17G0
Bloch, 6arc. )eudal Societ%+ Lol+ *: The 8roth of the Ties of Dependence+ Chica%o, 17O1
417DF5
WWWWWWWWW. )eudal Societ%, Lolu$e ': Social Classes and 4olitical 1rgani/ation. Chica%o,
17O1 417#05
Blu&, 8ero&e. 3ord and 4easant in Russia fro$ the Ninth to the Nineteenth Centur%.
Princeton, 17O1
Brenner, Roert. Merchants and Revolution: Co$$ercial Change, 4olitical Conflict, and
3ondon#s 1verseas Traders, *AA(-*QAB. Princeton 4385, 177D
Bush, 6ichael @. ,0enants. Ri%hts and the Peasantries of Europe under the >ld Re%i&e/ in
Social 1rders and Social Classes in 2urope since *A((+ 6.@. Bush 4ed.5. @ondon,
1772
Ciriacono, Salvatore. ,6ass Consu&ption ?oods and @u'ury ?oods+ 0he :e9
Industriali=ation of the Repulic of !enice fro& the Si'teenth to the Ei%hteenth
Century/ in $er&an !an der Wee 4ed.5, The Rise and Decline of Hr&an
,ndustries in ,tal% and the 3o Countries+ @euven, 17FF
Clastres, Pierre. Societ% against the State+ 3e( -or", 17GF 417G#5
Cooper, 8.P. ,Social and Econo&ic Policies under the Co&&on(ealth/ in ?.E. *yl&er,
The ,nterregnu$: The Ouest for Settle$ent+ @ondon, 17GD
Eco, R&erto. The Na$e of the Rose. 0rans. y Willia& Weaver. 3e( -or", 17FD
Epstein, Roert. Napoleon#s 3ast Lictor% and the 2$ergence of Modern "arfare. @a(rence
4LS5, 177#
;ischer, :avid $ac"ett. 7l&ion#s Seed+ )our British )ol!a%s in 7$erica. 3e( -or", 17F7
;ran"fort, $enri. :ingship and the 8ods+ 7 Stud% of 7ncient Near 2ast Religion as the
,ntegration of Societ% and Nature+ Chica%o, 17GF 417#F5
?rant, I.;. The Social and 2cono$ic Develop$ent of Scotland &efore *Q(B+ Westport 4C05,
17G0 4ReprintE ori%inal pulication, @ondon, 17D0
$all, 8ohn Whitney. Gapan: )ro$ 4rehistor% to Modern Ti$es+ 3e( -or", 17G1
$e%el, ?.W.;. 8runlinien der 4hilosophie des Rechts+ Philosophische Biliothe", Band 12#.
@eip=in% 1711 41F215
RRRRRRRRRRR+ 4heno$enologie des 8eistes, M!orrede., *ccessed online at
(((.&ar'archive.or%. 4?er&an ori%inal, 1F0O5
$ellie, Richard. 2nserf$ent and Militar% Change in Moscov%+ Chica%o, 17G1
Inalci", $alil. 7n 2cono$ic and Social Histor% of the 1tto$an 2$pire, ,: *B((-*Q((+
Ca&rid%e 4En%.5, 177#
8ac"s, Philip and Willia& Caferro, The Spinelli of )lorence: )ortunes of a Renaissance
Merchant )a$il%. Rniversity Par" 4P*5, 2001
8a&es, 6ar%aret. Social 4ro&le$s and 4olic% during the 4uritan Revolution, *QD(-*QQ(+
@ondon, 17D0
8olo(ic=, $.;. Historical ,ntroduction to the Stud% of Ro$an 3a. Ca&rid%e, 17OC
@enin, !.I. The Develop$ent of Capitalis$ in Russia 41F7O5 in Collected "or!s, L+ ,,,.
0ranslated fro& the #
th
Russian edition 4Sochieneniia, 17#1917C05. 6osco(. 17O09
17G0
@ynch, 6ichael. Scotland: 7 Ne Histor%+ @ondon, 1771
6annin%, Brian. The 2nglish 4eople and the 2nglish Revolution, *QD(-*QDT. @ondon, 17GO
6annin%, 8.C. ,Water, Irri%ation and their Connection to State Po(er in E%ypt./ 1F ;eruary
2012. *ccessed online at (((.econ.yale.edu aje%center a&annin%92012.pdf
6ar', Larl. M3ach(ort/ to the second ?er&an edition 41FGD5 of :apital. *ccessed online at
(((.&ar'archive.or% 4*rchiv so=ialistischer5
WWWWWWWW. MResultate des un&ittelaren Produ"tionspro=esses, Das :apital+ ,+ Buch+ Der
4rodu!tionspro/ess des :apitals+ L,+ :apitel+ ;ran"furt, 17O7. *ccessed online at
( ((.&ar'archive.or% 4*rchiv so=ialistischer5
WWWWWWWW. E!ono$ische Manus!ripte, *CASU*CAC+ Marx-2ngels "er!e, Bd+ D'+ Berlin
4::R5, 17FD
6c3eill, Willia&. 4lagues and 4eoples+ 3e( -or", 177F 417GG5
6unro, 8ohn. ,0he West European Woollen Industries and their Stru%%les for International
6ar"ets, c.1000 N 1C00./ Wor"in% Paper 3o. #, 22 3ove&er 2000. *ccessed
online at http+aa(((.chass.utoronto.caaecipaa(pa.ht&l
WWWWWWWWW. ,0he I3e( Institutional Econo&icsI and the Chan%in% ;ortunes of ;airs in
6edieval and Early 6odern Europe+ 0he 0e'tile 0rades, Warfare, and 0ransaction
Costs./ Rnnu&ered Wor" Paper, 10 8une 2000 4revised O ;eruary 20015.
*ccessed online at http+ !! www.chass.utoronto.ca !ecipa !wpa.html
3a1e&y, 8ohn. 7 Histor% of )lorence, *'((-*ASA+ >'ford 4En%.5, 200O
3icholas, :avid. Medieval )landers+ @ondon, 1772
WWWWWWWWWWWW. Ton and Countr%side: Social, 2cono$ic and 4olitical Tensions in
)ourteenth-Centur% )landers+ Bru%%e 4Bru%es5, 17G1
Pad%ett, 8ohn ;. ,0he E&er%ence of @ar%e, Rnitary 6erchant9Ban"s in :u%ento 0uscany/
420075. Wor"in% Papers. Paper F. *ccessed at (((.opensiuc.i.siu.eduapnW(paF
Perceval96a'(ell, 6. The Scottish Migration to Hlster in the Reign of Ga$es ,+ @ondon, 17GD
Rhodes, Walter E. ,0he Italian Ban"ers in En%land and their @oans to Ed(ard I and Ed(ard II/
in 0.;. 0rout and 8. 0ait, Historical 2ssa%s &% Me$&ers of the 1ens College,
Manchester+ @ondon, 1702
Roland $olst, $enriette. De Revolutionaire Masse-7ctie+ 2en studi. Rotterda& 171F.
*ccessed online at (((.&ar'archive.or% 4*rchiv so=ialistischer5
Roots, Ivan. ,Cro&(ellIs >rdinances+ 0he Early @e%islation of the Protectorate/ in ?. E.
*yl&er 4ed.5, The ,nterregnu$: The Ouest for Settle$ent+ @ondon, 17G2
Sanso&, ?eor%e. 7 Histor% of Gapan, ,,, *BBD-*Q(B+ Stanford 4C*5, 17OD
Scott, 8a&es. C. The 7rt of Not Being 8overned: 7n 7narchist Histor% of Hpland Southeast
7sia+ Princeton 43.8.5, 2010
S&out, 0.C. 7 Histor% of the Scottish 4eople,*AQ(-*CB(+ @ondon, 17G0 417O75
Stone, @a(rence. The Causes of the 2nglish Revolution, *A'T-*QD'. 3e( -or", 17G2
0a(ney, R.$. The 7grarian 4ro&le$ in the Sixteenth Centur%+ 3e( -or", 17O7 417125
0hirs", 8oan. 2cono$ic 4olic% and 4ro9ects: The Develop$ent of a Consu$er Societ% in
2arl% Modern 2ngland+ >'ford 4En%.5, 17GF
WWWWWWWWWW. Tudor 2nclosures+ Pa&phlet pulished for the $istorical *ssociation H?reat
BritainJ. @ondon, 17C7
Rn(in, ?eor%e. ,ndustrial 1rgani/ation in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries+
>'ford, 170#
van $outte, 8.*. 7n 2cono$ic Histor% of the 3o Countries, F0091F00. 3e( -or", 17GG
!ino%radoff, Paul. Ro$an 3a in Medieval Ti$es+ 3e( -or", 17OF 417275
Weer, 6a'. 2cono$% and Societ%: 7n 1utline of ,nterpretative Sociolog%, Lol+ ,,+ Edited y
?Anther Roth and Claus Wittich. Ber"eley, 17GF 417CF5
Retrospect and 'nticipation
If earthly nature is the enco&passin% fra&e(or" in (hich a free su1ect actively and
contradictorily for&s itself, a concept of and practice ai&ed at reali=in% hu&an freedo& has
appeared, and appeared late, in historical ti&e. 0his reali=ation is intert(ined (ith historical
necessity that is si&ultaneously at (or" in it.
We are, ho(ever, re)uired to specify (hat this necessity is and (hat it is not. 0he sphere of
popular autono&y, self9deter&ination and independence can e, ut need not e, enlar%ed.
$istory is not of necessity rational. Rather, it can e rendered rational. $istory is not the
pro%ressive reali=ation of hu&an freedo&. ;or in history this reali=ation... to the e'tent a
%eneral e&ancipation has eco&e possile... has unfolded dialectically+ 0he reali=ation of
freedo& is never linearE it is su1ect to setac"s, re%ressions, and &ere partial reali=ations.
But, if and then (hen, freedo& is reali=ed, has een achieved, history (ill e rendered fully
rational.
De 9ure, hu&an freedo& is ine'tricaly and inseparaly at once ound to social 1ustice, and to
the end of the do&ination of nature. De facto, they are al&ost al(ays separated. In the epoch
of universal history inau%urated (ith the develop&ent of capital, the &eanin% and si%nificance
of social 1ustice and hu&an freedo& are socio9historically relative to achieved levels of
o1ective sustance 4levels of &aterial culture5, for&s of >1ective Spirit 4econo&ic, le%al and
social and state institutions5 and the classes and social %roups that constitute society, thou%h
it is unachievale ecause at the sa&e ti&e it rests on an on%oin% reduction of nature to a ra(
&aterials sin"<
$istory in its e'pansive s(eep and its entirety is not the do&ain of the reali=ation of freedo&.
Hniversal hu&an freedo& (as for the first ti&e posed as a prole&, thou%h narro(ly and
astractly, onl% as capital historically appeared and syste&atically 4not sporadically5 e%an to
hold s(ay, that is, only as capital eca&e decisive for hu&an sociation. *t the sa&e ti&e, it
(as only understood &ystifyin%ly 4as a strictly a political event5, ofuscatorily 4as startin% fro&
so&ethin% other than the aolition of social division5 and restrictedly 4reali=ale only for those
(ho are proprietors of property in production5.
In each era of capital.s do&ination, a (hole co&ple' of overlappin%, intert(ined prole&s
conver%e on the )uestion of hu&an freedo&. *nd in each era, a specific thrust and
interpretation of that prole& co&es to the fore and %ives it, the prole& of hu&an freedo&,
reductionistically, a sin%ular cast falsely su%%estin% its resolution. In the era of for&al
do&ination, it is the prole& of &otion as the &easure of nature &astery 4;irst Study5. In the
era of real do&ination, it is the prole& of surplus laor 4Second Study5. In the era of totali=in%
do&ination, it is the prole& of re&a"in% the Earth to sustain capital in the face of the cli&ate
chan%e it has en%endered 4Postscript5.
*l(ays driven in the funda&ental sense e'clusively y a fren=ied co&pulsion to accu&ulate
value, the our%eoisie, today a &ere personification of capital in all socially and historically
si%nificant events, has never pursued freedo&, only the &a%nification and intensification of
the dual, intert(ined and practically indistin%uishale prole&s of creatin% and e'ploitin%
astract laor and constructin% a technical fra&e(or" for recreatin% nature as a source
provisionin% co&&odity production.
1
1
In point of fact, it (as not strictly spea"in% our%eois ut &iddlin% %roups... those (ho have lar%ely disappeared fro&
history, &iddlin% far&ers fi%htin% a%ainst the aritrary po(er of triutary lords, sei%niors and &a%nates over &asses
of serfs and other rural producers, ut aove all early artisans en%a%ed in stru%%les a%ainst institutionali=ed reli%ious
occlusion and a%ainst divinely sanctioned, asolutist "in%ly Po(er and its arcane le%alis&s... (ho (ere the first social
%roups in history to develop a consciousness of universal freedo&. It (as a restricted vie( to e sure 4for (hich
freedo& is %rounded in property as a &eans of securin% personal autono&y in and a livelihood fro& production5, ut
si%nificantly it had nothin% to do (ith e'pansion of productive forces. Pride of place here %oes to the @evellers in the
0he prole& of creatin% and e'ploitin% astract laor is one side of the relation of science to
the our%eoisie+ *s the theoretical anticipation of nature do&ination reali=ed in the
achieve&ent of our%eois tas"s, in endless e'pansion of productive forces, science
le%iti&i=es, 1ustifies and reinforces capitalIs he%e&ony over society and the social relations in
production on (hich control over that production, &oral and cultural authority in society and
political po(er in the state are all %rounded+ In and throu%h the &ediation of science the
do&ination of nature has eco&e, if it has not al(ays een, ine'tricaly ound up (ith class
e'ploitation, and (ith the oppression and i%otries that rest on the latter.
Inseparaly, constructin% a technical fra&e(or" for the recreation of earthly nature is the other
side of a relation in (hich the our%eoisie is no lon%er capale of actively parta"in% in,
1
that of
the relation to capital to nature+ 0he &ove&ent of capital recreates nature as a ra( &aterial
asin for that production. It is no other than an anti9hu&an, anti9natural cannial. Its lo%ic and
actual develop&ent has %enerated an i&&ense, perhaps hu&anly intractale prole&, aporia
and %rand cul9de9sac into (hich all of livin%, earthly nature is ein% propelled headlon%.
*andon&ent of the pro1ect of nature do&ination, creation of a ne( theoretical vision of
nature and a novel ense&le of techni)ues to &ediate our relation to nature, and %eneratin%
these in and throu%h the self9elaoration of revolutionary su1ectivity, are the necessary if still
inade)uate conditions for &a"in% hu&an freedo& actual.
En%lish Revolution. H;or their stru%%le and the elaoration of this a(areness, The 2nglish Civil "ars and the Birth of
)reedo$, Part III. EditorIs note.J
1
See the Second Interlude, elo(.
Second Study
Ne( Departures in Science: The Sciences of )ife
Co&ple'ly &ediated perhaps, ut authentically ne( departures in science only occur if society
itself 4i.e., the order of capital (hether 1ust e&er%in% or (ell estalished on its o(n asis5 has
itself reached an i&passe of sorts, and thus first poses a )uestion that &ust e at least in part
theoretically ,solved/ efore a path appears do(n (hich resolution in societal practical can e
underta"en...
Be%innin% (ith 0. Roert 6althus, there is a novel line of conceptual develop&ent that
stretches fro& the late 1F
th
century all the (ay do(n to the present. ,@ine/ and ,develop&ent/
are &isleadin% inas&uch as the central the&es as ori%inally stated recur ut (ith none of the
clarity< socially spea"in%< that they possessed at those ori%ins, and (ith little in the (ay of
&ore sophisticated elaoration. But the line runs, nonetheless, fro& 6althus throu%h :ar(in
do(n to conte&porary neo9:ar(inists. It has its e'plicit for&ulation in the notion of an
unalterale relation et(een the reproductive potential of livin% population %roupin%s and the
restriction that nature 4usually understood as susistence5 places on itE ut in the historicall%
significant, even if tacit sense it concerns the dual pro&le$ posed y the %ro(in% develop&ent
of the productive forces of capitalist society, that of the productivity of astract laor and (ith
it, &ost &anifestly, that of propertyless &en e'pelled fro& production+
It is a sin%ular event in the order of society, roadly spea"in%, that occasions this theoretical
reflection. It (as the suordinate of laor under capital in production, the initial appearance of
real do&ination in the for& of the factory syste&< (hich in estalishin% capitalis& on its o(n
asis &ay (ell e the &ost i&portant develop&ent in ,its/ history< and conse)uent upon it
the response of artisan (or"ers to their concentration as propertyless &en.< ;acin% an
e'istence (ithout a social anchor in (or" as a &oral econo&y of production and under assault
fro& capitalists, parlia&entary politicians, sheriffs and capital.s or%anic intellectuals 4lar%ely
do&iciled clerically5, it (as this con%re%ation of &asses of an%ry, fearful &en that sti&ulated
this reflection+ In visceral opposition to their dispossession, these propertyless laorers posed
an enor&ous dan%er to an evolvin% order 4&ore and &ore understood as laisse/ faire, as
unrestricted co&petition as the or%ani=in% principle of social life5 in a society do&inated y
these %roups.
>nce this reflection is developed< in 6althus, as an unalterale relation of population to
resources< it is appropriated as the asis of the study of life understood as nature, as natural
or or%anic life< in :ar(in, as an undifferentiated concept of life in its evolutionary
develop&ent. *t this point, theory returns to the order of society, that is, it anticipates and
si&ultaneously e'presses conceptually a lin"a%e 4that (as tacit in the very notion of nature
do&ination at the ori%ins of science5 that is a onda%e 4that really, effectively reinforces class
e'ploitation5+ In the incessant reorderin% of the laor processes y (ay of scientific9
technolo%ical inputs 4real do&ination in production5, the do&ination of nature eco&es
inseparale and operatively indistin%uishale fro& class e'ploitation, the prole& of
propertyless &en asent (or" increasin%ly pressin%. 0his (hole develop&ent is appropriated
in thou%ht ane(, in order to further elaorate it, rationali=e it, conceptually fi' it, render it
narro(, doctrinaire and authoritative, render it &ore scientific< the &odern synthesis, neo9
:ar(inian do%&a< and finds its conte&porary theoretically prepared devolution in
technolo%ies of capital, in %enetically9ased iotechnolo%ies of social control under conditions
of totali=in% do&ination and &assive casuali=ation, and in %eoen%ineerin% ai&ed at nature
itself.
Part I
6althus and the Prole& of Population
6althus. 7n 2ssa% on the 4rinciples of 4opulation, pulished anony&ously, (as first penned
in 1G7F as a short pa&phlet runnin% to so&e CC,000 (ords, aout 12C pa%es.
1
6althus 4identifyin% hi&self throu%h his (ritin%s as 0. Rot. or 0.R. 6althus5 is est "no(n for
his for&ulation of a ,natural la(./ We shall call it his ,population la(,/ and state it thusly, an
arith&etic increase in food production al(ays la%s y %ro(in% orders of &a%nitude over ti&e a
%eo&etric increase in population. It is its validity of (hich 6althus sou%ht to estalish. Well not
e'actly...
Because the historical develop$ent of capitalis& itself since 6althus. ti&e has de&onstraly
refuted this presu&ed ,la(/, sho(n it is ideolo%ical pre1udice raised to the level of a necessary
feature of hu&an e'istence, a critical account &ust proceed i&&anently in order to recount
(hat in his o(n ti&e led hi& to elieve other(ise. We shall atte&pt to elicit the historical
e'perience that %ives the lie to his account. In this re%ard, (e can recall one of 6ar'.s &any,
pointed and succinctly for&ulated criticis&s+ 6althus. de&onstration relies on a ,co&pilation
confusedly thro(n to%ether fro& historians. (or"s and travelersI accounts/
2
4our translation5.
But, ecause his ,la(/ has survived, nay lies at the foundations of co%nitive endeavors, any
nu&er of sciences do(n to this day, (e &ust confront 6althus. lo%ic, e'hiit that on its o(n
ter&s his conclusions are not (arranted, are as (e have 1ust indicated, nothin% &ore than
class i%otry. While e%innin% y developin% the historical conte't in (hich 6althus (rote, the
order of presentation (ill not e strai%htfor(ard+ Conte't and analysis of the co%ency of
6althus. ar%u&ent (ill appear intert(ined.
>stensily, the 2ssa% underta"es to refute the vie(s of (ell9"no(n conte&porary thin"ers,
&en (ho for 6althus (ere (ithout serious politics, daydrea&ers as they &i%ht e called today
4and &ay have een called then5. If so, then 6althus. re&ar"s constitute a pole&ical re1oinder
to t(o authors, ?od(in and Condorcet 4as is ovious fro& the full title of the te't5, re%ardin%
their speculative vie(s on 4in 6althus. (ords5 ,the future i&prove&ent of society./ 3o(
?od(in and Condorcet oth (ere convinced the ,&an"ind/ could achieve an infinite
perfectiility. *nd, it is precisely such perfectiility that 6althus could not sto&ach ecause, for
hi&, the vie(s articulated su%%est so&ethin% )uite far fro& &ere innocuous fantasies. 0hey
(ere, if you (ill, a 0ro1an horse.
Stated differently, there is a sutler sute't here+ 0he ar%u&ent &ay e e'plicitly directed
a%ainst ?od(in, ut it also ta"es ai& at the e&er%in% co&&unist and utopian &ove&ents that
first appeared in ;rance. 0hus, Condorcet as (ell as ?od(in is i&portant+ In the eruption of
funda&ental historical chan%e 4the ;rench Revolution5 carried out y &asses of &en and
(o&en for&in% the pleeian sorts of hu&anity, Enli%hten&ent thin"in% e'hiited a tendency, a
stron% one, to under%o transfor&ation. 0here is a division (ithin the our%eois order at a
&o&ent in history (hen such division (as si%nificant, (hen it &attered+ 6althus suspected
the Enli%hten&ent thin"in% of ?od(in and Condorcet opened the door to the t(in
ao&inations of the suppression of private property in production and the co&&unity of
%oods, i.e., to Baeuf.s earliest for&ulation of the co&&unist pro1ect or, in 6althus. (ords, to
,a society... all... &e&ers of (hich should live in ease, happiness, and co&parative leisure/
4chapter 15. 0o this he opposes the class rationality of the %reat our%eoisie (ith its o(n
1
0ho&as 6althus, 7n 2ssa% on the 4rinciples of 4opulation, as it 7ffects the )uture ,$prove$ent of Societ% ith
Re$ar!s on the Speculations of Mr+ 8odin, M+ Condorcet, and other "riters.
2
6ar' refers to 6althus. ,unt Busa&&en%e(Arfelten Lo&pilationen aus ?eschichtsschreiern und
Reiseeschreiun%en., 8rundrisse, ,0heorien Aer 6ehr(ert und Profit,, in E!ono$ische Manus!ripte, *CASU*CAC+
Marx-2ngels "er!e, Bd+ D': C0G.
traditions that he e&races and (hich he identifies (ith the na&es of :avid $u&e, *da&
S&ith and a little "no(n Scot &inister na&ed Roert Wallace, all British.
1
6althus e&odies and represents the dar" side of the our%eoisie, one (hich had ro"en (ith
the opti&is& that (as a decisive ele&ent of the (orld vision that at its origins cohered
various, ne( &iddlin% %roups of old order "in%ship allo(in% the our%eoisie to appear and act
as a class in history.
2
*l&ost in its entirety this rea" can e laid to, as (e stated, the
e&er%ence of &asses of &en and (o&en into, &a"in%, history. In 6althus. Britain, the
co&&unist vie(s of a Baeuf, 6arUchal or Buonarroti had potentially a social e&odi&ent in
layers a&on% the dan%erous classes, even if the radicali=ed laorin% &en in Britain situated
the&selves in the tradition of 0o& Paine.s Rights of Man and not that of the e'propriation of
the our%eoisie and a co&&unis& of distriution. 4;or 6althus, one does not distin%uish
et(een the Conspiracy of E)uals and &enacin% &en, croppers, (oolco&ers and other
artisans, (ho opposed the incipient factory syste& as, for e'a&ple, it (as ein% introduced in
West Ridin% e%innin% in 1G7C, &en (ho (ithin a decade (ould en%a%e in ,@uddite/ &achine
(rec"in%.
D
We should not for%et that the hereditary ene&y (as no( e'hiitin% the practical
i&port of the radical, Enli%hten&ent derived doctrine in its e'port of revolution, that the
aristocratically allied industrial rulin% class of En%land (as at (ar (ith the aristocrat
decapitatin%, ne( our%eois order that (as e&er%in% in ;rance as 6althus (rote the 2ssa%5.
Both (ere intolerale, hideous e'cretions fro& a society in (hich the funda&ental alance
constitutin% the social order< a ,stron% and constantly operatin% chec" on population fro& the
difficulty of susistence/ 4chapter 15, operatin%, (e add, politically and forcily if not fro&
nature< has een lost.
0hus, e'hiitin% this less than san%uine persuasion, in his Preface he (rites, ,0he vie( (hich
he Hi.e., the author, 6althusJ has %iven of hu&an life has a &elancholy hue, ut he feels
conscious that he has dra(n these dar" tints fro& a conviction that they are really in the
picture, and not fro& a 1aundiced eye or an inherent spleen of disposition./ >r &ore to the
point, he thin"s ,&an/ is ,conde&ned to a perpetual oscillation et(een happiness and
1
It %oes (ithout sayin% that 6althus (as a British nationalist. Condorcet, ;rench, (as a far &ore i&portant thin"er
than ?od(in. -et 6althus, devotin% 1ust t(o chapters to Condorcet, ran%es over five chapters of criticis& of ?od(in,
(ho of course (as British. 4*dditionally, one chapter is dedicated to oth.5 ;or the chauvinist, an opponent as a fello(
national is al(ays superior to a forei%ner, especially if he is a ,hereditary ene&y/ and even if his thou%ht possesses
%reater clarity and his ar%u&ent is &ore forceful. It should e recalled that the British had een at (ar (ith the ;rench
at the &o&ent of the pulication of 6althusI (or" for the etter part of a decade, openly since ;eruary 1G7DE and
that this stru%%le for (ealth, presti%e and territory (as conducted as far as a third a (orld a(ay, up and do(n the t(o
%reat rivers of "no(n 3orth *&erica 4the St. @a(rence and 6ississippi5 and then all over a%ain, still further afield,
another a third of the (orld a(ay in India.
*s for ?racchus Baeuf, on O 3ove&er 1G7C he re9launched his paper, Tri&un du people+ >n C :ece&er, the
:irectory issued an arrest (arrant for hi&. 4$e (ent under%round.5 $is action follo(ed on a poor harvest the previous
autu&n and ra&pant inflation and speculation in %oods prices in the cities. >n D0 6arch 1G7O, an insurrectionary
co&&ittee (as for&ed includin% Baeuf, Sylvain 6arUchal, ;ilippo 6ichele Bounarotti, *ntonelle, *u%uste9*le'andre
:arthi and ;Uli' @epeletier. Betrayed y one of this co&&ittee.s &ilitary a%ents, Baeuf (as arrested on 10 6ay. $e
(as e'ecuted a year later 42O 6ay 1G7G5. *lert Sooul, The )rench Revolution, *SCT-*STT, #F29#FD, #FO, #70, #71,
#72. Should anyone dout the sincerity of his convictions, at his trial he openly affir&ed the&. In the often )uoted
passa%e, he stated, ,0he sole &eans of arrivin% at He)uitale societal arran%e&entsJ is to estalish a co$$on
ad$inistration< to suppress private propertyE to place every &an of talent in the line of (or" he "no(s estE to oli%e
hi& to deposit the fruit of his (or" in the co&&on store, to estalish a si&ple ad$inistration of needs, (hich< (ill
distriute these availale %oods (ith the &ost scrupulous e)uality, and (ill see to it that they &a"e their (ay into the
ho&e of every citi=en./ 4Cited y 6urray Boo"chin, The Third Revolution, G.5
*ove all, it (as this that terrified 6althus.
2
See the Introduction, aove.
D
;or an unsurpassed account and analysis of this entire period, see E.P. 0ho&pson, The Ma!ing of the 2nglish
"or!ing Class, #G29O02.
&isery, and after every effort re&ainHsJ still at an i&&easurale distance fro& the (ished9for
%oal/ 4chapter 15<
While later editions of the (or" offer a panoply of conditions otainin% in societies across his
conte&porary (orld that 6althus elieved uttressed his position, the ori%inal te't &erely
states that position and &a"es (hat 6althus too" to e co&pellin% ar%u&ents in its defense.
@et.s e'a&ine this position.
The 7rgu$ent
Leep in &ind that, underneath everythin%< the position put forth, the ar%u&ents supportin% it,
their lo%ic and structure< the ,natural ine)uality/ et(een ,population/ and ,production in the
earth,/ and the supre&acy of the latter over the for&er, i.e., the ,chec"s/ that the latter place
on the for&er, and its conse)uence, the ,insur&ountale/ ostacle that the latter places ,in the
(ay to the perfectiility of society/ 4chapter 15< hat Malthus ta!es ai$ at is the ver%
possi&ilit% of a classless societ%, the transcendence of inequalit% rooted in $aterial
a&undance, and starting fro$ this the a&olition of class rule, hierarch% and su&ordination in
the institutional sense+ In the conclusion to this discussion (e shall return to this<Why is the
)uestion of hu&an perfectiility posed no(2 $o( is it posed2 *nd (hat is it in re%ard to this
)uestion that 6althus holds2
0here are, accordin% to 6althus, four &ore or less conte&porary %reat events that pressin%ly
pose the )uestion. 0hose are the recent discoveries of natural philosophy 4i.e., the &odern
science of nature, physics5E the disse&ination of %eneral "no(led%e ste&&in% fro& the
spread of printin%E in so&e sense follo(in% fro& these a critical spirit of in)uiry a&on% the
literateE and the ;rench Revolution, a verdict 4(hether it inspires %reatness in &en or leads to
inconsolale tra%edy5 on the historical si%nificance of (hich re&ains, so he tells us, as yet
undeter&ined. $e thin"s these four events si%nal road chan%es that (ill e fateful for
&an"ind+ 0hey pose the )uestion ,(hether &an shall henceforth start for(ards (ith
accelerated velocity to(ards illi&itale, and hitherto unconceived i&prove&ent, or e
conde&ned to a perpetual oscillation et(een happiness and &isery, and after every effort
re&ain still at an i&&easurale distance fro& the (ished9for %oal/ 4chapter 15. 0hou%h (e
&i%ht note that efore ever posin% the alternatives, he had, of course, already &ade up his
&ind.
0hese opposin% alternatives can e restated in ter&s of a )uestion of the relation of
population to susistence+ ,0he po(er of population is indefinitely %reater than the po(er in
the Earth to produce susistence for &en.K 0his relation, one in (hich the production of
susistence al(ays falls and increasin%ly continues to fall ehind the %ro(th of population,
has a &ore precise, &athe&atical for&ulation 4one that since 6althus had een repeated ad
nauseu$ y our%eois apolo%ists5, na&ely, ,Population, (hen unchec"ed, increases in a
%eo&etrical ratio. Susistence increases only in an arith&etical ratio/ 4chapter 15. 6althus is
satisfied to &erely state his position ecause to hi& and the li"e9&inded it is so intuitively
ovious and other(ise ta"en for %ranted.
1
*top this, it (as after all also confir&ed for hi& in
another source, the hitherto &entioned :r. Wallace in his Larious 4rospects for Man!ind,
Nature and 4rovidence 41GO15, (ho, in a discussion of a ,perfect ?overn&ent/ 4i.e., society
1
In point of fact, 6althus e%s our leave to &a"e t(o further assu&ptions+
,I thin" I &ay fairly &a"e t(o postulata.
,;irst, that food is necessary to the e'istence of &an./ 6an &ust, to paraphrase one &aterialist tradition, produce his
&eans of susistence, in our ter&s, &an is a ein% in nature.
,Secondly, that the passion et(een the se'es is necessary and (ill re&ain nearly in its present state/ 4chapter 15.
0he reproduction of hu&anity understood narro(ly and reductionistically as a iolo%ical species i&plies, thou%h
hardly lo%ically, that de$ographical expansion at current levels ill re$ain constant+ 0hus, the si%nificance of the ter&
,passion/ 0he )uestion of passion et(een the se'es (ill recur, as (e shall duly note in the te't elo(.
asent disease, fa&ine and social strife5, stated ,&an"ind (ould encrease so prodi%iously,
that the Earth (ould at least e overstoc"ed, and eco&e unale to support the nu&erous
inhaitants./
1
Returnin% to our introductory re&ar"s, (e shall for%o the te&ptation to si&ply state historical
develop&ent has proven 6althus (ron% and let it %o at thatE to say, ,If the hu&anly for&ed,
natural (orld, over(hel&in% rural, a%ricultural and non9capitalist, supported at &ost a illion
people circa 1F00, today that (orld circa 2010, lar%ely urani=ed, industrial 4and Tpost9
industrial.5 and capitalist, supports nearly G illion people. End of discussion./ Instead (e.ll
note that, as 6althus (rote, the era of fa$ines and &ass death y fa&ine (as 1ust co&in% to
a close, and the era of surpluses in the citadels of &odern capitalis&, i.e., the first sites of real
do&ination, lay on the i&&ediate hori=on. This as as true for Ba&euf as it as for Malthus+
But neither the end of the era of fa&ines nor the appearances of surpluses had eco&e
historical factE and startin% fro& ne(ly for&in% conditions 4chan%es in production that still
sporadic scientific inputs %enerated5 neither &an could anticipate the unfoldin% historical
reality of said fact. 4So that predicated on (hat (e (ould call sta%nation in production, the
co&&unity of %oods in Baeuf (as restricted so that ,each &an &i%ht receive his share/ of
the total social product ,ut no &ore than his share./5
>f course, there is &ore to it at least in the historical sense and in class ter&s, for reco%ni=in%
(hat, conceptually &ediated, 6althus sa( and understood re)uired that one e a&on% the
li"e9&inded, (hich, in turn, can only e descried in class ter&s+ It is not 1ust that, ,0his
HrelationJ i&plies a stron% and constantly operatin% chec" on population fro& the difficulty of
susistence,/ and that, ,0his difficulty &ust fall so&e(here and &ust necessarily e severely
felt y a lar%e portion of &an"ind/ 4chapter 15. It is also necessary, since ,it is an ovious truth/
,that population $ust ala%s &e !ept don to the level of the &eans of susistence/ 4Preface,
e&phasis added5. 0hat is to say, ,a lar%e portion of &an"ind,/ the underlyin% classes and
strata of proletarians, proletariani=ed tenants and peasants as (ell as other layers of petty
producers in the non9capitalist periphery, &ust e, if necessary, forci&l% held to susistence
levels. 0his is a rulin% class perspective as articulated y one (hose relation to it 4the En%lish
rulin% class5 (as deter&ined y his status as an ele&ent of its or%anic intelli%entsia.
3o(, for 6althus, everythin% (hich can e assi&ilated to his perspective is patently ovious+
$is ,opinion/ can e laid do(n, ,estalished,/ concisely and si&ply in a ,plain state&ent/ of
(hich ,little &ore appears< necessary/ (ith ,in addition/ ,the &ost cursory vie( of society,/
(hich is ,cursory/ 4Preface5 ecause it is so ovious and other(ise &erely ta"en for %ranted+
6althus elieves his vie(s are ovious to any reasonale oserver. 0he operative
assu&ptions (hich (e have footnoted elo( are si&ply ,added/ y hi& to clarify his positionE
they &erely illu&inate (hat every rational &an already "no(s... In point of fact, those
assu&ptions do nothin% &ore than estalish the class &asis on (hich his vie(s are
elaorated.
Histor% and Malthus
Before discussin% the structure of his ar%u&ent, let.s pause and consider oth (here 6althus
(as situated (ithin the historical &o&ent at (hich he (rote, and that &o&ent itself.
6althus (as the si'th of seven children includin% five %irls, orn to :aniel and $enrietta
6althus. ?oin% ac" to the previous century, the 6althus line had a history as apothecaries to
the royal fa&ily, as clerics, and as &erchants and &odest lando(ners 4the last t(o of (hich in
this era in En%land often (ent hand in hand5, essentially part of the s&all %entry. $e, his
silin%s and his parents lived in a countryside dotted (ith s&all to(ns, for&erly Surrey
1
Cited in Patricia 8a&es, 4opulation Malthus: His 3ife and "or!, C7. She indicates that Wallace.s influence on the
youn% 6althus ,(ent very deep indeed/ 4,&id, CF5.
County. 0hese to(ns (ere no lon% nodes thro(n up y and servicin% the surroundin% country
ut carried on capitalist co&&erce as ad1uncts to and i&&ediately (est of @ondon. In the
1GO0s, the 6althus. relocated and settled in another one of those to(ns 4so&e (ere etter
descried as villa%es5, *lury, (hile 0ho&as Roert, orn in 1GOO, (as still a child.
1
$is father
(as a &an of %enuine culture. $e (as personally ac)uainted (ith oth :avid $u&e and 8ean
8ac)ues Rousseau, and (as one of the latter.s literary e'ecutives.
2
6althus (as educated to the level of the day y his father until he (as ten, after (hich a
private tutor (as e&ployed. 0his education (as lieral, oth in the classical and the ori%inal
political and historical sense. 3ot surprisin%ly, 6althus (as sent to and pursued that education
at Ca&rid%e 4Christ Colle%e5. $e e'celled in @atin and En%lish decla&ation. $e %raduated in
1GFF, the sa&e year he (as ordained a &inister, and still at Ca&rid%e in 1G7D he (as
elected to a fello(ship (hich provided hi& (ith a stipend as lon% as he re&ained un&arried.
In that year, he eca&e a curate in >"e(ood, a s&all villa%e also in Surrey. 0he position
provided hi& (ith an inco&e for the services he rendered to the villa%e population
D
4(ee"ly
ser&ons, aptis&s, overseein% urials and, on his o(n, &inisterin% to and perhaps co&fortin%
the sic" and dyin%5 >"e(ood (as note(orthy for its rural i&poverish&ent.
0he &o&ent at (hich 6althus (rote (as to(ard the end of the era of fa$ines, a period in the
history of the asolutist "in%ships of (estern and central Europe, counterrevolutionary ;rance
of the Bourons and the Caots, Castilian and $apsur% Spain, Prussia and perhaps
S(eden. 0he period can e defined in ter&s of crop failures and poor harvests that led to food
shorta%es and, on the asis of %enerali=ed i&poverish&ent, sava%e ine)ualities and &ar"et
&ediated fa&ine, starvation and socially si%nificant depopulations. ,n the "est the era of
fa&ines, thou%h predatin%, is nonetheless coextensive ith the era of capital#s for$al
do$ination of la&or.
#
4)a$ine is ende$ic to agriculturall% grounded stratified societies in all its
historical for$s, and thou%h the periodi=ation (as different, at this &o&ent the sa&e situation
confronted the three %reat triutary for&ations in the (orld, 0sarist Russia, 6o%ul India and
dynastic China.5 It (as also a &o&ent of crisis in these re%i&es and the productive for&s that
underlay the&, a crisis in part defined y strenuous aristocratic efforts to re9i&pose the
sei%niorial urdens inclusive of dues and ta'es on already heavily (ei%hed do(n peasantries.
0he crisis, and this is also an ele&ent of its definition, reached, if not its =enith then, a point at
(hich e'plosive resistance heralded a period of )ualitative societal transfor&ation in ;rance in
the peasant eruptions 41GF0s5 that si%naled the advent of the Revolution. 0he crisis (as,
ho(ever, if anythin% ,overdeter&ined,/ that is, in a purely o1ectivistically descriptive sense, all
transpirin% (ithin the epochal for&al do&ination of capital over laor it (as e'acerated y
the contradiction et(een opposin%, if not entirely funda&ental for&s of productive activity,
et(een capitalis& 4estalished on its o(n foundations as self9valori=in% value5 and the
decayin% European rural, landed aristocratic for&s of surplus e'traction &isapprehended as
,feudal,/ et(een in9"ind and &onetary lordly e'tractions of unfree peasantries and the
concentration of s&all far&s into hands of lar%e capitalist far&ers 4carried out y e'propriation
of s&all independent producers5. 0his contradiction characteri=ed the situation in ;rance
C
as
&uch as in En%land at a &uch earlier date+ In oth cases, (e are spea"in% aout propertyless
&en, proletariani=ed peasants, and aout uran concentration. In ;rance, Paris (as the
scene of %reatest de&o%raphic concentration, a situation that for&ed (ithin a vastly e'panded
uran division of laor as &asses of petty producers serviced not only the re)uire&ents of a
1
8a&es, ,&id, 'vii9'viii 4chart sho(in% fa&ily tree5E 0ho&as Peterson, Malthus, 21.
2
Peterson, ,&id+
D
,&id, 2D9DFE 8a&es, ,&id, 17, 2C9D#.
#
* sin%le, not uncharacteristic e'a&ple is su%%estive. ;lorence (as su1ect to 111 fa&ines et(een 1DGC and 1G71.
;ernand Braudel, The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean "orld in the 7ge of 4hilip ,,, !ol. 1, D2F.
C
Sooul, ,&id, #FF.
%reat ad&inistrative center 4the "in% and court even if at !ersailles, his retinue, the offices
throu%h (hich his rei%n over the country (as effected5 ut their o(n needs as layer upon layer
of the sans-culottes population. In En%land, thou%h, the tra1ectory (as different+ 0here had
een the sa&e proletariani=ation startin% fro& enclosures of copyri%ht holdin%s 4(hich (ere
still on%oin% in 6althusI ti&e, ut deepenin% as rural, alread% (a%ed poor laorers lost non9
&ar"et supports due to enclosures, as &en (ere roed of fuel, (ood, and food, %leanin%s
fro& cornfields5+ S)uee=ed endlessly y (a%es that had een declinin% since 1GO0 and risin%
food costs, not only had lar%e capitalist far&s appeared ut the factory syste&
1
< (hich (e
identify (ith the first phase of real do&ination as it ori%inally appeared in En%land and (hich
had seen the rise of lar%e cities, Bir&in%ha&, Sheffield, 6anchester in additional to the
increasin% de&o%raphical densification of @ondon< for&ed and spread.
0he era (as overdeter&ined in still another sense. Rnifyin% dispersed econo&ically %ro(in%
&anufacturin% capitals and landed property on (hich %entry po(er as capitalist far&in%
intert(ined (ith the sheriffs and &a%istrates rested, the British Parlia&entary state stood
ehind the counterrevolution, ehind aristocratic ;rench refu%ees 4i.e., %raciously offered
the& the city of @ondon in (hich to hatch their plots and conspiracies5. But the &ove&ent of
capital itself churned up opposition+ 0he creation of %reat capitalist far&s (as acco&plished
throu%h e'propriation of the lands of s&all &enE &entioned aove, the spread of the factory
syste& (ith its ne( laor savin% &achinery rendered s"illed artisans redundant+ In 1G7C, price
inflation pushed the (or"in% poor, especially (o&en, into the streets in food riots across the
country, durin% (hich rioters so9called sei=ed flour, corn and &eat 4fro& far&ers, &erchants
and shop"eepers5, and durin% (hich these rural and s&all to(n proletarians %enerated their
o(n for&s of self9or%ani=ation 4called y the $a&&onds ,lea%ues of consu&ers/5, co&&ittees
to re%ulate food prices.
2
0he (hole po(er of this state at the various levels it operated (as
&oili=ed a%ainst this resistance as la(s (ere enacted, (o&en and &en (ho opposed and
defended the&selves a%ainst the &ove&ent of capital (ere hunted do(n, tried and
i&prisoned.
It (as in this &aelstro& of events that Reverend 0.R. 6althus, an *n%lican cleric (ith the
&oral sensiilities of 8ohn Calvin hi&self, (rote.
The Structure of Malthus. 7rgu$ent
6althus e%ins fro& the intuitive certainty of his asic assu&ptions< ,It is an ovious truth<
that population &ust al(ays e "ept do(n to the level of the &eans of susistence./ 0he only
)uestion (as the ,&eans/ of popular suppression, ,the &eans y (hich this level is effected./
40he ans(er (as never &entioned y 6althus. It (as provided y the *liens *ct and the
0reacherous Correspondence *ct oth of 1G7D. 0hese (ere &odifications to the @a( of
Settle&ents datin% fro& the rei%n of Charles II, fro& 1OO2, the&selves &odified irre%ularity
over the ne't hundred years. In )uestion (ere provisions that, asent C2 (ee"s of annual
e&ploy&ent, confined laorers to their o(n parishes. 0hey (ere used y capitalists cu$
1
8.@. $a&&ond and Barara $a&&ond, The Lillage 3a&ourer, chapter C. 0he authors point out 4,&id5, ,3athaniel
Lent, (ritin% in 1G7O HNotes on the 7griculture of Norfol!J says that in the last forty or fifty years the price of provisions
had %one up y O0 per cent, and (a%es y 2C per cent, Iut this is not all, for the sources of the &ar"et (hich used to
feed hi& are in a %reat &easure cut off since the syste& of lar%e far&s has een so &uch encoura%ed.I Professor
@evy H3arge and S$all HoldingsJ esti&ates that (a%es rose et(een 1GO0 and 1F1D y O0 per cent, and the price of
(heat y 1D0 per cent./
If (e can identify factory laor (ith this first phase of real do&ination, (e can also ac"no(led%e that it can e further
specified in ter&s of the openin% of an era in (hich socially9a%riculturally fa&ine e%ins to retreat, and (ithin a
)uarter century disappears fro& the &etropolitan centers of (orld capitalis&.
2
,&id+ *&on% other to(ns, *ylesury 4in the south, (est north(est to neary @ondon5, Carlisle 4in the far north, 1ust
south of the order (ith Scotland5, Ips(ich 4in the center and east near the 3orth Sea coast5, Bath 4in the south(est
near Bristol5 and ?uildford 4in the south, 1ust south(est of @ondon5 are &entioned.
&a%istrates to uproot and shift laor fro& parish to parish, (ere invo"ed to deploy soldiers
then the courts a%ainst popular outursts and, of course, to i&prison those (ho resisted.5
In a purely speculative &anner, 6althus then lo%ically retraced a series of propositions that
for&ed the foundation of this assu&ption, his ,ovious truth,/ in order to olster his position.
1
0o clinch the ar%u&ent, he provided his readers (ith a series of conte&porary ased
instances y (ay of (hich he &erely restated his ar%u&ent 4and on the asis of (hich, thou%h
never the only possile conclusion, he affir&ed the necessity of his intuitively certain
assu&ption and its foundations5. 3o( none of 6althus. e'a&ples are even derived fro& that
,confusedly thro(n to%ether co&pilation of historians. (or"s and travelers. accounts./ 6any
are si&ply i$agined+ We shall e'a&ine such an instance.
6althus tells us, ,In a state... of %reat e)uality and virtue, (here pure and si&ple &anners
prevailed, and (here the &eans of susistence (ere so aundant that no part of the society
could have any fears aout providin% a&ply for a fa&ily, the po(er of population ein% left to
e'ert itself unchec"ed, the increase of the hu&an species (ould evidently e &uch %reater
than any increase that has een hitherto "no(n/ 4chapter 25. $o(ever, 1ust t(o passa%es
earlier, he told us that, ,no state has hitherto e'isted 4at least that (e have any account of5
(here the &anners (ere so pure and si&ple, and the &eans of susistence so aundant./
What.s the point2 If no ,state/ has ever e'isted, at least none that (e "no( of, ho( do (e
"no( that ,the po(er of population/ left ,unchec"ed/ (ould entail a de&o%raphical increase
,&uch %reater/ than any ,hitherto "no(n/2 $o( do (e "no(2 We "no( si&ply ecause it is
so intuitively ovious, i.e., it is a speculative construction that accords (ith our deepest
convictions 4i.e., class i%otry5. 0hat &uch is certainE for, if there is no evidential asis for such
"no(led%e, (e are &erely assertin% &elief, conviction 4and not rational conviction5 in the %uise
of lo%ical inference< In point of fact, (e do "no( today and have "no(n since at least the
second )uarter of the short t(entieth century that co&&unities ased upon a funda&ental,
&aterial e)uality, societies (ithout states, have e'isted since the first e&er%ence of
a%riculture so&e 10,000 years a%o, and that these co&&unities (ere ones of %reat natural
aundance in (hich social laor ai&ed at susistence (as so li&ited in duration that it did not
fi%ure as a deter&inant of these societies, and that these co&&unities de&o%raphical density
never e'ceeded that capacity to socially reproduce the&selves fro& that natural
aundance<
2
While i&a%inin% is a lar%e part of 6althus. &ethod of presentation, and it uttresses intuitive
certainties, that is all it does. *r%u&ents of this sort are unevidenced, offerin% the appearance
of ein% &erely 4har&lessly5 speculative. :etachin% the lo%ic of ar%u&ent fro& history and
society, they are also vacuous.
Defense of the 7rgu$ent
6althus does not thin" of his speculation as speculation. $e elieves hi&self an intensely
acute oserver (ho, penetratin% to the essence of the hu&an condition, en%a%es in the
1
Enu&erated in part aove, these include 4a5 ,the po(er of population is indefinitely %reater than the po(er in the
earth to produce susistence for &an,/ 45 ,Population, (hen unchec"ed, increases in a %eo&etrical ratio.
Susistence increases only in an arith&etical ratio,/ 4c5 %iven that ,food HisJ necessary to the life of &an, the effects of
these t(o une)ual po(ers &ust e "ept e)ual,/ i&plyin% 4d5 ,a stron% and constantly operatin% chec" on population
fro& the difficulty of susistence,/ 4e5 ,0his difficulty... &ust necessarily e severely felt y a lar%e portion of &an"ind,/
4f5 ,0he... race of &an cannot, y any efforts of reason, escape/ fro& this natural ,necessity,/ and 4%5 ,&isery, is an
asolutely necessary conse)uence of it. !ice is a hi%hly proale conse)uence.../ 4chapter 15.
2
;or so&ethin% )uite different, and far &ore coherent, see Part !, ,$u&anity in 3ature,/ elo(.
for&ulation of la(s of nature that %overn hu&an ehavior and activity.
D
0he position is
certainly duious.
Lalidation, if you (ill, or defense of 6althus. position 4in ar%u&entative discourse the t(o
cate%ories are distinct, the first su%%estin% evidence, the second %enerally conducted in the
&anner of lo%ical de&onstration, thou%h here they are indistinct lar%ely ecause in 6althus
validation is defective< speculation run ra&pant, i&a%ination is illicitly deployed< and the
t(o practices co&prehended y the cate%ories are collapsed one into the other5 is carried out
y e&ployin%, a&on% others, a second and a third &ethod, that of the %ross astraction and
that of an illicit %enerali=ation fro& a sin%le instance.
$ere, (e can recount the follo(in%+
,In the Rnited States of *&erica, (here the &eans of susistence have een &ore a&ple, the
&anners of the people &ore pure, and conse)uently the chec"s to early &arria%es fe(er, than
in any of the &odern states of Europe, the population has een found to doule itself in
t(enty9five years/ 4chapter 25.
;or the &o&ent, let us %rant that in the Rnited States in the early years of the Repulic, in the
presidency of 8ohn *da&s, first, a&le susistence could e found across all classes, that,
second, &en and (o&en tended to &arry earlier and, finally 4assu&in%, as does 6althus, that
all &arria%es are ani&ated y a desire for pro%eny and fecundity and in this re%ard are
natural5 that the population of this country (ould %o onto doule in t(enty9five years.
3ote here that assu&ed points one and t(o characteri=e the &ethod of %ross astraction+
6althus as a rule proceeds fro& a culturally for&ed astraction< here ,a&le susistence/
and the ,people/ (ith their ,&anners/ 4custo&ary social ehavior5 the one (ithout re%ard to
access &ediated y and undifferentiated (ith re%ard to (ealth, standin% and po(er< to the
statistical astraction, ,population,/ as in, ,0his ratio of increase, thou%h short of the ut&ost
po(er of population, yet as the result of actual e'perience, (e (ill ta"e as our rule, and say,
that population, (hen unchec"ed, %oes on doulin% itself every t(enty9five years or increases
in a %eo&etrical ratio/ 4,&id, e&phases added5< 3otin% our e&phases, (e (ould a%ain
stress that (hile it &ay e te&ptin% to su1ect 6althus to censure for his failure to %rasp the
i&&ense increase in ,produce/ in his pro1ection of future production on the asis of a linear
extrapolation of present levels of production, this a%ain only a&ounts to an ahistorical criticis&
of a &an (ho did not 4at least at this point in his life5 live in an era in (hich the )ualitative
transfor&ation in production (ithin the e'istin% capitalist &ode (ere &anifest and
undeniale<
;la(ed ar%u&entation 4that of the %ross astraction5 of this sort allo(s 6althus to en%a%e in
an illicit %enerali=ation fro& a sin%le instance+
,@et us no( ta"e any spot of earth, this Island for instance, and see in (hat ratio the
susistence it affords can e supposed to increase. We (ill e%in (ith it under its present
state of cultivation.
,If I allo( that y the est possile policy, y rea"in% up &ore land and y %reat
encoura%e&ents to a%riculture, the produce of this Island &ay e douled in the first t(enty9
five years, I thin" it (ill e allo(in% as &uch as any person can (ell de&and.
,In the ne't t(enty9five years, it is i&possile to suppose that the produce could e
)uadrupled. It (ould e contrary to all our "no(led%e of the )ualities of land. 0he very ut&ost
that (e can conceive, is, that the increase in the second t(enty9five years &i%ht e)ual the
present produce. @et us then ta"e this for our rule, thou%h certainly far eyond the truth, and
D
@a(s have their corollaries, and 1ustified y the sa&e intuitive self9evidence, are also universal+ ,0he happiness of a
country does not depend, asolutely, upon its poverty or its riches, upon its youth or its a%e, upon its ein% thinly or
fully inhaited, ut upon the rapidity (ith (hich it is increasin%, upon the de%ree in (hich the yearly increase of food
approaches to the yearly increase of an unrestricted population/ 4chapter G5.
allo( that, y %reat e'ertion, the (hole produce of the Island &i%ht e increased every t(enty9
five years, y a )uantity of susistence e)ual to (hat it at present produces. 0he &ost
enthusiastic speculator cannot suppose a %reater increase than this. In a fe( centuries it
(ould &a"e every acre of land in the Island li"e a %arden.
,-et this ratio of increase is evidently arith&etical.
,It &ay e fairly said, therefore, that the &eans of susistence increase in an arith&etical
ratio. @et us no( rin% the effects of these t(o ratios to%ether.
,0he population of the Island is co&puted to e aout seven &illions, and (e (ill suppose the
present produce e)ual to the support of such a nu&er. In the first t(enty9five years the
population (ould e fourteen &illions, and the food ein% also douled, the &eans of
susistence (ould e e)ual to this increase. In the ne't t(enty9five years the population
(ould e t(enty9ei%ht &illions, and the &eans of susistence only e)ual to the support of
t(enty9one &illions. In the ne't period, the population (ould e fifty9si' &illions, and the
&eans of susistence 1ust sufficient for half that nu&er. *nd at the conclusion of the first
century the population (ould e one hundred and t(elve &illions and the &eans of
susistence only e)ual to the support of thirty9five &illions, (hich (ould leave a population of
seventy9seven &illions totally unprovided for/ 4,&id5.
*t this point in 6althus. i&a%ined construction, he ta"es note of a population loss due to
i&&i%ration, so to counteract its effects, he %oes for ro"e, ta"in% an ever hi%her level
astraction, the population of the entire (orld as his o1ect. 4Why not25
,But to &a"e the ar%u&ent &ore %eneral and less interrupted y the partial vie(s of
e&i%ration, let us ta"e the (hole earth, instead of one spot, and suppose that the restraints to
population (ere universally re&oved. If the susistence for &an that the earth affords (as to
e increased every t(enty9five years y a )uantity e)ual to (hat the hole orld at present
produces, this (ould allo( the po(er of production in the earth to e asolutely unli&ited, and
its ratio of increase &uch %reater than (e can conceive that any possile e'ertions of
&an"ind could &a"e it/ 4,&id, e&phases added5.
But startin% fro& the %ross astraction4s5 on (hich it is contin%ent, this %enerali=ation to the
entire (orld is illicit+ Without understandin% the differences in consu&ption as they are
constituted et(een different classes or strata (ithin society, et(een different societies and
for&in% (ithin the& et(een different asic for&s of productive activity as they operate at the
level of society 4i.e., (ithout re%ard to a do&inant for& of production (ithin a social for&ation5,
(e, that is, 6althus, can only inade)uately, &isleadin%ly and falsely, en%a%e in induction of
this sort. *nd in this he laid do(n a pattern of ar%u&entation that after t(o centuries still
endures<
0oday.s 6althusians ar%ue, for e'a&ple, that no( in e'cess of a illion people the &assive
further, future population of India &ust e chec"ed, (hile the population of the Rnited States
at rou%hly thirty percent of that of the sucontinent is un&entioned. E&ployin% a le%iti&ate
astraction, at least fro& the standpoint of this ar%u&ent, it &i%ht e noted that, co&paraly,
the difference et(een the consu&ption of children in the Rnited States e'ceeds on avera%e
that of children on the sucontinent y nearly t(o orders of &a%nitude 4ninety ti&es5. We
shall return to this...
6althus does, in fact, en%a%e a typolo%y of sta%es of hu&an develop&ent 4chapters D9C5
typical of the a%e+ Sava%ery, no&adic pastoralis& and civili=ation. In so doin%, ho(ever, he
&erely a&plifies his &ethodolo%ical errors.
$ere to see the sa&e &ethod at (or" (e need only consider the ,rudest state of &an"ind,/
sava%es. *l(ays operatin% (ith the statistical astraction, ,population,/ he is re)uired to
account for lo( population density. E'hiitin% an asolute &ini&u& of insi%ht, he indicates
sava%es en%a%e in huntin% as their ,principal occupation,/ (hich insures population,
co&paraly spea"in%, is necessarily thin since food sources are ,scattered over a lar%e<
territory./ $ere 6althus fastens on to 3orth *&erican Indians as e'e&plary. 4,Indians/ is itself
another astraction, i.e., for&ulated (ithout re%ard to varyin% for&s of social or%ani=ations,
the presence or asence of stratification, and so on.5 Since, as he e'plains, population
density is co$para&l% thin, he is further re)uired to su%%est at least that under the ,ri%ht
conditions/ 4our ter&5, sava%es, 3orth *&erican Indians as the case in point, too (ould soon
reproduce outstrippin% availale susistence. 0hus, it is necessary to consider ,passion,/ y
(hich oviously he does not &ere ardor or se'ual appetite ut &erely species &ultiplication
throu%h (hat are only se'ual &eans and (hich a&on% 3orth *&erican Indians is &ore
,apathetic/ than a&on% ,any other race of &en./ 3onetheless, a ,co&paratively rapid
population... HincreaseJ ta"es place (henever any of the tries happen to settle in so&e fertile
spot and to dra( nourish&ent fro& &ore fruitful sources than that of huntin%, and it has een
fre)uently re&ar"ed that Hthis occursJ (hen an Indian fa&ily has ta"en up its aode near any
European settle&ent and adopted a &ore easy and civili=ed &ode of life/ 4chapter D5. 3o
dout, ut then a%ainst the %ross astraction, for&s of hu&ani=ation 4sociali=ation5 &eans
nothin%E yet this ,Indian fa&ily/ has aandoned its co&&unity, and has effectively assi&ilated
a our%eois for& of sociation, yeo&an far&in% (ith its need for lar%e fa&ilies to do a%ricultural
laor at once for susistence and for the capitalist &ar"et. In point of fact, 6althus has proven
nothin%+ It is not the ,intrinsic/ character of individuals, or astractions li"e ,&an,/ ,&an"ind/ or
,population,/ ut the ense&le of social relations, that constitutes an individual or fa&ily.
In this vein 6althus continues, ,0he 3orth *&erican Indians, considered as a people/< But
(hich peoples2 *nd this indeed is the point, for the various Indian %roupin%s are peoples, not
sin%ularly ut in the plural. So (hich for& of life a&on% those that are characteristic of natives
at this ti&e, (hat for&s of productive activity, huntin% and %atherin%, huntin% and far&in%,
(hich Indian peoples are (e spea"in% aout2 0he Plains Indians2 Societies that, (ith the
spread of the horse north(ard fro& Central *&erican 4(here the ,con)uerors/ had rou%ht it
over fro& Spain5, uni)uely, aandoned one settled for& of life to en%a%e in another, this ti&e
&oile, huntin% uffalo al&ost e'clusively, (ithin the fra&e(or" of &aterial e)uality and a
stateless co&&unal self9or%ani=ation2 >r perhaps the Indians of the Pacific coastal
3orth(est
1
(ho (ere not only sedentary ut (ent eyond villa%e life, achieved lar%e scale
societies 4in the pre9&odern sense5 in (hich a certain a&ount of social (ealth circulated and
(as concentrated in a s&all sin%le stratu&, and (ho e'hiited i&portant hierarchies
enco&passin% slavery and societal differentiation producin% strata of noles and co&&oners2
8ust to &ention these t(o i&portant %roupin%s of peoples a&on% 3orth *&erican natives
points to the deconte'tuali=ed, de9sociali=ed, undifferentiated and indeter&inate astractions
that are &ethodolo%ically decisive for 6althus.
6althus, thou%h, is not deterredE happily he has arrived at that (hich he (as unsha"aly,
intuitively certain fro& the very e%innin%+
,0a"in% the population of the (orld at any nu&er, a thousand &illions, for instance, the
hu&an species (ould increase in the ratio of 99 1, 2, #, F, 1O, D2, O#, 12F, 2CO, C12, etc. and
susistence as 99 1, 2, D, #, C, O, G, F, 7, 10, etc. In t(o centuries and a )uarter, the population
(ould e to the &eans of susistence as C12 to 10+ in three centuries as #07O to 1D, and in
t(o thousand years the difference (ould e al&ost incalculale, thou%h the produce in that
ti&e (ould have increased to an i&&ense e'tent/ 4chapter 25.
In the course of 17 chapters, 6althus devotes the etter part of three 4chapter D9C5 to his
typolo%y of for&s of hu&an sociation, and several &ore to the prole&s that in his vie( his
theori=ation confronts, those events and processes in hu&an history such as i&&i%ration and
1
$ere see *lain 0estart, 3es chasseurs-cueilleurs ou l.origine des inIgalitIs.
the foundation of colonies 4chapter O5 and epide&ics and fa&ines 4chapter G5 that &i%ht, in his
vie(, tend to affir& or ne%ate his ar%u&ent.
In all cases, 6althus treats of his su1ect (ith the sa&e astractness. So, since no
&ethodolo%ically ne( %round is ro"en, the i&portant )uestions, for us, then are t(ofold.
;irst, (hat are his criticis&s of the &en (ho& he identifies as his &ain intellectual opponents
4Condorcet and ?od(in52 Second, since as a Christian cleric he is ostensily co&&itted to
hu&an (elfare, (hat pro%ra&&atically does he advocate (ith a vie( to the ,future
i&prove&ent of society/2
Condorcet and 8odin: The Critique of Hu$an 4erfecti&ilit%
6althus. first criticis& is that those (riters, Condorcet and ?od(in in particular, (ho concern
the&selves (ith hu&an perfectiility si&ply and (holly fail to recogni/e the force of his
ar%u&ent< (ell, dead four years Condorcet really couldn.t... 6althus, is not only &ystified ut
irritated+ ,0o a person (ho dra(s the precedin% ovious inferences, fro& a vie( of the past
and present state of &an"ind, it cannot ut e a &atter of astonish&ent that all the (riters on
the perfectiility of &an and of society (ho have noticed the ar%u&ent of an overchar%ed
population, treat it al(ays very sli%htly and invarialy represent the difficulties arisin% fro& it as
at a %reat and al&ost i&&easurale distance/ 4chapter F, also chapter 1 (here the sa&e
criticis& (as ori%inally aired5.
6althus ta"es as his o1ect of discussion CondorcetIs 2squisse d#un ta&leau historique des
progres de l#esprit hu$ain (hich he notes, perhaps so&e(hat s"eptically, (as penned (hile
in hidin% after (arrant for his arrest 4i&plyin% certain death5 (as issued.
1
Relatively spea"in% &ore sustantial, 6althusI criticis&s addressed the issue of propertyless
&en. ;ollo(in% Condorcet, he tells us that a critical survey of the ,civili=ed nations/ of Europe,
that is, the &ost econo&ically developed countries 4developed (ith a vie( to ,actual
population/ and their ,e'tent of territory,/ ,their cultivation, their industry, their divisions of
laor, and their &eans of susistence/5, cannot e'ist (ithout an industrial proletariat.
Industrial refers to the early factory re%i&e. ;or, accordin% to 6althus, ,it (ould e i&possile
to preserve the sa&e &eans of susistence,/ (hat today (ould e called standards of livin%,
,and, conse)uently, the sa&e population (ithout a nu&er of individuals (ho have no other
&eans of supplyin% their (ants than their industry/ 4chapter F5. 6althus renders us a fair
representation of Condorcet on this issue< We (ould note, as (e have &ore fully and &ore
conte'tually else(here,
2
the si%nificance of &aintenance of e'istin% population levels for this
ar%u&ent is e'e&plary of the terrain on (hich this ar%u&ent had until recently al(ays een
conducted, that of the ideolo%ical discourse of proponents of capitalist national states for
1
6althus says, ,it is said, under the pressure of <cruel proscription/ (ith reference to the situation of Condorcet.
0he (arrant (as issued 2G 6arch 1G7#. Suspectin% he had een lon% under (atch y 6onta%nard spies of the
Co&&ittee of Pulic Safety, Condorcet fled Paris. $e (as arrested three days later, i&prisoned and, follo(in% 1ust t(o
days in the %oal, (as found dead in his prison cell. 0o this day, it not "no(n (hether he too" his o(n life 4usin% a
poison fro& a friend5 or, fearin% popular reaction to the prospect of %uillotinin%, he (as &urdered y a%ents of his
political ene&ies.
6arie 8ean *ntoine 3icolas de Caritat, titled 6ar)uis de Condorcet, (as educated in 8esuit Colle%es in Rei&s,
Colli%e de 3avarre and Colli%e 6a=arin oth in Paris.
In 1GOC, he pulished 7n 2ssa% on the ,ntegral Calculus and (as elected to the 7cadI$ie des Sciences in 1GO7. In
1GG2, he pulished another &athe&atical treatise on the inte%ral calculus. In 1GGG, he (as appointed Secretary of the
7cadI$ie. In 1GFC, he pulished his &ost i&portant (or", on the philosophy of &athe&atics, 2ssa% on the
7pplication of 7nal%sis to the 4ro&a&ilit% of Ma9orit% Decisions. 0his oviously (as a (or" in the develop&ent of the
theory of proaility. Reaching &ac! to 3ei&ni/ and Neton, to oot he developed his thin"in% and in 1GFO (rote a
treatise 4never pulished in his lifeti&e5 on the differential and inte%ral calculus, %ivin% a ne( treat&ent of
infinitesi&als. $e (rote io%raphies of !oltaire and his friend 0ur%ot 4(ho&, as Co&ptroller ?eneral of ;inance, he
served under (hile at the 6int5.
2
The Critique of 4roductivis$ and Malthusianis$ appearin% in 1rigins and 2ndings+ HEditorIs note.J
(ho& lar%e populations secure e)ually lar%e industrial reserves of laor as (ell as &en as
cannon fodder in (ars of con)uest, ar%u&ents &ade y the early En%lish and ;rench political
econo&ists in defense of &ercantile capitalis&. In this sense, &en on either side of the
Channel &ade and accepted this ar%u&ent e'hiitin% their ulti&ate alle%iances< Condorcet
indicates, and 6althus readily a%rees, that such &en could only &ana%e very s&all, unstale
inco&es and that, accordin%ly, ,.0here e'ists then, a necessary cause of ine)uality, of
dependence, and even of &isery, (hich &enaces, (ithout ceasin%, the &ost nu&erous and
active class of our societies./ 4,&id, 6althus citin% fro& Condorcet.s 2squisse5. Consistent (ith
his &athe&atical trainin% and his service 4under @ouis V!I5 as Inspector ?eneral of the 6int
41GG291G715, Condorcet, &a"in% actuarial and interest calculations, proposed to &eet this
situation y institutin% a fund to %uarantee assistance to the elderly, to (o&en and children
(ho lose their husands and fathers, and to youn% people to estalish the&selves in life. 0he
fund (ould e derived fro& savin%s, that of those (ho (ould enefit fro& it and those (ho
died efore they could enefit fro& it 4chapter F5E since they could not e e'pected to save,
(e ta"e this to &ean it (ould e funded fro& a ta' on (a%es. 0his proposal as for&ulated y
Condorcet in his S!etch in 1G7# in intent and fundin% appears in the Rnited States today to e
effectively identical (ith Social Security. >n the asis of further si&ilar calculations, Condorcet
also proposed to )ualitatively (iden the foundations of the use of credit in society 4e'tendin%
its usa%e eyond the very narro( ran%e of the really (ealthy5, &a"in% it accessile %enerally
oth to individuals and s&all capitalists, &erchants, etc. $ere a%ain, there is a conte&porary
analo%ue in certain financial institutions (ithin the an"in% syste& that function as credit
&ar"ets.
6althus (ill have nothin% of either, statin% that their ,application/ to ,real life/ %enerates results
that are ,asolutely nu%atory/ 4,&id5. Puttin% aside the fact that the history of capitalis&
conde&ns 6althus. idiotic 1ud%&ent, he interprets Condorcet.s ,pro%ra&,/ his vision of state
ad&inistered syste& of social security as a "ind of En%lish Poor @a(s 4&ore of (hich later5.
6althus. readin% is deficient, ut his &ain o1ection< recall this discussion 4(hich ai&s at a
&ini&alistic safety net that does not touch the contradictions that shape capitalis& and
provide it (ith its dyna&ic5 concerns hu&an perfectiility< is, consistent (ith his assi&ilation
of it to the Poor @a(s, that it reproduces that the dyna&ic, as he understands, of unrestrained
population %ro(th+ ,Were every &an sure of a co&fortale provision for his fa&ily, al&ost
every &an (ould have one, and (ere the risin% %eneration free fro& the I"illin% frostI of
&isery, population &ust rapidly increase/ 4,&id5. $ere 6althus is &ista"en precisely ecause
he had ideolo%ically ,deduced/ 4our ter&5 the conse)uences of Condorcet.s ,pro%ra&/ fro&
his o(n intuitively certain assu&ptions, (hen 4accordin% to hi& and co&in% fro& hi&, this is
precious5, in decidin% these issues (e &ust pose the prior )uestion of ,ho( do (e "no( this
ut fro& e'perience2/ ,0heories/ &ust e ,founded on careful and reiterated e'peri&ents,/ so
that (e do not ,return a%ain to the old &ode of philosophi=in% and &a"e facts end to
syste&s, instead of estalishin% syste&s upon facts/ 4chapter 75. >n this )uestion, 6althus
(as, a%ain, not 1ust lo%ically and &ethodolo%ically &ista"en, ut si&ply &ista"en+ @e%iti&ately
notin% historical outco&es 4i.e., here appealin% to the only asis on (hich a practical 1ud%&ent
can e rendered5, it is ecause the history of capitalis& is that e'perience and the e'peri&ent,
and capitalis& has proven Condorcet ri%ht on this account<
E&inent &athe&atician and &athe&atical theorist, Physiocrat and anti9clerical 46althus
induitaly "ne( this5, lieral cha&pion of the *sse&ly a%ainst the Cro(n and its, the
*sse&lyIs, secretary, author of the plan that to this day lays at the foundation of the ;rench
educational syste&, a Repulican as the *sse&ly under the pressure of the Parisian sans-
culottes under(ent radicali=ation, author of the &oderate ?irondist constitution, a historical
figure of i$port, Condorcet (as a &an of action (ithout ein% a politician 4honesty and
forthri%htness, his ,&anners,/ deter&inin% his co&port&ent5. Entirely unli"e ?od(in, he died
for his convictions.
3onetheless ?od(in is clearly %er&ane here. *lso an Enli%hten&ent fi%ure, he (as a theorist,
articulatin% an exceedingl% coherent, conceptual fra&e of reference of ,philosophical,/ i.e.,
our%eois and hu&anist, anarchis& 4as opposed to, say, anarchist currents that circulated
a&on% (or"ers in Spain, ;rance and else(here in the t(ili%ht era of for&al do&ination, fro&
1FG0 do(n to the last i&perialist (orld (ar5. It is his &a1or (or", 7n 2nquir% Concerning
4olitical Gustice 41G7D5, that is the o1ect of 6althus. criticis&.
0he core of 6althus. opposition to ?od(in.s perspective is articulated in t(o chapters.
Effectively 6althus. criticis& flo(s in t(o directions, first, there are funda&ental
disa%ree&ents over asic features of the hu&an condition, and, second, there is a direction
confrontation over the rationalist scaffoldin% that supports ?od(in.s vie(s of hu&an
perfectiility 4chapter 1#5. ;or our purposes here, it is the for&er that &erits consideration.
1
3o( ?od(in is interestin%, that is to say, in direct opposition to Malthus he holds that there is
in hu&an society a principle, as it (ere, that prevents population %ro(th fro& outstrippin%
resources that are re)uired to sustain hu&ansE that oppression, e'ploitation, de%radation, i.e.,
,evil/ or in 6althus. (ords ,&isery and vice/ 4an e'pression that if it appears once appears a
do=en ti&es5, are as they appear in civil societ% a product of hu&an institutionsE and, that the
,spirit of oppression, the spirit of servility, and the spirit of fraud...are... i&&ediate HoutJ%ro(ths
of the estalished ad&inistration of property. 0hey are ali"e hostile to intellectual
i&prove&ent/ 4chapter 105, i.e., hostile to autono&ous personal for&ation. ?od(in is, in other
(ords, interestin% ecause he holds that private propert% in production, and &ourgeois
institutions the fa$il% particularl%, are the &asis on hich N$iser% and vice> rise.
3o( 6althus devotes far &ore space and (ords to ?od(in, as opposed to Condorcet,
ecause ?od(in is his &\te noire, the opponent to (ho& he has no real response, to (ho&
he can only oppose his o(n vie(s ut (ho& he cannot, other than reiteratin% those vie(s,
successfully counter.
2
In all this ?od(in developed the follo(in% position+ *sent private property in production and
the rutali=in% effects of hu&an institutions under civil society 4capitalis&5, ,In a state of
society (here &en lived in the &idst of plenty and (here all shared ali"e the ounties of
nature, these senti&ents (ould inevitaly e'pire. 0he narro( principle of selfishness (ould
vanish. 3o &an ein% oli%ed to %uard his little store or provide (ith an'iety and pain for his
1
0he for&er is ta"en up in chapter 10, the latter in chapter 1#. In et(een, 6althus critici=ed ?od(in.s vie(s 4as he
did Condorcet.s5 on the prolon%ation of hu&an life 4chapter 125 and his vie(s of the centrality of rationality in hu&an
constitution 4chapter 1D5, ar%uin% instead that hu&ans are ,co&pound ein%s,/ that ,passion/ as (ell as rationality is
constitute for ,&an.s/ ,nature./ In this re%ard it &i%ht e noted that, in contradistinction to his earliest presentation of
his funda&ental perspective in (hich se'uality appears as the &erely as the &eans of propa%atin% the species,
herein it $ust function exclusivel% as that activit% that insures an excess of progen% 0population5 over su&sistence,
a%ainst ?od(in he ar%ues for ,sensual< en1oy&ent,/ ,virtuous love, e'alted y friendship/ ,a(a"enHin%J the
sy&pathies of the soul/ and producin% ,the &ost e')uisite %ratifications/ 4chapter 115 all in e%ettin% pro%eny.
46althus (anted it oth (ays.5 It should e noted that this volte-face for&s &erely an appeal, not an ar%u&ent, in the
face of ?od(in.s utilitarian &orality, for (hich ehavior results fro& the calculation of conse)uences. ;or ?od(in,
sensual, here se'ual, pleasure (ith unpleasant conse)uences, e.%., a pro%eny that could not e supported (ith
availale resources, inco&es, etc., (ould not e pursued. 0hou%h it does not follo( (ith any necessity, ?od(in li"e
hi&self, as 6althus points out, does not advocate ,pro&iscuous intercourse./ In this conte't, a%ainst variety, diversity
and ,pro&iscuity,/ he (rites, ,0he love of variety is a vicious, corrupt, and unnatural taste and could not prevail in any
%reat de%ree in a si&ple and virtuous state of society/ 4,&id5, de&onstratin% his affinity to Calvin, even if they (ere not
of the sa&e deno&inational persuasion.
2
?od(in (as not an entirely laudale character. *s (e said aove, ?od(in (as unli"e Condorcet (ho died for his
convictions 4(hich is not the say that principled &en and (o&en &ust prove the&selves y dyin% for their
convictions5E rather, he, as an anti9statist theorist, has the ano&alous distinction of livin% out his life as a
%overn&ental pensioner, and under a 0ory re%i&e no less.
restless (ants, each (ould lose his individual e'istence in the thou%ht of the %eneral %ood./
3icely stated. 6althus can only retort+
,But that it is &erely an i&a%inary picture, (ith scarcely a feature near the truth, the reader, I
a& afraid, is already too (ell convinced./ Really2 *nd (hy, pray tell2 ,Man cannot live in the
$idst of plent%+ 7ll cannot share ali!e the &ounties of nature+> $ere 6althus reveals his real
visceral co&&it&ents as (ell as intellectual parenta%e, $oes+ N"ere there no esta&lished
ad$inistration of propert%, ever% $an ould &e o&liged to guard ith force his little store+
Selfishness (ould e triu&phant/ 4chapter 10, e&phasis added5. -es, of course. Bour%eois
e%ois& is characteristic of hu&anity as such, a universal condition that no hu&an can escape.
But only if, a%ainst ?od(in, ,selfishness/ is not %enerated under conditions of sociall%
deter$ined scarcity, only then (ould the ,su1ects of contention< e perpetual. Every
individual &ind (ould e under a constant an'iety aout corporal support, and not a sin%le
intellect (ould e left free to e'patiate in the field of thou%ht./
1
But it is a specific historical
e'perience, that circu&scried y capitalis& 4or perhaps (e should say for&s of sociation
ased on fi'ed places in a division of laor (herein &aterial ine)uality seeps do(n deeply into
and reor%ani=es the co&&unity itself5 that, contra 6althus, e'perientially %rounds this
assess&ent. 0o either side of capitalis&... the archaic past, a lieratory future that stands
efore us yet to e &ade... history elies 6althusI 1ud%&ent. $ere ?od(in is clearly superior.
Reduced to foa&in%, 6althus strate%y is t(ofold. 6ost i&portantly, to disin%enuously si%h, to
deun", to ridicule, to lau%h+ ,0he (hole is little etter than a drea&, a eautiful phanto& of
the i&a%ination. 0hese I%or%eous palacesI of happiness and i&&ortality, these Isole&n
te&plesI of truth and virtue (ill dissolve, Ili"e the aseless faric of a visionI, (hen (e a(a"en
to real life and conte&plate the true and %enuine situation of &an on earth/ 4,&id5. Why2 NThe
&lac! train of distresses? ould inevita&l% &e occasioned &% the insecurit% of propert%> 4,&id,
e&phasis added5< 0his is (holly consistent (ith his 1ud%&ent on the ;rench Revolution 4and
not 1ust in its 8acoin, ut in all, phases5+ $ere (e can see ,the hu&an &ind in one of the
&ost enli%htened nations of the (orld, and after a lapse of so&e thousand years, deased y
such a fer&entation of dis%ustin% passions, of fear, cruelty, &alice, reven%e, a&ition,
&adness, and folly as (ould have dis%raced the &ost sava%e nation in the &ost ararous
a%e./< ;or 6althus, our%eois that he is, the revolution threatened property and this is the
real issue. *nd (hat can he offer in support for his assertion of the centrality of private
property in production for hu&an e'istence, not for the ,%ood life/ ut for society to e possile
at all2 $e can only do%&atically reiterate his &athe&atical ratio 4and such is the second
strate%ic ele&ent5+ ,I have already pointed out the error of supposin% that no distress and
difficulty (ould arise fro& an overchar%ed population efore the earth asolutely refused to
produce any &ore./ ;urther parodyin% ?od(in.s utopian pro1ections, 6althus then proclai&s,
,With these e'traordinary encoura%e&ents to population, and every cause of depopulation, as
(e have supposed, re&oved, the nu&ers (ould necessarily increase faster than in any
society that has ever yet een "no(n/ 4,&id5. *nd, of course, he once a%ain 4spare us5
provides us (ith an e'actin% &athe&atical reductio ad i$possi&le+ >f course.
If 6althus. can only oppose his intuitively certainty9ased calculations to ?od(in.s position,
there re&ains that one na%%in% )uestion, that principle in hu&an society, y (hich, for
?od(in, ,population is perpetually "ept do(n to the level of the &eans of susistence./ $o( is
1
In the course of all this, 6althus does provide us (ith a %li&pse of his o(n utterly ac"(ard and reactionary utopia. It
is a%ricultural+ ,@et us suppose all the causes of &isery and vice in this island re&oved. War and contention cease.
Rn(holeso&e trades and &anufactories do not e'ist< 0here are no to(ns sufficiently lar%e to have any pre1udicial
effects on the hu&an constitution. 0he %reater part of the happy inhaitants of this terrestrial paradise live in ha&lets
and far&houses scattered over the face of the country. Every house is clean, airy, sufficiently roo&y, and in a healthy
situation. *ll &en are e)ual. 0he laors of lu'ury are at end. *nd the necessary laors of a%riculture are shared
a&icaly a&on% all/ 4chapter 105.
this so2 $o( is this possile2 ,0he sole )uestion is, (hat is this principle2 Is it so&e oscure
and occult cause2 Is it so&e &ysterious interference of heaven, (hich, at a certain period,
stri"es the &en (ith i&potence, and the (o&en (ith arrenness2 >r is it a cause, open to our
researches, (ithin our vie(, a cause, (hich has constantly een oserved to operate, thou%h
(ith varied force, in every state in (hich &an has een placed2/ 4,&id5.
6althus is affled. $e can only retreat to his ,la(s of nature,/ entirely unevidenced as they
are+ ,Is it not a de%ree of &isery, the necessary and inevitale result of the la(s of nature,
(hich hu&an institutions, so far fro& a%%ravatin%, have tended consideraly to &iti%ate,
thou%h they never can re&ove2/ Based on specific descriptions rou%ht ac" fro& the len%thy
period of the con)uest of the *&ericas 4a&on% (hich Bartolo&U de las CasasI (ere the &ost
analytically incisive, &ost thorou%h, &ost credile, and to e sure, unfa&iliar to 6althus5, to
this, ho(ever, ?od(in opposes the funda&ental insi%ht of all opponents of capitalist
&odernity as it first e%an to develop on its o(n foundations, the recognition of different
societies, of histor% and a $o$ent in histor% ithin hich sociall% deter$ined scarcit% did not
reign. 6althus paraphrases, ,a&on% the (anderin% tries of *&erica and *sia, (e never find
throu%h the lapse of a%es that population has so increased as to render necessary the
cultivation of the Earth./ 0o this 6althus has no ans(erE he can only offer denial<
4rogra$
*s (e have already su%%ested, 6althus is &iffed y the utter inaility of his %reat opponents,
and not 1ust the& N even those 4Wallace5 (ith (ho& he other(ise sees eye to eye fail to
%rasp the e'i%encies of the situation, to understand that ,the truth/ is that the ,ar%u&ent %iven
in this Essay/ is ,far fro& ein% re&ote,/ ut is ,i&&inent and i&&ediate,/ 4chapter F5
&eanin% that, induitaly, his pro%ra& is in ur%ent need of ein% carried out. E'pressed as
such 4pro%ra&&atically5 this ur%ency is, as (e shall see, (hat so &anifestly and patently
renders 6althus capital.s non-political Representative, i.e., he not only for&ulates the
naturalistic and reductionist pre&ises of the eternality of the e'istin% syste& of social
relations, ut he articulates the perspective of capital thou%h at the tail end of the curve of its
$ove$ent.
1
So (hat does he offer2
6althus e%ins fro& a criti)ue of the Poor @a(s.
Return to the curate in >"e(ood. 0he latter (as a %enuine ac"(ater located in the forest
re%ion at the center of Surrey. It did not eco&e a parish until 1FCD, so in the seventeen
nineties 6althus had no e'perience as a %uardian or visitor 4see i&&ediately elo(5+ 0hat is,
he (as not in any official capacity tied to the ad&inistration of those @a(s, thou%h, since
>"e(ood (as ad&inistered as co&ponent in a lar%er parish, 6althus (as )uite a(are of ho(
i&ple&entation of the Poor @a(s (ere overseen and the senti&ents of laorin% &en to(ard
the&. In this re%ard, the villa%e had at least t(o note(orthy features that stood out for 6althus
4oth io%raphers (e have cited point the& out5+ It (as e'ceedin%ly poor, its laorers and
their fa&ilies undernourished and underclothedE yet its aptis&al records for the entire
chronolo%ical ei%hteenth century indicate a rather a&a=in% %enerative capacity a&on% the
poor in the &idst of poverty, &alnourish&ent and s)ualor.
2
6althus did not (rite (ords li"e the
follo(in% &erely to fit an ideolo%ical ar%u&ent+ ,0he sons and dau%hters of peasants (ill not
e found such rosy cherus in real life as they are descried to e in ro&ances. It cannot fail
to e re&ar"ed y those (ho live &uch in the country that the sons of laorers are very apt to
e stunted in their %ro(th, and are a lon% (hile arrivin% at &aturity. Boys that you (ould %uess
1
See the previous footnote.
2
,It (as the ei%hteenth9century aptis&s in the >"e(ood Re%ister (hich so &uch astonished suse)uent cler%y&en,
(ho "ne( nothin% (hatsoever aout 6althus. 0hey noted (ith a&a=e&ent that there (ere so &any pa%es and pa%es
of aptis&s, and that the aptis&s (ere so %reatly in e'cess of the urials./ 8a&es, 4opulation Malthus, #O.
to e fourteen or fifteen are, upon in)uiry, fre)uently found to e ei%hteen or nineteen. *nd the
lads (ho drive plou%h, (hich &ust certainly e a healthy e'ercise, are very rarely seen (ith
any appearance of calves to their le%s+ a circu&stance (hich can only e attriuted to a (ant
either of proper or of sufficient nourish&ent/ 4chapter C5. It (as ecause (ithout e'ception this
descried his daily e'perience fulfillin% his oli%ations as a curate, an e'perience (hich he
could not sha"e, that he (as unale to see eyond<
In En%land, the 1G7C food ,riots/ fri%htened parlia&entary %entle&en, those staunch
defenders of the e&er%in% order of capital. *s sy&pathi=er of the (or"in% poor, Sa&uel
Whitread rou%ht a &ini&u& (a%e ill efore the Co&&ons. 0he ill itself (as a response to
these so9called riots across the country, in the South 6idlands 4i.e., the sa&e %eneral re%ion
i&&ediately (est of @ondon in (hich >"e(ood could e found5, in the far south(est 4:evon5,
in the s&all to(ns of the e'tre&e north 4Carlisle, Cu&ria5, coast eastern Suffol" 4Isp(ich5, in
southern coast $a&pshire 4;ordin%rid%e5, in the historically conservative south central
heartland 4:eddin%ton, >'fordshire5.
1
0errifyin% the e&er%in% &anufacturin% our%eoisie, this
activity erupted as (or"in% &en and o$en especiall% e'hiited their o(n ad hoc, infor&al
or%ani=ation+ 3o pilla%in%, no e'propriation, 1ust the appropriation of foodstuffs of retail
foodshops and estalish&ent of their o(n distriution at a fi'ed, ,fair price/ 4recallin% a%ain the
&oral econo&y of production that still lived in their a(areness5. Proceeds (ere returned to the
&erchants and retailers. But this self9activity and self9or%ani=ation (as anathe&a to the
our%eoisie. It (as ,ille%al,/ ,co&ination./
@ed y Willia& Pitt as Pri&e 6inister,
2
ehind (ho& stood capital.s early personifications
&outhin% the for&idale phraseolo%y aout the i&partial 1ustice of capitalist &ar"ets 4in the
$a&&ondsI (ords ,all the interests and instincts of class (ere dis%uised under the %old dust
of *da& S&ithIs philosophy/5,
D
the ca&pai%n to defeat the ill (as successful. In an effort to
lunt these spontaneous eruptions, Pitt rou%ht out his o(n ill, a Poor @a( Refor&, an
atte&pt to update and &oderni=e (hat fro& the standpoint of capital (ere increasin%ly archaic
&eans of controllin% and &oili=in% (a%ed laor. Pitt.s ill too (as sent do(n. So an older
le%ality 6althus called anachronistic re&ained in place. In (hat did they consist2
0he Poor @a(s date fro& an enact&ent 41O015 in the rei%n of Eli=aeth. In ta"in% over
assistance to the poor fro& the Church, the En%lish state retained its institutional fra&e(or" in
the parish. In various a&end&ents 41G22, 1GF75 ad&inistration of relief (as reor%ani=ed so
that y the &id91G70s 8ustices of the Peace appointed parish overseers (ho collected and set
the rates of assistance. :istriution of relief (as e'ecuted y paid %uardians 4one for each
parish5, (ho (ere appointed y the 1ustices on the asis of lists tenured y parishioners.
8ustices further appointed a ,visitor/ for each parish (ho &onitored the (or" of the %uardians
as he sa( fit.
Relief, a shillin% or t(o, (as provided (ee"ly at the ho&e of the recipient 4"no(n as ,out
relief/5, and in a (or"house, poorhouse or in a capitalist fir& 4,indoor relief/5. :readed y the
(or"in% class poor, provision throu%h the (or"house (as the earlier and far &ost co&&on
for& of relief, and it (as &andatory 4at penalty of losin% this &iserly inco&e5, (or"houses
4and poorhouses5 ein% constructed at parish e'pense.
#
6althus. pri&ary o1ection to the Poor @a(s (as 1ust as archaic as the la( itself, a thin &as"
for his real concerns 4(hich, at any rate, he states5+ $is criticis& invo"ed precapitalist political
concepts, ,for this assistance (hich so&e of the poor receive< the (hole class of the
co&&on people of En%land is su1ected to a set of %ratin%, inconvenient, and t%rannical la(s,
1
8.@ $a&&ond and Barara $a&&ond, The Lillage 3a&ourer, 7G97F.
2
;or the various positions assu&ed and &aneuverin% durin% the course of deate, see ,&id, chapter O.
D
,&id, 11F9117.
#
,&id+
totally inconsistent (ith the %enuine spirit of the constitution. 0he (hole usiness of
settle&ents, even in its present a&ended state, is utterly contradictory to all ideas of freedo&/
4chapter C, e&phasis added5. But it is not the classically repulican 4i.e., oli%archical5 criti)ue
of state9&ediated capitalist t%rann% that concerns hi& 4in variant %ra&&atical for&s, the (ord
appears three ti&es in a sin%le short para%raph5E rather it is the ,ostruction/ such relief
presents to the &ove&ent of capital 4(herein, of course, the pli%ht of laor is al(ays invo"ed5+
,H0heJ ostructions continuity occasioned in the &ar"et of laor y these la(s have a constant
tendency to add to the difficulties of those (ho are stru%%lin% to support the&selves (ithout
assistance/ 4,&id5, (hich, as a lieral in classical 4S&ithian5 sense, he really elieved &i%ht %o
the lon%est (ay to(ard a&elioratin% a poverty that (ould, in his vie(, never disappear+
>fferin% a &athe&atical de&onstration of sorts, 6althus tells us, ,the parish la(s of En%land
have contriuted to raise the price of provisions and to lo(er the real price of laor. 0hey have
therefore contriuted to i&poverish that class of people (hose only possession is their laor./
But this is only part of the issue, for ,(or"&en< H(ouldJ save a part of their hi%h (a%es for the
future support of their fa&ilies, instead of spendin% it in drun"enness and dissipation, if they
did not rely on parish assistance for support in case of accidents./ In the end, the Poor @a(s
lead ,to idleness and dissipation/ 4,&id5.
So (hat (as the re&edy2
,0he evil is perhaps %one too far to e re&edied, ut I feel little dout in &y o(n &ind that if
the poor la(s had never e'isted, thou%h there &i%ht have een a fe( &ore instances of very
severe distress, yet that the a%%re%ate &ass of happiness a&on% the co&&on people (ould
have een &uch %reater than it is at present./ 0he conclusion &ust follo(, ,(ere I to propose
a palliative< it should e< the total aolition of the present parish9la(s./ With his ac"(ard
loo"in% eye to a%riculture, such an enact&ent (ould ,%ive lierty and freedo& of action to the
peasantry of En%land./ $ere, for ,peasantry/ 4(hich no lon%er e'isted any(here in En%land5
(e should read ,capitalist far&ers/ 4or the lar%e capitalist tenants, of (hich there (ere &ore
than a fe(5E ut &ore i&portantly, ,the &ar"et of laor (ould then e free, and those
ostacles re&oved (hich< prevent the price Hof laorJ fro& risin% Hor fallin%J accordin% to
de&and/ 4,&id5.
With a vie( to the capitalist far&er or tenant, 6althus proposed, ,Secondly, pre&iu&s &i%ht
e %iven for turnin% up fresh land, and it possile encoura%e&ents held out to a%riculture
aove &anufactures, and to tilla%e aove %ra=in%./ *nd, even if 6althus. %lance (as
ac"(ard loo"in%, he reco%ni=ed the necessity of ,lieratin%/ the ,country/ fro& the %rasp of
,feudal/ restrictions in order to constitute a unifor& national &ar"et in laor, even if he only
sa( this national &ar"et in ter&s of a%riculture. So here.s the cru', ,Every endeavor should
e used to (ea"en and destroy all those institutions relatin% to corporations, apprenticeships,
etc., (hich cause the laors of a%riculture to e (orse paid than the laors of trade and
&anufactures./ 0he &easure, then, ai&ed at destruction of an older for& of self9or%ani=ation
a&on% artisan proletarians, a stratu& (hich 6althusI proposal patently su%%ests he
considered archaic+ $is prescription (ould effectively render artisan proletarians declassed,
nu&er the& a&on% the industrial reserve of laor. -es2 3o2 ,;or a country can never
produce its proper )uantity of food (hile these distinctions re&ain in favor of artisans. Such
encoura%e&ents to a%riculture (ould tend to furnish the &ar"et (ith an increasin% )uantity of
healthy (or"HersJ./ 0his, then, (as precisely the point.
,@astly,/ (e should note for%et the role of the state, ,for cases of e'tre&e distress, county
(or"houses &i%ht e estalished, supported y rates upon the (hole "in%do&, and free for
persons of all counties, and indeed of all nations. 0he fare should e hard, and those that
(ere ale oli%ed to (or",/ (ho, it %oes (ithout sayin%, the &anufacturers and capitalist
far&ers ali"e could dra( on as re)uired.
Marx.s Criticis$ of Malthus
Consider no( 6ar'.s criti)ue 4or that part of it (hich he too" up and concerned the 2ssa%5+
,Malthus. theory, (hich incidentally H(asJ not his invention, ut (hose fa&e he ac)uired
throu%h the clerical =ealotry (ith (hich he pushed it for(ard, actually only y (ay of the
e&phasis he placed on it, is douly i&portant+ 415 ecause he %ives rutal e'pression to the
rutal viepoint of capitalE 425 ecause he asserted as fact overpopulation in all for&s of
society. 4roved it he has not, for there is nothing $ore uncritical than his co$pilations
confusedl% thron together fro$ historians# or!s and travelers# accounts He&phases addedJ.
$is conception is alto%ether false and childish 415 ecause he re%ards overpopulation as
ein% identical in !ind in all the different historic phases of econo&ic develop&entE failin% to
understand their specific differenceHsJ, and thus stupidly reduces these very co&plicated and
diverse relations to a sin%le relation, as t(o natural series confrontin% one another, in (hich
the natural reproduction of hu&anity appears in one and the natural reproduction of
consu&ale ve%etation 4or &eans of susistence5 in the other, in pro%ressions the for&er
%eo&etric and the latter arith&etic/
1
4our translation5.
6ar' rilliantly %rasps that an undialectical relation of specific social %roups to their
surroundin% 4hu&anly5 natural (orld as a relation of &utual e'ternality (ill necessary
naturali=e the for&er. 0hus, he continues,
,In this &anner he transfor&s the historically distinct relations into an astract nu&erical ratio,
(hich he has fished purel% out of thin air, and (hich rests neither on natural nor historical
la(s/
2
4our translation, e&phasis added5. In our ter&s, 6althus. thin"in% is unevidenced,
astract and speculative. 0he conclusion is clear, na&ely, ,0here is alle%edly a natural
difference et(een the reproduction of &an"ind and e.%. %rain,/
D
ut no difference (ithin
nature itself 4i.e., 6althus is incapale of theori=in% the reco%nition that ,&an/ is hu$anl%
natural, even if his e'a&ples often proceed on this asis5.
0hus, ,0his ape Hi.e., 6althusJ therey asserts that the increase of hu$anit% is a purely natural
process, (hich re)uires external restraints, chec!s, to i&pede its %eo&etrical pro%ression.
0his geo$etrical reproduction is the natural reproduction process of &an"ind. In history he
(ould find that population advances on the asis of very different relations, and
overpopulation is li"e(ise a historically deter&ined relation, in no (ay deter&ined y astract
nu&ers or y the asolute li&it on the productivity of the necessaries of life, ut y li&its set
y specific conditions of production+ H*ndJ nu&erically li&ited as (ell. $o( s&all do the
1
MMalthus. 0heorie, die Ari%ens nicht seine Erfindun%, sondern von der er sich den Ruh& an%eei%net durch den
pfQffischen Eifer, &it de& er sie ver"Andete, ei%entlich nur durch den *"=ent, den er auf sie le%te, ist nach 2 Seiten
hin edeutend+ 1. (eil er der rutalen *nsicht des Lapitals rutalen *usdrAc" verliehnE 2. (eil er das fact der
kerpopulation unter allen ?esellschaftsfor&en &ehauptet hat. Be(iesen hat er sie nicht, denn es %it nichts
Rn"ritischeres als seine unt =usa&&en%e(Arfelten Lo&pilationen aus ?eschichteschreiern und
Reiseeschreiun%en. :urchaus falsch und "indisch ist seine *uffassun%, 1. (eil er die ]&erpopulation in den
verschiednen historischen Phasen der c"ono&ischen Ent(ic"lun% als gleichartig etrachtetE ihren spe=ifischen
Rnterschied nicht versteht und diese sehr "o&pli=ierten and (echselnden !erhQltnisse daher stupid auf ein !erhQltnis
redu=iert, (o einerseits die natArliche ;ortpflan=un% des 6enschen, andrerseits die natArliche ;ortpfal=un% der
!e%etailien 4oder &eans of susistence5 sich als =(ei natArliche Reihen, von denen die eine %eo&etrisch, die andre
arith&etisch fortschreitet, %e%unAerstehn., 6ar', 8rundrisse, ,0heorien Aer 6ehr(ert und Profit,, in E!ono$ische
Manus!ripte, *CASU*CAC+ Marx-2ngels "er!e, Bd+ D': C0O9C0G.
2
MSo ver(andelt er die historisch verschiednen !erhQltnisse in ein astra"tes BahlenverhQltnis, das rein aus der @uft
%efischt ist und (eder auf 3atur%eset=en noch auf historischen eruft., ,&id, C0G.
D
MEs soll ein natArlicher Rnterschied in der ;orpflan=un% des 6enschen =.B. und des ?etreides stattfinden., ,&id+
nu&ers (hich for *thenian &eant overpopulation appear to ush/
#
4>ur translation.5 0his
insi%ht is, (ell, si&ply eyond 6althus.
,Secondly, restricted accordin% to character. * surplus population of free *thenians
transfor&ed into colonists is si%nificantly different fro& a surplus population of (or"ers
transfor&ed into (or"house in&ates. @i"e(ise the surplus population of e%%ars that
consu&es the surplus produce of a &onastery is different fro& that (hich ta"es shape in a
factory/
1
4our translation5. $ere, (e affir& our o(n criti)ue of the fixed &ecause a&stract
0sociall% undifferentiated5 character of sociall% specific conditions 0and perhaps events5, and
the social relations that underla% the$+ 0his is to say that these conditions are fi'ed ecause
they are not historical, for (hile they are 4&eanin% that they are transient, not per$anent,
features of the hu$an condition5, this has no &eanin% for 6althus. It (as the ;rench
Revolution, the si%nificance of (hich 6althus re1ected, that opened up the perspective of
history. *s a our%eois thin"er asin% hi&self on that re1ection, it (as i&possile for hi& to
%rasp and e'plicate the si%nificance for his, for any, theori=ation of transient historical
conditions. 0hus, 6ar' is ahead of hi&self 4i.e., fails to en%a%e 6althus i&&anently5 (hen he
states 4aleit correctly, at least for us and for later 6althusians (ho have no e'cuse5 that, ,It is
he H6althusJ (ho astracts fro& these deter&inate historic la(s of the &ove&ents of
population, (hich are indeed the history of the nature of hu&anity, natural la(s, ut natural
la(s of hu&anity only as a specific historic develop&ent, (ith the develop&ent of its o(n
historical process deter&ined y the develop&ent of productive po(ers. 6althusian &an,
astracted fro& historically deter&ined &an, e'ists only in his rainE and thus also the
%eo&etric &ethod of reproduction correspondin% to this natural 6althusian &an. Real history
thus does not appear to hi& as the reproduction of his natural hu&anity astracted fro& the
historic process of real reproduction, ut to the contrary appears inverted+ Real reproduction is
an instance of 6althusian theory. 0hus, for hi&, the i&&anent conditions of population, and
overpopulation as (ell, appear at every sta%e of history as a series of external chec!s, (hich
have prevented population fro& developin% in 6althusian for&. 0he conditions in (hich
hu&anity historically produces and reproduces itself appear as &arriers to the reproduction of
6althusian natural &an, (ho is a 6althusian creature/
2
4our translation5.
#
M:er *ffe unterstellt daei, dab die Ler$ehrung des Menschen reiner 3aturpro=eb ist, der @u^erer restraints,
chec!s, edarf, u& nicht nach einer %eo&etrischen Proportion vor=u%ehn. :iese geo$etrische )ortpflan/ung ist der
natArliche ;ortpflan=un%spro=eb des 6enschen. In der ?eschichte findet er vor, dab die Population in sehr
verschiednen !erhQltnissen vor sich %eht und die kerpopulation eensosehr ein %eschichtlich esti&&tes !erhQltnis
ist, "eines(e%s durch Bahlen esti&&t oder durch die asolute ?ren=e der Produ"tivitQt von @eens&itteln, sondern
durch von &esti$$ten 4rodu!tions&edingungen %eset=te ?ren=en. So(ohl der Bahl nach eschrQn"t. Wie "lein
erscheinen uns die Bahlen, die den *theniensern kerpopulation edeutenh, ,&id+
1
MB(eitens de& Chara"ter nach. Eine kerpopulation von freien *theniensern, die in Lolonisten ver(andelt (erden,
ist von einer kerpopulation von *reitern, die in (or"house in&ates ver(andelt (erden, edeutend verschieden.
Eenso die ettelnde kerpopulation, die in eine& Lloster sein Surplusproduce ver=ehrt, von der, die sich in einer
factory ildet., ,&id+
2
MEr ist es, der astrahiert von diesen esti&&ten historischen ?eset=en der Populatione(e%un%en, die, da die
$istoria der 3atur des 6enschen die natPrlichen ?eset=e sind, aer nur natArliche ?eset=e des 6enschen auf
esti&&ter historischer Ent(ic"lun%, &it esti&&ten durch seinen ei%nen ?eschichtspro=eb Hedin%terJ Ent(ic"lun%
der Produ"tiv"rQfte. :er 6althussche 6ensch, astrahiert von de& historisch esti&&ten 6enschen, e'istiert nur in
seine& $irnE daher auch die diese& natArlichen 6althusschen 6enschen entsprechende %eo&etrische
;ortplfan=un%&ethode. :ie (ir"liche ?eschichte erscheint ih& daher so, nicht dab die ;ortpflan=un% seines
3atur&enschen eine *stra"tion von de& ?eschichtspro=eb, von der (ir"liche ;ortpflan=un%, sondern u&%e"ehrt,
dab die (ir"liche ;ortpflan=un% eine *nd(endun% der 6althusschen 0heorie. Was daher in der ?eschichte die
Bedin%un%en, i&&anenten Bedin%un%en so(ohl der Population als kerpopulation auf 1eder Stufe, erscheint ei ih&
als eine Reihe au^erer chec!s, die die Population verhindert haen, sich in der 6althusschen ;or& =u ent(ic"eln.
:ie Bedin%un%en, in denen die 6enschen sich historisch produ=ieren und reprodu=ieren, erscheinen als Schran!en
der Reprodu"tion des 6althusschen 3atur&enschen, der eine 6althussche Lreatur ist., ,&id, C0G9C0F.
In contradistinction to 6ar', (e (ould only recall that the historicall% constituted ,sta%nation of
production/ (hich is eternally %iven for 6althus 4or at least cannot "eep pace (ith
%eo&etrically increasin% population %ro(th5 is in essence the sa$e realit% as Ba&euf
understood it+ 6ar' in this respect does not e'plicitly %rasp, co&prehend, that he lives in the
shado( of the ;rench Revolution. 6althus least of all can %rasp this.
It is, then, necessary to return to our ori%inal perspective+ "hat is Nintuitivel% certain> in
Malthus is an appeal to, or &etter, a na!ed assu$ption of, the fixed character of sociall% 0and
historicall%5 specific conditions 0and perhaps events5 and the social relations that underlie
the$? eyond 6althus. thin"in%, all of these 4conditions, events and relations5 are transient,
not per&anent, features of the ,hu&an condition/ 4our ter&5 as 6althus intended the&.
Mas!ed &% Nrational> de$onstration 0deductive inference5 these assu$ptions are congealed
expressions of &ourgeois pre9udice+ 0hey are est e'plained 4as in 6althus. discussion of the
Poor @a(s5 as the class i%otry of the capitalist 4and our%eoisie5< It is not that 6althus,
&ired in our%eois pre1udice, does not see this< of course, he doesn.t< But &ore
i&portantly, all those ho ta!e up, or ta!e over, his si$ple $athe$atical for$ula, carr% over
tacitl% &ut necessaril%, that pre9udice+ 0his rin%s us to :ar(in.
Part II
:ar(in and the Evolutionary :evelop&ent of @ife
In 6althus, a little di%%in% easily uncovers the class pre1udice of the our%eoisie a%ainst the
laor on (hich it is e'istentially dependent. In :ar(in, the sa&e i%otry is present. It is,
ho(ever, less visile ecause it is &ore refined and hi%hly theori=ed, ta"in% shape as a
syste&atic reflection on the course< the evolution and develop&ent< of life itself. Precisely
ecause it is not &anifest, it is necessary in the course of e'plicatin% it to e'hiit the actual
social lin"a%e of this thou%ht, other(ise appearin% detached, to the concrete conditions and
events of the ti&e and place in (hich it too" shape. 0hen, and only then, (ill (e e ale to
fully co&prehend, havin% already (or"ed throu%h, the asic theoretical orientation of its
author, :ar(in, and de&onstrate that in fact, and ho(, our%eois class concerns deter&ined
and shaped this orientation.
Malthus and Darin
In 6althus, the opti&is& that characteri=ed our%eois e'istence at the ori%ins of science, as
science as a social class pro1ect &ediated the eco&in% of the our%eoisie as a historical
class 4one actin% in history5, has lar%ely disappeared< it (ill reappear and disappear a%ain<
;or in 6althus, the prole& of surplus laor... o1ectively and historically &ediated y
scientific and technolo%ical inputs into production... laor in its astract for&, first eca&e
conscious. But the ui)uitous presence of propertyless, dis)uieted &en is only the first for&.
;ro& :ar(in do(n to the neo9:ar(inians (ho, as ,&odern/ &en, ,synthesis/ 6endel and
:ar(in, the prole& of surplus laor (ill eco&e institutionali=ed, and as such only a
ac"%round feature of capitalist develop&ent dealt (ith y capital.s theorists of laor,
econo&ists, as an industrial reserve ar&y of the une&ployed. 0his ac"%round feature (ill
only leap to the fore%round and eco&e the&atic durin% periodic eruptions in crises of
capital.s &ove&ent, econo&ic contractions, slu&ps and in proletarian oppositional upsur%es
a%ainst the order of capital. It is only in our o(n ti&e that the prole& of surplus laor has
ta"en on the proportions that &a"e it difficult si&ply to i%nore, as &e%alopolises, cities of
slu&s, arrios and shantyto(ns of the capitalist periphery and not 1ust those of the periphery,
have eco&e a planetary feature, as the tenuous hold on life and society of casuali=ed laor
and une&ployale surplus populations &a"e increasin%ly re%ular lar%e scale natural
disasters< a function of (eather at its e'tre&e characteri=in% the initial phase of cli&ate
chan%e, itself a necessary outco&e of capitalist develop&ent< &assive hu&an tra%edies. *s
:ar(in (rites thou%h, this still all lies in the future<
6althus had a detailed, aleit rulin% class9ased understandin% of the situation at the ori%ins
of real do&ination 4proletariani=ation on the asis of the factory syste&5 as it unfolded on the
%round, and efore it ever %ave rise to the parlia&entary fi%ht et(een our%eois factions
over the atte&pted refor& of the Poor @a(s e%innin% ane( in 1G7O+ $is (or" as a cleric
&inisterin% to the >"e(ood villa%e populace, &ost of (ho& (ere propertyless &en, poor
laorers, per&itted hi& to see upfront and close the social i&pact of the Poor @a(s, once
ad&inistered. $is population la( is rooted in this e'perience to%ether (ith his clerical
4*n%lican, Christian5 convictions, (hich &i%ht e su&&ari=ed in the e'pression ,the poor (ill
al(ays e (ith us./
:ar(in (as different.
:ar(in (as a country %entle&an (ho, a&on% other thin%s 4raisin% a fa&ily5, en%a%ed in plant
cultivation and fossil collection as part of those studies. $e (as, in other (ords, a leisured
%entle&en in a sense that very &uch corresponded to the classical conception of leisure,
1
one
in (hich the householder did not laor, and this as a prelude to participatin% in the %ood life.
1
What his &ore recent io%raphers call a ,Whi% %entle&en on a private fortune,/ :es&ond and 6oore, Darin, 177.
Rnli"e the ancient householder, he did not, ho(ever, participate in politics< 0hen, a%ain, the
British Parlia&ent (as not a 4socially restricted5 co&&unity of ostensile e)uals en%a%ed in
their o(n self9rule, ut an arena in (hich the political Representatives of %reat capitals
stru%%le a%ainst one another and for%ed a precarious unity that per&itted the& to overco&e,
at least in part, their other(ise anta%onist relations in order to enact a le%al order (hich (ould
for& the social pre&ises of the activity of those capitals< But this leisure did provide :ar(in
(ith the re)uisite ti&e to reflect on and thin" throu%h the population la( (ith a vie( to the
entirety of life on Earth and the develop&ent of that life over %eolo%ical ti&e.
0he son of an estalished, (ealthy physician 4(ho (as also the son of an estalished,
(ealthy physician, Eras&us :ar(in, poet, (riter and naturalist of so&e repute5, Charles, a
&iddlin% or ,avera%e/ student, (as educated at Ca&rid%e 4li"e 6althus, at Christ.s Colle%e5.
$e spend five years aoard the $6S Beagle as co&panion to Roert ;it=roy 4ship.s captain,
naval officer, hydrolo%ist and &eteorolo%ist5 in the capacity, co&&on durin% the era, of a
naturalist on a voya%e of e'ploration around the (orld 4for the &ost part in the Southern
$e&isphere5. >n his returned he eventually settled in @ondon 4until 1F#25, &arried a first
cousin, E&&a, of the very, very (ealthy Wed%(ood fa&ily 4china &anufacturin%5. In 1FD7
and, (ith an annual allo(ance fro& his father and the do(ry and an annual allo(ance
provided y the &arria%e 4courtesy of En%lish (or"in%&en e'ploited in Wed%(ood facilities5
retired to a country ho&e in the villa%e of :o(n in Lent (here he pursued his studies.
,deal-Cultural and 2xperiential 4resuppositions of Darin.s Theori/ation
04ale%, 3%ell especiall%5
Even if not popularly %enerali=ed, at least a&on% i&portant social layers the &eanin% of
nature had under%one si%nificant transfor&ation since the advent of capitalis& in the West,
especially En%land+ It no lon%er invo"ed the sa&e fears, or a(e, as it did a&on% social %roups
co&posin% the various non9capitalist social and triutary for&ations in the (orld. *&on% the
educated and the (ell to do, a ro&anticis& e&racin% nature, especially in the literatures of
En%land, ?er&any and ;rance 4and in a peculiarly *&erican or isolatedly individualistic for&,
(itness 0horeau5, had already e&er%ed efore the second decade of the chronolo%ical
nineteenth century. Counterposed to the evils of the factory syste&, nature had eco&e the
repository of (hat (as authentic in hu&an relations. It (as in this respect considered eni%n
and in it inhered a &odel for hu&anity situated (ithin it ut, increasin%ly distinct, alienated
fro& it. It (as, then, ta&e, possessed of eauty and repose 9 al(ays (ith the proviso here (e
are referrin% to the ne( &iddlin% %roups that (ere for&in% in the heart of early capitalis&.
*&on% one of those &iddlin% layers that predated the rise of industry, the clerics, its study as
natural history had eco&e an acceptale pasti&e.
1
Si&ilarly, this preoccupation could e
said to characteri=e ele&ents (ithin ne(er social %roups 4recall Eras&us :ar(in, a doctor5.
0here (as a difference ho(ever+ 0hese persona%es constituted a transitional social
asse&la%e, for the pursuit itself (as under%oin% professionali=ation, its earers increasin%ly
acade&icians, its content increasin%ly technical, The 1rigin of Species ein% perhaps, as
?eor%e @evine re&ar"s, ,the last &a1or scientific te't fully readale y nonscientists./
2
:ar(in certainly o(ed so&ethin% to an older naturalis&, that is, a natural theolo%y (hose
fore&ost proponent (as Willia& Paley and his oo" y the sa&e na&e,
D
not the least his for&
of ar%u&ent that, unli"e 6althus. entirely deductive (or", (as cu&ulative and lar%ely
1
,HByJ the ei%hteenth century nature (as sufficiently ta&ed enou%h to e ideali=ed, at least y educated &en (ho did
not the&selves have to laor on the land. 0he ei%hteenth and early nineteenth centuries (ere the heyday of the cult
of a eni%n and edifyin% nature, (hile the ;all receded &ore and &ore into the theolo%ical ac"%round< 3atural
history eca&e an approved clerical hoy./ 8.W. Burro(s, ,Introduction/ to The 1rigin of Species 417G75, 1F.
2
;ro& the Introduction to the edition of The 1rigin of Species 4200#5 (e are usin%, ,&id, 'iii. 0his is a reprint of the first
edition.
inductive. In other (ords, astractly settin% aside funda&ental assu&ptions :ar(in.s
ar%u&ent y and lar%e proceeded fro& a &ass of evidence to %enerali=ation ased on it. >f
si&ilar i&port (as attention to the sa&e features constitutin%, in a for&al sense, the content of
the ar%u&ent 4(hat :ar(in (ould later call K&y theoryK5, na&ely, the transcendent
si%nificance of adaptation understood as a relation of utility, a relation that connected a %iven
or%anic structure to its function in ter&s of the enefit the or%anis& in )uestion derived fro&
it.
1
>f course, for :ar(in the enefit is not fir&ly, i.e., hereditarily, estalished, unless it is only
for&ed over %enerations 4as :ar(in says, it is selected5, and affects the or%anis& to the
e'tent it is a &e&er of a species, or, if you prefer, lar%ely in the a%%re%ate sense 4to%ether
additively (ith all other adaptations5 it is these adaptations that distin%uish a species as such.
But this (as :ar(in in 1FC7+ Ri%ht up to his return to En%land, until he e%an re%ular
discussions (ith the coterie of Whi% 6althusians in @ondon, :ar(in re&ained fir&ly tied to
Paley.s perspectiveE and Paley 4(ealthy, a cleric (ith his o(n parish, *n%lican archdeacon not
to &ention a :octor of :ivinity at Ca&rid%e5,
2
for his part, had pointed to these adaptations
as evidence of divine effort, creativity, and solicitude for the creation.
In respect of these si&ilarities and in particular (hat distin%uishes the& 4here, in the for&al
sense only5, there (ere t(o further features (hose effect, once $ediated &% Malthus 4(ho
(ould co&e later5, (as to place a ya(nin% chas& et(een :ar(in and Paley. 0he first (as
ideational, a te&poral perspective< (hich :ar(in for the &ost part o(ed to @yell, (hat
4appropriatin% Braudel.s ter&5 (e shall call the geolog% of the long dureI< for (hich the
Earth and life on it is &illions of years old.
D
>f course, develop&ents in e&ryolo%y and
especially anato&y (ere i&portant here, and i&portant to and for :ar(in< It is said that
anato&y.s founder, ?eor%es Cuvier, could identifialy reconstruct an e'tinct species fro& a
sin%le one< 0he second difference et(een the youn% :ar(in and Paley (as e'periential+
>n the Beagle voya%e :ar(in (as (itness to a hu%e assort&ent of the life for&s (hich he
collected, descried and catalo%ed and of (hich he (as ale to assess their li"enesses and
differences (ith re%ard to type. It is doutful that the e'perience of the latter (ould &a"e
&uch sense, or at least the sa&e sense, had he een unfa&iliar (ith Charles @yell. But that
(as not the case+ :ar(in spent that ti&e aoard the Beagle (ith ;it=roy, a personal servant
4na&ed Covin%ton5, the ship.s cre(, and at the various stops 4so&e e'tended, three years
do(n and around the southern cone of continental South *&erica, five (ee"s in the
?alapa%os Islands, and lon% stays in 0ahiti, 3e( Bealand and Sydney, *ustralia, 0as&ania,
the Coco Islands 1FC0 &iles northeast of Perth and G00 &iles southeast of 8a"arta, 6auritius,
and Cape 0o(n5 durin% the course of the voya%e.
#
$is other close co&panions (ere @yell.s
4rinciples of 8eolog% 4the first volu&e (hich he carried (ith hi& (as pulished in 1FD05, a %ift
fro& ;it=roy, the first t(o volu&es in En%lish translation of *le'ander von $u&oldt.s
4ersonal Narrative of his travels 4$u&oldt had e'plored e)uatorial South *&erica so&e
thirty years prior to :ar(in.s travels5, and 6ilton.s 4aradise 3ost+
C
D
0he full title of Paley.s (or" in )uestion is revealin% in this re%ard+ Natural Theolog%< or, 2vidences of the 2xistence
and 7ttri&utes of the Deit%, collected fro$ the 7ppearances of Nature+ >ri%inally pulished in 1F02, y the end of the
follo(in% year it had under%one four &ore editions.
1
Burro(s, ,Iid,/ 2D.
2
:es&ond and 6oore, ,&id, GF.
D
6ediated y develop&ents in the youthful ne( science of life, a%ainst the over(hel&in% !ictorian and Christian
sense of hu&anity.s and the Earth.s duration, :ar(in.s states e'plicitly the ancient character of &an and the Earth.s
%eolo%ical a%e. See The 1rigin of Species, e.%., GC, GG, F1, 10#, 107, 1CF.
#
Charles :ar(in, The Lo%age of the Beagle, passi&.
:ar(in dedicated the second edition of this (or" to @yell, e'plicitly ac"no(led%in% the i&portance for hi& of the study
of 4rinciples of 8eolog%+
C
While alon% the eastern South *&erica coast, doc"ed at 6ontevideo, :ar(in received a post fro& @ondon
containin% @yell.s second volu&e. It (as pulished t(o years after the first, in 1FD2. 0his, the second volu&e unli"e
:ar(in collected a lar%e variety of speci&ens. *&on% the& (ere seashells, corals, roc"s,
sand co&pressed to )uart=9li"e stone, tiny pela%ic or%anis&s cau%ht (ith cloths or nets in the
open ocean, fish, insects, sna"es, the s"ins of ani&als and irds he shot 4in the latter case a
do=en a (ee" (hen on dry land5, s"eletons du% out of the dirt or e'posed on the sides of
e&an"&ents due to erosion, so&e of (hich he reco%ni=ed and other (hich he did not< *t
Bahia Blanca on the eastern ed%e of the *r%entine Pa&pas, he found several s"eletons of
(hich he nu&ered a four le%%ed creature, closely related to ar&adillos ut as lar%e as a
horse, and close y near Punta *lta :ar(in uncovered a (eird &a&&alian s"eleton, he
thou%ht as lar%e as rhinoceros, of (hich &ost intact (ere the ones &a"in% up a s&all lon%
face and a hu%e pelvis
1
< 0his (as su&&er 1FDD. In @ondon, three years and &onths later,
the %reat 0ory anato&ist, Richard >(en, (ould identify the latter s"eleton as co&in% closest
to that of an ancient, %iant Cape anteater<
2
0he conceptual fra&e(or" (ith a vie( to
%eolo%ical ti&e that :ar(in (as slo(ly assi&ilatin% y (ay of his readin% of @yell per&itted
hi& to %rasp the te&poral si%nificance of these discoveries. In the case of this s"eleton it as
ancient+ Its ento&ed position had een undistured, seashells had postdated it since they
had een found in an upper layer. * sea or (atery ody had covered the land after the ani&al
(hose fra&e (as for&ed y the s"eleton roa&ed the Earth. $o( lon% had it ta"en for that to
occur< it could not have een a ,catastrophic/ event for sedi&ent had een deposited
%radually< and y (hat< evolutionary< develop&ent in or processes of nature had such a
&assive or%anis& co&e into ein%, and ho( had it eco&e e'tinct2 :ar(in pondered these
)uestions.
0he %eolo%y tau%ht at Ca&rid%e sa( in nature catastrophic develop&ents, ,violent crustal
&ove&ents, (renchin% strata and &ountain thrusts,/
D
floods and volcanic eruptions.
Counterposed to this, @yell.s natural (orld evolved slo(ly, (ith past develop&ent not differin%
in any essentials fro& the present. 4In this re%ard, note the sutitle of his (or"5
#
+ 0hese
develop&ents (ere unifor& and had occurred over lon% periods of ti&e. @yell.s 4rinciples
&ade hi& the leadin% proponent of unifor&itarianis& in the ei%hteen thirties
C
< si%nifyin% that
today.s cli&ate and planetary &ove&ents 4crust, volcanic5, %eolo%ical conte&poraneity itself,
(as all that (as re)uired to e'plain a deep %eolo%ical past, or in his o(n lan%ua%e, actualis$
(as the heuristic "ey to the past< In the third volu&e he undertoo" (hat y our standards
today (as a hi%hly li&ited reconstruction of that past history of the Earth.
;ro& the very e%innin% of the voya%e, once under(ay, @yell.s perspective (as to &a"e &ore
sense to :ar(in+ *t the first stop, St. 8a%o in the Cape !erde Islands three hundred &iles
(est of the northern *frican coast 4(est of conte&porary 6auritania5, he noted, on enterin%
the haror, a co&plete level (hite and in the face of the cliff runnin% for &iles alon% the coast
at a hei%ht of rou%hly forty9five feet aove the (ater line. Studyin% it, he reco%ni=ed the (hite
the first, (as not of the sa&e order of i&portance to :ar(in. In it, @yell propounded his vie( of adaptation, that each
species (as entirely and perfectly adapted in situ+ Environ&ental chan%e (ould not result in &utation, ut eli&ination
of the species, its e'tinction. @yell elieved &ore than less in a (holly un9divine, and ine'plicale, for&ation of ne(
species as &ore ancient ones disappeared, (ent e'tinct. 40he &ain ar%u&ent appears in the second volu&e (herein
he indicated the fossil record is inconclusive, and su%%ests no pro%ress in develop&ent, specifically to(ard hu&anity.
4rinciples of 8eolog%, !ol. 2, chapter 25. ;or the lirary aoard the Beagle availale to :ar(in, 8ohn Bo(ly, Charles
Darin, 10#.
1
;or Bahia Blanca, ,* S"etch of the :eposits Containin% E'tinct 6a&&alia in the 3ei%horhood of the Plata,/ Paul $.
Barrett 4ed.5, The Collected 4apers of Charles Darin, Part 1, ##9#C H0his (as a paper read efore the ?eolo%ical
Study of @ondon on D 6ay 1FDG.JE for Punta *lta, Lo%age of the Beagle, FF9F7, 1C791O0.
2
,&id, F7E :es&ond and 6oore, ,&id, 1#1, 20C.
D
,&id, 11G.
#
Being an 7tte$pt to 2xplain the )or$er Changes of the 2arth.s Surface, &% Reference to Causes No in 1peration+
C
See 4rinciples of 8eolog%, !ol. 1, chapter G, (herein @yell for&ulates the theori=ation, and chapter F, (here he
e'a&ines the ancient cli&ate of 3orth *&erica in relation to its %eolo%ical for&ations in order to ,test/ and defend the
theory.
and (as &ade up calcareous &aterial, that is, residues of the calciu& deposits of hard9
shelled odies of plan"ton and other pela%ic or%anis&s includin% shells the&selves. 0he and
itself (as lay atop ,ancient volcanic roc", and has een covered y a strea& of asalt/ at a
&o&ent in ti&e (hen the pela%ic calcifiers lay at the otto&.
1
>viously then a land for&ation
forty9five feet aove current sea levels had once een under(ater. -et (ithin historical ti&es,
as :ar(in pointed out, there had een no disruptive natural activity or &ove&ent, ,no si%ns of
volcanic activity./
2
-es, indeed, @yell (as &a"in% &uch sense out of :ar(in.s e'perience.
NSpecial Creation of Separate Species>
@etIs no( consider :ar(inIs &ature vie(s in so&e detail. 0his, of course, leads to a the&atic
discussion of so&e of :ar(in central concerns in The 1rigin of Species+
0here (as one feature of conte&porary thin"in% 4actually t(o5 re%ardin% the natural (orld that
very early on in the course of his len%thy studies :ar(in ca&e to re1ect. 0his (as the notion of
,special creation of each separate species./ 40he second (as the ,fi'ity/ of species, (hich
(as, for :ar(in, inseparale fro& the first5. 0he t(o (ere not 1ust related, since for :ar(in the
second stood or fell (ith the first.
D
But to %et at this and fully understand (hat he o1ected to,
(e &ust %o ac" to (hat :ar(in intended (hen he spo"e of the origin of species+
:ar(in did not ta"e speciation as such as the su1ect of his study, the )uestion of ho( the
ta'ono&ic cate%ory, species, e'pressin% a real develop&ent in nature, first appeared 4if for no
other reason than it never occurred to hi& that so&e for&, an entire "in%do&, of or%anis&s
did not speciate5.
#
Rather, :ar(in proceeded pheno&enally and pheno&enolo%ically. In this
re%ard (e can co&press a &ass of &aterial and still follo( hi& (ith a set of e'a&ples of our
o(n. E'a&ine the enor&ous nu&er of varieties 4,reeds/5 of the do&estic cat. When (ould
one eco&e a distinct species2 >r, are ocat and lyn' varieties or separate species2 40he
&ountain lion, cou%ar and panther in the (estern Rnited States are na&es for re%ionally
distinctive, yet identically the sa&e species and cannot even e differentiated each fro& the
others as varieties.5 Why are the Ben%al ti%er and the Sierian ti%er not species ut varieties
4in this case, suspecies52 :ar(in devotes considerale space 4not to these specific
)uestions ut5 to )uestions of this "ind+ !arieties are ,variations/ on a type, a species, and
:ar(in concludes that it is only over %eolo%ical ti&e the distinction et(een one and the other
can e seen, for ,species are only stron%ly &ar"ed and per&anent varieties,/ (hich, in turn,
are nascent 4or, as he.ll say, incipient5 species+
C
0he distinction is not hard and fast, for
1
Lo%age of the Beagle, 1C.
2
,&id, 1O.
:urin% the voya%e, that is, on land, :ar(in e'perienced natural arran%e&ents of this sort fre)uently, leadin% to the
sa&e conclusion. Witness, for e'a&ple, his description of the plain throu%h (hich the Santa Cru= flo(s and the
estuaries fro& (hich it deouches as they are fed runoff fro& the Cordillera 6ts. 4on the national order et(een
conte&porary *r%entina and Chile at rou%hly C0_ south latitude5. See the section of a paper 4,>n the distriution of
the Erratic Boulders on the Conte&poraneous Rnstratified :eposits of South *&erica/5 entitled ,Border ;or&ation in
the !alley of the Santa Cru=,/ The Collected 4apers of Charles Darin, Part 1, 1#F.
D
:ar(in.s criti)ue of ,independent creation/ is a criti)ue of species ,fi'ity,/ for once (e ad&it that species elon%in% to
the sa&e %enus are lineally descended fro& other, y and lar%e e'tinct species< for%oin% the notion of an
independent creation of each separate species< the concept of species fi'ity has to e aandoned. :ar(in hi&self
e'pressly refers to the latter 1ust once 4in his Introduction5, statin% that, ,I a& fully convinced that species are not
i&&utale./ The 1rigin of Species, 1C.
3onetheless, the t(o concepts (ere distinct, even if on evolutionary assu&ptions the for&er entailed the latter.
$avin% de&onstrated the Earth (as %eolo%ically very old, @yell, for one, holdin% to species fi'ity, did not accept an
evolutionary vie( of life. :ar(in deals (ith the latter, species fi'ity or i&&utaility, in a less direct &anner in chapter
10 in its entirety y (ay of a discussion ,on,/ or concernin%, ,the %eolo%ical succession of or%anic ein%s/ 4the title of
the chapter5, see 2C192GO, esp. 2C292CD, (here i&&utaility is e'plicitly addressed.
#
See this Study, Part I!, elo(.
C
,!arieties are species in the process of for&ation./ The 1rigin of Species, 7G.
varieties pass over into species, in fact this $ove$ent constitutes, for :ar(in, the origin of
species. ,HWhereverJ &any species of the sa&e %enus have een for&ed, or (here< the
&anufactory of species has een active, (e ou%ht %enerally to find the &anufactory still in
action, &ore especially (e have every reason to elieve the process of &anufacturin% ne(
species to e a slo( one. *nd this certainly is the case, if varieties e loo"ed at as incipient
species./
1
If this can e sho(n, then individual species, each and every one, are neither the
product of a ,special creation/ nor is their reality ,fi'ed,/ per&anent and unchan%in%
2
<
With its theolo%ical 1ustification rooted in 8enesis, the divines (ho had hitherto do&inated the
ne(ly e&er%in% study of the natural history of the Earth, %eolo%y, elaorated the notion of
,special creation./ Were not the ea"s of irds, the tails of &on"eys, the cla(s of cras, (as
not all of the creation e')uisitely fitted each to its situation in the (orld2 0here (ere t(o
further aspects to this. Beyond utility, the creatures &a"in% up nearly the entirety of the
creation e'hiited a natural eauty< in appearance, in &ove&ent< that only a :ivinity could
e held to account forE and these, utility and eauty, the&selves (ere inte%ral &o&ents of a
natural har&ony that only ?od in his enevolence, &a%nificence and suli&ity could have
authored. :ar(in, ho(ever, (as to find so&ethin% )uite different operative in nature.
;irst, there is the e'peri&ental and e'periential evidence itself. ;or e'a&ple, ,I should never
have e'pected that the ranchin% of the &ain nerves close to the central %an%lion of an insect
(ould have een variale in the sa&e species< H-etJ )uite recently 6r. @uoc" has sho(n a
de%ree of variaility in these &ain nerves, (hich &ay al&ost e co&pared to the irre%ular
ranchin% of the ste& of a tree./
D
*nd, there is ,the (ell9"no(n HinstancesJ< of the pri&rose
and co(slip, or Pri&ula veris and elatior. 0hese plants differ consideraly in appearanceE they
have a different flavor and e&it a different odorE they flo(er at sli%htly different periodsE they
%ro( in so&e(hat different stationsE they ascend &ountains to different hei%htsE they have
different %eo%raphical ran%esE and lastly, accordin% to very nu&erous e'peri&ents< they can
e crossed only (ith &uch difficulty./
#
*ll this indicates is that the t(o cases 4insects (ith
distinct nervous for&s, the t(o plants5 are distinct, yet internal evidence derivin% fro&
inter&ediate structures and descent 4i.e., co&&on parenta%e at so&e point5 stron%ly su%%ests
(e are dealin% (ith varieties (ithin species.
C
Second, then, on this asis there (ere enor&ous, confusin% prole&s of classifications, that,
in turn, pointed ac" to the inherent difficulties in sortin% out the differences et(een varieties
and species+ 0hese prole&s (ere several+
4a5 ,Co&pare the several floras of ?reat Britain, of ;rance or of the Rnited States, dra(n up
y different otanists, and see (hat a surprisin% nu&er of for&s have een ran"ed y one
otanist as %ood species, and y another as &ere varieties./ 4E'a&ples of such classifications
are cited.5 ,*&on%st ani&als (hich are united for each irth, and (hich are hi%hly loco&otive,
doutful for&s, ran"ed y one =oolo%ist as a species and y another as a variety, can rarely
e found (ithin the sa&e country, ut are co&&on in separated areas. $o( &any of those
irds and insects in 3orth *&erica and Europe, (hich differ very sli%htly fro& each other, have
een ran"ed y one e&inent naturalist as species, and y another as varieties, or, as they are
often called, %eo%raphical racesh/
O
If species are this indistinct ho( is it possile to spea" of a
,special creation of separate Hi.e., reco%ni=aly distinctJ species/ or to hold their distinctive
1
,&id, CC.
2
,&id, 1F, #G, #7, C0, C#9CF, C79O0, 7D, 7G, 7F977, 10O, 1#O91C1, and DGF (here the &ost salient ar%u&ents a%ainst
,special creation/ are su&&arily &arshaled and counterposed to species ,i&&utaility/ 4fi'ity5.
D
,&id, #G.
#
,&id, C0.
C
,&id+
O
,&id, #7.
characteristics are ,fi'ed,/ for ,the distinction et(een species and varieties/ is ,entirely va%ue
and aritrary./
1
45 0here (as the lo%ical, classificatory analysis of increasin%ly &ore %eneral types of
deter&inants< ased on or%an, anato&ical, functional, etc. relatedness< that lin"ed
suordinated or%anis&s, %roups of or%anis&s, types of or%anis&s to increasin%ly s&aller
%roups and types of or%anis&s.
2
4c5 0here (as a )uestion of efforts orderin% on asurdity to account for (hat (ere other(ise
specific characteristics of a species (hen these appear in another species classified (ithin the
sa&e %enus. ,$e (ho elieves that each e)uine species (as independently created, (ill<
assert that each species has een created (ith a tendency to vary, oth under nature and
under do&estication, in this particular &anner, so as often to eco&e striped li"e other
species of the %enus Ha horse li"e a =eraJE and that each has een created (ith a stron%
tendency, (hen crossed (ith species inhaitin% distant )uarters of the (orld, to produce
hyrids rese&lin% in their stripes, not their o(n parents, ut other species of the %enus./
D
0hird, there (as the lo%ically ar%ued su&&ation of &uch e'perience in the for& of &ethodical
oservations. ,In the lar%er %enera the species are apt to e closely, ut une)ually, allied
to%ether, for&in% little clusters round certain species. Species very closely allied to other
species apparently have restricted ran%es< H0heJ species of a lar%e %enera present a stron%
analo%y (ith varieties. *nd (e can clearly understand these analo%ies, if species have once
e'isted as varieties, and have thus ori%inatedE (hereas, these analo%ies are utterly
ine'plicale if each species has een independently created./
#
;ourth, there (as a prole& of differences and si&ilarities of structure in related or%anis&s.
,>n the ordinary vie( of each species havin% een independently created, (hy should that
part of the structure, (hich differs fro& the sa&e part in other independently created species
of the sa&e %enus, e &ore variale than those parts (hich are closely ali"e in several
species2 I do not see that any e'planation can e %iven./
C
0hen, returnin% to e'perience, there is the lar%er )uestion ased i&&ediately and directly on
Darin.s on experience+ Why in the isles of the ?alapa%os *rchipela%o did the %iant
tortoises e'hiit s&all 4and, for :ar(in, difficult to ascertain5 variations fro& island to island2
<3atives could unfailin%ly sur&ise fro& (hich island a tortoise had co&e<
O
0he point2 0he
&ore stron%ly different species fro& conti%uous locales 4or in different %eolo%ical eras in the
1
,&id+
Si&ilarly, ,* considerale catalo%ue, also, could e %iven of for&s inter&ediate et(een t(o other for&s, (hich
the&selves &ust e doutfully ran"ed as either varieties or species and this sho(s, unless all these for&s e
considered as independently created species, that, the one in varyin% has assu&ed so&e of the characteristics of the
other, so as to produce the inter&ediate for&. But the evidence is afforded y parts or or%ans of an i&portant and
unifor& nature occasionally varyin% so as to ac)uire, in so&e de%ree, the character of the sa&e part or or%an in an
allied species./ 0hen to clinch it, :ar(in casually notes that he has ,collected a lon% list of such cases./ ,&id, 1DF91D7.
2
,It is a truly (onderful fact< that all ani&als and all plants throu%hout all ti&e and space should e related to each
other in %roup suordinate to %roup, in the &anner in (hich (e every(here ehold N na&ely, varieties of the sa&e
species &ost closely related to%ether, species of the sa&e %enus less closely and une)ually related to%ether, for&in%
se'tons and su9%enera, species of distinct %enera &uch less closely related, and %enera related in different de%rees,
for&in% su9fa&ilies, fa&ilies, orders, su9classes, and classes. 0he several suordinate %roups in any class cannot
e ran"ed as a sin%le file, ut see& rather to e clustered round points, and these round other points, and so on in
al&ost endless cycles. >n the vie( that each species has een independently created, I can see no e'planation of
this %reat fact in the classification of all or%anic ein%s</ ,&id, 11D.
D
,&id, 1#D. :ar(in continues, ,0o ad&it this vie( is, as it see&s to &e, to re1ect a real for an unreal, or at least for an
un"no(n, cause./
#
,&id, CG.
C
,&id, 1DD.
O
The Lo%age of the Beagle, D7F9D77E and &ore %enerally, The 1rigin of Species, D1O9D1G.
:ar(in &a"es this point< against the notion of a special creation? at every opportunity he can, for e'a&ple, (ith
re%ard to the fertility and sterility of hyrids and &on%rels, ,&id, 22#.
sa&e locale5 shared definin% characteristics, the &ore proale it is that these species had a
co&&on ancestor and the less proale the notion of a ,special creation of separate
species./
1
0he (ei%ht of evidence and ar%u&ent a%ainst this notion e'tended to species fi'ity. *s
%eolo%y itself developed (ith accu&ulatin% fossil discoveries, the te&poral di&ension of the
Earth.s a%e itself eca&e &ore and &ore a prole& and su1ect to ar%u&ent and analysis.
2
0he a%e of fossils &ay not have een ri%orous deter&inale, ut they did provide indisputale
evidence that &any species, no( e'tinct, predated the appearance of hu&anity and (ere in
this sense ancient. 0o preserve the ilical ti&e9line 4rou%hly #C00 years fro& the creation to
the present5, divines, theolo%ians and clerical naturalists 4often in the sa&e persona%e5 had
responded that this could e understood in ter&s of ,Tsuccessive creations/+ Species that once
inhaited the Earth, or portions of it, had een destroyed< y so&e catastrophic event< and
ne( species had een divinely created. But this rou%ht us ac" to @yell, to the fossil record,
to an 4unifor&itarian5 ar%u&ent that %eolo%ical events, relations and for&ations are to e
understood solely in ter&s of on%oin% %eolo%ical processes, in ter&s of chan%es (hich can in
principle still e (itnessed. If, as @yell hi&self oserved, (e accept the la(s of nature are
unchan%in% and endurin%, the ar%u&ent for the %eolo%y of the lon% dureI (ill appear &ore
co%ent as, (e add, (ith :ar(in.s opposition to the independent creation of separate species.
D
Natural Selection
-et as late as the conclusion of the Beagle voya%e, :ar(in still had not constructed a
coherent alternative to the notion of independent creation that his theoretically &ediated
e'perience and an e'perientially &ediated theory had led hi& to re1ect. When he finally did,
he (ould call it natural selection (ith e'plicit reference to and as distinct fro& do$estic
selection
#
4in the evolutionary sense, do&estication5 as practiced y reeders of cattle, sheep,
horses, do%s and especially pi%eons 4a&on% (hich, he could count hi&self5, as (ell as in
plant horticulture 4culinary and flo(er cultivation5 and a%riculture.
0he concept is fairly strai%htfor(ard, and, (hile it can e stated concisely, it is also heavily
,theory laden./ It is, ho(ever, the sense of the co&ple' of further concepts, (hat they &ean
and si%nify and (hat they don.t, (hich natural selection entails and (hich re)uire e'ploration.
Start, thou%h, (ith natural selection.
Selection ,acts/ in nature y &odifyin% and adaptin% livin% ein%s to their various conditions
and places 4in nature5.
C
What :ar(in calls ,natural selection/ is a purely passive outco&e of
1
0hrou%hout the (or", :ar(in periodically 4and perhaps tan%entially to the&e he is developin%5 elicits still other
ar%u&ents a%ainst the notion of a ,special/ 4or independent5 creation 4of each species5. ;or e'a&ple, in his
discussion of %eolo%ical distriution of species, he points out that, ,* volcanic island, for instance, upheaved and
for&ed at the distance of a fe( hundreds of &iles fro& a continent, (ould proaly receive fro& it in the course of
ti&e a fe( colonists, and their descendants, thou%h &odified, (ould still e plainly related y inheritance, to the
inhaitants of the continent. Cases of this nature are co&&on, and are< ine'plicale on the theory of independent
creation./ ,&id, 2F#.
2
:ar(in provides us (ith his o(n sense of the enor&ous te&poral e'panse of Earth history in his calculation of the
a%e< in e'cess of D00 &illion years< of a En%lish %eolo%ical for&ation called the Weald. ,&id, 2D192D2. See the
entire discussion of chapter 7 4,>n the I&perfections of the ?eolo%ical Record/5.
D
0he %eolo%ical a%e of the Earth is also i&plicated in :ar(in.s discussion of ,%eo%raphical distriution/ of species that
co&prises t(o entire chapters 410 and 115, ,&id, 2GO9D2C. 0herein he pursues a sustained pole&ic a%ainst the notion
of the independent or special creation of separate species. See 2F#, D10, D1D, D1# and D1C (here the intent %uidin%
this construction eco&es e'plicit, D#D9D## 4rese&lance5, DCG, DCF9DC7 4rudi&entary or vesti%ial or%ans5 (here
ar%u&ents fro& desi%n, and the final chapter (here various ar%u&ents 4so&e ori%inally put to other purposes5 are
riefly recapitulated and the notion of special creation is syste&atically attac"ed, DG0, DG1, DG29DGD, DGD9DG#
4instinct5, DGC9DGO 4%eo%raphical distriution5, DGG 4e&ryolo%y5, DG7, DFD9DF#.
#
,&id, G#9GC.
C
,&id, 112.
the action and interaction< (hich, contrary to :ar(in, are pri&ary and (hich are %overned y
iolo%ical values of self9preservation, self9&aintenance and self9enhance&ent< of species
individuals in specific &ilieus and ecolo%ies. 0hese iolo%ical values, thou%h, are not
i&portant for :ar(in 4this state&ent of natural ehavior (ould e unintelli%ile to hi&5, ut
(hat is of the ut&ost si%nificance is variation+ ,;or as all the inhaitants of each country are
stru%%lin% to%ether (ith nicely alanced forces, e'tre&ely sli%ht &odifications in the structure
or haits of one inhaitant &i%ht %ive it an advanta%e over others./
1
0hese ,e'tre&ely sli%ht
&odifications/ are (hat is &eant y variations. 0he variations are ,e'tre&ely sli%ht/ ecause
natural ,selection can act only y the preservation of infinitesi&ally s&all inherited
&odifications, each profitale to the preserved ein%,/ and natural selection ,acts solely
throu%h the preservation of variations in so&e (ay advanta%eous, (hich conse)uently
endure./
2
Why is this purely passive process the outco&e of the action and interaction< (hich :ar(in
calls a ,stru%%le/ for life or e'istence< of species individuals in their various &ilieus2 What
drives the (hole process in the first place2 *nd, (hy &ust ,or%anic ein%s< e e'posed
durin% several %enerations to the ne( conditions of life to cause any appreciale a&ount of
variation/2
D
0he ans(er, (hich :ar(in tells us (e &ust al(ays re&e&er, is ,that $an% $ore
individuals are &orn that can possi&l% survive,/
#
so that ,in the course of thousands of
%enerations< individuals havin% any advanta%e, ho(ever sli%ht, over others, (ould have the
est chance of survivin% and procreatin% their "ind./
C
0he stru%%le a&on% or%anis&s is
on%oin%, constant, even relentless+ ;ollo(in% on ,any physical chan%e, such as cli&ate or
elevation of the land,/ /ne( places in the natural econo&y of the country are left open for the
old inhaitants to stru%%le for, and eco&e adapted to, throu%h &odification in their structure
and constitution./
O
So that in the end the outco&e is al(ays the ,preservation of favorale variations and the
re1ection of in1urious variations, H(hichJ I call 3atural Selection./
G
0he ,e'tre&ely sli%ht
&odifications,/ the variations, are preserved hereditaril%, thus on the asis of se'ual
reproduction, thou%h the specific &echanis&s (ere not "no(n to :ar(in as he readily
ad&ited.
F
40hus, (e can spea" of, as later :ar(inians do, the differential sortin% of (hatever
this hereditary &echanis& is that follo(s upon individual or%anis&s. reproduction success.5
:ar(in provides us (ith a su&&ary state&ent of the entire position+ ,*s &any &ore
individuals of each species are orn than can possily survive, and as, conse)uently, there is
a fre)uently recurrin% stru%%le for e'istence, it follo(s that any ein%, if it vary ho(ever sli%htly
in any &anner profitale to itself, under the co&ple' and so&eti&es varyin% conditions of life,
(ill have a etter chance of survivin%, and thus e naturall% selected+ ;ro& the stron%
principle of inheritance, any selected variety (ill tend to propa%ate its ne( and &odified
for&./
7
0here are several ra&ifications of this conception that (e are re)uired to riefly e'plore for the
sa"e of fuller clarity.
1
,&id, GO.
2
,&id, FO, 7O. E&phasis added.
D
,&id, 1G.
#
,&id, G#. E&phasis added.
,<each species tends to increase inordinately</ ,&id, 2C7.
C
,&id, G#9GC.
O
,&id, 7297D.
G
,&id, GC.
F
,&id, passi&.
7
,&id, 1#. E&phasis in ori%inal.
;irst, it is i&portant to note that :ar(in is not, at least in the i&&ediate and direct sense, (hat
(e today call an environ&ental deter&inist. >ver and a%ain, he e'pressly states that
,conditions of life such as food, cli&ate, etc.,/ ,the direct action of heat, &oisture, li%ht, food,
etc.,/ play so&e role, ut only a &inor one producin% ,very little direct effect/ in deter&inin%
species constitution.
1
1rganis$s are related to their environ$ent? and this relation is
unilateral, fro$ environ$ent to organis$? onl% &% a% of co$plex $ediation, i+e+, &%
selection ased on co&petition, as descried aove.
Second, :ar(in assu&es, openly, that this relation is utilitarian, the assu&ption of course
perfectly attuned to our%eois e'istence+ While so&e &odifications cannot e directly and
i&&ediately related to use 4i.e., so&e are &ediately so5, the or%anic i&port of &ost and all
i&portant &odifications is decided y its use. In the case, for e'a&ple, of a series of
&odifications over %eolo%ical ti&e, he states ,each %rade<HisJ useful to its possessor,/
,natural selection &i%ht easily speciali=e, if any advanta%e (ere thus %ained,/ as ,natural
selection acts y<the preservation of individuals (ith any favorale Hi.e., usefulJ variation, and
y the destruction of those (ith any unfavorale deviation of structure,/ ,natural selection
Haccu&ulatesJ< sli%ht &odifications< to any e'tent, in any useful direction./
2
But the (orld
4nature5 is not for&ed si&ply to satisfy our%eois needs 4for utility, efficiency, econo&y in use
or e'penditure, superiority of co&petition in %eneratin% desired resulted5, co&pulsive at that,
D
as :ar(in assu&ed yet did not fully understood. 0hus, he cites ,several/ ,la(s of inheritance/
4actually he discusses only t(o5, and (hat he calls se'ual selection as further deter&inant of
&odifications, or &ore %enerally of species constitution.
#
0he t(o la(s of inheritance he calls
reversion and correlation of %ro(th.
C
In each case, a &odification has no direct use, ut is
nonetheless &ediately related to selection, use and adaptation. 0he latter ,la(/ (ill assu&e
)ualitatively %reater si%nificance in our discussion of non96althusian, non9:ar(inian and non9
6endelian deter&inants of life 4Part !, elo(5.
1
,&id, passi&, 20 HcitationsJ, 17920, GF, 7D, 12, 11O, 11G, 122, 1DF, 1#2, 1O#, 1G0, D1F.
2
,&id, 1CO, 1C7, 1OD, 200.
?iven li&ited resources, selection, it should e stressed, is lar%ely co&petition a&on%st or%anis&s 4interspecies, ut
especially intraspecies5, (hich relative to cli&ate plays the far lar%er and vastly &ore i&portant role.
D
-es, yes, even the ee is ,usy/ and efficiency is one of its virtues+ ,certain insects< HdependJ in &ain part on its Ha
plant.sJ nectar for food. I could %ive &any facts, sho(in% ho( an'ious ees are to save ti&e./ ,&id, FC. 0he choice of
(ords is not 1ust a for&ulation lac"in% in precision, ut fully e'presses the &anner< and the only &anner< in (hich
:ar(in, as a our%eois, sees and is capale of seein% and understandin% the (orld. 0he follo(in% sections shall
de&onstrate this.
#
Se'ual selection ,depends, not on a stru%%le for e'istence, ut on a stru%%le et(een the &ales for possession of
the fe&alesE the result is not death to the unsuccessful co&petitor, ut fe( or no offsprin%. Se'ual selection is,
therefore, less ri%orous than natural selection. ?enerally, the &ost vi%orous &ales, those (hich are est fitted for their
places in nature, (ill leave &ost pro%eny. But in &any cases, victory (ill depend not only %eneral vi%or, ut on havin%
special (eapons, confined to the &ale se'. * hornless sta% or spurless coc" (ould have a poor chance of leavin%
offsprin%/ ,&id, F1.
$avin% said this &uch, :ar(in later notes the 4lac" of5 relation of se'ual selection, as it calls it, to utility+ ,0he effects
of se'ual selection, (hen displayed in eauty to char& the fe&ales, can e called useful only in a rather forced
sense./ ,&id, 1OO.
C
Reversion refers to the reappearance after their asence for at least a %eneration of features or characteristics of an
earlier ancestor in the current, livin% %eneration. ;or :ar(in.s discussion, ,&id, 2292D. Stephen 8ay ?ould en%a%es in
an e'tensive discussion of this and its si%nificance for a ,critical/ :ar(inis& in his 1ntogen% and 4h%logen%
4Ca&rid%e, 6*, 17GG5.
By correlation of %ro(th, :ar(in &eant, ,that the (hole or%ani=ation is so tied to%ether durin% its Hthe or%anis&.sJ
%ro(th and develop&ent, that (hen sli%ht variations in any one part occur, and are accu&ulated throu%h natural
selection, other parts eco&e &odified./ 0his is particularly true (ith a vie( to the relation et(een the e&ryo and
the &ature adult, for the ,several parts of the ody (hich are ho&olo%ous, and (hich, at an early e&ryonic period,
are ali"e, see& liale to vary in an allied &anner+ (e see this in the ri%ht and left sides of the ody varyin% in the
sa&e &annerE in the front and hind le%s, and even in the 1a(s and li&s, varyin% to%ether<. 0he tendencies I do not
dout &ay e &astered &ore or less co&pletely y natural selection</ ,&id, 12#.
0he third feature of the conception of natural selection concerns the (ay in (hich it is related
to the other, alternative traditional iolo%ical theori=ation of the asic deter&ination of species
constitution 4na&ely, inheritance of ac)uired characteristics5, (hich in :ar(in and his
follo(ers, (e add, a&ounts to a position on the funda&ental deter&ination of life itself.
Contrary to the consensus that e&er%ed follo(in% the discovery of 6endel.s (or" 4circa
17005, and the ri%id interpretation of adaptation that characteri=ed the unification of these t(o
lines of analysis and investi%ation 4(hich (ill eco&e apparent in Part III of this Study5,
:ar(in.s and 6endel.s, :ar(in did, in fact, accept a for& of the hereditary trans&ission of
ac)uired characteristics. 0hus, he tells us, ,I find in the do&estic duc" that the ones of the
(in% (ei%h less and the ones of the le% &ore, in proportion to the (hole s"eleton, than do
the sa&e ones in the (ild duc"E and I presu&e that this chan%e &ay e safely attriuted to
the do&estic duc" flyin% &uch less, and (al"in% &ore, than its (ild parent./
1
$e, further, has
no dout 4and says so5 that ,use in our do&estic ani&als stren%thens and enlar%es certain
parts, and disuse di&inishes the&E and thus such &odifications are inherited,/ that ,&any
ani&als have structures (hich can e e'plained y the effects of use./ 0his, ho(ever, does
not e'tend to &utilations 4i.e., they are not inherited5, and it &ust e stressed that inheritance
here is a )uestion of the ,long continued effects of disuse in< pro%enitors,/ and that, finally,
&uch of this should itself e put do(n to natural selection.
2
So that, for e'a&ple, ,durin%
thousands of successive %enerations each individual H6adeiraJ eetle (hich fle( least, either
fro& its (in%s havin% een even so little less perfectly developed or fro& indolent hait HsicJ,
(ill have had the est chance of survivin% fro& not ein% lo(n out to sea./
D
0hus, :ar(in
(illin% %rants the ac)uisition of characteristics due to use or disuse, ut not in the @a&arc"ian
sense, not as characteristics ac)uired in a sin%le lifeti&e and passed on hereditarily to the
ne't %eneration.
If (e return to the su&&ary deter&ination of natural selection offered y :ar(in and cited
aove, (e can note a final, funda&ental and decisive concept< prodi%ious species
productivity, that, referrin% us ac" to a reality of alle%ed co&petition (ith other species
individuals 4especially of the sa$e species5, i&plies e'cess population relative to availale
resources, thus necessitatin% a stru%%le for life< tyin% to%ether the various co&ponents of the
theoretical e'plication of species constitution. 0his re)uires an e'tended discussion.
Struggle for 3ife
2vidence in Darin.s Theori/ation and its Critique
Referrin% ac" to earthly nature as a (hole, the conceptual terrain on (hich :ar(in operated
is astract and in a far lar%er (ay than that, hu&an society, 6althusI concepts referred ac"
to. 0he enlar%e&ent is astract, first ecause the &eanin% and si%nificance of nature is not
unchan%in% and hence i&&ediately and invariantly availale ut is, for us, al(ays socially
&ediatedE second ecause, li"e 6althus. un&ediated and indeter&inate concept of society
4as a population %roupin%5, :ar(in.s concept of life is entirely undifferentiated and co&pletely
ho&o%eni=ed. In other (ords, :ar(in for&ulates his core concept on the &odel of the &odern
science of nature+ ,@ife,/ li"e ,or%anic ein%/ 4or li"e ,&atter/ and ,odies/5, is an astraction
4the one (ithout conceptual content, the other asent sensile content5 and lac"s sensuous9
&aterial or ,real/ referent. In so doin%, :ar(in is entirely uncritical, i.e., he never articulates
the &eanin% of life 4or of or%anic ein%s5, conceptually capturin% and fi'in% its deter&inantsE
to oot, in the service of &ystification his reductionis& is not even thorou%h 4he does not
1
,&id, 20.
2
,&id, 11F. E&phasis added. 0he (hole )uestion receives e'tended treat&ent, 11G9121. See also 1GC, 1G7, (here
use and disuse &ediately deter&ine ac)uisitions that are hereditary %ained or lost (ith a vie( to instinct.
D
,&id, 117.
su%%est ,life/ and ,or%anic ein%s/ as (ell are illusory &odalities of ,&atter/ and ,odies/
su1ect to che&ical and ,physical/ analysis5. 0hus, in :ar(in ,life,/ (holly undifferentiated (ith
no for& of it escapin% total deter&ination y its ,reality,/ has so&e undefined independence
vis9P9vis ,&atter./ 0he conceptual terrain on (hich :ar(in operated is astract, third, ecause
in %enerali=in% 6althus. population la( to life as a (hole he is una(are that this si&ple
&athe&atical for&ula is a con%ealed e'pression of our%eois pre1udice. 0hou%h he is
unconscious 4&aye not5, it does not follo( and it does not &ean that his &anner of
presentation and that presentation itself do not e'press a certain duplicity in this re%ard+ 0he
undifferentiated concept of life &as"s the direction of his ar%u&ent 4fro& society to nature5, a
direction that is hidden y a series of &ystifications. @et.s pull these veils aside<
In the appro'i&ately 1O0,000 (ords that for& the (ritten te't of The 1rigin of Species of the
reprint of the first edition (e use, the ter& ,stru%%le for e'istence/ appears (ith 1ust as &uch
fre)uency as the ter& ,stru%%le for life/< crucially, thou%h, the for&er appears in :ar(in.s
Introduction, as the headin% of the chapter (e are aout to discuss, and durin% the course of
the presentation in this chapter (here the ter& is defined as such, a deter&ination to (hich
(e shall return shortly. Because :ar(in even refers to the ,stru%%le for life/< the title of the
(or" as it ori%inally appeared is The 1rigin of Species &% Means of Natural Selection, or the
4reservation of )avored Race in the Struggle for 3ife< the far &ore fre)uent deploy&ent of
the ter& ,stru%%le for e'istence/ in later editions is a concession to the popularity, and
notoriety, of the ter& that (as &ore ri%htfully associated (ith the na&e of $erert Spencer.
0he fre)uent use of one ter& in the early editions, the other later on points to a funda&ental
a&i%uity in :ar(in.s conception of the actual situation throu%h (hich selection occurs.
Return to the previously &entioned deter&ination+
,I use the ter& Stru%%le for E'istence in a lar%e and &etaphorical sense, includin%
dependence of one ein% on another, and includin% 4(hich is &ore i&portant5 not only the life
of the individual, ut success in leavin% pro%eny./
1
While the position :ar(in ar%ues and the
ter& itself su%%ests an intensely co&petitive fi%ht for life a&on% ,or%anic ein%s,/ or &ore
precisely for the resources that are availale to sustain life< and i&&ediately and directly
si%nifies the pro1ection into nature of the &ellu$ o$niu$ in o$nes that characteri=es a
historically specific for& of social ,life/ under conditions of capitalist production< :ar(in
(ould contradictoril% enlar%e the sense of his ter&, renderin% it of course a&i%uous ut, far
&ore i&portantly, o&fuscator%+ His argu$ent consistentl% $oves fro$ societ% 0and hu$ani/ed
nature5 to nature in its geographical and geological seep, here the for$er for$s a $odel
and the &asis for understanding the latter+ This is necessar%< it is unavoida&le: Nature is not
essentiall%, u&iquitousl% or predo$inantl% an arena of co$&at &eteen genera, species and,
$ost i$portantl% for Darin, species individuals, even if society, that is capitalist society, is.
2
0he e'pansive ,definition/ reco%ni=es this+ It tacitly ac"no(led%es the i&portance of the
,dependence of one ein% on another/ 4(hich in his ar%u&ent and descriptions (ei%h far
&ore heavily that co&petitive stru%%le5, hence its para$ount i&portance+ *s his pri&ary
e'a&ple illustrates,
D
it is the interrelatedness and reciprocal dependency as they actually
1
The 1rigin of Species, O1 4chapter III5.
2
0hus, in spea"in% aout the ,%eolo%ical succession of or%anic ein%s/ reconstructed fro& fossils found in
sedi&entary deposits, :ar(in states ,(hen y sudden i&&i%ration or y unusually rapid develop&ent, &any species
of a ne( %roup have ta"en possession of a ne( area, they (ill have e'ter&inated in a correspondin%ly rapid &anner
&any of the old inhaitants/ 4,&id, 2CF5 If not his &odel, then the con%ruency et(een it and he European settler
colonial populations en%a%ed in %enocides of native peoples in the *&ericas (ould have, for hi&, confir&ed his
vie(s.
D
We shall cite at len%th+
,In Straffordshire, on the estate of a relation< several hundred acres< had een enclosed t(enty9five years
previously and planted (ith Scotch fir< si' insectivorous irds (ere very co&&on in the plantations< the effect of
the introduction of a sin%le tree Hhas een potentJ, nothin% (hatever else havin% een done, (ith the e'ception that
constitute natural relations a&on% various or%anis&s 4as they, in turn, co9e'ist in
interconnected ecolo%ical niches, (ithin &ilieus and across re%ions5 that is deter&inate for
,or%anic ein%s./ If heredity and selection are the ,&echanis&s/ y (hich species co&e into
ein% and pass a(ay 4and they are only in hi%hly restricted (ay as (e shall de&onstrate
elo(5, it is not in any si%nificant sense on the asis of a co&petitive stru%%le for e'istence
that this occurs. $ere, then, the ,&etaphorical/ e&ploy&ent of the ter& ,stru%%le for
e'istence/ 4or ,life/ as the case &ay e5 is a &ystification, an illicit, oscene inversion of the
practical sense of, if not ,cooperation/ 4to e sure, an e)uivalent &ystification5 then, ecolo%ical
inte%ration and &utual dependency y susu&in% oth under the concept of co&petition,
(hose central sense is hu&anly natural and historical, referrin% to anta%onis&, a%%ression
and elli%erency as they for& in the life practices of the our%eoisie and, as capitalis& co&es
to hold s(ay, as co&petition is %enerali=ed across society 4and thus appears &ore and &ore
to characteri=e ehavior a&on% all social strata5.
1
0he stru%%le for life is not, ho(ever, causi sui. It is founded else(here+ It ,inevitaly follo(s
fro& the hi%h %eo&etrical ratio (hich is co&&on to all or%anic ein%s< &ore individuals are
orn that can possile survive/E
2
stated si&ilarly yet differently, it ,inevitaly follo(s fro& the
hi%h ratio at (hich or%anic ein%s tend to increase< as &ore individuals are produced than
can possily survive, there &ust in every case e a stru%%le for e'istence, either one
individual (ith another of the sa&e species, or (ith the individuals of distinct species, or (ith
the land had een enclosed, so that the cattle could not enter. But ho( i&portant an ele&ent enclosure is, I plainly
sa( near ;arnha&, in Surrey. $ere there are e'tensive heaths, (ith a fe( clu&ps of old Scotch firs on the distant
hilltopsE (ithin the last ten years lar%e spaces have een enclosed, and self9so(n firs are no( sprin%in% up in
&ultitude< I (ent to several points of vie(, (hence I could e'a&ine hundreds of acres of the unenclosed heath, and
literally I could not see a sin%le Scotch fir< But on loo"in% closely et(een the ste&s of the heath, I found a &ultitude
of seedlin%s and little trees, (hich had een perpetually ro(sed do(n y the cattle.
,$ere (e see that cattle asolutely deter&ine the e'istence of the Scotch firE ut in several parts of the (orld insects
deter&ine the e'istence of cattle< HInJ Para%uay< neither cattle nor horse nor do%s have ever run (ild, thou%h they
s(ar& south(ard and north(ard in a feral stateE and Hit has eenJ sho( that this is caused y the %reater nu&er in
Para%uay of a certain fly, (hich lays its e%%s in the navels of these ani&als (hen first orn. 0he increase of these
flies, nu&erous as they are, &ust e haitually chec"ed y so&e &eans, proaly y irds. $ence if certain
insectivorous irds 4(hose nu&ers are proaly re%ulated y ha("s or easts of prey5 (ere to increase in
Para%uay, the flies (ould decrease then cattle and horse (ould eco&e feral, and this (ould certainly %reatly alter<
the ve%etation+ this a%ain (ould lar%ely affect the insectsE and this, as (e 1ust have seen in Staffordshire, the
insectivorous irds, and so on(ards in ever9increasin% circles of co&ple'ity. We e%an this series y insectivorous
irds, and (e have ended (ith the&. 3ot that in nature the relations can ever e as si&ple as this/ ,&id, OG9O7.
0hus, ,in the lon% run the forces are so nicely alance, that the face of nature re&ains unifor& for lon% periods of
ti&e,/ and, accordin%ly, it &ay (ell e that over this lon% period of ti&e ,the &erest trifle/ 4,&id, O75 &i%ht e hereditary
trans&itted, in 6endelian ter&s, y (ay of %enetic &utation, ut this is not driven y an astraction, the population
la(, as it has een e'tracted as a &odel %overnin% a specific social and historical confi%uration of social relations and
then ,applied/ to nature.
1
0his is not the only ti&e :ar(in.s pri&ary e'a&ple de&onstrates precisely the opposite of (hat he intends
4su%%estin% that, on :ar(in.s assu&ptions, the theori=ation tends to e ,non9falsifiale,/ i.e., all evidence can e
conceptually inte%rated (ithout effectin% the structure of the theory5+ In discussin% the ,Chal" of Europe/ 4i.e.,
sedi&entary for&ations that for& the Cretaceous90ertiary 4L905 oundary, circa OO &illion years a%o, visile in, e.%.,
seaside cliffs not 1ust in Europe ut around the (orld5, :ar(in states, ,0his %reat fact of the parallel succession of the
for&s of life throu%hout the (orld, is e'plicale on the theory of natural selection/ 4,&id, 2O1, the entire ar%u&ent
appears fro& 2C792O25, &eanin%, a&on% other thin%s, that the succession of species as (itnessed y the %eolo%ical
record is a slo( develop&ent that occurs over &illions of years. In point of fact, the L90 oundary &ar"s one of the
five %reat &ass species e'tinctions in the Phanero=oic, that is, the last O00 &illion years, and this particular e'tinction
occurred )uic"ly, in %eolo%ical ti&e in an instant 4over several &onths5. See Peter Ward, Hnder a 8reen S!%, 10911,
D19DD. >n one side of the oundary species disappeared en $asse, and on the other side ne( species e&er%ed
rather rapidly too 4i.e., not over &illions of years5. 3iels Eldrid%eIs and Steve ?ould.s theory of ,punctuated
e)uiliriu&/ is, in a hi%hly &odified :ar(inian fra&e(or", intended to &eet this prole&. See The Structure of
2volutionar% Theor%, G#C9722.
2
,&id, DOF
the physical conditions of life./
D
0his is, of course, 6althus or, as :ar(in hi&self says, 6althus
,applied (ith tenfold force/ to nature in its entirety.
#
0he evidence that :ar(in rin%s to ear on this deter&ination confir&s our 4not his5 for%oin%
analysis, (hile revealin% the entirely our%eois &ethodolo%y operative in that, his analysis.
#
0he evidence is of three "inds+ 4a5 calculations of the %eo&etric rate of increaseE 45 various
ani&als in a state of nature so9called, i.e., ,our do$estic ani&als of &any "inds (hich have
run (ild in several parts of the (orld,/
C
citin% cattle and horses in South *&erica and *ustraliaE
and 4c5 experi$ents, assu&ed to reproduce events in nature<
7 Digression
3o( each for& of evidence for the population la( in the deter&ination of the stru%%le for life is
characteri=ed y a&stractness+ We &i%ht di%ress here to descrie ho( a type of thin"in%<
one (hich has e&er%ed only in co&&odity producin% societies in (hich the astraction of
e'chan%e value fro& use occurs on the asis of &ar"et transactions, one (hich receives its
&ost e'tre&e develop&ent in societies of capital, that is, societies in (hich laor is astracted
in production
O
< penetrates and shapes the &ethods, episte&olo%y and the entire outloo" of
the for& of "no(led%e 4science5 characteristic of &odern capitalist society.
*stractness is constituted &ethodolo%ically in the &ove&ent fro& a pre%iven, sensile
(hole, an apperceived totality of perceptual pheno&ena to isolated aspects of this totality
(hich, deconte'tuali=ed and dee&ed ,facts,/ are characteri=ed as essential deter&inations.
0he relations et(een these ,facts,/ nothin% &ore the &ere correlations, are declared ,la(s/
%overnin% the pheno&ena. 0he totality is a%%re%ately reconstructed, its (ealth lost, its
&anifold deter&inations i%noredE the %iven ,facts/ are fi'ed and fro=enE those correlations
otainin% a&on% ,facts/ 4and not their %enesis and for&ation5, the astract ,la(s,/ are said to
or%ani=e and structure events, processes and relations. In science, i.e., our%eois theory, this
is done for purposes of the prediction, that is, control of nature.
D
,&id, O19O2.
Bet(een the ellipses the passa%e reads+ ,Every ein%, (hich durin% its natural lifeti&e produces several e%%s or
seeds, &ust suffer destruction durin% so&e period of its life, and durin% so&e season or occasional year, other(ise,
on the principle of %eo&etrical increase, its nu&ers (ould )uic"ly eco&e so inordinately %reat that no country could
support the product./
#
,>n the !ariations of >r%anic Bein%s in a State of 3atureE on the 3atural 6eans of Selection on the Co&parison of
:o&estic Races and 0rue Species/ in Barrett 4ed.5, The Collected 4apers of Charles Darin, Part 2, #9C.
0his (as an unpulished paper datin% fro& 1F## and presented years later efore the @innean Society in con1unction
(ith a si&ilar paper drafted y *lfred Russell Wallace. 4>n 1F 8une 1FCG, :ar(in received a letter fro& Wallace (ho,
(hile sufferin% fro& &alaria, (as in 3e( ?uinea. 0he letter detailed the synthesis of di==ily, feverishly one &i%ht say,
accu&ulatin% insi%hts in (hich he, startin% fro& 6althus. population la(, too had arrived at natural selection. Well
appraised of :ar(in.s years of &eticulous and laorious investi%ation and see"in% to insure reco%nition of such,
$oo"er and @yell resolved the situation y (ay of the 1oint presentation of research su&&aries that too" place early
the follo(in% year.5
#
See the Introduction, ,Ele&ents of the Conceptual Structure of Science,/ aove.
C
The 1rigin of Species, O2. E&phasis added.
O
*straction is a real, necessary and essential feature of production constitutin% capitalis& as capitalis& 4real
do&ination5+ In the actual (or" processes, laor is astracted, i.e., the concrete laor of a (or"er en%a%ed in
producin% a useful o1ect is transfor&ed, it is reduced 4i.e., astracted5, that is, it is %enerali=ed, )uantified and as
such it is &easured in units of )uantitative ti&e, as laor ti&e o1ectified and &ateriali=ed in its si&ilarly astracted
issue, so that once a useful product, no( a co&&odity to e sold and ou%ht, its ,value/ is deter&ined (ithout re%ard
to any concrete 4i.e., sensile and useful5 )ualities, y its &onetarily e'pressed price, 1ust li"e the once concrete
laor.
-ou say you don.t elieve in &iracles2 0he e'ploitation of concrete living laor acco&plished in capitalist production
processes every day constitutes a transustantiation< the transfor&ation of specifically hu&an affections,
sensiilities, corporality, e'perience and reflection into value 4capital5< at least as &ysterious to our%eois thou%ht as
the transfor&ation of read and (ine into the ody and lood of Christ.
It is this for& of thin"in%, call it (hat you (ill 4ofuscation and self9&ystification5, that is
astract+ 0hat (hich is isolated and ele&ental is held to e pri&ary. 0o e sure, %enuine
thou%ht al(ays e%ins y splittin% the (hole, y isolatin% an aspect, ut it does so only to
return to the (hole 4totality5 y (ay of a &ove&ent ac" and forth fro& &o&ent 4aspect, part5
to that (hole in (hich those &anifold relations, the interrelatedness of the pheno&ena, are
e'plicated, their connection to each other and the (hole they for& are &ade e'plicit. 0his, a
practice of concretion, is the &ethod of thou%ht. We call such thou%ht dialectical.
:istinctively counterposed to astract thou%ht 4(hat $e%el called the Rnderstandin%, itself a
reification of co%nitive activity5 dialectical thou%ht, then, constitutes itself in the effort to %rasp
and e'plicate the contours of actual &ove&ent, to catch, fi', and theoretically reproduce and
anticipate the structures 4natural pheno&ena, hu&ani=ed natural relations, social relations,
institutions, social for&ations, etc.5 that at once e&er%e fro& and shape the daily activity of
hu&an ein%s. In this respect, dialectical ,lo%ic/ is constituted as an ideal for&ali=ation of the
relations a&on% the aidin% structures that recur in this &ove&ent. 0hus, in dialectical ,lo%ic/
it is reco%ni=ed that ideally, for thou%ht, for$ can e astracted fro& content. But it also
reco%ni=es that in the practice of daily life for& and content are inseparale ecause they
penetrate and &utually deter&ine one another. 4Si&ilarly, dialectical thin"in% reco%ni=ed the
necessity of re1oinin% for& and content (hen ideal analysis returns to real, practical
situations.5 3e( for&s can e&er%e fro& chan%es in content, and for& can undoutedly ut
only (ith %reat violence to content e i&posed on it, therey effectively e'pressin% the
he%e&ony of astraction. 0ransfor&ation of for&s necessary i&plies prior chan%es in content,
and chan%es in content (ill sooner or later necessitate novel for&s. In daily life, for& cannot
e &echanically counterposed to content. If the sustance of daily life under%oes chan%e, the
for&s of e'pression of that life cannot &aintain their ori%inal character (ithout chan%e or
alteration.
:ar(in.s efforts to for&ulate ,la(s,/ say of variations, (ere clearly pursued (ith a vie( to the
&odern science of nature as his &odel. $is thin"in% is astract in the precise sense specified
here<
Struggle for 3ife
2vidence in Darin.s Theori/ation and its Critique, Re9oined
0he calculation is paradi%&atically astract+ It does not rise fro& the pheno&ena, fro& the
relations et(een species or species individuals 4or et(een species and &ilieu, ,physical
conditions/5, ut is e'ternally i&posed. *ccordin%ly, it can only e 1ustified y fiat, in the lo%ical
sense y postulation, so that :ar(in tells us that, ,all or%anic ein%s are e'posed to severe
co&petition,/ ,a stru%%le for e'istence inevitaly follo(s fro& the hi%h ratio at (hich or%anic
ein%s tend to increase,/ ,every sin%le or%anic ein%< HstrivesJ to the ut&ost to increase in
nu&ers,/
1
etc., or y &ystification 4alle%ory, &etaphor, (hatever5. $ere :ar(in has deduced
real events 4conceptuali=ed as a ,stru%%le for e'istence/5 fro& the concept 4a ,hi%h ratio/5
(hich alle%edly rises fro&, theoretically fi'in% and e'plainin%, those events+ Isolated as a &ere
aspect fro& real relational conte't and content, nature in its diverse and &anifold relations,
processes and events, the ,la(/ e'pressed &athe&atically y the calculation is presented,
i.e., posited, as real, astractly deter&inin% those relations and processes and events... In a
later discussion, (e shall discuss a co&ple' of non96althusian, non9:ar(inian and non9
6endelian deter&inants of species life as they rise fro& relations and processes in nature.
Because :ar(in contradictorily operates (ith an undifferentiated, and vacuous concept of life,
he can strai%htfor(ardly offer as a second for& of evidence do&esticated ani&als that, he
asserts, are no different fro& their feral counterparts 4astractly they aren.t5, and he can ar%ue
1
,&id, O0, O1, O#, DOF.
4that is, assu&e5 they can essentially e found in a ,state of nature./ 0he issue here concerns
that difference et(een hu&ani=ed nature and an earlier nature, a nature ,efore/ the
evolutionary appearance of hu&anity. 0here is an episte&olo%ical prole& here in this very
for&ulation 4(e have addressed it else(here5,
1
ut then :ar(in is lissfully una(are of it<
(hich all over a%ain situates hi& s)uarely in the traditions of science, of its &etaphysical
realis& and its ato&is&< 0hat difference is this+ 3ature on :ar(in.s o(n analysis is for&ed
y co&ple' and &ultifaceted, chan%in% ut ti%htly "nit and (ell inte%rated relations and
processes et(een and a&on%st ,or%anic ein%s/ that involve predation, &utual dependency
and, contrary to :ar(in, ade)uate or sufficient resources. 0he hu&an introduction of a ne( or
different species into a niche, local ecolo%y or re%ion disrupts those relations and processes<
0his is not to say that ,&an/ is not so&eho( part of nature, not in nature, not ,hi&self/
hu&anly natural, and it does not &ean that hu&ani=ed nature is not as aspect, today
decisively so, of ne( natures as they incessantly appearin% in %eolo%ical ti&e< Instead, this
disruption creates conditions that are other(ise rare 4infre)uently a cascade of e'tinctions, a
loss of iolo%ical diversity in the short run, epide&ics5 and that re)uire ti&e, historical if not
al(ays %eolo%ical ti&e, to for& and re9estalish an ecolo%ical e)uiliriu&, a ne( ut alanced
fauna and flora, literally a ne( nature. In citin% 4the inter1ection of5 do&estic species in4to5
&ilieus (here they had not previously e'isted, :ar(in fastens onto conditions such as
inade)uacy of food supplies and fa&ine that can fre)uently arise ut only durin% a period of
disruption, and he does this y isolating or a&stracting that period of disruption< a product of
hu&an interaction in nature and (ith nature and the te&poral fra&e(or" in (hich this has
occurred< fro$ the total evolutionar% context and proclai&s the& characteristic of the entire
evolutionary develop&ent of ,life/ as it has occurred over tens of thousands of &illennia. 0hus,
he is ale to ,arrive/ at 6althus. population la(.
0he third for& of evidence :ar(in presents is e'peri&ental. $e clears a plot of %round of such
and such di&ensions, &a"in% sure they can.t e cho"ed off y other plants and so(s
seedlin%s of various species in ro(s. 6ost are "illed y slu%s and insects that dine on the&,
ut a&on%st those that &ature only nine of t(enty survive as the other eleven perish for lac"
of vi%or.
2
0his e'peri&ent is an early for& 4early in the history of the evolutionary life sciences5
of the laoratory recreation so9called of natural conditions. It con1ures entirely artificial
conditions 4i.e., conditions that do not appear in nature, e.%., one of the author.s favorites
appears in ani&al physiolo%y, the use of decererate cats5, and it %enerates a specious
ar%u&ent aout plants that %ro( to%ether en $asse forcin% others to the %round. 0(o points
should e noted in this re%ard. ;irst, it is ecolo%ical disruption that y and lar%e creates
conditions in (hich unalanced, here e'cessive, for&s occupy a niche that (on.t support
the&. Second, plants cultivators that are created throu%h hu&an activity are entirely
dependent on hu&an cultivation and propa%ation, i.e., on another, lately appearin% for& of life
in nature and do not appear (ithout it, (ithout its propa%ation and cultivation. 3o conclusions
can e dra(n fro& this re%ardin% life on earthly nature, especially (ith respect to the
sustainaility of species life, as it has developed over eons of %eolo%ical ti&e.
0o this point the evidence :ar(in offers, ecause it is illicit, reaffir&s the population la(. Is
there are any other evidence2 -es. :ar(in discusses predation as an alternative to
1
See the Introduction to "h% the Stud% of Hu$an 1rigins is Necessar% and "h% it is ,ndispensa&le to a
Revolutionar% and 2$ancipator% 4ro9ect appearin% in 1rigins and 2ndings, (here the prole& is concisely
for&ulated, directly confronted and resolution is offered. 4Briefly, the episte&olo%ical issue is that the assu&ption of
an ,earlier/ nature ,prior/ to ,&an/ is independent of any and all possile oservational fra&e(or"s, that is, of the
e'perience and directly evidential "no(led%e of all possile su1ects or hu&an ein%s. 0he prole& %oes far eyond
this, ut for our purposes here it is enou%h to state it episte&olo%ically to e'hiit the fla(ed evidence :ar(in rin%s to
ear on his prole&.5
2
The 1rigin of Species, OC.
4insufficient5 food resources as it ,deter&ines the avera%e nu&ers of a species./ In his first
turn to ,nature/ itself, i.e., conceptually un9astracted, non9e'peri&ental relations that involves
non9do&esticated life 4here &a&&als and irds5, he states, ,there see&s to e little dout
that the stoc" of partrid%es, %rouse, and hares on any lar%e estate depends chiefly on the
destruction of ver&in. If not one head of %a&e (ere shot durin% the ne't t(enty years in
En%land, and, at the sa&e ti&e, if no ver&in (ere destroyed, there (ould, in all proaility, e
less %a&e than at present, althou%h hundreds of thousands of %a&e ani&als are no(
annually "illed</
1
Re&ove the ideational veil, and (hat do (e discover2 Contrary to his
intent, (hat is revealed is a natural &alance as a re1oinder to the %eo&etrically increase
pro1ected as the decisive real natural process, that denies, ne%atin%, the population la(.
2
But
instead of relations inherin% in nature, :ar(in is co&pelled< it is the lo%ic of his ar%u&ent,
the &anner of thin"in% and, for hi&, li"ely conceptually coherent, fully consistent< to thin" of
predation, cli&ate 4i.e., ,seasons of e'tre&e cold or drou%ht/5, epide&ics and predation
a%ain,
D
to thin" fully natural relations as ,chec"s/ that ,co&e into play/< as if, havin% started
fro& a %ross astraction 4the population la( paradin% as a real relation and e'istential
deter&inant5, the account of those real relations and e'istential deter&inants is so&eho(
external, and thus &ust ,co&e into play/
#
in the course of natural life.
In the critical sense unconvincin%, the ar%u&ent cannot end here since it is constructed lar%ely
(ithout reference to real natural relations 4or, as such, they appear only as e'ternally
i&posed, as ,chec"s/5E it is, in other (ords, conducted ,&etaphorically,/ i.e., (ith reference to
,co&petition,/ to the ,econo&y of nature,/ to ,the %reat attle of life,/ to ,advanta%e over<
co&petitors,/ ,eaten< in the %reat race for life,/
C
that is, it is conducted on the terrain of
our%eois society and in the lan%ua%e of our%eois thou%ht. But (hatever else :ar(in says,
tacitly he %rasps the inade)uacy of the ar%u&ent, even if he doesn.t e'plicitly reco%ni=e it is
not a )uestion of ,advanta%e/ ut a lac" of ecolo%ical niche inte%ration, a )uestion of a
structure of relations for&ed durin% te&porary disruption that is fastened onto and
conceptually fi'ed as characteri=in% the history of life on Earth as such. 0hus, he e'pressly
invo"es ,i&a%ination,/ as"s us to i&a%ine, in order to ,convince us/
O
4(ell, yes, startin% fro&
the population la(, one can i&a%ine, one can convince oneself of (hat is pri&arily5, na&ely,
of the i&portance that ,(e "eep steadily in &ind/ Hthe etter to cast that ideational veilJ that
,each or%anic ein% is strivin% to increase at a %eo&etrical ratio./
G
H-ep, there can e

no
dout+ 0he la( of population %eo&etrically for&ulated inheres in relations a&on% all or%anic
ein%s.J
$e concludes the discussion (ith a senti&ental yet %enuinely our%eois pa%eant to life in its
stru%%le (ith, for and a%ainst itself+ 0he ,(ar of nature is not incessant< no fear is felt<
death is %enerally pro&pt, and< the vi%orous, the healthy, and the happy survive and
&ultiply./
F
Perhaps, ut li"ely not.
1
,&id+
2
It (on.t do to say that every species ,&ust e chec"ed y destruction at so&e period of life/ or the conse)uences of
,the %eo&etrical tendency to increase/ 4,&id, OD5 descend (ith full forcefulness, ecause the ,destruction/ so9called,
here predation, is on%oin%, a re%ular feature of the e'istence of the prey, a condition it constantly and continuously
liale to, not an event that happens at ,so&e period of life./ We are not en%a%ed in hairsplittin%, lo%ic choppin%, a
&ere &incin% of (ords. :ar(in.s position is a necessary outco&e of the utterly astract &anner in (hich he poses
the prole&.
D
,&id, OC, OO, OG, 2GO.
#
,&id, G0 and passi&.
C
,&id, G2, GD, 2CD.
O
,&id, GD.
G
,&id+
F
,&id.
We at any rate &ust %ive &ore serious consideration to the )uestion than a celeration of
our%eois asociality+ If the evidence does not support the population la(, (hile the latter is
nonetheless the foundations of :ar(in.s evolutionary construction, (hat is the actual %round
on (hich :ar(in.s theori=ation rests2
Darin and Malthus
:ar(in differed fro& 6althus in at least three si%nificant (ays. ;irst, 6althus. de&onstration of
his population la( is deductive, (hile :ar(in.s ar%u&ent is cu&ulative. Second, and
correlatively, 6althus. ,evidence/ is anecdotal and lac"s internal coherence, :ar(in.s, thou%h
illicit, is syste&atic and coherent. 0hird, 6althus %uarantees the rationality of his deduction4s5
y invo"in% the veracity of ?od, &ore precisely, ,the po(er, %oodness, and fore"no(led%e of
the :eity/ 4chapter 1F5, (hile :ar(in reconstructs the ,population la(/ (ithout the %uarantor
relyin% only on the force and (ei%ht of the 4fla(ed5 evidence he presents, the coherency of his
ar%u&ent 4and, relative to these, the assu&ptions effectively asserted y fiat and underlyin%
the ar%u&ent5.
-et in all this, 6althus. presence is al&ost tan%ileE in :ar(in.s (ords, his ,is the doctrine of
6althus applied (ith &anifold force to the (hole ani&al and ve%etale "in%do&s/
%
<
6althusI reflection concerned society+ Conceived as a la( of nature, his population la(
deter&ines the possiilities 4nil5 of a free, undivided society incorporatin% &aterial aundance
as one of its pre&isesE in other (ords, 6althus concerned hi&self (ith specifically hu$an
society. Because :ar(in operated (ith an undifferentiated concept of life, hu&an e'istence in
its social and historical &odalities is not distinct fro& life %enerally. $e si&ply too" it for
%ranted that it is entirely licit to ,apply/ 6althus. ,doctrine/ (ith ,&anifold force to the (hole
ani&al and ve%etale "in%do&s./
But in :ar(in.s case, it is 1FC7, not 1G7F 4the date of pulication of 6althus. 2ssa%5. 0hat is,
even as fa&ine appears over and a%ain in the capitalist periphery to(ard the end of the lon%
nineteenth and into the short t(entieth century 4in the Bo&ay hinterland of those Indian
re%ions under British colonial ad&inistration, in Shaan'i province in northern China and
else(here5,
2
in the core capitalist countries of the "est 02ngland, )rance and Belgiu$5, the
era of fa$ines? rooted in a dependenc% on the vagaries of nature, on seasonal fluctuations
in agriculture, on crops and harvests? had co$e to an end no later than *CDB.
<>ne can, as (e did, %rasp this fro& the prodi%ious develop&ent of productive capacity in
the Rnited States after 1F#D, for as (e descrie i&&ediately elo( 4,0he Panic of 1FDG/5, the
trans*tlantic econo&y had already lon% a%o inseparaly tied capitalist develop&ent in Britain
and (estern Europe to that in the Rnited States, and less i&&ediately to Prussia, as (ell as
&ore isolated, and less inte%rated centers of develop&ent in East and South *sia. ?iven the
&utual penetration of the econo&ies of (estern Europe and the Rnited States, %ro(th in the
latter (ould not have een possile (ithout si&ilar e'pansion in En%land and on the
continent.
D
But<
It (as clear that here capitalis& had %enerated a &odicu& of a surplus. Why didn.t :ar(in
see this2 0he si%ns of it aounded, especially in the &ilieus in (hich :ar(in &oved 4the
environs of @ondon, one of three centers of the capitalist universe5, and the infor&ation and
0he pa%eant is repeated, &ore elaorately, at the very close of the (or"+ ,0hus, fro& the (ar of nature, fro& fa&ine
and death, the &ost e'alted o1ect (hich (e are capale of conceivin%, na&ely, the production of the hi%her ani&als,
directly follo(s. 0here is a %randeur in this vie( of life, (ith its several po(ers, have een ori%inally reathed into a
fe( for&s or into oneE and that, (hilst this planet has %one cyclin% on accordin% to the fi'ed la( of %ravity, fro& so
si&ple a e%innin% endless for&s &ost eautiful and &ost (onderful have een, are ein%, evolved./ ,&id, DF#.
1
,&id, O2.
2
6i"e :avis, 3ate Lictorian Holocausts, Parts I and II, and their su&&ation, 20C9207.
D
,&id, chapter 2, Parts I, IIE si&ilarly, aleit (ith less elaoration, Eric $osa(&, The 7ge of Capital, D0.
accounts of develop&ents he had access to 4i.e., our%eois ne(spapers recordin% ne(,
on%oin% technolo%ically9ased advances in production, transportation and co&&unication5+ In
1F#C, rail lines e'isted lar%ely in Britain, ;rance, Bel%iu& and eastern and (estern 4today
6id(estern5 Rnited StatesE y 1FCC, five continents had developed at least one &a1or rail line,
havin% )uadrupled in e'tent, in the Rnited States alone, rails (hich in 1F2F had covered three
&iles 4#.F "ilo&eters5 had y 1FC7 cover 21,GC0 &iles 4DC,0C0 "ilo&eters5.
1
In the sa&e
period, tonna%e of stea&ships 4as a &easure of their presence oth on inland (ater(ays and
the hi%h seas5 increased y a factor of ei%hteen 41F ti&es5.
2
*nd every(here railroads (ent,
electric tele%raph lines (ere set up in parallel and alon%side. What (as the si%nificance of all
this2 0he historical &o&ent of the ,si&ultaneous (idespread adoption of the railroad, the
tele%raph, and the ocean9%oin% stea&shipK constituted Kthe really critical ... HperiodJ in
*&erican econo&ic historyK efore the H*&ericanJ Civil War. *fter 1F#O, these &ethods
eca&e, Kal&ost overni%ht, standard vehicles of transportation and co&&unication.K
D
0he
sa&e could e said aout Britain and the developed areas of Europe 4Bel%iu&, ;rance,
S(it=erland and the (est an" of the Rhine5. 0he %enerali=ation of these for&s of
transportation, distriution and co&&unication rendered the &ar"ets for capitalist production
co&&ensurate (ith develop&ent of productive forces that had een on%oin% since the end of
the 3apoleonic (ars on the continent,
#
and therey, crucially, overca&e the locali=ed nature of
the &ar"et,
C
inte%ratin% every %eo%raphical space and place re%ularly touched y capitalist
co&&erce into the rhyth&s and te&pos of capitalist develop&ent. ,t as on this &asis, that
the era of fa$ines ca$e to a close+
Why didn.t :ar(in see or at least sense this2 If not in 1F#F or 1F#7 five or si' years follo(in%
the e'pansion that (as (ell under (ay y 1F##, then in 1FC0 or in particular follo(in% up the
suppression of the revolutions of 1F#F and the sharp upturn in capitalist develop&ent after
1FC1, in 1FC#, 1FCC or 1FCO2 6ar' and En%els sa( and then e'plicitly honed in on the issue
in 1F#F
O
< So (hat aout :ar(in2 $e (as an e'traordinary acute oserver 4(itness the
descriptions in his account of the Bea%le voya%e, his 1rigin, Note&oo!s and his letters5. $e
(as a syste&atic thin"er (ho even added an entire chapter in (hich he %ave detailed
considered o1ections to his theory, everyone ut one or so it appears.
G
This as not an issue
of cognitive capacit% or insight+ ,t as a class issue, an issue of the funda$ental, underl%ing
1
World(ide, in 1FCO rail(ays covered OF,1C0 "ilo&eters. Iid, D10, 0ale 2.2.
2
0onna%e rose fro& D2,000 in 1FD1 to CGO,000 in 1FCO. $osa(&, ,&id+
D
*lfred Chandler, 8r., K0he >r%ani=ation of 6anufacturin% and 0ransportation,K 1DG91DFE and his The Lisi&le Hand,
1FF91F7.
#
$osa(&, ,&id, DD.
C
,In Russia and< else(here, it (as not unco&&on for people to die of starvation in one area (hile only a fe(
hundred &iles a(ay %rain rotted in the fields for (ant of a &ar"et./ 0his situation (as est e'pressed )uantitatively in
the price of %rain+ ,0he avera%e price of rye in 6osco( and St. Petersur% for the years 1G7G91F0D Hnote the dates
(ith an eye to the first t(o editions of 6althus. 2ssa%J (as al&ost three ti&es as hi%h as in Liev./ Ca&eron, )rance
and the 2cono$ic Develop$ent of 2urope, 12. We (ould only add that et(een 1FDG and 1FGD, a orld price,
particularly in %rain a%ricultural products 4(heat, rye, arley5 as (ell as corn, for&ed.
3o( the capitalist &ar"et and its %enerali=ation rou%ht an end to the era of fa&ines only on the prior, historically
necessary condition of &aterial ine)uality ased on fi'ed social or class positions in production. If this &ar"et is a
&ystified social relation that in its i&&ediacy appears as an e)uitale e'chan%e et(een uyer and seller 4it is5, in
the entire epoch of divided societies stretchin% ac" 10,000 years, fa&ine has al(ays een a socially &ediated
facticity, never a natural %iven. 0he &ar"et %uarantees nothin%, and in &any cases secures the possiility of a truly
horrendous outco&e+ In 6ysore 4India5 in 1FGG91FGF, rou%ht on y crop failure, fa&ine and starvation (as the
outco&e of i% far&ers and &erchants (ho "ept %rain of (hich there (as plenty off the &ar"et, hoardin% it, to%ether
(ith the leadin% British i&perialist voices 4Roert *rthur ?ascoyne9Cecil, @ord SalisuryE >(en 6eredith, Ed(ard
Roert @ord @yttonE Sir Richard 0e&pleE Sir ?eor%e CouperE et al5 (ho sat y not 1ust lettin% the deaths happen ut
(ho rationali=ed the situation (ith social :ar(inian pronounce&ents. In the end perhaps 12920 &illion 4no one really
"no(s5 Indian peasants died of starvation. See 6i"e :avis, ,&id, 219C7.
O
The Co$$unist Manifesto, especially the section I entitled ,Bour%eois and Proletarians./
and precognitive assu$ptions that organi/ed the experience of societ% and societ% in nature
as such.
$ad :ar(in %rasped that the population la( (as a pro1ection on to nature of conditions that
did not in all cases otain in hu&an society 4hu&anity itself ein% part of nature5, a pro1ection
of historically transient conditions, then he (ould have een co&pelled to ad&it there (as a
part of nature in (hich the population la( (as not valid. $ad he reco%ni=ed this, then he
(ould have een further forced to )uestion (hether it (as valid (ith re%ard to the rest of
nature, that is, livin% nature. *nd, if this, then his entire construction (ould have een
1eopardi=ed. :ar(in didn.t reco%ni=e this ecause he couldn.t. 0o do so (ould have re)uired
hi& to see eyond co&&odity production and &ar"et e'chan%e includin% the e'chan%e of
laor and to see the& as specific historical for&s of the or%ani=ations of hu&an e'istence,
eyond the or%ani=ation of &anufacturin% around the poles of capital and astract laor,
eyond the conditions of his life (hose status as a leisured %entle&an depended upon that
or%ani=ation of social life, eyond our%eois society, and to see through the clai$ that $odern
science as a universal for$ of !noledge+ 0o see eyond each of these (ould have een to
adopt a standpoint that (as utterly alien, and &ostly li"ely unintelli%ile, to hi&, to for%o the
clai&s of science, to ac"no(led%e that there (as so&ethin% li"e a our%eois standpoint in the
first place and then that it (as not universal, that this society &i%ht (ell e historically
transient and its science as its hi%hest cultural achieve&ent &i%ht (ell e also.
:ar(in could not, for none of this even seeped into consciousness. Such is the &eanin% of
our%eois pre1udice<
4rosaic )oundations
of Darin.s Theori/ation in the 3ife 4ractices of the Culture of Class
6althusianis& had een orn in the reaction a%ainst the ;rench Revolution, to the scarcity
and hun%er driven utopian strivin%s of &asses of &en and (o&en, a%ainst the hope that the
future &i%ht offer the prospects of overco&in% the scarcity and the fi'ed place in society
accorded the lo(liest, no( lar%ely synony&ous (ith a (a%ed, propertyless class. But 6althus.
vision hadn.t een solely ac"(ard loo"in%+ ;ollo(in% 4*da&5 S&ith, he elieved societal
prole&s could e a&eliorated y %reater co&petition in production 4&ostly as it effects the
price of laor5, and y free trade in e'chan%e. *nd no(, thirty three years later, a %reat refor&
&ove&ent had sprun% a%ainst the ,old Corruption,/ the (hole syste& of rotten orou%hs and
virtual representation on the asis of (hich a tiny stratu& of politically do&inant %reat
co&&ercial and lando(nin% aristocrats, 0ories to a &an, continued to he%e&oni=e
Parlia&ent. 4If Ca&rid%e Rniversity, (here fanatic 0ories such as the *n%lican clerical
ad&inistration, the dons and fe( else voted, (as ,represented/ y and elected t(o &e&ers
of Parlia&ent, the to(n of Ca&rid%e had no representation.5 But in those last thirty years
capitalis& developed a very, very lar%e foothold in Britain, and the industrial our%eoisie,
(hich had &ore than less &ade its peace (ith reaction and counterrevolution, (as e%innin%
to lift its tail, not its head< for it (as a popular &ove&ent of artisans, (or"in% &en and poor
laorers (ho first raised the anner of refor& durin% the crisis of 1FD191FD2, the &iddle
G
See The 1rigins of Species 4chapter O5, (here he %roups those o1ections into four %eneral cate%ories of
)uestions< If one species has descended fro& another y (ay of %radually accu&ulated, naturally selected
advanta%eous traits, (hy are there no transitional for&s, say in the fossil record2 Is it possile that one species could
have descended fro& other (ith entirely different structure and ,haits/2 Can instincts e trans&itted and chan%ed or
transfor&ed throu%h natural selection2 $o( does one account for crossed species producin% sterile offsprin%, (hile
the crossed varieties are fertile2 <(hich once e'a&ined reveal that :ar(in considers the foundations of his
theori=ation so secure as to e unchallen%eale. ,&id, 1#C91#O. $e further considers o1ections to selection
e&racin% instincts and its &odifications separately, in chapter G 4see his su&&ation, 17G92005, as (ell as hyridis&
in chapter F 4see the su&&ation, 22#922C5.
classes follo(ed. 0he Refor& *ct 41FD25, enlar%in% enfranchise&ent, also follo(ed. But the
crisis had not run its course+ Wor"in% class a%itation for universal &ale suffra%e, (hich found
or%ani=ational e'pression in an upsur%e of political unions so styled, continued (ell into
1FD#,
1
and spran% up ane( in the late thirties.
*t that &o&ent, a ran%e of &iddle class refor&ists atte&pted to sei=e control of the &ass
&ove&ent "no(n to history as Chartis&, and the &ost coherent a&on% the& (ere illu&inated
y a vision of free &ove&ent of &en and capital includin% freedo& fro& the poor la(s for the
&asses in the streets, and of course a freely elected Parlia&ent. In this respect, 6althus.
thou%ht (as fully con%ruent (ith that of the refor&ers+ Call the perspective of these %roups
that ased the&selves on industrial capitalis& ,Whi% 6althusianis&/<
When he returned fro& the five years 41FD191FDO5 he spent aoard the Beagle, :ar(in stayed
in the @ondon apart&ent of his rother, Eras&us *lvery "no(n to his friends as Eras. 4$e %ot
his o(n roo& and lod%in%s do(n the street fro& his rother in 6arch 1FDG.5 ;ro& here,
:ar(in (as close to the structures housin% the &a1or scientific societies and institutions, the
Boolo%ical Society, the ?eolo%ical Society, the @innean 6useu& and the British 6useu&, all
of (hich he often fre)uented. $e found intellectual succor in literary dinners and evenin%
discussions (ith his rother, to%ether (ith an old fa&ily friend, a youn% &an na&ed $enslei%h
Wed%(ood, cousin to the :ar(in rothers, a philolo%ist (ho (as see"in% to understand
lan%ua%e in ter&s of ,la(ful/ develop&ent and in this sense ,historically/ 4ut not in the
dialectical sense, the upsur%e of novelty, the incessant creation of ne( for&s out of chan%in%
content5. $enslei%h and the :ar(ins (ere often 1oined y $arriet 6artineau, a political
novelist of sorts, that is, a first rate propa%andist offerin% populari=ed e'planations of Whi%
le%islated refor&s to the Poor @a(s
2
< @oo"in% &uch li"e a ,couple,/ Eras and $arriet had
een havin% an affair < *nd, yes, it (as the very sa&e Poor @a(s that 6althus had
pole&ici=ed a%ainst, and in no &ere ironic coincidence, 6artineau had &et the old &an earlier
in the decade< shortly efore his death< at (hich ti&e he passed the aton to her+
6artineau (as a fiery 6althusian, fiercely so, and (hat Charles (as i&iin% (as a Whi%
6althusianis& to%ether (ith a la(ful develop&ental &odel, nicely co&pli&entin%, reinforcin%
and deepenin% the %eolo%y of the lon% dureI assi&ilated fro& @yell, for understandin% that
nature he had seen, (al"ed in, collected copious sa&ples of and &a"e notes aout durin% the
Beagle voya%e.
0his (as heady stuff. 6artineau, in fact, (as a radical and a freethin"er, callin% for the
enfranchise&ent of (or"ers and a fir& eliever in (o&en.s ri%hts 4&arital e)uality, 1oint
property o(nership5. :esirin% nothin% so &uch as tran)uility and respectaility,
D
and
personally attuned to the conservatis& of his fa&ily, his father and that of the Wed%(oods,
Charles (ould e%in to &ove a(ay fro& this cro(d and &arry conventionally shortly
thereafter 4i.e., (ould refuse ,suordination/ to the 6artineau ,doctrine/5, ut not
6althusianis&. It (as ,in the air/ every it as &uch as ,evolution/<
$e (ould soon 46arch 17DF5 %et around to readin% the 2ssa% on 4opulation
#
< for it,
6althusianis&, (as ori%inally an intellectual effort to %rapple (ith the situation on the %round,
1
E.P. 0ho&pson, The Ma!ing of the 2nglish "or!ing Class, F0G9F0F.
2
:es&ond and 6oore, ,&id, 17F, 21O 4$enslei%h and the dinners5, 1CD 4$arriett 6artineau5.
D
,&id, e..%., 20D.
#
The 7uto&iograph% of Charles Darin, 120.
In the air2 Be%innin% fro& the 1FD2 refor&s, this ,Whi% restructurin% (as an assertion of &iddle9class 6althusian
values. HRpon his returnJ :ar(in found that 6althus had ac)uired a ne( &eanin%. $is na&e (as on everyody.s lips,
as either Satan or Savior. $is doctrine of population, pro%ress, and pauperis& (as no lon%er acade&ic. It (as the
every "ernel of poor9la( policy+ the stuff of infla&&atory rhetoric H(itness 6artineauJ, popular defiance, and
%overn&ent propa%anda./ :es&ond and 6oore, ,&id, 17G.
to %ra control of the refor& &ove&ent in order to lierate ,society/ fro& its shac"les,
1
the
perspective on the (orld of the &anufacturers, &ill o(ners, iron &a"ers, in other (ords,
leadin% ele&ents of the industrial our%eoisie, ut even the shop"eepers, all (ho (anted
done (ith the old order.
2
But si&ultaneously it &ore, far &ore, than this...
The 4anic of *CBS
0o %et a real, visceral sense of the relation to 6althusianis& to the industrial our%eoisie and
its political e'pression in Whi%%ery and fro& here :ar(in.s relation to it, (e &ust loo" to the
o1ective conte't, the econo&y, in (hich the order of society (as constituted, in (hich the
(ealth, status and po(er of the industrialists (as (on. What (as really si%nificant in this
re%ard (as collapse of a oo& ased on cotton production...
Be%innin% fro& capitalist finance, the Panic of 1FDG (as ine'tricaly ound up (ith the
trans*tlantic trade in cotton... cotton, it &i%ht e recalled, (as at the center of production,
e'chan%e and trade in a nascent (orld capitalist econo&y
D
... and atop there (as the )uestion
of speculation on the trade y En%lish investors. 4Cotton production, of course, (as not the
only activity under%oin% dra&atic e'pansion, its reified &ove&ent as price not the only
astraction that (as dra&atically risin%. In the Rnited States, driven y the fren=ied activity of
speculators the &assive increases in land sales and their thin%ly o1ectification in the
&ountin% KpriceK per acre of land sold (est of the *ppalachians, also played a &a1or role in
creatin% inflationary pressures in the 8ac"sonian econo&y.5 In fact, a real oo& in cotton 4and
land5 had een under(ay since the early 1FD0s.
#
En%land, the Rnited StatesI pri&ary creditor in trans*tlantic trade, had itself under%one rapid
an"in% e'pansion in the thirties. In 1FDO alone, forty9t(o ne( an"s of issues (ere
estalished (ith ranches that rou%ht the total to t(o hundred ne( institutions. 6uch of this
(as spurred y speculative activity, a oo& in usiness ventures that sa( over G0 co&panies
of every sort for& durin% a three &onth period in the sa&e year in @iverpool and 6anchester
alone. Ban"s provided the credit, aleit short9ter&, to pursue these ventures. 0he total
nu&er of an"s in that year ca&e to a full si' hundred seventy.
C
Easy &oney fueled inflation,
a rise in the prices of co&&only consu&ed %oods as (ell as industrial ra( &aterials ran%in%
fro& 2CZ9100Z. 0his enor&ous e'pansion of de&and ste&&in% fro& these KcountryK an"s
and, &ost i&portantly for the speculatively fed course of events, fro& invest&ent houses tied
to the *&erican trade, stripped the Ban" of En%land of &uch of its %old reserves. In response
1
0he shac"les included old aristocratic and %entle&anly, 0ory97nglican control over the or%ani=ations of science.
:es&ond and 6oore, ,&id, 177. :ar(in.s fa&ily, it &i%ht e noted, (as Whi%%ish and Rnitarian, thou%h the latter
hardly ran to dissent 4and a&on% the dissenters 6artineau had to e counted5, a tendency that in the case of
:ar(in.s father, 8osiah, (as thorou%hly detested.
2
In point of fact, the relation to 6althus (as personal+ 6althus. dau%hter 4E&ily5 (as a rides&aid at $enslei%h.s
&arria%e to E&ily 6ac"intosh (hose father, Sir 8a&es, had een a close friend to 6althus hi&self, oth havin%
lectured at the East India Colle%e. ,&id, 201. In this conte't, it should not e for%otten that :ar(in &arried $enslei%h.s
sister, E&&a, co&pletin% the circle of relations, as it (ere, et(een :ar(ins and Wed%(ood in this %eneration. What
stood et(een the t(o fa&ilies (as reli%ion+ 0he Wed%e(oods (ere *n%lican.
D
*fter 1FD2, prices for cotton had e%un to cli&. 0hus, in 1FDD, a pound of cotton fetched 12.D2l, in 1FD# 12.70l, in
1FDC 1G.#Cl, in 1FDO 1O.C0l, and in 1FDG 1D.2Cl. *nd, of course, at the sa&e ti&e the de&and, pri&arily En%lish, for
southern, slave laor9produced cotton continued to %ro(. :ou%lass 3orth, The 2cono$ic Develop$ent of the Hnited
States, 0ale *9!II, 2D2. !olu&e for the sa&e years as &easured in ales of cotton (as CC7,210E O#1,#DCE GO0,72DE
GFF,01DE and, 71O,7O0. ,&id+
#
0he &ove&ent of cotton prices in the &iddle decades of the thirties put additional &oney in the poc"ets of those
involved in cotton e'chan%e, especially in the for&s of co&&issions on profits 4i&porters, e'porters, ro"ers,
an"ers5 and advances on cotton sales 4planters en%a%ed in or aspirin% to lu'ury consu&ption5, ut also &erchant
retailers in 3orthern cities in the Rnited States (here planters often su&&ered. Reflected in the fi%ures for *&erican
i&ports, lar%e parts of those %ro(in% inco&es (ent into the purchase of British finished %oods.
C
$.3. $ynd&an, Co$$ercial Crises of the Nineteenth Centur%, #D.
to this depletion of reserves 4and li"ely (ith a vie( to the alar&in% price increasin%5, 8a&es
Pattison, the Ban"Is director, raised the Ban"Is discount rate in 8une 1FDO 4to #mZ5 and a%ain
in *u%ust 4to CZ5 to counteract the continuin% drain on those reserves.
O
*s it e%an to da(n on the Ban"Is directors that the British &oney &ar"et (as concentrated
s)uarely in trans*tlantic trade (ith the Rnited States, (ord of the Specie Circular directive
reached Pattison.
1
$e (as alar&ed. 3o( the Ban" of En%land (as effectively a central an"
in the &odern sense+ *ll the po(er that nor&ally accrues to a centrali=ed an"er (as
availale to Pattison. $e leaned on British i&port houses (hose activities (ere centered on
*&erican trade+ $e did so y instructin% the Ban"Is @iverpool a%ent to refuse the notes of
specific invest&ent houses (hose trade (as predo&inately *&erican ased. By >ctoer,
an"ruptcies a&on% &ercantile houses and trades in the *&erican East e%an to appear. Still
the price of cotton, rou%ht to &ar"et in >ctoer 4follo(in% a late *u%ust9early Septe&er
harvest5, held up.
0hen, in the late (inter British &anufacturersI de&and for cotton slac"ened and its price fell.
*s a result, in early 6arch 1FDG, an i&portant 3e( >rleans fir&, $er&an Bri%%s and Co.,
failin% to &eet its oli%ations incurred in cotton purchases, (ent elly up. 4*lready in
:ece&er 1FDO, a lar%e 6anchester an", the 3orthern and Central, had sou%ht relief fro&
Pattison and the Ban" of En%land.5
2
In 3e( -or" and 3e( >rleans, the sa&e scenario (as
repeated, this ti&e y several fir&s. >n one side of the *tlantic, de&and fro& British
&anufacturers for cotton (as collapsin%, and the Ban" of En%land had proscried the trade of
certain houses (ith, to prevent further deepenin% of, their already over(hel&in% dependency
on the *&erican trade in cottonE on the other side of the *tlantic, the *&ericans found
the&selves unale to uy, sell, orro( or pay. Business (as co&in% to a screechin% halt, and
panic (as settin% in. By 1 *pril, the Panic (as under(ay.
In the Rnited States, a national %overn&ent under the ne( Presidency of 6artin !an Buren,
8ac"sonian on an" &atters to the one, refused to treat in anythin% ut &etallic currency. It
essentially stood y as *&erican an"s (ere presented (ith their notes, and in short ti&e
(ere unale to &eet the suddenly over(hel&in% de&and for specie. In 6ay, e%innin% (ith
those in 3e( -or", an"s refused to honor their o(n notes. Suspension (as soon
%enerali=ed. By the end of the year, si' hundred ei%hteen an"s had failed.
D
*nd in the Rnited States the crisis, not &erely uran and co&&ercial, en%ulfed the lar%e
eastern cities and their i&&ediate hinterlands, i.e., the East in its entirely, precisely the re%ion
of the country (hich had %one the furthest do(n the road of capitalist develop&ent, that is,
inte%ration into the trans*tlantic econo&y increasin%ly do&inated y industrial capitals.
Producin% cotton, thus central to its e'chan%e and inte%rated into its trans*tlantic circuits,
southern planters felt the crush i&&ediately and responded rutally+ In 1FDG, the price of
cotton fell t(enty percent and planters sava%ely e'ploited their chattels reali=in% an increase
in production of a si'th 4&easured in ales of cotton produced5. Inco&es nonetheless fell
nearly a third. 0he follo(in% year, 1FDF, rou%ht another lar%e fall in the price of cotton.
#
O
Bray $a&&ond, Ban!s and 4olitics in 7$erica, #CGE Willia& ?. Shade, Ban!s or no Ban!s, D#E $ynd&an, ,&id<
8aco Riesser, The 8reat 8er$an Ban!s, GFG n. 1F.
1
0he Species Circular refers to one of t(o actions ta"en in the R.S. in su&&er 1FDO that e'acerated the Panic once
under(ay. In *u%ust, *ndre( 8ac"son instructed his 0reasury Secretary, @evi Woodury, to issue circular en1oinin%
federal land a%ents to accept only specie 4%old or silver5 as pay&ent for purchase of pulic lands. 40he first had een
a le%islative enact&ent re)uested and si%ned y 8ac"son, a Kdeposit act,K that is, le%islation that &ade &andatory
return to state %overn&ents of any surpluses that &i%ht accrue to the national 0reasury.5
2
Riesser, ,&id+
D
$ynd&an, ,&id, #O.
#
Cotton rou%ht 10.1#l per pound in 1FDF. Production in ales (as GFF,01D ales in 1FDO and 71O,7O0 in 1FDG.
3orth, ,&id, 0ale *9!II, 2D2. Prices rose in 1FD7, ut it (as already too late+ 0he Panic had %iven (ay to depression.
In o1ectivistic and reified ter&s, the KcauseK of the do(nturn and contraction lay outside the
*&erican econo&y proper. In an advanced industry, ne( centers of te'tile production 4eyond
6anchester, @yons and @o(ell5 appeared in Sa'ony, Prussia and Brussels, Bel%iu& and ta"en
to%ether "nit the nascent capitalist (orld into a %loal econo&y. 0hese recently opened
spinnin% &ills increased (orld capacity, and cut into the En%lish share of that &ar"et.
Co&&ercial houses responded (ith failures in Canton, Calcutta, Brussels and @a $avre. *
European recession e%an to unfold. In Britain, %rain harvest, poor in 1FDF, failed in 1FD7+
Wheat and other %rains had to e i&ported. Coupled to an inordinate and &assive
develop&ent of British rail(ay construction and e'cessive stoc" speculation 4that included the
i&&oderate purchase of *&erican onds5, Ban" of En%land %old reserves, lar%e a&ounts
soa"ed up y industriali=in% pro1ects, had flo(n out of the country to pay for i&ported %rains+
Suspension of specie pay&ents (as a%ain i&&inent.
1
En%lish &anufacturers cut deeply into their purchases of *&erican cotton. In the Rnited
States, the Ban" of the Rnited States in Philadelphia, no lon%er a federal depository and
heavily involved in cotton e'chan%e since the Panic of 1FDG, its specie reserved dra(n off in
this &aelstro& of events, suspended specie pay&ents in >ctoer 1FD7. >ther *&erican
an"s soon follo(ed. 6etropolises (ithin the co&&ercial capitalist (orld under%oin% incipient
industriali=ation had een su1ect in those industriali=in% centers to si&ultaneous crises,
financial and industrial 4overproduction5. 0hey dra%%ed their hinterlands into a full9scale
depression.
Business failures &ultiplied. In the Rnited States, a )uarter of all fir&s in 3e( En%land had
already %one under. *n esti&ated 70Z of all factories closed efore the e%innin% of 1FDF.
0he (or"in% classes of the East (ere rava%edE a&on% the re&ainin% e&ployed, the (a%e
structure collapsedE &ea%er state and privately philanthropic social safety nets (ere
estalishedE social and class conflict intensified as classic read riots 43e( -or" City5 and
anti9rent riots 4upstate 3e( -or"5 erupted, sheriffs (ere forcily re&oved fro& office in
6ississippi, nativis& raised its u%ly head in the i% cities of the East. In Britain, Chartist rallies
in the %reat industrial cities railed a%ainst the old order e&odied y 0ory control of the state
4not 1ust the Parlia&ent, ut the universities and their faculties, the scientific societies, etc.5+
0he cry (as for refor&, for universal 4&ale5 suffra%e, salaried 6e&ers and annual elections.
Chartis& (as country(ide, a &ass &ove&ent, and on its ed%es the depression e&oldened
desperate &en and (o&en to riot especially a%ainst the refor&ed Poor @a(, the state
co&pulsion to (or" (here there no (or" or face the poorhouse and (or"houses, (hich, under
attac" as visile sy&ols and e&odi&ents of the Poor @a(s, (ere fire9o&ed, urned, not
infre)uently destroyed
2
...
0he depression that follo(ed rene(ed panic 41FD75 (as an early instance of a classic sha"e9
out+ It started fro& the sphere of circulation 4especially a&on% &erchants and retailers5. It
spilled over into productionE and it eca&e a crisis of production of finished cotton %oods
centered on Britain ut (ithin the European and trans*tlantic econo&y as a (hole (ith ripples
shutterin% production in the capitalist periphery 4e.%., Canton5. 0he slu&p dra%%ed on into
1F#D...
Nature and Societ%
Collapse of a speculative ule, the financial Panic of 1FDG, and suse)uent depression+
*ccu&ulation in the capitalist sense (as co&in% to a sudden halt. It (as not 1ust that a
s(ellin% ar&y of the une&ployed %reatly increased the costs of poor relief, the financin% of
(hich fell on the &iddlin% %roups, ut the threat of revolution hun% in the air. 0a"en to%ether it
1
$a&&ond, ,&id, C029C0D, $ynd&an, ,&id+
2
0he first riots had already occurred in 6ay 1FDC in the counties south of @ondon, :es&ond and 6oore, Darin, 17O.
(as this, all this, that really (elded the industrial layers of the our%eoisie to 6althusianis&,
that in a stunnin% (ay clarified for this class its relation to society as a (hole. Recall the
Whi%%ish refor&s 4the Refor& *ct, 1FD25, or &ore precisely industrialists. and &anufacturers.
support for the&<
Refor& (as opposed y 0ories, co&&ercial and landed capital (ith its aristocratic veneer. It
(as supported y s&all &anufacturers and the artisan proletariat they e&ployed 4(here it
e'isted5, y lar%e factory o(ners, y those tied to the ne( capitalist fir&s 4factories5 as
supervisors of laor, as accountants, and as planners and or%ani=ers of production, y the
ne(ly e&er%in% professions 4e.%., in the sciences5, and y store"eepers and retailer
&erchants. But support often (ent eyond (ords+ So&e of these people (ere in the streets
for&in% the ,pulic/ pressure that %ot the ill passed. 0he Refor& *ct secured seats in the
Co&&ons for the lar%est of the cities that had e&er%ed durin% the Industrial Revolution 4i.e.,
in our ter&s, the ,event/ announcin% the institution of real do&ination in production5, and
aolished seats in Parlia&ent in the least densely populated ,rotten orou%hs,/ those &odels
of virtual representation that until the &o&ent of passa%e of the Refor& *ct &ade Parlia&ent
a %entle&an.s clu (ithout any electoral ase in En%lish society. *fter the *ct (as le%islated
all of one in si' adult &ales in a population of 1# &illion (ere enfranchised. 4Wor"ers, of
course, (ere not.5 It (as the circles and institutions created y these strata, the&selves
attached to lar%e industrial capitals that (ere consolidatin% their e'istence in part throu%h the
Refor& *ct 4and other le%islation5 itself, in (hich Charles :ar(in &oved<
:ar(in (ould theori=e, for&ulate and then in his pulication of The 1rigin, articulate a (orld
vision< in the %rand sense of an enco&passin% perspective on &an, his place in the (orld
and the universe< fully co&&ensurate (ith, illu&inatin% and %oin% eyond, the relation of
6althusianis& to the life practices of this e&er%in% class of industrial capitalists. But here and
no( in 1FDF91FD7, only the linea&ents of this vision appeared<
End the relief. ?et the poor off the dole. 0his (as de rigueur: It creates an reservoir of free
(a%ed laor and forces the price of laor do(n< co&petition< and, to oot, it lo(ers ta'es
on the &anufacturer and industrialist 4oth y eli&inatin% the ta'ation on inco&es to support
the syste& of relief and y lo(er ta'es relative to increased inco&e5. It helped the laorin%
poor, paupers, the&selves. 6ade the& self9reliant. 0his (as 6althus. *nd if this (as not
enou%h, if they si&ply do not fall y the (ayside and disappear 4i.e., starve, die5, %et rid of
the&, so&eho(< ship the& aroad if need e. 0his (as still 6althus. 4In the last, si'th,
edition of the 2ssa% pulished y durin% his lifeti&e, 6althus sanctioned e&i%ration.5
1
Still
6althus did not )uite %rasp 4at least in 1G7F, actually in 1FD# he still hadn.t5 the dyna&ics of
capitalist develop&ent, of %ro(th y (ay of contraction, depression and sha"e9out, the
Ncreative> destruction of e'istin% values 4deflationary devalori=ation5 ecause this (rec"a%e
itself for&ed the pre&ise of a rene(al of the syste& of capitalist social relations, the asis for
reco&&encin% the production of co&&odities on an e'panded or an enlar%ed asis. Instead
he, 6althus, (as focused on those %eo&etrical ra&ifications of population %ro(th relative to
arith&etically %ro(in% resources 4food supplies5. But (hat held in nature, held in society. In
oth, (e (ould find ,the 6althusian rush for life./
2
0here (ere chec"s in nature+ Predation,
starvation 4inade)uate resources5, natural disastersE si&ilar chec"s could, if one (ished to
state it, e found in society+ predation, starvation, industrial disasters 4e.%., collapsed
&ineshafts, factory fires5. 6ore i&portantly, population pressure pushed aside the (ea"er
individuals (ithin a species< It did &ore than push the& aside, it (as a ,force li"e a hundred
thousand (ed%es/ thrustin% the&selves ,into every "ind of adapted structure/ in ,the %aps in
1
*nd, in fact, at &any as #00,000 (or"ers, (ith or (ithout fa&ilies, left Britain annually< for *ustralia, the Cape
Province and the Rnited States< durin% the slu&p follo(in% on the panic. ,&id, 2OO.
2
Paul $. Barrett, et al 4eds.5, Charles Darin.s Note&oo!s, *CBQ-*CDD: OD7 4,*stract of 6acculloch H1FDFJ, 2F
/
5.
the econo&y of 3ature/
1
< @i"e plant cultivars, a&on% the laorin% &asses the fe( est
adapted varieties (ould eventually prosper pushin% aside the hu%e &ass of the less (ell
adapted, the la=y, the una&itious, all of (ho& (ould in the lon% run disappear< @ater
:ar(in (ould find a for&ulation to capture this situation, ,as all or%anic ein%s are strivin%, it
&ay e said, to sei=e on each place in the econo&y of nature, if any one species does not
eco&e &odified and i&proved in a correspondin% de%ree (ith its co&petitors, it (ill soon e
e'ter&inated/
2
< With the co&petition ca&e the selection+ Rnder depression conditions (ith
the e%%ars scaven%in% in the streets, only the est a&on% the& (ould survive. Society li"e
nature (as at (ar (ith itself< (e should not allo( ourselves to e &isled y ,.)uiet. (ar of
or%anic ein%s %oin% on HinJ the peaceful (oods ` s&ilin% field,/ it is ,dreadful,/
D
and (e
couldn.t e &isled y the ra%in% class stru%%le. >n his (ay to @innean lirary or the British
6useu&, (herever necessary :ar(in too" sides streets to avoid "nots of con%re%atin%
(or"ers, those &oili=in% for a Chartist rally or de&onstration< and those that (ere fit (ould,
over %enerations, i&prove species life, here hu&anity. $ere (as indeed a Ncreative> force, it
lifted the species. 0his (as pro%ress, not s&ooth and unilinear ut rutal and crushin%, in
society as in nature< Population in this rarefied for& (as a ,trans&utation/ of surplus laor<
0his, then, (as :ar(inE and, so&e of it (as very nasty indeed+ :ecades efore social
:ar(inis& appeared and (as populari=ed, flo(in% fro& his class and e'istential orientation
:ar(in had accepted, assi&ilated, and spo"e not entirely a&i%uously ut %uardedly to e
sure... offerin% a theoretical solution, i.e., capitalIs 1ustification, to the prole& of surplus
populations... in the refined and rarefied lan%ua%e of (hat (as indeed a vicious
6althusianis&.
1
,&id, DGC 43oteoo" :, 1DC5.
2
:ar(in, The 1rigin of Species, 71 4chapter #, ,3atural Selection/5.
D
Charles Darin.s Note&oo!s, #27 43oteoo" E, 11#5.
Part III
0he 6odern Synthesis 43eo9:ar(inis&5
0he prole& of population reappears at the &o&ent of the &ost concentrated e'pression of
the %eneral crisis of capitalis&, a crisis (hose &ost open, forceful &anifestation (as the
Slu&p itself+ 0he prole& e'ploded in truly &assive une&ploy&ent not 1ust in the core
capitalist nations 4Britain, ?er&any and the Rnited States5 ut throu%hout the capitalist
periphery in areas (here penetration of the value for& &i%ht not have other(ise een
i&&ediately apparent.
1
3ot fortuitously, the prole& of population also reappeared in the (or"
of evolutionary theorists 4hardly any of (ho& (ere actually iolo%ists5 0his (or" constituted a
%enuinely ne( departure in the sciences of life, < ;or, here, evolution is understood as ,a
chan%e in the %enetic co&position of populations/
2
< ;ro& the perspective of the i&&anent
develop&ent of science, sciences of life so9called, the %enetic co&position of populations has
no co&prehensive &eanin% apart fro& nature do&ination, fro& the develop&ent of
technolo%ies of social control, of social %roups of hu&ans understood as natural ein%s
su1ected to &anipulation and control. ;ro& the perspective of the syste&ic crisis of
capitalis&, this e'plicit theoretical concern, ho(ever &ediated, rarefied and oli)uely it
appeared, is an e'pression of the prole& of surplus laor and, %enerali=ed 4a %enerali=ation
effected y the very &ove&ent of capital5, the prole& of surplus population. ;ro& oth
perspectives, this theori=ation (as elaorated far in advance of its internally driven practical
conse)uences and outco&es. Still, a %eneral crisis in the o1ective conte't in (hich an entire
civili=ation had developed enters into theori=ation, for e'a&ple, precisel% in the conceptual
shift fro& the individual or%anis& to species as population groups as the proper o1ect of
evolutionary theory+
D
*ll the &a1or (or"s that for&ed the asis of neo9:ar(inian thin"in%<
the shift fro$ the individual organis$ to population groups and a deter$inis$ &ased on
adaptation are its central, novel features< appeared in this period, &ost et(een 17D1 and
17DG. Because this theori=ation is hi%hly rarefied and see&in%ly developed solely on the asis
of its o(n lo%ic, it is necessary to recount, scrutini=e and criti)ue it on its o(n ter&s. So here
(e shall e'a&ine 1ust one of those &a1or (or"s, :o=hans"y.s 8enetics and the 1rigin of
Species, a %enuine theoretical synthesis reputed to e a central docu&ent of the entire
develop&ent at its ori%ins<
In the last (or" of his life, a &assively spra(lin% historical9critical effort to re9theori=e the
foundations of :ar(inian evolution, Stephen 8ay ?ould devoted a short section 4relatively
spea"in%5 to neo9:ar(inis&, other(ise "no(n as the ,&odern synthesis./
#
$e e'a&ined the
elaoration of neo9:ar(inis& in ter&s of (hat he identified as a t(o9phase process of
,inte%ration around a rene(ed :ar(inian core,/ that is, the unification of various sudisciplines
(ithin iolo%y 4e.%., otany, =oolo%y, cytolo%y, anato&y, physiolo%y, &orpholo%y, etc.5 around
the y then ,traditional/ perspective of s&all scale, continuous variaility as the pri&ary source
of evolutionary chan%e. 0he specific character of the ,synthesis/ is the assi&ilation of
6endelian %enetics, that is, its &athe&atical for&alis& 4the de&onstration that ,s&all
selection pressures actin% on &inor %enetic differences/ can produce evolutionary chan%e5, to
1
;or e'a&ple, on the ruer plantations of 6alaya, Ceylon and the :utch East Indies+ 0hese estates did poorly,
disappearin% as capitalist enterprises, the (a%ed ruer (or"ers cut loose and forced to return to their ho&eland
4India5. See the Prolo%ue to The 8er$an Road to Reneed ,$perialist "orld "ar, the section entitled ,0he Slu&p+
$o( Bad :id It ?et2/
2
0heodosius :o=hans"y, 8enetics and the 1rigin of Species 417C15, 1O.
D
In :ar(in hi&self (e find a shift fro& selection ,actin%/ on individual or%anis& to species 4The 1rigin of Species,
1OG91OF5. 0his can, si&ilarly, e seen to e the case (ith re%ard to instinct 4,&id, 1GC5. But these are sin%le and
sin%ular passa%esE they neither convey the overall sense of his ar%u&ent< (hich at any rate is specific, the or%anis&
is the o1ect of study< nor do they even re&otely su%%est his focus.
#
The Structure of 2volutionar% Theor%. Ca&rid%e 46*5+2002. C0D9CF#.
that traditional perspective.
1
0he &ain achieve&ent of this first phase (as to estalish the
,self9sufficiency/ of a 6endelian &ediated traditional :ar(inis& y (ay of e'clusion of the
leadin% contendin% theori=ations, the co&petin% @a&arc"ian functionalis&, and saltational and
ortho%enetic vie(s.
2
Si%nificantly, he dated the e%innin%s of the first phase fro& 171F, fro& a
,pivotal/ essay of Ronald *. ;ischer. 4It is the date that is si%nificant+ *%ainst the fore%round
reality of the Russian Revolution, for a our%eois any theori=ation that stresses incre&ental
chan%e (ould have een at once e&otionally %ratifyin%, intellectually satisfyin% and, least it e
for%otten, an ideolo%ical affir&ation of capitalis& in private, and politically our%eois
de&ocratic for&.5
D
In contrast to the first phase of inte%ration and consolidation, one in (hich
he thou%ht that (ithin the synthesi=ed fra&e(or" a pluralis& of vie(s could in principle co9
e'ist, ?ould dee&ed the second phase decidedly one in (hich vie(s hardened, in (hich
natural selection (as elevated to the e'clusion, effectively spea"in%, of all other
deter&inations as the &echanis& 4he says ,a%ent/5 of evolutionary chan%e. ?ould indicated
this hardenin% too" on the shape of orthodo'y for (hich alternative vie(s even (ithin a
:ar(inian fra&e(or" (ere cavalierly dis&issed out of hand.
#
0his is the situation that (e face
today in really crude theori=ations such as Richard :a("ins. The Selfish 8ene. In order,
ho(ever, to achieve a critical perspective on this synthesis it is necessary to %rasp its
si%nificant and se&inal ele&ents, not to &ention its &ost coherent for&ulation, and to do this
(e &ust return to the period of its for&ation.
1rganic Diversit% and 7daptation
We shall ta"e our cue fro& Steve ?ould, and e'a&ine that &o&ent at (hich this hardenin%
eca&e apparent, et(een the first 417DG5 and third 417C15, and final, editions of 0heodosius
:o=hans"y.s 8enetics and the 1rigin of Species+
0he very presentation of this (or", and (ith it its theoretical content and the ai& %uidin% its
construction, under(ent a chan%e fro& first to last edition+ *s ?ould hi&self noted,
:o=hans"y deleted t(o chapters 4I! and !, ,Chro&oso&al Chan%es/ and ,!ariation in
3atural Populations/5 fro& the ori%inal 17DG edition, those that contained the ul" of the
&aterial on non9adaptive or non9selected natural pheno&ena 4aleit so&e of this &aterial (as
incorporated into other chapters5...
In a (orld 4that of capital as capital5 in (hich the o1ectifications of Spirit are, co&ple'ly
&ediated, entirely iso&orphic in relation to and ho&olo%ous (ith the o1ective shape and
or%ani=ation of productive activity 4itself a &ystified, alienated o1ectification of the sa&e Spirit
as tacit, irreducile anony&ously functionin% su1ectivity5, this hardenin%, revealed here if only
in part in these deletions, (as a piece (ith, cut fro& the sa&e faric 4even thou%h to e sure
oth develop accordin% to their o(n lo%ics5 as the suppression of open class stru%%le and the
1
,&id, C0#.
2
,&id, C0G9C0F.
Crudely, Saltationists hold the evolutionary chan%e occurs in 1u&ps or leaps, not throu%h the accu&ulation of s&all9
scale chan%es 4&utations5. It is not inconsistent (ith a hereditary &echanis& of chan%e.
>rtho%enetists, on the other hand, hold that evolutionary chan%e develops alon% (ell9defined, narro( path(ays
%enerated y ,factors/ internal to the or%anis& itself. 0hou%h it too is not inconsistent (ith a hereditary &echanis&, it
is counterposed to :ar(inis& in that evolutionary chan%e is neither rando& nor controlled y environ&ental
pressures, ut is directional.
D
0his is neither incident nor an ,e'ternal/ consideration+ 0he Russian Revolution (as a foreground, not ac"%round,
reality, that darfs the events of 7 Septe&er 2001, even as those events have een a&plified y continuous and
ui)uitous &edia spectacular indoctrination and propa%andi=ation, in its i&pact and the force (hich it shaped the
consciousness of all classes in all societies of the (orld. 3o( all these early t(entieth century fi%ures in evolutionary
iolo%y re&ained %enuinely, even if acade&ically attached, our%eois %entle&en, and for the our%eoisie, the
Russian Revolution (as a profound, thorou%h%oin% and utterl% terrif%ing challen%e to the order of capital.
#
,&id, C0C.
staili=ation of social life follo(in% on the recedin%, then disappearin% revolutionary (ave
announcin% capitalIs %eneral crisis and follo(in% in particular on the victory of the de&ocratic
i&perialists over their fully &odern totalitarian and fascists rivals...
:o=hans"y further added a chapter 4!, in the 17C1 edition5 called ,adaptive poly&orphis&./
Most i&portantly, he aandoned a roadly ased, open perspective on evolutionary causation,
and adopted a ri%orous if not entirely infle'ile adaptationist account. In the last edition,
:o=hans"y ar%ued ,adaptation ai&s at the est solution/ in recountin% the dyna&ics of
evolutionary develop&ent, and he posited the relation of environ&ent to or%anis& as
deter&inate, niche specific and unilateral, and opti&al. 0his is evident fro& very early on, fro&
a first chapter that under(ent an e'tensive re(rite.
In the first edition, :o=hans"y tells us that or%anic diversity is e'perientially %iven, ovious
and self9evidentE that a ,scientific study/ of it can &ethodolo%ically proceed in one of t(o
(ays, first y (ay of e'a&ination of oth livin% and fossili=ed ein%s (ith a vie( to anato&ical
structure and function, proceedin% to classificatory sche&es ased on perceived re%ularities
as %enerali=ed. 0his (as the &ethod of evolutionary theory at its ori%insE ut a second &ethod
has e&er%ed since the chronolo%ical ei%hteenth and nineteenth centuries on the asis of ,a
shift fro& the oservationalis& of the past to a predo&inance of e'peri&entation./ While
critical of the fetishi=ation of )uantitative and e'peri&ental &ethods, he opts for the latter+ ;or
%enetics, his interest and discipline, falls (ithin the purvie( of such an approach since the
prole& of or%anic diversity on (hich the discussion has een focused is est treated as ,an
aspect of unity throu%h a study of the &echanis&s (hich &ay e responsile for the
production and &aintenance of variation, an analysis of the conflictin% forces tendin% to
increase or to level off the differences et(een or%anis&s./ In this conte't, the ,ai& of the
present oo" is to revie( the %enetic infor&ation earin% on the prole& of or%anic diversity./
It (as and is not concerned (ith the prole& in its &orpholo%ical aspect.
1
In the last edition, ho(ever, the ai& and orientation has shifted and could not stand out &ore.
$ere (e e%in fro& the assertion that ,the adaptedness of or%anis&s,/ their ,structures,
functions, and &odes of life,/ ,to their environ&ent is stri"in%./ It is ,adaptation to< local
diversities of haitats/ that ,rin%s aout the diversity of< or%anis&s/ (hich occupy the sa&e
territory< ,0he oserved discontinuity in the ody structures and in the (ays of life Hof
different speciesJ is a result of adaptation to the discontinuity of the secular environ&ents on
our planet/
2
< $ere too, :o=hans"y tells us, or%anic ,diversity and discontinuity of or%anic
variation are perceived y direct oservation./ But no(, ,diversity and discontinuity/ and
,adaptation to the environ&ent/ are ,causally related/ oth as a ,profitale (or"in%
hypothesis/ and as a &atter of ,natural sur&ise./
D
;ro& the deter&inistic perspective of the &ethodolo%ically &odeled &odern science of
nature, this ,(or"in% hypothesis/ &ay illu&inate )ualitatively &ore ,oservations/ and &ay
advance the atte&pt to e'peri&entally %round theori=ation, ut (e fail to see in (hat (ay it
(ould e ,profitale/ 4other than to note that the very e'pression, also co&&only and
unconsciously e&ployed y :ar(in, is indicative to the e'tent to (hich the thin"in% in (hich
the sciences of life in their evolutionary for&ulations had eco&e e&edded in the daily
lan%ua%e that appears and is reproduced in the &atri' of those practices ai&ed at capital
accu&ulation5. 6oreover, this ,(or"in% hypothesis/ is e$phaticall% not a ,natural sur&ise/ or,
alternately, is only i&&ediately apprehended as such y those (hose daily lives &ove (ithin
this &atri' and for (ho& those practices serve as &odel of hu&an practice %enerally. But, as
(e 1ust stated, :o=hans"y is in this re%ard unconscious, so that to drive ho&e the enor&ous
1
8enetics and the 1rigin of Species 417DG5, #,C, O,G.
2
8enetics and the 1rigin of Species 417C15, 2CC.
D
,&id 417C15, D9#, F.
chan%e in e&phasis fro& the first edition, the ,present oo" is devoted to an in)uiry into the
nature of this HcausalJ relation/ et(een or%anic ,diversity and discontinuity/ and ,adaptation to
the environ&ent./
1
8enot%pe, 4henot%pe, 2nviron$ent
In point of fact, :o=hans"y.s theori=ation of his position is inco&plete and contradictory+ $e
reco%ni=es dialectical causality in the relation of populations to their environ&ents, yet this
understandin% is untheori=ed, uninte%rated, and confusedly presented.
0he %enotype is the su$ total of the %enes of an individual or populationE the phenotype is
i&&ediately %iven 4i.e., oservationally accessile5, for&ed y the ,or%anis&.s structures and
functions,/ /(hat a livin% ein% appears to e to our sense or%ans./
2
?enotypes produce
4,en%ender/5 phenotypes, the total ran%e of (hich can e created ,in all possile
environ&ents,/ and constitute the set of potentially possile phenotypes, a set desi%nated as
the ,nor& of reaction/ of the %enotype
D
< Both lo%ically and (ith a vie( to the real situation it
conceptually su&&aries, this is i&&ediately at odds (ith the assertion that ,phenotypes<
develop in response to environ&ental influences (hich recur re%ularly in the nor&al haitats
of a species/+
#
If phenotypes develop in response to the environ&ent, they are not created y
the %enotype< unless of course the %enotype is active, agenc%, unless in other (ords ,the
staility of the %enotype is< not due to a che&ical inertness of the %enes/ and any
,phenotype that &ay e for&ed is necessarily a response of the environ&ent to the activity of
a %enotype./
C
0o render this deter&inis& as it flo(s fro& the %enotype to the environ&ent
intelli%ile, it (ould have to dialectici=ed, the deter&inis& (ould also flo( fro& the
environ&ent to the %enotype. :o=hans"y (ill say it does 4he effectively did say this in the
re&ar" 1ust cited5, ut not dialectically for in the latter case the notion of possiility and
actuality could not e ontolo%ically separate... in :o=hans"y, as separate the for&er lo%ically
characteri=es the %enotype, the latter is the e'istential status of the phenotype 4its ,capacity,/
so to spea", to e'ist, to e'ist as a real specification of different unreali=ed or possile
phenotypes, that e'istence and reality cataly=ed y the action of the %enotype in reaction to
different environ&ents5... ut instead possiility (ould e e&edded in their relation itself, as
latent develop&ental possiility. But to state this is to %ive up the concept of deter&inis&
alto%ether. :o=hans"y (ill not have that.
;or hi&, the environ&ent re&ains undeter&ined, ut presu&aly 4and contradictory as
already su%%ested5 in the roadest sense is for&ed, relationally, y the su& of all other
or%anis&s confrontin% a population %roup to%ether (ith its inor%anic9che&ical sustratu&
appearin% as %eolo%ical landscapes 4in the end the Earth as a physical ody in o1ective
space 43e(ton5 or space9ti&e 4Einstein5 descried y &odern science5, in the narro( sense
referrin% &erely to the latter.
0he asic prole& is the &etaphysical fra&e of reference, one in the for& of a reductionis&
and an episte&olo%ically un1ustifiale distinction et(een %enotypic essence and phenotypic
appearance, the for&er %eneratin% the latter+ But in nature, the nature (ithin (hich (e are
situated, only livin% ein%s act< (e shall offer a deter&ination of life elo(
O
< and act only in
concert,
G
ut, for no(, (e only need to note that %enes, as non9livin%, co&ponents of livin%
cells, do not act, do not &odify and transfor& their surroundin% &ilieus as do all livin% ein%s
1
,&id 417C15, F.
2
,&id 417C15, 20.
D
,&id 417C15.
#
,&id 417C15, 22.
C
,&id 417C15, 20921, 21.
3one of these passa%es even appear in the first, 17DG edition.
O
See Part I!, ,@ynn 6ar%ulis+ Sy&iosis and ?enuine Evolutionary Innovation,/ elo(.
as &o&ents and aspects of lar%ely livin% totalities, and certainly do not rin% forth novelty 4as
do hu&ans5, a (orld of &utually i&plicative real and ideal o1ects that &ediate the relation of
hu&anity to nature. ?enes &erely replicate, for the &ost part unerrin%ly duplicate,
the&selves, ut the% transfor$ nothing, &ring nothing ne into &eing, in nature. >nly livin%
ein%s< ein%s that dyna&ically &aintain their o(n internal or%ani=ation and structure in the
face of &ilieus under%oin% chan%e, that reproduce the&selves and, in all this, that &odify their
surroundin%s< only sentient< respirin% 4reathin%5, feelin%, sufferin% ein%s (ith affects 4no
&atter ho( diffuse5 and needs 4no &atter ho( unspeciali=ed5, even at the level of vital feelin%,
drive or i&pulse as in plant life that does not respond to a specific sti&ulus, rather to the total
situation (ithin the environ&ent (ithin (hich it is rooted.
1
< only such ein%s have &eing in
and for the$selves, su1ectivity< (hether it is the sensory9&otor a(areness of ani&als 4(hat
(e call ani&al senti&ent of self5, vital i&pulse 4plant life5 that interposes its nutrient, %ro(th
and reproductive re)uire&ents et(een itself and its i&&ediate surroundin%s, or cellular life
that in a continuous che&ical e'chan%e of an inside (ith an outside 4&etaolis&5 e'hiits its
capacity for self9&aintenance and self9reproduction. -et :o=hans"y, presupposin% a%ency
and action, cannot pose the philosophical )uestion of su1ectivity< his science precludes it<
and he cannot even as", ,(hy %enetics2/ Why the ,physiolo%y of inheritance and variation/2
0he ans(er< (hy other than the &anipulation and re&a"in% of nature and ,hu&an nature/ in
order to continuously reconstruct earthly nature in its entirely 4includin% hu&anity5 as a ra(
&aterial asin for capitalist production of a (orld of co&&odities< is not 1ust utterly eyond
the scope of his science, ut reveals that science as a &ethodolo%ical9e'peri&ental product of
scientists as functionaries of capital.
:o=hans"y (ants dialectical circularity, inti&ates it, tries hard< ,3evertheless, (hat counts
in evolution are the phenotypes (hich are produced y interaction of the %enotypes of the
or%anis&s (ith the environ&ents that are encountered in different parts of the (orld/
2
< ut
cannot )uite reach it N in the end it is deter&inis& he holds fast to< this is a li&it of our%eois
thou%ht, specifically science< 0he position is contradictory, and not in the dialectical sense+
;or :o=hans"y in a lo%ically contradictory (ay... this (ill eco&e clearly &o&entarily... holds
it is the %enotype, this %ross astraction fro& the livin% or%anic unity, that ,e'erts Tpressure. on
its environ&ent/
D
< So instead, his presentation ,en%enders/ %ra&&atically and syntactically
confusion+ ,* %enotype is potentially ale to en%ender a &ultitude of phenotypes, (hich can
e reali=ed if the environ&ents needed to have the potentialities co&e to li%ht are availale or
can e created/
#
< $eaning that the %enotype can %enerate a specific phenotype relative to
G
If, for e'a&ple, (e descrie action a&on% hu&ans, (e can, a%ain for e'a&ple, say the 8ohn, Richard and I lift in
order to &ove the piano, ut if (e as" (ho is the su1ect of this action, it is not 8ohn, Richard or I individually or even
a%%re%ately, ut in concert, it is e (ho lift it and (e (ho are the su1ect of this action. 4$ere, a&on% hu&ans, ,in
concert/ presupposes &utual reco%nition, each ac"no(led%es the efforts of all, and each underta"in% the action as
part of this ,(e,/ so that in this very doin% (e count, ,all to%ether no(, one, t(o, three, lift./5
1
0hus, the plant &oves up and do(n, not in specific directions ut only indiscri&inately to(ard, say, the li%ht. It this
sense (e say i&pulse is ve%etative, &eanin% it is essentially oriented to(ard that (hich is outside it. It does not have
sensation, hence no specific &e&ory, 1ust its present dependence upon its life history in its entirety. See our ,;ro&
6etaphysics to Philosophical *nthropolo%y+ 6a' Scheler.s Man.s 4lace in Nature+/
2
8enetics and the 1rigin of Species 417C15, 21.
D
,&id 417C15, 1C, 17, 20 4citation5, 21. :o=hans"y is fir&er in the first edition for&ulation, (here his &ore fle'ile, less
adaptationist position does not ,en%ender/ the contradiction+
,0he %enetic constitution of an individual, its %enotype, deter&ines its reaction to the environ&entE the appearance or
phenotype is the resultant of the interaction et(een the %enotype and the environ&ent/ ,&id 417DG5, 1C.
$ere, thou%h the %enotype re&ains undeter&ined 9 it is not the sedi&entation over %enerations of specific re%ularly
recurrin% phenotypes continuously &odified y and for&in% those phenotypes, it is not astracted fro& the individual
or%anis& that ,carries/ or ,ears/ it N even if the relation et(een the individual %enotype and its &ilieu involves
,interaction./
#
,&id 417C15, 21.
the presence of a specific environ&ent< ut stating far &ore, raisin% the )uestion as to (ho
or (hat (ould ,create/ and ho( the ,needed/ environ&ents (ould e ,created,/ a particularly
dicey )uestion and thorny prole& 4i.e., stated as such, it is unintelli%ile on his o(n
assu&ptions5+ ;or :o=hans"y holds the %enotype itself, and ,the "ind of chan%es it is
capale of producin%, are in the last analysis environ&entally deter&ined/E notin% further&ore
this environ&ent is not the one that presently prevails, ut ,is the su& of the historical
environ&ents to (hich the or%anis&,/ &ediately the %enotype 4(hich is finally on his
assu&ptions the correct &anner in (hich to state the issue5, ,had een e'posed in its
phylo%eny./
1
0o cut throu%h this a("(ard and perple'ed presentation, as (ell as the &ystifyin%
deter&inis&, it is necessary to %rasp that livin% ein%s incessantly &a"e and re&a"e the
environ&ents that shape the&, that life and the environ&ent &utually penetrate and for& one
another< there is no causal pri&acy of one over the other
&
< in a te&porally unfoldin%,
evolutionary process that is develop&ental 4i.e., entails the continuous e&er%ence of
increasin%ly co&ple', novel for&s of life over %eolo%ical ti&e5<
7 Digression, 7gain
0he notion of possile and actual (orlds appears over and a%ain in various for&s of thou%ht
that characteri=e this epoch, one (rac"ed y a %eneral crisis of capitalis& as it (as driven
fro& one i&perialist (orld (ar to another y (ay of its &ost concentrated e'pression, the
Slu&p... We could only fruitlessly speculate on depth psycholo%ical &otivation, ut...
Co%nitively, for e'a&ple, it appears in $usserl 4the later volu&es of ,deas, his )or$al and
Transcendental 3ogic5 for (ho& transcendental su1ectivity in acts of &eanin% esto(in%
%enesis is correlated (ith the (orld of daily e'perience as one (orld a&on% &any possile
(orldsE in $eisener% for (ho& the &athe&atical for&alis& 4on the asis of (hich )uantu&
&echanical results can e rendered intelli%ile5 per&its hi& to say that, %iven its velocity 4or
position5, the position 4or velocity5 of a suato&ic particle is descried statistically y a series
of proailitiesE
D
and, here, in :o=hans"y, (here the %enotype is potentially ale to %enerate
any nu&er of phenotypes.
What (as the relation et(een crisis and this thou%ht2 0hat relation is si&ultaneously
e'istential, lo%ical and &ethodolo%ical.
E'istentially, as the cul&ination of capitalist develop&ent this (orld revealed that at its
inner&ost core our%eois civili=ation is irrational. 3ot to elaor the point, it (as a%ainst the
ac"drop of the over(hel&in%, daily presence of this (orld, its events and contours, that all
thou%ht developed.
#
@o%ically, this notion is an e'pression of the funda&ental prole& of
our%eois thou%ht, na&ely, an underlyin% sustratu& that resists penetration y thou%ht and
re&ains e'ternal to the conceptual syste& it %enerates.
C
Startin% fro& Lant.s Copernican
Revolution, atte&pts to overco&e the irrationality of contents provided the &otive force for the
develop&ent of ?er&an Idealis& 4;itche.s ,Ich/ that produces the (orld fro& its o(n self9
activity, $e%el.s 8eist that in co&in% to itself co&prehends the totality of (hat is in an asolute
self9consciousness5. But the (orld confronted in ?er&an Idealist thou%ht (as )ualitatively
1
,&id 417C15.
2
See Part !, the section entitled ,:ialectical Circularity in the :eter&ination of @ife,/elo(.
D
See the 0hird Study, ;irst S"etch, elo(, devoted to a discussion of this issue at the heart of )uantu& &echanics.
#
In $usserl, this (as e'plicitly stated in his introductory re&ar"s to his Crisis 417DO5E in the Preface to the third edition,
:o=hans"y refers to the ,convulsion of the War/ as the ac"%round a%ainst (hich his second edition (as (ritten.
C
0he entire prole&atic (as, of course, rilliantly developed y @u"acs in his analysis of the ,*ntino&ies of Bour%eois
0hou%ht/ in Histor% and Class Consciousness+ It is critically e'a&ined here in its further develop&ent eyond @u"acs
in the analysis of Larl PopperIs theori=ation of the philosophy of science. See the ;ourth Study, Part III, ,0he Prole&
of ;oundations 4Irrationality of the Sustratu&5,/ elo(.
different fro& the (orld deter&ined fro& the crisis of capital. 6ethodolo%ically, all these for&s
of thou%ht are for&alistic. *s such, they cannot in principle overco&e the independence of
content, ut are al(ays left (ith an irrational residue, (hether, as in $usserl, it is an
nonspatial, ate&poral transcendental e%o that, %eneratin% all conceptual productions ased
on, is so&eho( rooted in te&poral and (orldly precate%orial e'perienceE in $eisener% and
)uantu& &echanics, e'peri&ental facts (hose e'planation is contradictory, (hich presents a
situation in (hich certain facts that can e e'plained thorou%hly and fully only on the asis of
the assu&ption that li%ht consists in (aves and not particles, and others (hich can only e
accounted for in ter&s of particles and cannot e rendered intelli%ile in ter&s of (aves 4or, if
you prefer, position and &o&entu&5E or, it is an a%ency, the %enotype, that is fully deter&ined
throu%h the &ediation of its &erely possile product, its phenotype, y the environ&ent as in
:o=hans"y.
8enes, Mutations, 4opulations
>ne is not re)uired to accept< especially on :o=hans"y.s and later neo9:ar(inian
accounts< the %enetic deter&ination of life. We certainly do not.
1
With the e'ception of a sin%ular insect 4:rosophila, a fruit fly5 that fi%ures in a decidedly
para&ount &anner in :o=hans"y.s presentation, &ost of the %enetic for&ulated
deter&inants of livin% or%anis&s are, politely spea"in%, superficial as in hair color, eye color
and secondary se'ual characteristics. If nothin% else, %enetically ased iolo%y de&onstrates
(hat is decisive, na&ely, the ehavior, activity and the contents of a(areness 4even if this
a(areness is only a %enerali=ed orientation to(ard an outside5 (hich provide for the livin%
or%anis& its o(n life, its ein% in and for itself, cannot e deter&ined fro& its analyses. 0his
said, let us return to 8enetics and the 1rigin of Species?
:o=hans"y does not start fro& of an account of the or%anic %enotype understood in ter&s of
populations and populations understood in ter&s of or%anic %enotypes. $e can discuss
populations and %enes separately, considerin% the latter first and then the for&er instead of
e'a&inin% each in relation to the other, ecause his reco%nition that %enes ,interact/ and his
clai& 4to (hich he is co&&itted5 that population %roups 4species5 are ontolo%ically real
not(ithstandin% 4and thus havin% falsely %one eyond a pri&itive ato&is&5, his asic
orientation to this relation, the &anner in ter&s of (hich he i&&ediately apprehends it,
reproduces all over a%ain (hat (e have characteri=ed as &etaphysically ato&istic.
0hus, his consideration of %enes and populations %oes eyond separate accounts. 0he reality
of life is dualistically or%ani=ed+ ,When a hereditary variation is produced and in1ected into a
6endelian population it enters... into the field of actions of factors/< those ,factors/ consistin%
in ,natural and artificial selection, the &anner of reedin% characteristic for the particular
or%anis&, its relation to the secular environ&ent and to other or%anis&s coe'istin% in the
sa&e &ediu&/< that ,oey rules sui generis, rules of the physiolo%y of populations, not those
of the physiolo%y of individuals./
2
*stractly &ediated y the heredity variation 4&utation5,
each ,level,/ i.e., order of vital reality, is distinct and is not deter&ined fro& its relation to the
other. 0here is no inte%ration of levels in (hich the ne( order founds its autono&y on the
asis of its dependency, its uni)ue and novel structure is not related to an ,older/ or ,earlier/,
,underlyin%/ level 4all our ter&s5 fro& (hich the ne(er one e&er%es. So havin% co&e this far,
i.e., havin% reco%ni=ed different ,levels/ or orders of the real, :o=hans"y starts fro& each
ne( level (ith its &ost ele&entary feature 4(hich, at each level, he never transcends, i.e.,
inte%rates5.
In follo(in% :o=hans"y, (e are oli%ated to consider the %ene first.
1
See this Study, Part ! in its entirety, elo(.
2
,&id 417DG5, 120E 417C15, C09C1 4citation, e&phasis in ori%inal5.
>peratin% at the level of the or%anis&, heredity is intrinsically conservative, hence the
%enotype is stale. 0he &utation of %enes and, containin% the %enetic &aterial chro&oso&es,
thus chro&oso&al chan%e is the source of evolution. 6utation ,counteracts/ this staility, as
an opposin% a%ency
1
< $ere (e (ould note, entirely consistently (ith :o=hans"y.s
&etaphysically ato&istic reifications, a real process, evolution, is the outco&e of an astract
dialectic of concepts, that is, the interaction of ideal 4i.e., theoretically fi'ed5 &o&ents of the
%enotype pro1ected as real, its &utation ,counteractin%/ its staility<
6utations are chan%es in any e'istin% %ene4s5 (hose su& total 4an a%%re%ate totality5 &a"es
up the %enotype. :o=hans"y.s for&ulation for this is a %enetic chan%e in ,ancestral/ types.
0hey occur as ,sudden chan%es,/ that is, there is no slo( or incre&ental chan%e 4ho(ever the
latter &i%ht e conceived5 or passa%e et(een the ori%inal and the novel or &utant ,type./
2
0hese arupt chan%es ,vary %reatly/ and are ,&easured y the visile departure fro& the
ancestral condition in the structural and physiolo%ical characters/ or, you prefer, traits or
phenotypes
D
< *nd (hile he (ould li"e to restrict the &eanin% of &utation to %ene chan%es,
there is, at least at the &o&ent he (rote, a prole& here, na&ely, there (ere si&ply no
availale &ethods to &a"e a direct co&parison, che&ical and structural in nature, et(een
the novel &utant and the ancestral %enes. Instead, the only availale evidence for chan%e in
the %ene structure (as pheno&enal, not :o=hans"yIs ter& at this point ut perfectly
con%ruent (ith his intent, na&ely, the appearin% phenotypic variant (hich, li"e the %enetic
structure itself, is, accordin% to :o=hans"y, su1ect to the la(s of 6endelian inheritance. But
a chan%e in chro&oso&al structure, and this is the prole&, (hether that chan%e is deficiency
4loss5 or reduplication, rearran%e&ents due to inversion or translocation,
#
also follo(s
6endelian la(s.
C
;or %enetic e'peri&entalists operatin% at this &o&ent there (ould, then,
have een no (ay to distin%uish the t(o, %enetic and chro&oso&al chan%es< 3o( ,varyin%
%reatly/ enco&passes a ran%e of chan%es, fro& those that in the early sta%es of develop&ent
of or%anis& are deadly, ,lethal/ as :o=hans"y says< this is "no(n throu%h the e'peri&ental
e'ter&ination of various species individuals of Drosophila en &asse< to chan%es so s&all
that it (as e'tre&ely difficult if not i&possile to detect the&.
O
?enes can produce chan%es in &ore than one trait, and as such their effects are &any or said
to e ,pleiotropic/ or to have &anifold effects. While the fre)uency of such %enes (as not,
circa 17C0, (ell "no(n, the ul" of &utations (hich %enerate chan%es that are noticeale or
even stri"in% do so in a sin%le character or trait. Pleiotropic effects, (here they occur, involve
chan%es that see& to e insi%nificant, even trivial.
G
But, it should e stressed, and this is
hinted at aove in the reference to inversion and translocation, %enetic ,effects/ are not si&ply
the product of the relation of a sin%le %ene, its structure, ut to its locational relation (ith other
,nei%horin%/ %enes. 0hese ,effects/< the relation is patently understood causally<
:o=hans"y in accordance (ith the literature of his day calls ,positional/ and they e'tend to
the phenotype, e.%., to the &orpholo%y of flies.
F
0his perspective differs si%nificantly fro& the
1
,>(in% to the inherent staility of the %enotype, heredity is a conservative a%ent. Evolution is possile only ecause
heredity is counteracted y another process opposite in effect N na&ely, &utation./ ,&id 417C15, 2C.
2
It is sudden ,in the sense of no %radual passa%e throu%h %enetic conditions inter&ediate et(een the ori%inal and
the &utant type./ ,&id 417C15, 2O92G.
D
,&id 417C15, 2G.
#
:o=hans"y defines inversion as a chan%e of ,location of a loc" of %enes (ithin a chro&oso&e/ y ,a rotation
throu%h 1F0_/ (hich (hile retainin% the sa&e %enes chan%es their arran%e&ent. ,&id 417C15, 27. This is a purel%
experi$ental and artificial change, one that does not occur in nature+
0ranslocation refers to a shift in the location of a %ene (ithin the %enotypic structure.
C
,&id 417C15.
O
,&id 417DG5, GF9G7E 417C15, D1.
G
,&id 417C15, DD.
F
,&id 417DG5, 1DE 417C15, DO.
nascent %enetics that e&er%ed at the e%innin% of the chronolo%ical t(entieth century (ith the
4re5discovery of 6endel+ ;or the latter (as ato&istic in the e'tre&e, elievin% that %enes could
cross over or chro&oso&es rea" (ithout en%enderin% any difference in &utational chan%e
since %enes (ere considered independent entities (hose arran%e&ent, thou%h ,constant,/
(as accidental, their properties inherent not relational.
1
0hus, a chro&oso&e is to e dee&ed a syste& of interdependent %enes and this (ithout
re%ard to positional effects.
2
;inally, (e can say that &utants, %ene chan%es startin% fro& an
ancestral type, are y and lar%e very infre)uent, rare if you (ill 4and thou%h he asserted this in
his preparatory theoretical discussion of %enes, :o=hans"y later noted this vie( does not
hold (ith re%ard to certain species5, since ,they appear in sin%le individuals a&on% &asses of
unchan%ed representatives of a strain./
D
With this ele&ental presentation in hand and continuin% to follo( :o=hans"y, (e can turn to
populations.
While population dyna&ics are, accordin% to :o=hans"y, essential to evolutionary theory, the
careful e'a&ination of phenotypes as they occur in nature cannot in principle secure a
syste&atic "no(led%e of %enetic variaility.
#
3onetheless, populations can e understood in
an entirely la(ful &anner in the &athe&atical sense+ 0he ,evolutionary processes in
populations/ can e "no(n and understood ,y deducin% their re%ularities &athe&atically
fro& the "no(n properties of the 6endelian &echanis& of inheritance./
C
E'peri&ental (or" at
once per&its researchers to e&pirically verify these la(s and to develop their si%nificance for
the %enotypic develop&ent of populations.
What eco&es clear at this level is a )ualitative difference in the understandin% of heredity on
the asis of the ,&odern synthesis/ and that of one of its t(o le%s, :ar(in hi&self 46endel
ein% the other5.
In :ar(in 4and a&on% his conte&poraries (ho accepted his vie(s5, it (as ar%ued that
crossin% species individuals produce offsprin% for (hich the hereditary &aterial is &i'ed,
a&al%a&ated as :o=hans"y says. What is i&portant here is that the ,difference et(een the
ancestral hereditary &aterials (as supposed to e either lost entirely or at least i&paired y
passa%e throu%h the hyrid or%anis&./
O
>ver %enerations, that ancestral &aterial (ould e
irretrievaly lost, halved in each and every %eneration until at least in principle co&plete
ho&o%eneity (ould e produced. 40his ho&o%eni=ation (ould, for :ar(in, never e reached+
>nly the ori%inal &aterial (ould e lost since continuin% hereditary chan%e (ould introduce
ne( variations (hich in turn (ould e hereditary trans&itted.5 0here is a prole& here, one
e'peri&entally discovered+ Rnless variaility arises ane(, aove or at least at the level of that
produced y crossin%, &utations rates &ust occur (ith ,prodi%ious fre)uency./
But this is not (hat is oserved. 4@o( &utation rates are.5 :o=hans"y calls the vie(, and
these its conse)uences shared y :ar(in and his conte&poraries, a lendin% theory of
inheritance and opposes a ,particulate/ perspective to it. If the %enetic &aterial has an
essentially self9contained or, etter, a discrete character, it is preserved in the &athe&atical
fashion, say recessively, as de&onstrated y 6endel. ;or 6endel, the free assort&ent of
%enes (ill result in reco&inations that do not reduce the a&ount of variation, ut of course
(ill have as its conse)uences in cases of species individuals or the interreedin% of species
1
,&id 417C15, DO, DG.
2
,&id 417C15, DG.
D
,&id 417C15, D7.
#
,&id 417C15, C1, OC. In the latter passa%e it is stated, ,3o &atter ho( carefully one e'a&ines the phenotype of (ild
representatives of a species, the infor&ation therey %ained aout the %enetic variaility in natural populations (ill e
inco&plete./ Conte'tually, ,inco&plete/ has the sense for&ulated aove in our te't.
C
,&id 417DG5, 120E 417C15, C1. 0he for&ulation is the sa&e in oth editions.
O
,&id 417DG5, 1219122E 417C15, C2.
the disappearance of for&erly distinct %roups as population %roups, if you (ill their phenotypic
ho&o%eni=ation.
1
0he free assort&ent of %enes as theori=ed is a ,la(/ of 6endelian %enetics. But it is not
funda&ental at least for evolutionary theory estalished on the asis of population %enetics.
Instead, this honor is reserved for a deter&ination of the relative fre)uency of %enes in a
population that is a product< this is a thou%ht e'peri&ent, an i$agining that constructs a
situation that does not and cannot in principle e'ist in or on earthly nature< introduced into a
previously unoccupied territory characteri=ed y its %eo%raphic isolation (here no ne(
populations are introduced and no departures 4e&i%rations5 ta"e place. 0his population
consists of t(o strains of a se'ually reproducin% or%anis&, strains that are cross fertili=in%,
(ell adapted to this i&a%ined environ&ent, that are distin%uished only y a sin%le %ene 4**
and aa5 and that reproduce and %enerate ne( offsprin% ,rando&ly./ Rnder these conditions,
the %ene fre)uencies 4specified as ) and 19), respectively5 (ill not vary, re&ainin% constant
throu%h all future %enerations. 0he distriution of the %enotype in this population 4actually the
population in )uestion consists in three %enotypes5 is %iven in the follo(in% &athe&atical
for&ulation, )
2
** e 2)419)5 e 419)5
2
aa n 1, a for&ulation descries the ,e)uiliriu& condition
in a rando& readin% population./
2
0he si%nificance of this ,la(/ is lar%ely t(ofold, and oth conse)uences stand out in
contradistinction to :ar(in.s no( classical perspective. ;irst, once achieved, variaility in a
population stays constant and the latterIs %enetic content does not slo(ly and irretrievaly
disappear y crossin%. Second, and this is decisive, accu&ulatin% &utations in a population
occur (ithout re%ard to (hether they are useful
D
or deleterious to or%anis&s, and occur (ith
far %reater fre)uency than strictly useful &utations.
#
In star" contrast to :ar(in 4(ho
&aintains that this is not possile5, deleterious &utations too accu&ulate as part of the
%enotype.
C
6utations, ,%ood/ or ,ad,/ and their rates of fre)uency are then central to :o=hans"y.s
analysis. In fact, "no(n as ,poly%enic/ a continuous or constant and ceaseless variaility
featurin% relatively s&all or &inor chan%es in develop&ental rates is li"ely the for& of
&utation of %reatest i&port in evolution.
O
0hese incre&ental chan%es are ,stored,/ as it (ere,
as part of the %enotype of the population. 40hus, the infre)uent incident of ,frea"s of nature,/
of non9viale or%anis&s, hereditary disease and ,&onstrosities/ to use :ar(in.s ter&.5 ?iven
that a population (ith hi%h &utaility (ill have a hi%her asolute )uantu& of deleterious
&utations as part of its %enotypic ,repository/ 4our ter&5, selection (ill on these assu&ptions
oviously adaptivel% favor %enotypes in (hich &utation rates are lo(er, ,"ept at a &ini&u&/
as :o=hans"y says
G
< It is too selection that (e no( turn.
1
,&id 417DG5, 122E 417C15, C2.
;or :ar(in, see The 1rigin of Species, e.%., 2C192GO 4chapter 105 and passi$+
2
,&id 417DG5, 12D912#E 417C15, CD 4citation5, G7. 0he rule is called the ino&ial s)uare or $ardin%9Weiner% la(, after
the t(o %eneticists 4?.$. $ardy and W. Weiner%5 (ho in 170F first hit upon it.
D
:ar(in, of course, reco%ni=ed not all adaptations are i&&ediately decided y use. See Part II, ,3atural Selection,/
aove.
#
,&id 417DG5, 12#, 12CE 417C15, CD, CC, OG, F2, 71.
C
;or :ar(in, see this Study Part II, ,3atural Selection/ and the sources cited therein, aove.
0his is not the only place (here :o=hans"y see"s to ,correct,/ i.e., reinterpret the &eanin% and si%nificance of
prole&s first syste&atically ta"en up y, :ar(in. Chapter O in the third edition 417C1, 1DC91GF5 called ,race
for&ation,/ see"s to account in 6endelian ter&s for transitions et(een ,sy&patric poly&orphis&/ 4%enotypically
hetero%eneous %roups ithin the sa$e species livin% (ithin the sa&e re%ion, territory or environ&ent5 and ,allopatric
races/ 4oviously %enetically distinct suspecies or varieties to use :ar(in.s ter&s livin% in different %eo%raphic
locales5. ;or :ar(in.s discussion of varieties and species, see Part II, ,.Special Creation of Separate Species,./
aove.
O
,&id 417C15, G1.
G
,&id 417C15, GD.
Selection
*ccordin% to :o=hans"y, the 6endelian theory of &utation fills a %ap in :ar(in.s theory of
evolution y accountin% for the ori%ins and for&s of hereditary variation. 0his is indisputale.
*s (e indicated at the end of the last section, deleterious &utations, unli"e in :ar(in, also
accu&ulate as part of the %enotype. *s a rule, those &utations (hose adaptedness, as it
(ere, develops as a response to recurring environ&ental influences and conditions are those
:ar(in dee&ed ,useful,/ those that are in :o=hans"y.s ter&s ,adaptively valuale
&odifications./ 0o the other side, those adaptations that are &ade to rare, unusual or
hapha=ardous environ&ent conditions and influences, adaptations :o=hans"y calls
,&orphoses,/ are har&ful, in1urious or deleterious+ 0hey have not as he states, ,%one throu%h
a process of ad1ust&ent in the evolutionary history/ of or%anis&s on (hich the %enotypes of
the population %roupin% 4species5 are ased.
1
With respect to this, :o=hans"y offers a &ore
e'actin% definitional deter&ination of ,adaptive value,/ as the capacity, relatively spea"in%
4ecause it is a constantly varyin% ,)uantity/5, of various earers of a %iven %enotype to pass
on their %enes to the %ene pool of succeedin% %enerations.
2
0hus, a strictly or entirely
in1urious %ene has an adaptive value of =ero. *%ain, the deter&ination is &ade )uantitatively,
so that it is a statistical concept that e&phasi=es or, etter, ,&easures/ 4our ter&5 the
,reproductive efficiency of a %enotype in a certain environ&ent./
D
0his is ho( :o=hans"y
understands :ar(inian ,fitness/+ 0his is i&portant ecause he, :o=hans"y, ar%ues this
concept, fitness, can e detached fro& co&petition and stru%%le, as in the stru%%le for life or
for e'istence, at least in ,the sense of direct co&at et(een individuals./
#
Well, yes, ut then
:o=hans"y is intentionally playin% on the a&i%uity of the concept ecause, ,direct co&at/
is the &ost narro( of readin%s of :ar(in and (hat he, :ar(in, intended (as &uch roader+
3otin% the presence of 6althus in :ar(in.s thin"in%, he restates :ar(in.s strai%htfor(ard
readin% of the population la(, ,or%anis&s tend to produce &ore offsprin% that can survive
(ithout eventually outrunnin% the food supply./ 4:o=hans"y a%ain hed%es :ar(in here,
statin% ,the slo(est reedin%/ or%anis&s.5 $e notes further that it is the differential &ortality of
different %enotypic earers constitutin% a population that &a"es, in the further astract 4fro&
or%anic interaction5 peculiarly neo9:ar(inian readin% of the old &an, selection effectively
actual. $e adds that, ho(ever, ,&etaphors/ such as ,survival of the fittest/ and the stru%%le for
life/ (ere unfortunate, played to ,propa%andists/ 4i.e., social :ar(inians5, and ,&ore
pictures)ue than accurate/
C
< * "indly readin% of :ar(in, ut ofuscatory not to &ention
alto%ether &ista"en< Instead, he offers the follo(in% deter&ination of selection, ,the carriers
of different %enotypes in a population contriute differentially to the %ene pool/ of the follo(in%
%enerations.
O
3o( this peculiar deter&ination of selection 4in principle, unrelated to co&petition and
stru%%le5 is entirely consistent (ith :o=hans"y.s statistical concept of adaptive value, ut it is
also unsustainale. In reference to a principle elucidated 417D#5 y the evolutionary iolo%ist,
?.;. ?ause, and later affir&ed y other leadin% neo9:ar(inians 4e.%., Ernst 6ayr5, he appears
to reiterate this interpretation y ,deconstructin%/ ?ause.s principle 4na&ely, t(o species (ith
the ,sa&e ecolo%ical re)uire&ents/ cannot share the sa&e environ&ent indefinitely ecause
$ere :o=hans"y une)uivocally states that a nu&er of researchers have de&onstrated that ,in1urious/ chan%es
for& the &a1ority of &utations.
1
,&id 417C15, 22, F2 4citation5, 1DC.
2
,&id 417C15, GF, G7.
D
,&id 417C15, GF.
#
,&id 417C15.
C
,&id 417C15, GG.
O
,&id 417C15.
the ,&ore efficient/ one (ill eventually ,outreed and supplant/ the other5.
1
Since no
,asolutely unifor& and asolutely constant environ&ent could e inhaited/ y a sin%le
species, i.e., it is &ade ,hetero%eneous/ y the ori%inal species. very presence, ?ause.s
principle is ,unrealistic/ 4yes, ,unrealistic/ ut then the ,asolutely unifor& and asolutely
constant environ&ent/ is ,theoretical,/ i.e., ideal, areal or, if you prefer, ,unrealistic/5. $avin%
re1ected the principle, :o=hans"y proceeds to reinstate it+ $e relates that, in fact, different
species (ith the sa&e ecolo%ical ,re)uire&ents/ can coe'ist in the sa&e environ&ent 4thus
they are said to e ,sy&patric/5 if the territory is ,hetero%eneous,/ i.e., if they do not coe'ist
spatially or te&porally,
2
(hich is another (ay of statin% that in the sa&e ti&e and place they
cannot coe'ist, thus reaffir&in%< in a (holly ac"door &anner< ?ause.s principle, and
renderin% his statistical concept of adaptive value unrelated to co&petition and stru%%le
incoherent and, as (e said, unsustainale.
In this re%ard, (e can note 1ust ho( far :o=hans"y has co&e in his e&race of evolution as
,essentially a process of adaptation to the environ&ent throu%h natural selection,/
D
of a
&ediated, yet fully unilateral relation of or%anis& to environ&ent y (ay of selection throu%h
adaptation+ In the first edition of 8enetics and the 1rigin of Species, he cites t(o recent (or"s
4oth appeared in 17DO5, one y Ronald ;isher that co&es do(n hard on the side of
adaptation, callin% evolution ,pro%ressive adaptation and< nothin% else,/ and the other y
Roson and Richards that asserts, a&on% other thin%s, that, ,0here are &any thin%s aout
livin% or%anis&s that are &uch &ore difficult to e'plain than so&e of their supposed
Tadaptations../ :o=hans"y.s position (as that, ,3o a%ree&ent on this issue has een
reached as yet./
#
In the final edition, he cites the sa&e authors 4and in ;isher.s case, the
sa&e passa%es5 and concludes that ,a&on% the t(o opinions 1ust cited, the first H;isher.sJ is
elieved y a &a1ority of &odern evolutionists to e &uch nearer the truth than the second./
$e includes hi&self a&on% that &a1ority, since, for hi&, ,0he develop&ent of population
%enetics/ over the previous t(o decades ,has consideraly stren%thened the theory of natural
selection./
C
It (ould e re&iss not to note that :o=hans"y.s o(n narro(ly ased evolutionary
studies 4si'teen pulished et(een the dates of these t(o pulications5, relatin% al&ost
e'clusively to Drosophila, ear &ost heavily on this 1ud%&ent. 4With respect to this, see the
final section in this, Part III.5
8ust ho( far :o=hans"y (as (illin% to push his adaptationist perspective can e seen in his
discussion of acteria.
O
$e speculates acteria possess %enes that are discrete entities that
,under%o chan%es independently of each other,/ that a ,nuclear apparatus/ has een
discovered in acteria, and that the ,%enetic &echanis&s in acteria are not radically different
fro& those in other livin% ein%s,/ here spea"in% of se'ual fusion and reco&ination, all of
(hich intends that reproduction in acteria is 6endelian. $o(ever, startin% fro& the late
17O0s (hen usa%e of the recently invented electron &icroscope eca&e (idespread, an
entirely different understandin% of acteria has for&ed. In particular, three decades of (or" y
Sorin Sonea have resulted in the follo(in%+
G
Bacteria do possess %enes, ut no nucleus,
%enes chan%es are neither independent of each other nor independently carried out (ithin the
cellular confines of an individual acteriu&. 6ost i&portantly, acteria do not speciate, the
dyna&ics of %enetic transfer a&on% acteria is decidedly non96endelian and non9adaptive
1
,&id 417C15, 107. 0his ar%u&ent appears no(here in the ori%inal 17DG edition.
2
,&id 417C15.
D
,&id 417C15, 77.
#
,&id 417DG5, 1C1. 0he citations fro& the other three authors appear in :o=hans"y.s te't.
C
,&id 417C15, GG.
O
,&id 417C15, FO970, esp. FF.
G
See the discussion, in particular its footnoted elaorate in Part I!, the section headed ,@ynn 6ar%ulis+ Sy&iosis and
?enuine Evolutionary Innovation,/ elo(.
4Sonea calls it ,cooperative/5, and they possess a sin%ular, %loal %eno&e 4,%enotype/5 (hich
is accessile to all acteria. 6as"ed y e'peri&ental references, :o=hans"y.s speculation
4and that of those sources he cites5 is deter&ined y his theoretically adaptationist and
selectionist i%otry, y a heavily theory9laden e'peri&entalis& that pre1udices the evidence it
%enerates.
1
We shall return to this.
Species, 2volutionar% Develop$ent, N7daptive 3andscapes>
Species are not 1ust a ta'ono&ic or classificatory %roupin%. 0hey are interreedin%
co&&unities, 6endelian populations (hich, in turn, are ,spatio9te&poral o1ects, ,.real./ or
,.o1ective./ and, &oreover, the ,funda&ental realities of the livin% (orld/
2
< an interestin% and
a&itious assertion ut one that retrospectively, that is, in li%ht of the role of acteria in
planetary life and in particular in sustainin% a (orld hospitale to life, is flat out &ista"en<
D
Species are not unchan%in% and static %roups< :ar(in "ne( and said this< ut constitute a
&o&ent, :o=hans"y says a ,sta%e,/ in an evolutionary process of the develop&ent of life
one outco&e of (hich is diver%ence+
#
0hey for& as interreedin% %roups of 6endelian
populations split up, separate into t(o 4or &ore5 reproductively isolated %roups, and, for
:o=hans"y reproduction is sexual, (hich itself %enerally is conditional on %eo%raphical or
spatial isolation
C
< (hich :ar(in also "ne( and said. In fact, follo(in% a lon% line of his
conte&poraries, :o=hans"y tells us that the essence of speciation is develop&ent of
4se'ually5 reproductive isolation 4as opposed to ase'ual for&s of reproduction5.
O
6endelian
populations are products of adaptive evolution, (hose %enetic structures tend to diver%e, a
%radual process, in response to chan%es and differences in environ&ent.
G
$o( is this
evolution to e characteri=ed2 Since it, not a visile or tan%ile reality, is a len%thy %eolo%ical
process, ho( &i%ht it e i&a%ined2
0he ,causal relation/ is e'plained &etaphorically deployin% a conceptual sche&a ta"en over
fro& Se(ard Wri%ht characteri=in% ,adaptive landscapes/+
F
In an entirely astract, non9
co&prehendin% &anner characteristic of &odern science, an or%anis&, all or%anis&s,
species, can e i&a%ined to e possessed y specific traits and %enes that shape their
develop&ent. So&e of these traits are shared y different or%anis&s, &a"in% the& species
individuals, so&e are not, ut the or%anis&ic unity of actually e'istin% traits and the
co&ination of all potentially possile ones, the for&er constitutin% an i&&easuraly s&all
portion of the latter, can e further i&a%ined as a &ulti9di&ensional space in (hich every real
1
:o=hans"y.s position appears contradictory, for at one point he see&s to reco%ni=e, ut only in part, the distinctive
character of acteria, notin% that ,individuals in a clone of acteria are %enotypically ali"e, unless &utation has
intervened./ *nd (hile this poorly states the case, he nonetheless further see&s to understand their reproduction is
neither se'ual nor 6endelian+ $e continues, ,Se'ual reproduction has rou%ht a ne( for& of iolo%ical inte%ration.
Individuals are co&ined into reproductive co&&unities,/ ut he then retreats callin% these co&&unities ,6endelian
populations/ ,&id 417C15, 2O0. $e retreats ecause he can understand it no other (ay.
2
,&id 417C15, 2CO, 2O2. 0his assertion does not appear in sa&e discussion in the ori%inal edition, see 417DG5, D11.
D
Species are not, ho(ever, ,tan%ile natural pheno&ena/ 4,&id 417C15, 2OD+ 0hey &ay e ,real/< thou%h
episte&olo%ically :o=hans"y.s entire presentation (ould have to under%o funda&ental chan%e to &a"e the case for
this< ut they are not perceptual. Who has ever touched a species2 See this Study, Part I!, ,Partisan of the
6onera,/ elo(.
#
,&id 417C15.
C
,&id 417DG5, 2D092D2E 417C15, 1F091F2.
O
,&id 417C15, 2OD, for the list of conte&poraries (ho hold this positionE 417DG5, D1O9D21 and 417C15, 2GD92G# for the
ase'ual difference in this re%ard.
Consistent (ith a &ore advanced understandin% of ase'ual acterial reproduction 4(hich, only to e e'pected< for
he is asent the conte&porary instru&ents particularly the electron &icroscope to e'a&ine acterial interaction5,
:o=hans"y appears to reco%ni=e that, lo%ically at least, ase'ual oli%atory or%anis&s do not speciate. ,&id 417C15,
2G#92GC.
G
,&id 417C15, 2O1, 2FG.
F
,0he Role of 6utation, Inreedin%, Crossreedin%, and Selection in Evolution,/ DCO9DOO.
or possile or%anis& has a place.
1
3o( these co&inations, all of the&, can ,e %raded (ith
respect to their fitness to survive in the environ&ents that e'ist in the (orld./ 0he ,vast
&a1ority/ is si&ply ,unfit for survival in any environ&ent,/ ut a&on% those that are they can
e assi%ned to certain haitats and ecolo%ical niches to (hich they are suited. ,Related %ene
co&inations are, on the (hole, si&ilar in adaptive value./
2
In i&a%inin% (e can visuali=e+ !isually, this i&a%inin% (ould for& a topo%raphic &ap
characteri=ed y pea"s and valleys+ Clusters of successful 4at survivin%5 %ene co&inations<
the ,patterns (ith superior adaptive values/< (ould e represented y ,adaptive pea"s,/ the
,unfavorale/ co&inations< sy&oli=in% those ,unfit for survival and perpetuation/< (ould
for& in the valleys lyin%, as it (ere, et(een the pea"s, and (ould in the for& this ar%u&ent
ta"es e essentially e&pty.
D
0he clusterin% si%nifies the ascertainale ,fact/ that %enes and
traits do not for& rando&ly, they do not constitute a &ass of other(ise aritrarily assi%ned
niches and haitats, ut are nonetheless discontinuousE instead, these %enes co&inations
are related, so that (e can spea" of fa&ilies of related %ene co&inations. In ter&s of actually
e'istin% species, ,the ecolo%ical niche occupied y the species Tlion. is relatively &uch closer
to those occupied y ti%er, pu&a, and leopard than occupied y (olf, coyote, and 1ac"al./
Continuin% (ith this &etaphoric i&a%inin%, these fa&ilies too are related, the pea"s %o
to%ether as do those in a &ountain ran%e or, a%ain, in actual ter&s, ,the feline, canine, ursine,
&usteline, and certain other %roups of pea"s for& to%ether the adaptive Tran%e. of carnivores,
(hich is separated y deep adaptive valley fro& the Tran%es. of rodents, ats, un%ulates,
pri&ates, and others./
#
*daptive ran%es can e susu&ed under roadest ta'ono&ic
classifications, ones that separate 4&a&&als fro& irds or reptiles5 and other that unify at
increasin% hi%her levels of %enerality
C
4the classes of &a&&als, irds and reptiles are all
&e&ers of the suphylu& verterate, phylu& cordate5. 0his hierarchical arran%e&ent of the
classification of livin% ein%s ,reflects the o1ectively ascertainale discontinuity of adaptive
niches,/ that is, the discontinuous &anners and &eans ,y (hich or%anis&s that inhait the
(orld derive their livelihood fro& the environ&ent./
O
0his unilateral, causal relation of environ&ent to or%anis&, to species, is displayed &ost
forcily in the characteri=ation of the &anner in (hich %enotypic adaptivity declines. 0his
occurs in one of t(o &anners. ;irst, as a conse)uence of either %eolo%ical chan%es or ,&an.s
interference (ith the haitats of or%anis&s,/
G
adaptive values are lo(ered. 4Re&e&er
1
,&id 417C15, F.
2
,&id 417C15.
D
,&id417C15, F910, 2CC 4citations5.
#
,&id 417C15, F, 7, 10 4citations5.
C
,&id 417C15, 10.
O
,&id 417C15+
G
In this re%ard, :o=hans"y concluded 417C15 y considerin% ,iolo%ical and cultural variale of hu&an evolution./ $e
tells us, the ,interrelationships et(een iolo%y and culture are< reciprocal,/ that it is ,a de&onstrale fact that
hu&an iolo%y and hu&an culture are part of a sin%le syste&, uni)ue and unprecedented in the history of life,/ that
hu&an evolution ,cannot e understood e'cept as a result of interaction of iolo%ical and of social variales,/ and
finally, that social life, ,and especially the develop&ent of civili=ation, have influenced the evolutionary patterns of the
hu&an species so decisively that hu&an iolo%y is inco&prehensile apart fro& the hu&an fra&e of reference/ y
(hich he &eans ,cultural/ reference fra&e. ,&id 417C15, D0#9D0C. But he is un(illin% to say that not only does ,culture/
not start (here ,iolo%y/ leaves off, ut that culture reaches ac" eyond hu&anity at its ori%ins and shape that
iolo%y, so that in (hat is ,uni)uely,/ i.e., distinctively, hu&an, the t(o cannot e distin%uished. H;or all this, see the
"h% the Stud% of Hu$an 1rigins in Necessar% to a Revolutionar% and 2$ancipator% 4ro9ect, Part I, ,0he 6eanin% of
ISocietyI and E'tent of Presence in 3ature/ and The 7ppearance of #Spirit## in 1rigins and 2ndings+ EditorI note.J -es,
,&an/ can and &ust e understood evolutionarily, ut not on :o=hans"y.s ter&s, not adaptively. ;or hi&, it re&ains
the case that ,iolo%ical adaptation/ has deter&ined and doutless (ill continue to deter&ine, ,*ll suse)uent
evolutionary history of the hu&an species,/ that a distinct iolo%ical reality can still e separated out, so that the
,iolo%ical &eanin% of the diversity a&on% hu&ans< is adaptation to the variety of the environ&ents (hich an
or%anis& encounters or creates/ 4,&id 417C15, D0C, D075, critically notin% that if a ein% creates its ,environ&ent,. i.e.,
,adaptive value/ is a statistical concept.5 Second, this value declines as a species ,finds its
(ay fro& the adaptive pea"/ it currently occupies to another, occupied or unoccupied
1
4thou%h, it should e said that to e consistent here :o=hans"y should have held out the
possiility that the species. %enotype &ay fit (ell (ith its ne( &ilieu5.
0hus, early on :o=hans"y patently e'hiits the appetites of neo9:ar(inian thou%ht, in (hich
and for (hich adaptation causally relates or%anis& to environ&ent in a (ay that is, as (e
have indicated aove, deter&inate, niche specific and unilateral, and, for those (ho follo(
hi&, opti&al.
2
*i&ed at %enetically ascertainin% ho( the static structure of the ,topo%raphical/
arran%e&ent of species is constituted, the neo9:ar(inian pro1ect is vastly at odds (ith :ar(in
(ith his orientation to(ard the genesis of, the te&poral constitution over %eolo%ical ti&e of the
relation et(een, varieties and species.
D
0his a triute, one &i%ht say, to the e'tent to (hich
capitalis&< even in crisis< has een naturali=ed as the conte't of conte'ts in (hich all
scientific, hence uncritical and essentially ahistorical theori=ations, as cate%orial elaorations
of the e'perience of i&&ediacy 4even if already &ediately i&&ediate, i.e., e'peri&entally
constructed5, &ove and return to their un%rounded foundations.
Drosophila and the 2xperi$ent in 8enetics
:o=hans"y (as a Russian U&i%rU. Both efore and after co&in% to the Rnited States his
(or" in %enetics (as e'peri&ental, focused on the fly %enus :rosophila aout (hich he (as a
reputed ,e'pert./ But (hat had een often overloo"ed (as in Russia, unli"e the (hole of the
*n%lo9*&erican (orld, e'peri&ental (or" ased on 6endelian %enetics had een
successfully and in a far reachin% &anner synthesi=ed (ith the traditions of ta'ono&y and
natural history. 0hus, it should co&e as no surprise that :o=hans"y also speciali=ed in the
ta'ono&y of ladyirds 4the coccinellid eetle5.
#
But (hat is really i&portant here (as his e'peri&ental (or" (ith fruit flies.
0here are t(o points that re)uire disentan%lin%. ;irst, it is one thin% to ar%ue that continuous
%eo%raphical variaility in nature is 6endelian and not different in the )ualitative sense fro&
discontinuous variaility as it, for e'a&ple, appears in laoratory e'peri&ents.
C
4It is
)ualitatively different.5 It is an alto%ether different proposition to ar%ue< actually it is never
e'plicit, al(ays assu&ed< that the e'peri&ental results of (or" on or%anis&s constructed on
the asis of artificial conditions that prevail in a laoratory situation tell us so&ethin% essential
aout or%anis&s as they live and act in nature. It is si&ultaneously reductionist and erroneous
and, &ore si%nificantly, confuses, o&literating the distinction &eteen 4and alto%ether failin% to
%rasp (here they intersect5, to orders of significance and the realities the% refer &ac! to.
Wor" (ith Drosophila &ay e hi%hly ,productive/+ It is not a particularly co&ple' or%anis&,
and perhaps ecause of these %ene sustitutions, inversions and translocations 4e.%.,
reposition a (in% on the ody of the or%anis&5, '9rays (ill destructively rea" chro&oso&es<
In the space of less than t(o chapters 4total CO pa%es5, :o=hans"y.s discussions of various
species of this fly %enus and e'peri&ents on species individuals appear on no less than thirty
funda&entally chan%es earthly nature and creates a distinctive hu&an (orld in and throu%h this activity, it is not
,adaptin%/ to it, i.e., ,causality/ is circular or, etter, dialectical.
1
,&id 417C15, 2GG.
2
;or our purposes here, i.e., in %raspin% the neo9:ar(inian thrust, it is irrelevant (hether, as ?ould asserts,
:o=hans"y has illicitly appropriated Wri%ht.s &odel, (hether he has, in fact, raised the ,&odel/ to an ,inappropriate
level/ y shiftin% its ,&eanin% fro& an e'planation for nonopti&ality 4(ith i&portant aspects of nonadaptation5 to an
adaptationist ar%u&ent aout est solutions./ The Structure of 2volutionar% Theor%, C2G.
D
See, for e'a&ple, chapter 7 (here he dealt (ith the %eolo%ical record, The 1rigin of Species, esp. 22O922G.
#
?ould, The Structure of 2volutionar% Theor%, C179C20.
C
:o=hans"y, ,&id 417DG5, CO9CG.
We (ill have occasion to return to the e'peri&ent and its relation to science and capital in the follo(in% section, and
in the conclusion to this entire (or".
pa%es< Brid%in% a %ap that other(ise 4i.e., other than in thou%ht5 is closed e'cept, for
instance, in cases of e'tre&e psychosis in hu&ans or the rare asence of certain autono&ic
functions in &a&&als, the elucidation of the for&al characteristics of or%anis&s y (ay of the
&anipulation of the co&ponent ele&ents of livin% ein%s i&perceptily slides over into a
deter&ination of or%anic &ehavior, not ecause scientists do not %rasp the difference 4and y
and lar%e they patently do not5, ut ecause the asence of this difference is presupposed as
such, as the only assu&ption consistent (ith the class ased pro1ect e&edded in and
%uidin% the &odern science of nature.
Risin% fro& these e'peri&ents in syste&ic and syste&atic practices of the &anipulation of life,
its viaility, its )uality as lived, and its len%th 4e.%., y or%an chan%e producin% (hat is
popularly called ,frea"s of nature/5, the )uestion for&s, ,Why en%a%e in e'peri&ents2/ 0o
satisfy a perverse and cri&inally scientific curiosity 4cri&inal ecause it e&otionally %ratifies
repressively desuli&ated sadistic and &urderous i&pulses of other(ise ,(ell inte%rated,/ i.e.,
socially accepted co&pulsive, personalities52 -es, ut thou%h ,correct,/ this analysis is li&ited
and hardly ade)uate. 0hen (hy2 Because the entire edifice of conte&porary science,
inclusive of its &assive state fundin%, its structures that house its laoratories, the instru&ent
and &achine co&ple'es utili=ed therein, its associations, its educative for&s of developin% the
individuals (ho ear this pro1ect called science and its hierarchical or%ani=ation all for& the
institutional fra&e(or" in (hich do&ination and control of nature and hu&an nature is
achieved strictly in accordance (ith the re)uire&ents of the on%oin% reproduction of the order
of capital.
Second, there is so&ethin% identifialy far &ore sinister here 4elo( the level of
consciousness of individual scientists, thou%h not in all cases5. 0his &ust e developed at
so&e len%th.
1
In his analyses of &odernity and its 4conte&porary5 outco&e, ;oucault deploys the cate%ory
of incarceration, referrin% to (hat he calls ,carceral/ society. In En%lish and ;rench, ,carceral/
is a neolo%is& ety&olo%ically derived fro& the ver, incarcerate 4incarcIrer5, ut
i&prison&ent here is not understood in ter&s of restriction of &oility and spatial confine&ent.
Rather, those concentrated places, spaces and sites (here &asses of hu&an ein%s
con%re%ate 4d(ell, (or", consu&e5 daily (ithin the societies of the (orld for& a carceral
archipela%o in (hich Po(er is instituted and arises y (ay of control of odies< *s a study of
the underlyin% sustratu& of living odies, as scientists (ould reductionistically have it,
%enetics is access to the control of odies par excellence< While the ody that is
incarcerated is a livin% ody 43ei&5, that of a practical, vital, reathin% and sufferin% ein%
possessed of affects and needs, one that lives and e'periences, a ody intert(ined (ith and
on the asis of (hich su1ectivity 4personality5 develops, is cultivated and shaped, this ody is
not the ody theori=ed. 0he latter is the sa&e ody o1ectified and instru&entali=ed 4and as a
dead ody it is also the o1ect of Western &edical science, a cadaver5, die :Vrper+ -et it is,
nonetheless, the asis for control throu%h i&prison&ent in its &ost forceful sense and can e
e'perienced as an instru&entE and, in fact, it is all the ti&e, in laor specifically and in practical
activity %enerally, for e'a&ple, (hen I rin% &y (ei%ht to ear on an o1ect in order to &ove it.
$ere I a& a 3ei&-:Vrper+ It is si&ultaneously the structure of reality itself, its constitution as
inte%rated levels< or%anic synthesis of inor%anic &olecules, pri&ordial cellular life for&in%
fro& the reor%ani=ation and restructurin% of or%anic &olecules, eu"aryotes fro& a syntheses
of pro"aryote for&s, etc., hu&anity on the asis of co&ple' &a&&alian ani&al for&s, each
ne(ly e&er%in% level refor&in% and reor%ani=in% that on (hich it is ased, appearin%
irreducile and novel, its autono&y as a ne( order of e'istence estalished on the asis of
1
;or a full treat&ent of (hat follo(s, see our ,*lan 6ilch&an.s Essays on the $olocaust, ;oucault and $eide%%er+ *
6editation on the 3a=i ?enocide, its >ri%ins and its $istorical Conte&poraneity./
this very dependency< and the uni)uely hu&an capacity for self9o1ectification of any and all
of our co%nitive, e&otional and physiolo%ical states, processes and activities that per&its the
livin% ody to e treated strictly as an o1ect and instru&ent, for e'a&ple, the in%estion of
che&icals that shift a hor&onal alance and upset &y affective life, that induces a stupor,
etc< 0hus, in the conte&porary (orld of capital efore Po(er, as the state, ever openly
appears 4and shapes individual, personal life5 as %roups, a%encies and ,odies/ of ar&ed
&en, as the force of la( and institutions of coercion of all "inds, it, as &icro9po(er, develops
throu%h the various types of control 4e.%., %enetic &odification, dru%9ased psycholo%ical
&anipulation of affective life, of fears, an'ieties and hopes, etc., a control itself insinuated into
the &ost inti&ate and private do&ains, fa&ily life, se'uality, and the hidden recesses of
personal life, drea&s, fantasy, the uried pains of childhood5, that is, throu%h control of the
need and e&otional structure of e&odied su1ectivity, creatin% docile odies that (illin% self9
inte%rate into a syste& of hierarchical social relations of co&&and and oedience, and only
then and fro& here ta"es shape as institutionally separate Po(er, as the state< 0he
foundations of this control rest, first, on the peculiar character of hu&an ein%s as hu&an
ein%s, on the socio9cultural in9for&in% of a supposed iolo%ical sustratu&, hence on the
social and historical character of need, and, second, on the capacity to dispose of the
activities of social laor, that is on the peculiar, self9instru&entali=in% and character9for&in%
practice of a 3ei&-:Vrper? *t this, the latter level, Po(er constitutes itself, in part at least, and
lar%ely le%iti&i=es itself positively, in ad&inisterin% and &inisterin%, &ana%in% and re%ulatin%
daily life of underlyin% populations, throu%h an array of technolo%ies of control 4do&ination5
that are rou%ht to ear on that population %roupin% y a plethora of 4and ever proliferatin%5
a%encies of the state. 0he &ore sophisticated those technolo%ies of control 4today, these are
e'e&plified y infor&ational technolo%y and the io9technolo%y of %enes5, the &ore control
over the inti&ate details of daily life is e'ercised. 0hus, the state< and it is &anifest ho( the
science of %enetics facilities this tas"< ai&s at reconstitutin% the various classes in society as
a &assified, inherently &anipulale de&o%raphical totality, i.e., an astract population
%roupin% such as the nationE its policies, practices and interventions constitute a &io-politics of
this population, its pri&arily for& of self9understandin% e'ists as political econo&y, its theory
today is lar%ely the science of %enetics and the neo9:ar(inian ehavioris&s it has spa(ned,
and its &eans of control in the classical sense 4ar&ed force5 are e&odied in its technical
apparatuses of security and policin% 4and, as it (ere, as a reserve, a second order ar&y of
social (or"ers, psycholo%ists and institutional ad&inistrators5 and, &ore and &ore today, in
the practices of its array of &edical institutions, estalish&ents and personnel oriented to(ard
phar&aceutical and increasin%ly %enetic controls rin%in% us ac" to that point at (hich (e
e%an this discussion<
0hese practices developed in the old &etropolitan capitals of the capitalist (orld... Stretchin%
ac" to :ar(in and his fello( naturalists and for(ard to the (or" of &en li"e :o=hans"y (ho
syste&ati=ed the e'peri&ental and &ethodolo%ical asis for these practices< If one cannot
see in the e'plicitly intended effort to "ill land9shells y t(enty days of su&er%ence in salty
sea(ater, and (hen this is ineffective to re&ove the ani&alsI ,thic" calcereous operculu&/
and to re9i&&erse the& for fourteen &ore days,
1
a strai%ht line of develop&ent that, leadin%
throu%h &ethodical and &eticulous use of ,lethals,/ ,nonadaptive,/ ,in1urious/ recessive %enes
9 (hose carriers are crossed (ith other or%anis&s, "no(in% full (ell that in so&e of the
pro%eny these %enes (ill eco&e do&inant and "ill the ne( or%anis&s,
2
further leads to the
e'peri&ents on hu&an ein%s y free=in%, or%an re&oval, in1ection (ith deadly acteria and
is consu&&ated in the industriali=ed (orld of &ass death in Bir"enau, 6a1dane", Chel&no,
1
:ar(in, The 1rigin of Species, D1G9D1F.
2
:o=hans"y, 8enetics and the 1rigins of Species 417DG5, 2#E 417C15, D19D2.
Soi\r, Bel=ec and 0relin"a, then this failure to see, %rasp and understand is a function of
the severe co&part&entali=ation of affectivity, schi=oid personality or%ani=ation and perhaps
even reco%nition that this is the price capital e'tracts for &aterial co&fort ased on the
rationali=ed develop&ent of daily life under conditions of capitalist production<
1
Since they first appeared on the ac"s of unitary co&&unities torn y social division, states as
states, in their &ost rudi&entary for& odies of ar&ed &en, held the capacity to inflict death.
In the &odern epoch, &urder of populations, %enocide in its e'tre&e for&, has een (ithin the
reach of state po(er. In the conte&porary era as Po(er pursues a io9politics of population
ai&ed at enhancin% a hi%hly controlled and re%i&ented for& of life, it at the sa&e ti&e %athers
to itself the capacity to industrially ad&inister death. It (as in ?er&any, e%innin% (ith &uch
the sa&e hi%her educative social :ar(inian and eu%enics orientation, that the 3a=is, startin%
fro& the central, iolo%ically understood cate%ory of ,race,/ developed a io9politics of
populations that reached its then conte&porary hi%hpoint in &an9&ade &ass industrial death
of (hole populations, in the death (orlds for (hich *usch(it= served as a ,&odel./
2
*nd this is the point+ Capital.s science of %enetics is the co%nitive fra&e(or" in (hich a io9
politics of populations at its ori%ins develops and in and throu%h (hich it is today constantly
elaorated.
1
In the Rnited States these practices appeared fro& the ti&e of the first i&perialist (orld (ar on(ard, ut (ere lar%ely
confined to the eu%enics &ove&ent situated pri&arily in the for&al educative institution of ,hi%her learnin%,/ and did
not co&e into their o(n until the after&ath of the last i&perialist (orld (ar+
In its anta%onis& to(ard the Soviet Rnion, a ne( for& of ureaucrati=ed, statist and capitalist Po(er, a confrontation
unfolded, not 1ust ideolo%ically ut, on the plane of a fierce co&petition over the type of societal or%ani=ation that
(ould &ostly readily advance &aterial security and co&fort, for&in% therey an ideal situation for the elaoration of a
io9politics of population. It (as at this &o&ent that the heirs to the eu%enics &ove&ent (ere s(ept into the a%encies
4e'istin% and ne(ly for&in% ones5 of the *&erican state and, as it (ere, thereafter descended into the streets.
2
We should e clear as to (hat is at issue here vis9P9vis the 3a=is. It is the relation of 3a=i cri&inality to &odern
science+
0he specificit% of 3a=i cri&es can in part e %rasped (ith a vie( to &ethod+ 0hey (ere syste&atically, coldly, and
ureaucratically carried out on the asis of (estern scientific rationality. It is crucial to %rasp that, eyond out(ard
appearance, that syste& (as central to 3a=i %enocide. KSyste&K in the case of the 3a=is refers to the intentionally
directed, &ethodical, and &eticulous and experi$entall% &ased practice that atte&pted to co&prehensively identify,
destroy the culture of, and then Ke'tirpateK, Ke'ter&inateK, that is, &urder hu&an ein%s (ho, accordin% to crudely
theoretical criteria 4i.e., to iolo%ically9naturally %rounded and, hence, alle%edly per&anent and unchan%in%, i&puted
ehavioral, &oral, and cultural characteristics5 (ere ahu&an, Ksuhu&anK, and presu&ed unfit, Klife un(orthy of lifeK.
But it is syste& in this sense that, for the lieral, tolerant and hu&ane, characteri=es the hi%hest cultural 4:ultur5 or
civili=ational achieve&ent, science, of the ,West/ as such. Co9e'tensive (ith the science, capitalist civili=ation is the
foundation upon (hich 3a=is& developed, and it is science as theor% that underpinned the 3a=i %enocide in its
specific for& as industriali=ed &ass &urder.
Richard Da!ins# NSelfish 8enes>
7 Note on the 7pogee of and 7&surdit% in the Neo-Darinist Doctrine of 7daptation
*daptation is crucial to :o=hans"y.s perspective+ >r%anic ,diversity &ay e considered an
outco&e of the adaptation of life to the diversity of the environ&ents of our planet./
1
-et
thou%h the causality operative here, as (e pointed out at the outset of this discussion, is
deter&inate, niche specific, and unilateral, it is not nonetheless ,ri%id/ as in, for e'a&ple,
entailin% a one9to9one correspondence fro& the environ&ent y (ay of the phenotype to the
%ene 4or, for that &atter, vice versa5. :o=hans"y reco%ni=es ,position effects/ 4%ene effects
for (hich or%anis&ic develop&ent is not only controlled y that %ene.s structure ut in relation
to other %enes (ith (hich it %rouped5E
2
not unli"e :ar(in, he reco%ni=es &i%ration and
%eo%raphic isolation also enhance or lessen the effects of selection therey indirectly
&ediatin% the relation of %enetic structure of populations to their environ&entsE
D
he is acutely
a(are that evolution so&eti&es e'hiits characters 4traits5 (hose ,adaptive values/ are not at
all apparent, are (hat he ter&s adaptively ,neutral,/ and that this neutrality &ay represent only
an aspect of a lar%er (hole, that the ,evolutionary fate of a %ene is deter&ined y its effect on
the overall adaptive value of the %enotypic T%estalt./E
#
that, relatedly, a &utation or &utant
%ene &ay have adaptively unfavorale effects relative to its %enotype ut in relation to another
%enetic co&ple', in ,co&ination/ (ith other %enes, it &i%ht e favoraleE
C
and, that si&ilarly
do&inance and recessiveness of %enes is decided y the entire %enotypic structure.
O
Even if
the last 417C15 edition of :o=hans"y (or" e'hiited a hardenin%, as ?ould says, (hose &ost
i&portant feature (as the centrality of adaptation for all evolutionary theori=ation, later 3eo9
:ar(inis& develop&ent, especially as it reached its hi%hpoint 4a do&inance that it has not
relin)uished to this day5, say as it (as propounded after 17G0, cannot e said to have shared
this ,openness./
0he first si%nificant state&ent of this, the later ,evolution/ of neo9:ar(inis& ca&e (ith Ed(ard
>. Wilson.s Socio&iolog%. But Wilson, (hile providin% one a&on% other theoretically rarefied
and reified elaorations of capital.s technolo%ies of social control, is too consistent, too
reasoned, too difficult, in other (ords, alto%ether out of the tune (ith capital.s culture of the
daily life do&inated y its spectacle, and in this respect y its i&&ediacy, its inanity, its
disse&lin%, its &endaciousness, its &ystifications and ofuscations. In &ost re%ards, not so
(ith :a("insI and his ,selfish %ene./ $ere the issue is not ,adaptation/ as one cate%ory
a&on% others operative in the relation of or%anis& to environ&ent 4the ,ar%u&ent,/ if that is
(hat it can e called, does not rise to this level5, ut articulation of the ,vie(point/ that %oes
far eyond &ere ,adaptation/ in :o=hans"y.s sense, that of the %ene as selfish agenc% that
is deter&inate, even if &ediately, for life as a (hole precisely ecause, first, every
4phenotypic5 trait characteristic has its correspondin% %ene or %enes and, second, each and
every or%anic trait, structure and function is itself an adaptation... ;or us, it is the entirely
diversionary ,standpoint/ of a (or" (holly i&&ersed in the culture of capital.
What is there to ar%ue (ith ,a %ene.s9eye vie( of nature/ or ,the %ene.s eye vie( of
:ar(inis&/2 >ther than an article, ,a/ and ,the,/ is there a difference et(een ,nature/ and
,:ar(inis&/2
G
$o( is such a standpoint achievale2 :oes it occur to :a("ins that a ,%ene.s9
eye vie(/ is episte&olo%ically asurd2 :oes :a("ins understood that the invocation of ,our
1
:o=hans"y, ,&id 417C15, 2C#.
2
,&id 417DG5, 1DE 417C15, DO.
D
,&id 417DG5, 1#091#G, 1F191FO 4&i%ration5, and chapter F 4isolation5E 417C15, chapter G 4isolation5.
#
,&id 417C15, 77.
C
,&id 417C15, 2C7.
O
,&id 417C15, 10#.
G
Richard :a("ins, The Selfish 8ene, viii, i'.
fa&iliar criteria of verification and falsification/
1
refers to cate%ories of the evaluation of
evidence and truth that are, a%ain, episte&olo%ically incoherent2
$o( can (e ar%ue (ith so&eone (ho elieves that ,(e, and all other ani&als, are &achines
created y our %enes/2 0hat the funda&ental prole& of %enetics entails a de&onstration that
,selfishness,/ not ,altruis&,/ %overns iolo%ical develop&ent2
2
0hat ,hu&ans< evolved y
natural selection/2
Who, in reachin% ac" to the ori%ins of eu"aryotic life, can only see ,a hi%hly co&petitive
(orld/ in (hich ,survival/ and only ,survival/ is at issue, in (hich the predo&inant )uality
securin% ,success/ is ,ruthless selfishness,/ and sees the (ar carried out et(een and a&on%
%enes2 ;or (ho& are ,fitness/ and the ,stru%%le for e'istence/ the definin% features of a life
en%a%ed in a fi%ht to the death a%ainst itself over ,li&ited resources,2 $o( is it that the %ene
,&a"es its livin%/ in the %ene pool2 0hat ,su9ranches and su9ranches/ of plants and
ani&als as ,survival &achines/ ,evolved/ ,each one e'cellin% in a particular speciali=ed (ay/2
Is the ,currency used in the casino of evolution< survival/2 :oes evolution as a ,casino/
su%%est life is a crap shoot2
D
Is a ,cost enefit/ deter&ination a universal feature of hu&an
life, or &erely that of our%eois 4e%oistic5 &an2
#
In all these cases, the specific features of
daily life under conditions of capitalist production, its &assified su1ectivity, its astract laor,
its &ellu$ o$iu$ in o$nes, are transposed into an undifferentiated nature understood
ato&istically in ter&s of %enes.
$o( is it that these funda&ental units, %enes, have the character of ,replicators,/ (hose &ost
i&portant feature is individual ,fecundity/2 $o( is it that (e, that is, ,all ani&als, plants,
acteria, and viruses,/ all are ,survival &achines/2
C
>n (hat %rounds does :a("ins lu&p the
livin% 4ani&als, plants, acteria5 (ith the non9livin% 4viruses52 Is an or%anis& %enetically
,pro%ra&&ed/ (ith a ,list of nasty thin%s/ such as ,various sorts of pain, nausea, an e&pty
sto&ach/ to (hich it accordin%ly responds in the &anner of a co&puter pro%ra& responds to
soft(are instructions2
O
Who or (hat &a"es the assess&ent that ,survival of the fittest. is really 1ust a special case of
a &ore %eneral la( of survival of the sta&le>2 *nd (hat does this su%%est< (ith necessity<
aout a ein% in nature characteri=ed y refle'ivity2 *nd (hat is the status of such a ein%2 Is
it &erely another ,stale thin%,/ i.e., a ,collection of ato&s that is per&anent enou%h or
co&&on enou%h to deserve a na&e/2
G
What is a ,thin%/2
What 1ustifies :a("ins. %enetic reductionis& and ato&is&2
F
0he ,fact/ that %enes are
,i&&ortal,/ possessin% an ,e'pectation of life/ that ,&ust e &easured< in thousands and
&illions of years/2 What &etaphysics lur"s here, &a"in% ,a %ene a %ood candidate as the
asic unit of natural selection/2
7
I.e., if %enes ,collaorate and interact in ine'tricaly co&ple'
(ays, oth (ith each other and (ith their e'ternal environ&ent,/ and if ,the effect of a %ene
depends on its environ&ent, and HifJ that includes other %enes,/ if ,%enes (hich are in no (ay
lin"ed to each other physically can e selected for their &utual co&patiility,/ ,if a co&patile
co&ination of %enes/ is ,selected to%ether as a unit,/ then ho( is it possile to spea" of a
unilateral relation ased on a one9to9one correspondence et(een %ene and trait, for
e'a&ple, ho( is it possile that ,se'uality versus non9se'uality His toJ< e re%arded as an
1
,&id, i'.
2
,&id, 2, D, 12D.
D
,&id, 2E GE 10E 1G, 1FE #C, #O, CC.
#
,&id, O7, 7F, 11O, passi&.
C
,&id, 1G, 21, #O, passi&.
O
,&id, CG.
G
,&id, 12. E&phasis in ori%inal.
F
See the characteri=ations of a ,ehavior pattern/ and ,sin%le %ene,/ e.%., ,&id, O0, O2.
7
,&id, D#E DO, #0.
attriute under sin%le9%ene control, 1ust li"e lue eyes versus ro(n eyes/2 What evidence
does :a("insI offer for the assertion that the ,sa&e %enetic unit or %ene is to e re%arded as
the nearest thin% (e have to a funda$ental, independent agent of evolution./
1
*nd if consciousness, choice, ehavior 4sedi&ented or ,internali=ed/ social nor&s %overnin%
daily life5 and action 4collective doin%s that transfor& the social (orld and, or, re&a"e
surroundin% nature5 disappear in this potpourri of %enetic deter&inis&, ho( do they reappear,
especially at levels elo( (here they are y and lar%e dee&ed to operate2 $o(, for e'a&ple,
is it that a ,&other &on"ey/ %rievin% over the loss of an infant and, in ,stealHin%J an infant fro&
another fe&ale/ is e'coriated for ,a doule &ista"e, since the adopter not only (astes her
o(n ti&e,/ ut ,also releases a rival fe&ale fro& the urden of child9rearin%/2 Is the &on"ey
to en%a%e in reflection2 Choose an alternative course of action ased on a ,cost enefit/
analysis of her situation2
2
0o &o&entarily reflect on this is to e struc" y its ridiculousness.
0here is a sin%ular ,funda&ental feature,/ cellular si=e, that distin%uishes fe&ales fro& &ales
in or%anis&s (hich se'ually reproduce+ ;e&ale %a&ates are si%nificantly lar%er. 6oreover, ,it
is possile to interpret all the other differences et(een the se'es as ste&&in% fro& this one
asic difference./
D
:a("ins has een roundly critici=ed for the latant se'is& of this entire
account 4a&on% other thin%s its &anifest politically reactionary character5, for e'a&ple, in the
discussions of courtship, stepchild adoption and desertion.
#
0his is, further, a )uestion of the
,thin"in%/ that is operative in accounts of this sort, a reductionis& that is utterly astract, that
is in principle incapale of %raspin% the specificity of various natural and hu&an for&s of
sociation, and it is e)ually apparent in his characteri=ation of the physiolo%ical situatedness of
%enes 4here se'ual %enes that ,spend aout half their ti&e sittin% in &ale odies, and the
other half sittin% in fe&ale odies/5
C
+ Se'uality is not %enetically deter&ined in the sense
:a("ins (ould have it, i.e., in ter&s of its social si%nificance. 0o the contrary, it is this social
deter&ined si%nification that pervades the entire e'perience, affectivity and physiolo%y of
hu&an ein%s 4under specific, and specifiale, socio9historical conditions of sociation5 and
other, e.%., hi%her pri&ate, for&s of life.
$is discussion of the %enetic deter&ination of ,cooperative interaction/
O
si&ilarly ste&s fro&
this reductionis&, and here it rin%s the (hole utterly crude our%eois character of his
conception of the %ene, as ,selfish,/ to the fore. @i"e the political econo&ists of old 4ut (ith
none of their sophistication5, he starts fro& the %ross ato&istic astraction, this funda&ental
unit, the %ene 4in their case, the e%oistic individual5. 0he &eanin%less and asurdity of his
account resides in the fact that he cannot, and does not even underta"e to, discuss and
render intelli%ile co&&unal for&s of activity, and the reason, ovious, is that he does not
start for& social or%ani=ation of laor and production.
G
In the end, he ad&its his o(n vacuity,
statin%, ,0here is no end to the fascinatin% speculation that the idea of reciprocal altruis&
en%enders (hen (e apply it to our o(n species. 0e&ptin% as it is, I a& no etter at such
speculation than the ne't &an</
F
6eanin%, in his s&u%, self9satisfied &anner, that all such
discussion is speculation, an entirely %ratuitous and (ron%headed assertion.
0he e'tracts aove are entirely su&&ary (ith re%ard to :a("ins. vie(s, that are in point of
fact under(hel&in% (ith the &ass of e'a&ples, and in particular, &etaphors and analo%ies
that other(ise do&inant his presentation. 0his vast preponderance of &etaphors and
1
,&id, DG, D7, #0 4e&phasis added5, F# 4e&phasis deleted5.
2
,&id, 102910D.
D
,&id, 1#1.
#
,&id, 1#G91C0. $e %rud%in%ly ac"no(led%es and accepts the criticis& in his 17F7 Preface, ,&id, '.
C
,&id, 1#C.
O
,&id, 1OF.
G
,&id, 1OO91FF.
F
,&id, 1FF.
analo%ies per&its :a("ins to avoid &a"in% an ar%u&ent directly, for an ar%u&ent as such
(ould de&onstrate the &eanin%lessness, in so&e cases the ludicrousness of the points he
elieves he is &a"in%, of the ,position/ he for&ulates.
*s (e su%%ested i&&ediately aove, (hat is there to ar%ue (ith here2 0he position is
i&pre%nale 4(hat :a("ins hi&self (ould call ,unfalsifiale/5, since he, in his o(n (ords,
&erely spea"s the aritrary and capricious ,lan%ua%e of convenience/
1
4i.e., is e'pressin%
nothin% &ore than personal preference5+ :eployin% a ale of &etaphors and confused
analo%ies, :a("ins re1ects ar%u&ent as a for& of persuasion. $is entire ,position/ stron%ly
su%%ests he re1ects tacitly or other(ise rational nor&s of discourse. 4But, then, (here do his
real interests lie2 In sellin% oo"s, as sales fi%ures and lirary place&ents &i%ht indicate2 In
,success/ or personal a%%randi=e&ent as his responses to revie(s &i%ht su%%est25
:a("ins elieves< he theori=es nothin%, he does not en%a%e thou%ht< in %ene
deter&ination of plant, ani&al, and hu&an ehavior and activity. $is ,perspective,/ if (e &ay
%race it (ith this characteri=ation, is a step ac", nay several steps ac" (ith re%ard to the
&odern synthesis at its ori%ins. It.s not 1ust that he is a populari=er 4so (as Steve ?ould5, it is
that his ,analyses/ are %rossly undertheori=ed, incoherent once they aspire to achieve this
level 4theory5, and co&pletely insulated to oot.
:a("ins. ,(or"/< pap, s(i==le and %ara%e< can and should e dis&issed (ith a cavalier
(ave of the hand, if for no other reason than his central pole&ic a%ainst ,altruis&/ and in favor
of the ,selfish %ene/ is an anthropo&orphic pro1ection. 0his issue is false, the ,prole&/ non9
e'istent.
1
,&id, #G.
Part I!
;oundations of the 6althusian9:ar(inian 3e'us in Potential Species Productivity
3eo9:ar(inis&, especially in its second do%&atic phase, thou%h pervasive and do&inant is
not the sole for& in (hich evolutionary iolo%y is understood and practiced in the *n%lo9
*&erican (orld today. Be%innin% in the early 17G0s 4actually datin% ac" to the early t(entieth
century in Russia5, a for& of iolo%ical theori=ation has developed that esche(s the
conceptual strait1ac"et of adaptation, assertion of a unilinear relation runnin% fro&
environ&ent to or%anis&, and &athe&atical &odels of population %roups as the o1ect of
evolutionary analysis. Instead, this alternative affir&s the self9or%ani=in%, self9sustainin%, self9
reproducin% and self9deter&inin% 4autono&ous5 character of ,life/ as s%nthesis+ 0his includes
,life.s/ capacity to &aintain itself, its structure and or%ani=ation in the face of dra&atic chan%es
in its &ilieu. Rather technically referred to as serial endosy&iosis, this theori=ation is
associated &ore than any other fi%ure (ith the na&e of @ynn 6ar%ulis 4(ho, unli"e 6althus,
:ar(in and :o=hans"y, is a livin% conte&porary of ours5.
Because she is oriented to a %enuine account of speciation as such and pursues this account
in the conte't for (hich life is inseparaly shaped y and shapes the nonor%anic (orld in
(hich it has evolutionarily developed, and thus reaches ac" to life in its earliest "no(n stale
for&s in their relation to earthly nature, 6ar%ulis is ale to... aleit fro& the perspective of a
still too hi%hly undifferentiated concept of life and on the asis of a theory that retains in
essential for& the 6althusian concept of population... develop a $%stified criti)ue of hu&anity
and civili=ation that nonetheless raises her standpoint far aove that achieved y ,nor&al
science./
3%nn Margulis
S%$&iosis and 8enuine 2volutionar% ,nnovations
*%ainst the ri%idity of neo9:ar(inian doctrine 4she e'plicitly characteri=es it on the &odel of
reli%ious do%&a5,
1
6ar%ulis lays clai& to an authentic :ar(inian voice in our o(n era.
2
*nd, in
fact and for the purposes of this discussion, she does reach all the (ay ac" to :ar(in, to the
very foundations of his theori=ation in his identification of the essential core of natural
selection found in ,Ilife.sI potential productivity./ 0his is of the ut&ost si%nificance+ 6ar%ulis.
focus in this re%ard rin%s into clear relief the underlyin% asis that connects evolutionary
iolo%y at its ori%ins 4:ar(in5 to its &ost recent develop&ents, that e'hiits its continuity and
sustains this relation across its entire history, and that sustains it as a rarefied, so&eti&es
oli)ue, theoretical reflection on prole& of surplus population as it rises fro& capitalist
practice. We can de&onstrate this continuity y e'a&inin% the concept of potential
productivity as elaorated y 6ar%ulis.
D
We shall start tentatively y offerin% a deter&ination of life at its ori%ins. We shall then reveal
its funda&ental division 4accordin% to 6ar%ulis5, and de&onstrate the essential relation of life
to its i&&ediate &ilieus. 0his decidedly counterposes 6ar%ulis. co&prehension of life to neo9
:ar(inians. >n this asis, (eIll e'hiit her continuity 4her fidelity5 to :ar(in. $avin% done so,
(e shall have laid are the central &otif that has %uided the construction of all evolutionary
iolo%ical thin"in% since its ori%ins, effectively affir&in% the relation of the science of life to
1
,Bi% 0roule in Biolo%y,/ reprinted in 6ar%ulis and :orion Sa%an, Slanted Truths: 2ssa%s on 8aia, S%$&iosis, and
2volution, 2G192G2, 2G7, 2F1.
2
See the entire essay referred in the previous note.
D
We (ould e re&iss if (e did not e'plicitly note the i&portance of 6ar%ulis. re9theori=ation of iolo%y and its
evolutionary foundations+ 0he ody of her (or" ta"en to%ether, especially her S%$&iosis in Cell 2volution, is not
&erely the proverial ,&a1or contriution/ to her field. Rather, it for&s a syste&atic, funda&ental rethin"in% of
evolutionary iolo%y as a (hole, and devolves on to a coherent series of reflections on earthly nature and life, and,
eyond this, to a su&&ary state&ent of the place and role of hu&anity in this nature.
capital, its prole&atic and the tas"s in one of its for&s that it, capital, sets for its theory
4science5 eyond (hich it, science, does not trans%ress...
*s it first e&er%ed on Earth so&e D.F to # illion years a%o, in its &ost ori%inal, archaic for&
life consisted &ini&ally in a cellular &e&rane, a %reasy little lipid a% containin% phosphates
and nucleotides that, in &etaolis&, in a continuous che&ical e'chan%e of an inside (ith an
outside, %re( increasin%ly co&ple' and capale of self9&aintenance and, eventually (ith real
consistency, self9reproduction. Startin% fro& here (e can further for&ulate a asic distinction
that, as it turns out fro& the standpoint of life considered si&ply as livin%, is funda&ental,
na&ely, the distinction et(een pro"aryote and eu"aryote.
1
Pro"aryotes are &acterial or%anis&s 4includin% lue9%reen al%ae and %rass %reen 4rochloron
or%anis&s5 as (ell as so&e &ulticellular acterial type or%anis&s 4actino&ycetes and %lidin%
&y'oacteria5.
2
Characteristically, they lac" a nucleus+ * &e&rane does not enclose the
%enetic &aterial internal to a acterial cell, instead it floats freely in the cytoplas&. In
%eolo%ical ti&e, acteria precede the appearance of nucleated or%anis&s 4hence, ,efore/ the
,nucleus/5, the eu"aryotesE that is to sa%, in our co$plexl% conceptuall% $ediated evidential
reconstructions of earl% life insepara&le fro$ the histor% of the earl% 2arth, the ,fusion,/
,unification,/ or sy&iosis of t(o ori%inally distinct and independent acterial or%anis&s 4a
spirochete, a fla%ellated or &oile acteriu&, a s(i&&er, and an archaeacterial host5, this
co&in% to and as it (ere livin% to%ether as one 4ce&ented y the inte%ration of spirochete
:3* into the host %eno&e5, constituted nucleated or%anis&s at their ori%ins, a process called
,eu"aryosis./
D
Eu"aryotic cell or%ani=ation is the foundation of all, &ore elaorate life, plant,
fun%i and ani&alE or, to en%a%e in the reductionis& typifyin% iolo%ical analysis that assu&e
4as does 6ar%ulis5 life can e ade)uately understood in ter&s of its &ost ele&entary for&s,
plant, fun%i and ani&al for&s are eu"aryotes.
#
1
Ety&olo%ically, the ter& ,pro"aryote/ is derived fro& the ancient ?ree", ,pro/ and ,"aryon/ si%nifyin% ,efore/ or
,prior/ and ,seed/ or ,nucleus./
2
@ynn 6ar%ulis, S%$&iosis in Cell 2volution: Micro&ial Co$$unities in the 7rchean and 4rotero/oic 2ons, 27.
S%$&iosis in Cell 2volution is 6ar%ulis. &a1or (or", a theoretical su&&ation of her scientific investi%ations, reflections
and analyses, (hat (e &i%ht call a funda&ental and %rand evolutionary iolo%y. 0he first edition of the (or" (as
pulished in 17F1, and the second, utili=ed here, constitutes a &a1or revision in (hich ne( develop&ents in early cell
iolo%y per&itted 6ar%ulis to reinterpret the acteria to or%anelle transitions that for&ed the eu"aryote. ;or re&ar"s
in this re%ard, see the Preface to the second edition, ,&id, ''i.
D
,&id, O, 2O7, D00.
#
It (ould e helpful to further distin%uish acterial pro"aryotes fro& eu"aryotic cells y (ay of a rief discussion of the
%enetic9hereditary i&plications of the asence or presence of a cellular nucleus.
Bacteria live in lar%e, densely cro(ded co&&unities often co&prisin% illions upon illions of or%anis&s, co&&unities
that appear interconnected spatially. Within a acteriu&, :3* &olecules are loosely pac"ed in circular shapes "no(n
as lar%e replicons. 0here are also si&ilar &olecules or fra%&ents or aspects, if you (ill, of those &olecules (ithin a
cellular structure called a s&all replicon. 0he s&all replicons are not ounded y the acteriu&, fated as it (ere to
e'ist (ithin its &e&rane. Instead, they can ,seep/ out and into other acteria, throu%h a &olecular construct that
neutrali=es the acterial cell (all of a ne( host. In this for&, they are "no(n as plas&ids or propha%es. 0hey are vital
to the reproduction of acteria, since %roups of si&ilar acteria, "no(n as strains, possess fe(er %enes that are
necessary for the strain to e'ist in any %iven natural &ilieu. 0he acteriu& is, as the strains are, inco&plete as an
or%anis&. 0he s&all replicon as a propha%e, say, (ill carry fro& one acteriu& to another the %enes that are
necessary for its e'istence, perhaps &utations and especially in the case (here a novel, e'istentially dan%erous
event, process or situation develops in its environ&ent< Bacteria can exchange genes rapidl% and reversi&l%< 0he
entirety of replicons to%ether (ith co&&unities of acteria and their %enes constitutes a %loal %ene pool, or glo&al
geno$e, that any strain can dra( on at any %iven ti&e 4Sorin Sonea and @Uo ?. 6athieu, 4ro!ar%otolog%5< In this
re%ard, Sonea and 6athieu spea" of a ,unifor& %loal clone/ 4,&id, GC5 and a ,%loal superor%anis&/ 4,&id, GG5.
Critically, (e can note this %loal acterial or%anis& so9called is not ounded y a &e&rane, at this %loal level
&etaolis& cannot le%iti&ately e spo"en of, and there is no reproduction of the ,superor%anis&/ as such. 0he
characteri=ation is a hypostati=ation, the prole& here is in conceptuali=ation. 0he authors fail to ade)uately theori=e
the unity in difference and difference in unity that essentially distin%uish acteria ta"en to%ether. We can and should
reco%ni=e a functional unity ut not a living one< $eredity, then, is not an acco&plish&ent of intracellular :3*, and
0Continued on the folloing page5
6ar%ulis proposes 4she (as not first5 a t(o super "in%do&, five "in%do& ta'ono&y.
1
0he t(o
super"in%do&s are, of course, pro"aryota and eu"aryotaE and the five "in%do&s are &onera,
and protoctista, plantae, fun%i and ani&alia. 0he &onera, essentially non9nucleated
or%anis&s, are divided into t(o types 4su"in%do&s5 of acteria, archaeacteria and
euacteria.
2
?enerally spea"in%, the for&er %roups of acteria respire anaeroically, that is,
they do not rely on o'y%en 4(hich is lethal to the&5 in &etaolis&E the latter %roup is either
si&ultaneously anaeroic and aeroic li"e the cyanoacteria, or aeroic, that is o'y%en
dependent for respiration. It (as fro& 6ar%ulis that the author first learned 4thou%h she
e&phatically (as not the first to reco%ni=e, the insi%ht %oin% ac" to the late nineteenth
century a&on% students of acteria5
D
that the Earth (as not al(ays at&ospherically of
o'y%en9nitro%en co&position. Co&position of the pri&ary at&osphere, &ade of %ases that
e&anated fro& the solar syste& neula as various< planetary, secondary 4&oons5, asteroid,
&eteorite< odies (ere differentiated out, is no lon%er accessile. 0he earliest Earth
at&osphere &ay have een lar%ely nitro%en (ith a si%nificant &ethane co&ponent. @o(
o'y%en environ&ents still e'ist in aundance on Earth 4(herever (ar& te&peratures
do&inate, for e'a&ple, at the &id9oceans rid%e vent syste&s and %eother&al hot spots, in
oilin% hot sprin%s, hydro%en sulfide9rich %eother&al sprin%s, hot rine la"es, on the ed%es of
active terrestrial volcanoes and (ithin the crater and plu&es of an eruptin% su&arine
volcano, ithin roc"s in the polar deserts, on the floors of ice9covered la"es and sea ice in the
*ntarctic, and in deep a)uifers fro& one to over three "ilo&eters elo( the surface of the
Earth, even in lo( o'y%en &uds that can e found te&perate =ones5, ut they are oviously
no lon%er ui)uitous and deter&inate for life as a (hole. It is 6ar%ulis. esti&ation 4one that is
conventionally shared5, that such an at&osphere e'isted, no later than circa D.F to # illion
years a%o, and persisted for a lon% ter&, at least for 2.C illion years.
3o( a&on% eu"aryotes none of these features and conditions that characteri=e pro"aryotes
otain. 0he for&er do possess &e&rane ound :3* that individuates the& as or%anis&s,
their internal cell structures are )ualitatively dissi&ilar to pro"aryotes, :3* is not transposed
fro& one or%anis& to another of the sa&e type, all the necessary hereditary features are
contained intercellularly, eu!ar%otes for$ ph%siologicall% and hereditar% 4(ith the e'ception of
diverse secondary characteristics5 identical individuals ithin a t%pe 0the% speciate5, and they
all have a life cycle e%innin% in irth and ter&inatin% in death of the or%anis&. So ho( did
eu"aryotes ori%inate2
6ar%ulis. ans(er is that eu"aryotes, a %enuine evolutionary novelty of the first order of
si%nificance, o(e their ori%ins to &er%er of distinctively different acteria 4pro"aryotes5.
$er theori=ation points to a develop&ent in (hich four different unifications led to essentially
t(o distinct for&s of eu"aryosis. 0he theory 4serial endosy&iosis or sy&io%enesis5 is
%enerally accepted ith the exception of one of those sy&iotic events that involved
&itosis 4cell division in (hich duplicate ,&ale/ and ,fe&ale/ ,chro&oso&es/ for& the asis of reproduction5 is not the
&eans of the %eneration of ne( acteria. Bacteria Nevolve> ithout speciation, the% do not speciate 4Sonea, ,Bacterial
Evolution (ithout Speciation,/ 7C910C.5. In fact, acteria do not have an identifiale life cycle, and thou%h their
e'istence can e ter&inated 4y introduction of a forei%n, destructive and inassi&ilale che&ical force (ithin their
environ&ent, y predation5, they are not ,orn,/ and do not &ature, a%e and die 4,&id5.
1
S%$&iosis in Cell 2volution, 2#92O 4charts5.
2
*&on% the for&er are counted &etho%ens 4&ethano&icroiates, &ethanoacteria5, ther&ophiles and halophilic
acteriaE a&on% the latter (e find %reen non9sulfur acteria, purple acteria 4(hich %ave rise to ani&al &itochondria
after their assi&ilation y other acteria at a later sta%e of eu"aryosis5 and cyanoacteria 4(hich %ave rise to plant
chloroplasts, a%ain, after their assi&ilation y other acteria, discussed elo(, and other(ise "no(n as ,lue9%reen
al%ae/5. ,&id, O29OD, OC 4fi%ures5.
D
See @iya 3i"olaevna Lha"hina, Concepts of S%$&iogenesis: 7 Historical and Critical Stud% of the Research of
Russian Botanists, and 8an Sapp, S%$&iosis &% 7ssociation: 7 Histor% of S%$&iosis, passi&.
eu"aryotic &otility. While (e shall not atte&pt a detailed e'plication of these unifications,
1
(e
can riefly descrie the&.
@i"e the ori%ins of life itself, the last co&&on ancestor to these t(o "in%do&9level for&s of
acteria is no lon%er accessile< 3o( that &eans that this reconstruction is hi%hly
speculative (hich further &eans, eyond &arshalin% availale, aleit thin evidence for this
event, the reconstructed event as an event plays little role in the presentation of the
theori=ation in S%$&iosis in Cell 2volution
2
< But archaeacteria still e'ist and it is a for& of
this acteria, a sulfur respirin% and heat tolerant acteriu& 4a ther&oacidophil (hich
contriuted &ost of the protein &a"in% &etaolis&5 to%ether (ith a, relatively spea"in%,
,s&aller,/ elon%ated and &oile acteriu&, a s(i&&er 4the ori%in ho&e of acteria (as
a)ueous5 and anaeroe "no(n as a spirochete (hose unity for&ed the ori%inal sy&iosis.
0he nucleated or%anis&s (ere s&all, oviously &icroes, &oile and anaeroic 4s(i&&ers
livin% in non9o'y%enated, a)uatic &ilieus5. 6ar%ulis elieves these environ&ents (ere al(ays
characteri=ed y scarcity of food, the or%anis& itself su1ect to lethal to'icity and desiccation,
at least relative to intracellular environ&ents that are characteri=ed y an aundance of food
4here (e are spea"in% of inor%anic che&icals that can e synthesi=ed5 and a)ueous. She
elieves the s(i&&er (as ale to reach the &e&rane of the archaeacteriu&, thus havin%
access to nutrition and ener%y.
D
0he s(i&&er, (ho 6ar%ulis elieves (as e'tre&ely hardy,
(as to sustain itself (ithin the other acterial or%anis&, oth eventually under%oin%
transfor&ation as a conse)uence, %ivin% rise to the nuclear cytoplas& of eu"aryotes as (e
see the& today.
#
40he nucleus, ho(ever, developed y internal differentiation of the
nucleocytoplas&, not y sy&iosis.5
C
0his first eu"aryotic cell re&ained anaeroic and (as heterotrophic 4i.e., it &etaoli=ed
preconstituted or%anic co&pound &olecules5.
O
0here (ere three other evolutionary develop&ents, all sy&iotic, (hich are crucial for
eu"aryotic life. 0he first of these,
G
the evolutionarily ne't develop&ent (as the assi&ilation of
an o'y%en reather, a purple acteriu& 4proteoacteriu&5. 0hese (ere aeroic euacteria
(ith a cytoplas&ic syste& capale of the total o'idation of carohydrates producin% caron
dio'ide and (ater, ale to live in acidic a)ueous &ilieus characteri=ed y hi%h te&peratures.
F
0hey eventually eca&e cellular &itochondria, and are as such responsile for the o'y%en
respiratory9ased &etaolis& of the novel evolutionary develop&ent, (hich is no( tri%eno&ic
4i.e., has a %enetic structure that inte%rates aspects, not all, of the once specific %eno&es of
each of three once distinctive acterial or%anis&s5.
0he second in this %roup of evolutionary develop&ents
7
4and the third recounted here5
involves sy&iosis y (ay of (hich an ori%inal, pri&itive eu"aryotic 1ust descried developed
1
;or such an account, see our ,@ynn 6ar%ulis+ Partisan of the 6onera./ 6anuscript, 2007, (here (e have also
underta"en a detailed evidential and &ethodolo%ical criti)ue, and e'a&ined her relation to neo9:ar(inis&.
2
S%$&iosis in Cell 2volution, 20#920F, esp. 20C.
D
The S%$&iotic 4lanet, ##.
#
6ar%ulis 4S%$&iosis in Cell 2volution, 1G, D#15 tells us that no "no(n pro"aryote feeds y en%ulfin%, then di%estin%,
other livin% cells 4a practice "no(n as pha%ocytosis5, so, she e'cludes the speculative hypothesis that the
archaeacteriu& en%ulfed the spirochete.
C
0his &uch appears clear, first, fro& the inaility of the nucleus itself to produce proteins< it is not an autono&ous
syste&< and second, fro& continuity et(een the outer nuclear &e&rane (ith the endoplas& reticulu& 4a strin%
li"e cytoplas&ic sustance that surrounds the nuclear &e&rane and e'tends into the latter itself5, itself a
continuation of the alance of the endo&e&rane syste& 4outer nuclear &e&rane, endoplas&ic reticulu&, outer
&e&rane of other or%anelles and ?o%li apparatus5, all of (hich stron%ly su%%ests a develop&ental process of
internal differentiation. ,&id, D1 4line dra(in% and s"etch5, 220, 21F.
O
,&id, G.
G
,&id, D0C9D2O.
F
,&id, D0O.
7
,&id, D2G9D##.
the capacity for photosynthesis, (hich involved its &er%er (ith a pro"aryote capale of
sourcin% ener%y fro& li%ht. 0he pro"aryote, a cyanoacteriu&, (as at once capale of
sustainin% itself in oth non9o'y%en and o'y%en environ&ents.
1
0he acteriu& that this
cyanoacteriu& assi&ilated resulted in the for&ation of chloroplasts, and thus involved the
ori%ins of plant life+ $eterotrophic protists< those or%anis&s that are nucleated 4eu"aryotic5
yet are not ani&al, plant or fun%i, (hich are dependent upon organic &olecules as sources of
oth ener%y and caron< sy&iotically ac)uired fully developed, aeroic pro"aryotes (hose
ener%y source (as li%ht 4&a"in% the& o'y%enic and phototrophic5.
2
;or 6ar%ulis, li"e the
previous &entioned &er%er, this one also (as a ,loody/ stru%%le as the o'y%en respirator
en%ulfed and in%ested, atte&pted to ut (as unale to assi&ilate a ri%ht %reen
photosynthetic acteriu&. 0his incorporation in the literal sense of the (ord transpired only as
the un9assi&ilated %reen acteriu& endured and unification (as achieved. 0he %reen
acteriu& (ould eco&e a chloroplast, i.e., a specific for& of a plastid, a cellular or%anelle
possessin% a hereditary syste& that does not derive fro& and continues to function relatively
autono&ously in relation to the nucleus< their syste&s are interdependent, yet the or%anelles
reproduce differently that the nucleus reproducin% the rest of the cell< constitutin% (ithin the
cell a &o&ent of non96endelian heredity as is si&ilarly the case (ith &itochondria.
3o(, the photosynthetic function in plants to%ether (ith or%anelle dependency on products of
nuclear %eno&e de&onstrates the increasin% tendency to(ard interdependency in cell
evolution.
D
In fact, in each of these &er%ers the develop&ent ta"es over lar%e stretches of
%eolo%ical ti&e, occurs over and a%ain, and involves a %ro(th in the si=e and co&ple'ity of
the ne( or%anis&. 0hese sy&ioses are (hat 6ar%ulis calls ,oli%atory,/ i.e., they are
irreversile and eco&e so y %enetic inte%ration 4aleit partial5 of the sy&ionts. In all cases,
the novel or%anis& reproduces prolifically, ,selected/ 4thou%h y (ay of non96endelian
inheritance5, etter fitted in the :ar(inian sense to sustain itself in ein%.
0he last, ut actually the second evolutionarily si%nificant sy&iosis
#
4the fourth as (e are
presentin% it here, one not %enerally accepted y &icroiolo%ists and evolutionary iolo%ists5
concerns the ori%ins of another &oile acteriu& 4(hich (ould eco&e the &oility or%anelle,
the undulipodia5, a s(i&&er also, for as (e &i%ht note the only environ&ent of livin% ein%s,
or%anis&s, on Earth for perhaps as &uch as the first three illion years of evolution (as
a)ueous. >n 6ar%ulis. account, this or%anelle ori%inated fro& spirochete acteriu&, (hich
&eans that it (as the evolutionary outco&e of the union of spirochete acteriu& (ith the
protoeu"aryote descried aove 4that is, the outco&e of the first &er%er5, an archaeacteriu&
itself under%oin% evolutionary chan%e, itself the product of the ori%inal sy&iosis. She thin"s
that spirochetes ori%inally attached the&selves to the protoeu"aryote in order to feed,
specifically on s&all or%anic &olecular co&pounds that seeped throu%h the &e&rane of the
host.
C
>nce inte%rated into the host, the latter achieved an enor&ous selective advanta%e,
na&ely, rapid &otility<
Beteen 2ndos%$&iotic Theor% and Darinian 2volution
Return to the point of departure of this discussion+ >viously, there is a relation et(een
pro"aryotes and eu"aryotes. It is evolutionary. 0he process of the for&ation of the first
1
Photosynthesis developed in anaeroes in the asence of &olecular o'y%en. Photosynthetic or%anis&s that release
%aseous o'y%en (ere a later develop&ent, and only after si%nificant a&ounts of at&ospheric o'y%en had een
produced< over thousands of &illennia< to transfor& Earth.s at&osphere did oli%atory o'y%en respirin% or%anis&s
appear.
2
,&id, D2F, DD0.
D
,&id, DDF.
#
,&id, 21G9D0D.
C
,&id, O+
eu"aryotes 4first in %eolo%ically reconstructed ti&e5, called eu"aryosis, (as, accordin% to
6ar%ulis, sy&iotic, the union of t(o distinct acteria into a sin%le cellular or%anis&.
S%$&iosis is evolutionar% novelt% 0innovation5. 0hese sta%es, steps or unifications in the
evolutionary process of eu"aryosis can and should e understood as a series of )ualitative
transfor&ations that, only e%innin% (ith distinct "inds of acteria, cellular life under(ent.
Clearly, then, 6ar%ulis thin"s that the &ost si%nificant evolutionary innovations in the deep
history of life on Earth (ere t(ofold, first, the creation of &etaolic path(ays funda&ental to
all life
1
and, second, the sy&iotic unifyin% phases of a develop&ent that led fro& pro"aryotic
cellular life to eu"aryotic life, eu"aryosis. ;or 1ust as &anifestly, for her, there is si&ply nothin%
co&parale in that entire history (hich rises to the level of chan%e and transfor&ation as this
passa%e+ ;or 6ar%ulis, to account for the developin% structure and or%ani=ation of the
pro"aryotic cell, and its sy&ioses, fro& the first &er%er throu%h the others (ith their
increasin% cellular co&ple'ification, is to account for the &a1or evolutionary develop&ent in
that entire history, efore (hich all others pale. Why2 Eu"aryosis, as the sy&iotic process of
cellular nucleari=ation, is co9e'tensive (ith &itotic se'uality 4(ith self9contained cellular :3*,
chro&oso&al division, &ale and fe&ale contriution of half their :3* and on this asis (ith
or%anis&ic reproduction5 and hereditary reproduction of individuals that are the sa&e as to
type, that is, (ith speciation+ While acteria (ith their %loal %eno&e do not speciate,
eu!ar%osis is at the origins of species, and an account of eu"aryosis is an account of ,the
ori%in of species./
So, if in respect to ori%ins 6ar%ulis has %one eyond :ar(in, for her, ho( is the pre-eu"aryotic
conception of (hat is truly innovative in evolution fit (ith a :ar(inian theori=ation that is ased
upon hi%hly co&ple' eu"aryotes, plant and elaorate ani&al 4the over(hel&in% portion of
(hich :ar(in discusses is insect and &a&&alian5 life2 What, conceptually, if not %eolo%ical9
te&porally and evidentially in the analytic sense, lin"s her to :ar(in2 What connects serial
endosy&iosis, for (hich nothin% of evolutionary si%nificance occurs after the appearance of
eu"aryotes, (ith the :ar(inian theory of evolution2
;or :ar(in (hatever the specific hereditary &echanis&, natural selection has the &eanin% of
a differential sortin% of the reproductive success of individual or%anis&s. So that, &i%ht any
inherited differences decide ho( &any pro%eny so&e or%anis&s have in relation to other
4species si&ilar5 or%anis&s, patently then the inheritance of the follo(in% %eneration (ould
have contriuted to that nu&erical difference in pro%eny. In ter&s of reproductive success, (e
are of course spea"in% of offsprin% (hose chances of survive and reproduction 4a%ain relative
to other or%anis&s5 are enhanced y this inheritance. 3o( for :ar(in, as (e have seen, it is
the 6althusian insuperale nu&erical preponderancy of the offsprin% an or%anic ein%
produces over (hat, in co&petitive stru%%le (ith other such ein%s 4especially those of the
sa&e species5, can survive that renders natural selection so e'traordinarily efficacious.
1
$avin% for%one this discussion, (e can si&ply cite 6ar%ulis+ ,:urin% the *rchean a%e of the anaeroes< it is
proale that all of the &a1or pro"aryotic &etaolic and en=y&atic syste&s had evolved+ nucleic acid 9 protein9ased
autopoiesis and :3* repairE fer&entationE %lycolysisE iosynthesis of ester9 and ether9lin"ed lipidsE &ethano%enesisE
cell (all and spore (all for&ation< al"anoate reserve deposition< tricaro'ylic acid path(ays oth for synthesis and
for *0P %enerationE the various path(ays of caron dio'ide fi'ationE nitro%en fi'ationE anaeroic photosynthesis< the
o'idation of hydro%en sulfide to sulfurE the deposition of ele&ental sulfur, sulfate, and sulfideE iron and &an%anese
o'idation and reductionE and so forth./ ,&id, 1D0.
6ore to the point, ,0he pre9Phanero=oic (orld (as co&posed of s&all or%anis&s ut an evolutionarily po(erful iotaE
&a1or trends and innovations of the e'tant iosphere (ere estalished< ;er&entation, photosynthesis, aeroiosis,
sy&ioses, &itosis, &eiosis, &orpho%enesis, and e&ro%enesis had &ade possile y then the &odulation of the
planet.s surface y life./ ,&id, D#D.
;or 6ar%ulis, any 4&eanin% all5 or%anis&4s5 su1ect to natural selection (ill evolve in :ar(in.s
sense. Why2 Such is the case &erely for ,the si&ple reason that all the potential products of
reproduction can never survive,/
2
(here ,potential products/ &eans pro%eny or offsprin%.
6ar%ulis is )uite clear+
3atural selection is a si&ple conse)uence of the fact that too &any autopoietic entities are
potentially self9produced than can possily survive. ,3atural selection/ is the inaility, in any
%iven case, for the iotic potential to e reached. Biotic potential, the capacity for or%anis&s to
self9produce 4fission into, hatch, %ive irth to, etc.5 other or%anis&s, is &easured y the units+
or%anis&s produced per %eneration 4or or%anis&s per unit ti&e5.
2
>r, ,:ar(in reco%ni=ed that all populations, %iven unli&ited resources had the capacity to
%ro( e'ponentially. $e called the &any Tchec"s. that "eep all populations fro& ever reachin%
their reproductive potential Tnatural selection../
D
*%ain, ,We "no( aout the inheritance of
variation and iotic potential N &ore individuals are produced than can possile survive in the
populations of all creatures at all ti&es./
#
Perhaps, &ost forcefully, ,< the failure to %ro( and
reproduce at &a'i&al capacity 4that is, failure of iotic potential to e reached5 is e)uivalent to
natural selection./
C
6ar%ulis. account of this &otor of evolution at its ori%ins< su%%estin% a (orld of &aterial
scarcity, here starvation, as the %reat drivin% force for unification< transpires at the level of a
iolo%ical account of the ori%ins of life &odeled on one of the t(o %reat variants of hu$anit%.s
ori%ins in our%eois literatures. 40he other is the (orld of natural aundance in (hich the
ori%inal co&&unity is pri&itively e%alitarian, socially undivided. 0he fi%ure &ost often
associated (ith this vision is Rousseau5+ Please, if you (ill, note the for&al identity of points of
departure et(een 6ar%ulis and the %reat our%eois thin"ers< @oc"e for e'a&ple, $oes
surely, ut $ore to the point Malthus in particular< 6an appears in the state of nature that is
shaped y scarcit%, y the rute facticity that there is not enou%h for all. *s a theori=ation of
the state of society, as a natural ein%, ,&an/ is co&pelled y need to laor, to overco&e
naturally %iven scarcity throu%h the develop&ent of techni)ue, (hile scarcity itself &a"es it
inevitale an individual or %roup (ill raise hi&self or itself over others, thus socially or%ani=in%
this facticity, to secure hi&self or itself a%ainst its rava%es< Crudely, this is the social theory
of the our%eoisie. Patently such is the case in $oes 4(here security is %uaranteed y
soverei%n Po(er5, and in 6althus, (here social division disappears to e replaced y the
,pli%ht/ of the poor laorers, and the population la( receives its for&ulation. In :ar(in, 4the
cate%ories of the analysis of5 society is 4are5, as (e have already indicated, transposed into
nature.
6ar%ulis. position in this re%ard can and should e reco%ni=ed as a &ore astract, rarefied
state&ent of :ar(in hi&self+ 0hus, for :ar(in, ,a stru%%le for e'istence inevitaly follo(s fro&
the hi%h ratio at (hich or%anic ein%s tend to increase/
O
(hile in 6ar%ulis, the sa&e stru%%le
results fro& ,the nearly infinite iolo%ical potential for reproduction./
G
0he difference is that, for
6ar%ulis, an unreali=ale potential productivity characteri=es all life inclusive of acteria, a
characteri=ation that :ar(in had he een a(are of the si%nificance of the &onera (ould have
induitaly affir&ed. But the concept potential productivity should e identified as (hat it is,
na&ely, a conte&porarily refined, restate&ent of the 6althusian population la(, ut one
2
Slanted Truths, 101, 7F 4citation5.
2
,&id, 10#.
D
,&id, 21#.
#
,&id, 2C2.
C
,&id, 10C.
O
The 1rigin of Species, O1.
G
S%$&iosis in Cell 2volution, 1G1.
insidiously pro1ected ac"(ard in %eolo%ical ti&e to those &o&ents at (hich in this
reconstruction life in its ,ele&entary/ cellular for& achieved its initial e'pansions 4sy&ioses5.
0his is a our%eois, scientific theori=ation par excellence+
4otential 4roductivit% and its Critique
3o(, for :ar(in, reproductive success 4and hence natural selection5 is ine'tricaly ound up
(ith the actual pro%eny of any %iven or%anis&s. 0he e&phasis on actuality is conceptually a
piece (ith the hereditarily &ediated, unilinear relation of or%anis& to environ&ent< ta"en
over fro& 6althus< e'pressed in the neo9:ar(inians y (ay of the ,&es&eri=in% concept/ of
adaptation.
1
If, ho(ever, or%anis& and &ilieu incessantly shape each other, if (e reco%ni=e
the asic inadequac% of this flaed conceptuali=ation 4positivistically, the essentially ,falsified/
nature of this unilateral and unilinear concept5, then the stress on potentiality< in point of fact,
e%innin% fro& an actually unreal, ideal and counter9real, i&possile situation practically and
lo%ically (ith a vie( to events in nature, thou%h not in a laoratory< is a ac"handed (ay to
retain the lin"a%e to :ar(inis&, effectively to 1ustify selection, (hen the fi'ed or%anis&
4species5 N environ&ent relation has een aandoned, after it is no lon%er &eanin%ful to
spea" of natural selection as the %eneral deter&inant of the constitution of species as such.
2
In this re%ard, 6ar%ulis is not a &averic". 0he strate%y she pursues is co&&on a&on%
conte&porary iolo%ists (ho are alive to life.s decisive role in &a"in% its o(n environ&ent.
0hus, 6anfred Schido(s"i, (ritin% in the sa&e volu&e to (hich 6ar%ulis is also a contriutor,
tells us that, ,It is (ell estalished that livin% syste&s possess an intrinsic property of ein%
ale to proliferate until they encounter e'ternally i&posed li&its, strivin% to occupy all e&pty
spaces availale and therey strainin% the spatial and nutritional carryin% capacity of the
supportin% environ&ent to virtual e'haustion./
D
*s if the or%anis& could e considered apart
fro& its ecolo%ical conte't, as if its e'istence (as &onadolo%ical, as if it e'isted in a vacuu&.
In thou%ht, reflections of this sort are dee&ed speculatively astract in the &etaphysical
sense. But, then, the &odern science has created a conte't, the laoratory, in (hich that
speculative see$s to, in the sense of se&lance, lose its astractness, in (hich it appears
,concrete/< in, of course, the interests of the (ill to po(er, the nihilistic pro1ect of planetary
do&ination also called nature ,&astery./
What, pray tell, &a"es this so ,(ell "no(n/ 46ar%ulis5 and ,(ell estalished/ 4Schido(s"i52
Why is it so self9evident2 0o find out (e &ust return 4fro& Slanted Truths5 to 6ar%ulis. far less
pole&ical, &ore ,scholarly/ (or" (here our ans(er, in a thro(a(ay line, a(aits us.
In a re&ar" aout the asence of division in "inetoso&es 4intracellular or%anelles at the ase
of the undulopia5, 6ar%ulis notes, ,Even in Stentor+++ 20,000 oral "inetoso&es can e
e'peri&entally induced to for& in less than t(o hours</
#
-es, ste&&in% fro& the uni)uely
capitalist conte't in its perverse scientific practice other(ise "no(n as laoratory
1
Slanted Truths, 2G2, 77.
2
In her pole&ic (ith the neo9:ar(inists, 6ar%ulis tacitl% reco%ni=es this, i.e., the artificial and ideal assu&ptions<
assu&ptions that entail, asent constraints, lo%ical even if e'peri&entally ased, speculative constructs< (hich are
involved in positin% potentiality as deter&inate for the reproductive success of livin% or%anis&. 0here she states, ,<
natural selection 1ust refers to the fact that iotic potential is not reachedE the aility of populations of cells and
or%anis&s to &a'i&ally %ro( is al(ays li&ited y the %ro(th of different cells and or%anis&s and their associated
surroundin%s/ 4Slanted Truths, 2GD5. But, in doin% so, she invo"es precisely (hat she has re1ected else(here, if not a
co&petitive stru%%le 4,survival of the fittest/5, then environ&ental deter&inis&. In contradistinction, for&s of life not
only &aintain their inte%rity 4internal structure and or%ani=ation5 in the face of a chan%in% &ilieu 4self9&aintainin% as
6ar%ulis ar%ues5, ut are self-li$iting+ 0he ,potential for e'ponential %ro(th/ is not one of ,life.s (ell "no(n properties/
4,&id, 1#F5, thou%h self9li&itation of actual reproduction is.
D
,Suantitative Evolution of Bio&ass throu%h 0i&e+ Biolo%ical and ?eoche&ical Constraints,/ 211.
#
S%$&iosis in Cell 2volution, D00.
e'peri&entation, ,0his is,/ indeed, a de&onstration of ,the doctrine of 6althus applied (ith
&anifold force to the (hole ani&al and ve%etale "in%do&s./
1
$ere, the potential character of natural productivity is artificiall% induced< it is not a
develop&ent ased on conditions in nature, ut a la&orator% experi$ent, that is, it is a
situation (herein (holly unnatural conditions, conditions not otainin% in nature are created,
for e'a&ple, a livin% ein% is su1ect to or%an re&oval, it is dis&e&ered, dissected, stained,
leached, in1ected (ith &olecular antiodies, < e.%., anti9tuulin seru& is applied to cellular
structure &ade of tuulin proteins< its life sustainin% activities are inhiited< e.%., fluid is
introduced into a cellular or%anis& that dissolves the cytoplas&< it is thrust into a lethal
%aseous or li)uid environ&ent< e.%., an aeroic or%anis& is su1ect to lo( o'y%en
concentrations, a pela%ic or%anis& is su1ect to arupt, drastic chan%es in (ater
te&perature<
2
i.e., it, the or%anis&, is gratuitousl% $urdered. In a purel% a&stract (ay 4a%ain,
in a (ay in (hich it does not occur in nature5, (e are dealin% (ith a condition<"illin%, as in
predation< that has the sa&e outco&e ut is alto%ether asent the shapes of those that
e'ist in nature ut one (hich is explicitl% precluded, set aside, in Darinian evolutionar%
theori/ations. E'peri&ents, especially those (ith flies or u%s in 1ars, are too nu&erous to
cite.
D
7n experi$ent on the $odel of &ourgeois science is an artificial construct characteri/ed
&% conditions that o&tain nohere in nature. It is only a )uestion of its purpose.
#
$ere, the purpose of the e)uation of natural selection (ith the failure to achieve potential
productivity is ovious+ It is a )uestion of retainin% the lin"a%e (ith :ar(in, (hich, in so&e
circles at least, is &andatory if one (ishes to e read, understood and applauded as an
evolutionary iolo%ist. In an overlappin%, aleit different conte't 4one that is &ore than &erely
relevant to 6ar%ulis, (ith her co&&it&ents to ,?aia/ that date ac" to the early seventies and
a nu&er of articles co9authored (ith @oveloc"5, ?.R. Willia&s (rites, ,0he ?aia hypothesis,
y su%%estin% that the hi%h level of >2 in the environ&ent is set y the re)uire&ents of a
iosphere do&inated y aeroes as (ell as ein% a cause of that do&inance, ris"s turnin%
:ar(inian evolution into a HdialecticallyJ circular ar%u&ent. 0he only ovious escape fro& such
circularity is to define opti$ali/ation in such a a% that it i$plies $axi$al exploitation of
2arth.s surface &% living organis$s/<
C
43ote the aritrary, fiat construction... an ,escape/ that
,defineHsJ opti&ali=ation in such a (ay/... (hich is put forth to salva%e (hat is patently
untenale.5 I.e., this escape saves the population la(, and theoretically is the only defense
that capital.s science can present. But if all or%anis&s, not as individuals ut as %roups, as
co$$unities of organis$s, &a"e or produce, alter or &odify and thus transfor& their
surroundin% ,environ&ents,/ there is no sense is spea"in% aout natural selection precisely
ecause it, as a concept, &oves (ithin the theoretical hori=on of a passive or%anis&
necessarily and unilaterally deter&ined y its &ilieu.
1
The 1rigin of Species, O2, and also :ar(in.s Introduction 4,&id, 1#5 (here he says the sa&e in al&ost identical
(ords.
2
S%$&iosis in Cell 2volution, 27F, 277, D00, D2C.
D
$i%hpoints in a reconstruction of the history of these e'peri&ents, thou%h, are &entioned in Schido(s"i, ,Iid,/ 2119
212.
#
Su&&arily, the purpose is e'hiited &ost forcily y the e'peri&ent, itself the core of a our%eois and instru&entalist
theory of nature. *i&in% at its, nature.s, do&ination, as capital has under%one autono&i=ation and the our%eoisie
has lost its role in history 4has itself eco&e a functionary of capital, a personification of econo&ic cate%ories5, this
do&ination ta"es the for& of reduction of nature to a ra( &aterial asin for capitalist production, a reduction (hose
theoretical for& and pro1ection is the &odern science of nature...
C
?.R. Willia&s, ,?aian and 3on%aian E'planations for the Conte&porary @evel of *t&ospheric >'y%en,/ 1OG.
E&phasis added.
4artisan of the Monera
:istin%uished y autotrophic nutrition, y haitat that is often ano'ic, and in particular y
&orpholo%y and structure that are essentially deter&ined y freely situated cytoplas&ic :3*
4non9nucleation5, acteria for& a "in%do&, the hi%hest or &ost e&racin% ta'on in &ost
co&&on classificatory sche&es of life. 0he traditional na&e %iven this distinctive for& of life is
$onera.
*s 6ar%ulis 4in all her pulications (hether populari=ed or technical and theoretically
elaorate5 and others indicate, the &onera is for the lar%est part responsile for the ceaseless
creation and recreation of Earth as a haitale planet, one suitale not 1ust to hu&an life, ut
to all for&s of life itself included. It is the continual and constant che&ical e'chan%es of %ases
and li)uids that acteria &etaolically en%a%e in that have produced an o'y%en at&osphere,
suitale surface te&perature and the sli%htly al"aline hydrosphere, all of (hich are the
essential preconditions of earthly life in aeroic for&. It is, ho(ever, &ista"en to su%%est the
dense de&o%raphy of hu&an populations on a (orld(ide scale< the 6althusian prole& of
population rearin% its head< for& an ade)uate %round for an enco&passin% theori=ation of
the fate of the Earth. ;irst, if 6althus had een correct, the resource ase of hu&anity (ould
have lon% a%o disappearedE second, (hile the qualit% of hu$an, ani$al and plant life &ay all
(ell e %rounds for restrictin% population %ro(th, the ecolo%ical carna%e visited on the Earth,
and the ostensile ,anthropo%enically/ %enerated cli&ate chan%e (ar&in%, are not
conse)uently upon the &asses of hu&an ein%s at any level of develop&ent. 3ote that today
4circa 20075, for e'a&ple, an Indian child 4the Indian sucontinent ein% one of the &ost
densely populated re%ions on Earth, India havin% the second lar%ely population in the (orld5
consu&es 1a70
th
of the annual ener%y that her *&erican counterpart does. 0he prole& is
&anifestly for&s of consu&ption and production, ener%y inefficient consu&ption not to
&ention rec"lessly e'trava%ant consu&ption, and the type of develop&ent that underpins that
consu&ption, i.e., it is capitalist develop&ent. *s today the prospects of a cli&ate chan%e
cataclys&< in (hich an arupt shift fro& a cold &ode 4an inter%lacial (ithin a %lacial5 to a hot
one in (hich the face of the land&asses and ocean che&istry (ill e radically transfor&ed,
&ost %eolo%ically conte&porary species life and the lar%est portion of hu&anity (ill si&ply
disappear< eco&e increasin%ly irreversile, the affir&ation of life in the 4acterial5 for& that
has he%e&oni=ed the Earth since its ori%ins, in opposition to that for& 4hu&anity5 that see$s
to e the a%ent provo"in% cli&ate chan%e, is understandale even if conceptually it si%nifies a
far fro& ade)uate %rasp of the prole&. ;or that prole& is the lo%ic of the develop&ent of a
syste& of social relations+ 0he prole& is not $an ut the estran%ed, unreco%ni=ed and
o1ectified product of our o(n social and collective activity that has ta"en on a lo%ic of its o(n
(hich, in turn, has co&e to syste&atically do&inate us and our activity. 0he prole& is
capital+
:oes 6ar%ulis understand this2 Patently she understands the transcendent value of &icroial
life (ithin the conte't of a dyna&ically stale, yet evolvin%, self9differentiatin% and internally
or%ani=ed totality that is earthly nature. It is fro& (ithin this fra&e of reference that, as a
hu&an ein% she articulates her position. But does the &onera spea! for itselfK $as it not
ta"en the entirely of the evolution of earthly nature to %enerate a ein% that can conde&n itself
as a ,po'/2 We should e fair here, 6ar%ulis position is not so &uch &isanthropic< althou%h
the title of the essay that occasion this re&ar" &ay su%%est other(ise
1
< as one that
reco%ni=es that dan%ers of a culture (hose funda&ental operative and practical assu&ptions
are e%re%iously anthropocentric, that is, ,a culture that puts hu&ans at the center of all thin%s
and only values the conversion of the iosphere into hu&an haitat./
2
With this
1
,* Po' Called 6an/ 4177C5 reprinted in Slanted Truths+
2
,&id, 2O0. E&phasis added.
characteri=ation in &ind (e can situation her (ithin certain &iddlin% %roups of conte&porary
societies of capital, those (ho are tied at the hip to capitalist fir&s, to their research and
develop&ent centers funded y the state 4understood as the institutional arena in (hich
other(ise anta%onist capitalist for%e a partial, hierarchically or%ani=ed unity5< lar%ely
acade&ic institutions< (ho, %raspin% the dan%ers of this ,culture,/ are nonetheless
e'istentially and personally (ithout option, and (ho can, accordin%ly, only e'press
disenchant&ent.
While (e thin" her assess&ent is essentially ,correct,/ it is alto%ether asent specification.
What is actually at issue is the %loal ,culture/ of capital+ Its very &ove&ent produces %loal
social and planetary natural transfor&ations. 0his &ove&ent is %overned y a lo%ic<
production for productionIs sa"e, the self9valori=ation of value... the o1ective necessary result
of (hich is the utter (rec" of earthy nature. 0his destruction, aleit %eolo%ically te&porary,
ai&s at its self9re%ulatory, cohesive character (hich, controlled y life in its iospheric aspect,
has &ade that life %enerally and hu&anity specifically possile. It is in and throu%h the
&ove&ent of capital that ho&o%eni=ation of the Earth and its (rec"a%e occurs, as it tends
to(ard the creation of nature e'istin% at t(o poles, u%lified ra( &aterial asins 4denuded
forests, open &ines, desertified %rasslands, etc.5 at the start of a cycle of co&&odity
production and to'ic (astelands 4(etlands turned into landfills, decayin% uran centers, etc.5
at the end of that cycle, i.e., (ith co&&odity consu&ption. @ac"in% a historical alternative to
the order of capital, it is (ithin this overall conte't that (e can characteri=e @ynn 6ar%ulis as a
partisan of the &onera.
Part !
:ecisive, non96althusian, non9:ar(inian and non96endelian :eter&inants of @ife
1
*%ainst neo9:ar(inian 4and, (hether consciously or not, :ar(in.s o(n5 reductionis&,
6ar%ulis affir&s the specificity and uni)ueness of acteria (ithin life, (hile, y force of si&ilar
pre1udice, en%a%in% in &aterially the sa&e reductionis& (ith a vie( to eu"aryotic life 4(hich,
for her, is undifferentiated5+ She is unale or (illin% to see the specificity of hu&anity (ithin
earthly nature and, &ore seriously, fails to %rasp the novelty of e&er%ent ein%s (ithin the
structure of inte%rated levels that characteri=es that nature. 0his reco%nition per&its us to
for&ulate five &a1or li&itations to efforts to understand life in its various for&s in ter&s of
6althusian, :ar(inian and 6endelian deter&ination.
By a considerale &ar%in the &ost i&portant in the fullest and )ualitative sense is dialectical
causality.
Dialectical Causalit% in the Deter$ination of 3ife
*s (e have noted, neo9:ar(inists propound for&al e'planations of the evolution of
or%anis&s. 0hat is, chan%es that arise y &utations are che&ical chan%es, chan%e in the
:3* se)uence of or%anis& e%innin% fro& the cellular level as an instance of a population
%roupin% or species. 4;urther, these chan%es are e'pressed &athe&atically, if not al(ays
statistically.5 In this (ay, neo9:ar(inis& chance &utations as physical deter&inations of life
%overnin% the or%anis&.s e'istence are asserted as the ori%in of all evolutionary chan%e.
*ccordin%ly, this theori=ation (ill center all e'planation in the funda$ental sense as an
outco&e of or%anis&ic or%ani=ation reduced to, as 6ar%ulis correctly notes, survival
re)uire&ents in its essential and unilinear deter&ination y the ,environ&ent,/ understood as
,adaptation./
2
Even at its &ost asic level as cellular level, life is self9or%ani=in%, self9sustainin% and self9
reproducin% and self9deter&inin% 4autono&ous5 s%nthesis, (hat 6ar%ulis calls autopoietic,
and is ale to &aintain itself, its structure and or%ani=ation in the face of dra&atic chan%es in
its &ilieu. In contrast, neo9:ar(inis&, (ith its physicalistic, non9autopoietic understandin% of
life, holds tenaciously to a linear concept of evolution and, of course, its (holly uncritical and
uns(ervin% co&&it&ent to 4in her succinct for&ulation5 a ,&es&eri=in% concept/ of
adaptation.
0he concept of adaptation is not &erely prole&aticE it is a (indo( on a syste&ic incoherency
pla%uin% neo9:ar(inian theory+ @ife does not, co&&unities of livin% or%anis&s do not, as
6ar%ulis reco%ni=es and as the neo9:ar(inians are lind to, in any sense ,adapt to/ a passive
physio9che&ical environ&ent, one that is preconstituted, si&ply %iven. Rather, life activel%
$a!es and $odifies the surroundings that shape it. :ialectical circularity in life.s ,causation/ is
the first non96althusian, non9:ar(inian and non96endelian deter&ination of life.
7ll life, not 1ust hu&anity in for&in% socio9historical (orlds, is ceaseless activity en%a%ed in
synthesis that &a"es and re&a"es surroundin% nature of (hich it itself is part and in (hich it
is for&ed. >nce life appears, it en%a%es in re&a"in% its o(n inor%anic conditions, (hich as
such disappear. @ife incessantly re&a"es those conditions that are the&selves the product<
over thousands of &illennia< of the interaction of or%anic (ith inor%anic earthly nature. ;ro&
it very ori%ins, life is autopoietic, &eanin% life literally &a"es itself and, derivatively, that life is
independent, ut an independence that is only for&ed on the asis of prior dependency. 0he
very nature that is perceptually %iven in hu&an e'perience is the outco&e of thousands of
&illennia of the non9:ar(inian co9evolution, of &utually penetration, shapin% and
1
3on9:ar(inian, non96endelian refers to %enetic processes in (hich neither selection nor the neo9:ar(inian
elaorated &athe&atical for&alis& is operative.
2
Slanted Truths, 2G0, 2G2.
transfor&ation, of life in its &ultifarious for&s and (hat is astractly characteri=ed as
%eolo%ical nature+ 0he %eolo%ical and tectonic processes 4uplift, suduction and plate
spreadin%, volcanis&5 that for& &ountains, oceans and at&osphere are all &ediated<
controllin% the pace of occurrence, transfor&ed or literally created y life< throu%h plant
accelerated (eatherin% of roc", the deposition of sedi&ents, y acteriolo%ical &etaolic
production of %ases and &aintenance of te&perature and oceanic al"alinity. 0here are no
purely %eolo%ical processes.
1
0(o instances, the first (hich 6ar%ulis herself offers, (ill
suffice.
6ost of the (orld.s iron ore is %eolo%ically situated in anded iron for&ations 4BI;s,
alternatin% o'idi=ed and reduced iron rich and iron poor layers of &a%netite, and he&atite or
si&ilar, associated &inerals set in a silica &ediu&5, and can e found in less than ten locales.
0he richest deposits a&on% the& are found in the @a"e Superior re%ion of 3orth *&erica, the
Lrivoy9Ro% re%ion of Russia, (estern *ustralia and southern *frica. The inorganic structure
0Nph%sical> properties5 of these B,)s as produced through the $eta&olic activit% of non-
ox%gen respiring 0anaero&ic5 &acteria fro& rou%hly 2.C illion to 700 &illion years a%o. 0hese
include various acteria (hich are respirin% iron reducers that ,reath/ 4i.e., derive essential
nutrients fro&5 iron o'ides. 0hey include those (hich reduce iron o'ide and iron hydro'ide to
ferrous iron co&pounds, those that precipitate iron o'ides, and &icroial co&&unities
4cyanoacteria5 that produce %aseous >2, the o'idi=in% a%ent.
2
0he second e'a&ple is si&ply funda&ental+ 0he very at&osphere that &a"es aeroic life, for
e'a&ple, &a&&alian and specifically hu&an life, possile is the outco&e of the
transfor&ation of a &ethane9nitro%en at&osphere into an o'y%en9nitro%en one+ It is the
product of the %aseous (astes of acterial life over the past 2.C illion years 4only in the last
O00 &illion years have plants eco&e si%nificant in this re%ard5, and is actively &aintained at
a concentration that is, in ter&s of e)uiliriu& che&istry, ano&alous 4not to &ention at a
concentration aove (hich spontaneous (ildfires (ould rea" out across the Earth5. *s
6ar%ulis relates+ ,0he o'y%en (e reathe, the hu&id at&osphere inside of (hich (e live, and
the &ildly al"aline ocean (aters/ in (hich the asic or%anis&s in the trophic sense find
suitale surroundin%s< none of these partial &o&ents of earthly nature as a %eophysiolo%ical
totality 4as ,coupled syste&s/ in the &ystified cyernetic lan%ua%e of our%eois science5< are
,deter&ined y a physical universe run y &echanical la(s./ ;or in ,star" contrast (ith a
&echanical, physics9centered (orld, the &etaoli=in% iosphere is physiolo%ically self9
controlled/
D
and evolutionarily for&ed in, dialectically, an incessant process of reciprocal
deter&ination.
#
,ndeter$inac% in 8enetic Deter$ination
Suspendin% any 1ud%&ent on the si%nificance of %enetic deter&ination of ehavior in or%anic
populations,
C
several non9:ar(inian, non96endelian processes in and throu%h (hich %enes
are spread throu%hout a population %roup have een identified y the hi%hly respected
1
;or elaoration of this position, see ,0he ?eophysiolo%y of Earthly 3ature, , 0and ,,5/ in the Postscript, elo(.
2
S%$&iosis in Cell 2volution, G#9GC, 110.
D
Slanted Truths, 2F092F1.
#
*t the cellular level, it is che&ical e'chan%es that involve the productive character of life itself, synthesis throu%h
&etaolis&, that involve %as and li)uid e'chan%e, i.e., reathin%, eatin%, and e'cretin%, that are detectale
&anifestations of autopoiesis, are &aterial e'chan%es that ,are the sine quo non of the autopoietic syste&, (hatever
its identity,/ and are not rationally e'plicale in cate%ories that do not start fro& this livin% autono&y and
independence.
C
>ur position in this re%ard is su&&arily set out in our "h% the Stud% of Hu$an 1rigins is Necessar% to a
Revolutionar% and 2$ancipator% 4ro9ect, Part III, ,?enetic 0rans&ission and Species Constitution in 3on9:ar(inian
Evolution/ appearin% in 1rigins and 2ndings. HEditorIs note.J
%eneticist and &olecular iolo%ist ?ariel :over.
1
$ere (e shall very riefly recount the &ost
i&portant.
0he first is %ene conversion. It occurs, in the narro( sense, as a s&all, &oile piece of :3*
&ade of &any nucleotide ases 4often in the thousands5< assisted y an en=y&e called a
transposase< detaches itself fro&, ,1u&pin% out of,/ the chro&oso&e of (hich it is part. 0he
%ap left in the chro&oso&e is filled, not y closin% up ut, as the sa&e s&all piece of the
opposite alternate parental chro&oso&e 4re&e&er this structure is that of a doule heli'5
un(inds and copies itself< also assisted y an array of host en=y&es< as a te&plate. 0he
copy inserts itself into the %ap. 0his :3* (ith the re9inserted se%&ent is reproduced y
&itosis, as each of t(o &e&ers of a pair of chro&oso&es are separated in se'ual division
and enter into t(o ne( individual pro%eny. 0he process of detach&ent can e repeated (ith
each ne( %eneration, occurrin% indefinitely, and in this &anner spread throu%h the population.
But if the detached se%&ent and its replace&ent (ere parts of the ancestral :3* (hat
difference (ould it &a"e2 3one. $o(ever, if the detached, &oile se%&ent itself ori%inated
else(here, say (ith a different species, then the conse)uence over %enerations &i%ht e
si%nificant. 0his did in fact happen (ith t(o species of :rosophila 4illistoni and
$elanogaster5 in the early decades of the last century. 0he se%&ent in this case (as "no(n
as a &oile P ele&ent and, transposed fro& illistoni, it had deadly conse)uences for
:rosophila $elanogaster+ While the se'ual division is ovious 6endelian, the ori%ins of the
&oile se%&ent, the precise analo% of a &utation, (as 1ust as patently not.
We can identify t(o &ore %enetic processes. >ne is called crossin%9over. It occurs as, and
(hen, t(o chro&oso&es lyin% side y side under%o a rea". 0his per&its one end of one
chro&oso&e to connect up (ith the other end of the opposite chro&oso&e for&in% t(o
chro&oso&es, and involves the t(o strands of a doule heli' in each chro&oso&e. 0he
technical ter& for descriin% the t(o ne(ly 1oined chro&oso&es is ,&osaic./ If the rea" does
not ta"e place in e'actly the sa&e places in each of the t(o chro&oso&es, it need not, then
there is an une)ual e'chan%e of %enetic &aterial, a crossin%9over, fro& one chro&oso&e to
the other. *%ain, this has the effect of &utation (ithout such havin% ta"en place, and, a%ain,
the %enetic chan%e can e spread throu%hout a population over ti&e, over nu&erous
%enerations, y &itosis.
0he other, final %enetic process is "no(n as slippa%e. 0his involves the internal chro&oso&al
structure, the doule heli', specifically the t(o strands of nucleotides that in part constitute it.
4Recall that on the &odel of a t(isted ladder, the spirally represented strands are su%ar9
phosphate co&inations, the hori=on run%s are ases. >ne ase co&ined (ith a su%ar9
phosphate section of a side to (hich it is ,attached/ is called a nucleotide.5 In a short repetitive
se)uence (here each repetition is li"ely less than ten ases, a ,slip/ can occur in each of the
t(o strands, so that there are only, say, nine of ten ases in the repetition &atched to the each
other (ith one repetition of each un&atched. What follo(s is either en=y&e eli&ination of the
un&atched repetition or, as in %ene conversion, utili=ation of the un&atched repetition as a
&odel or te&plate to produce a co&ple&entary repetition on the opposin% strand. Slippa%e is
this occurrence as an on%oin% process of the loss and %ain of repetitions.
*&on% for&s of :3* turnover, slippa%e is &ost co&&on and &ost fre)uent. :over points out
that a %ene can %enerate repeats that are different as to "ind and are interspersed (ith one
another. $e also indicates that all three for&s of :3* turnover can result in the replace&ent of
a ,fa&ily/ of %enetic units y a variant for&, leadin% to %enerali=ation of the variant. 3o( in
each and all cases, these non96endelian for&s of :3* turnover effect parts of %enes, (hole
1
,6olecular :rive+ * Cohesive 6ode of Species Evolution,/ Nature, 277E ,6olecular :rive in 6ulti%ene ;a&ilies+ $o(
Biolo%ical 3ovelties *rise, Spread and are *ssi&ilated,/ Trends in 8enetics, 2E Dear Mr+ Darin: 3etters on the
2volution of 3ife and Hu$an Nature.
%enes, or the re%ulatory re%ion of :3* in a %ene (hich contains several short stretches of
ases ound to proteins 4the re%ulatory ,a%ent/5 that deter&ine %ene transcription. *nd as
su%%ested aove, each of these for&s of turnover, (hen lin"ed to se'ual reproduction, can
spread novel %enetic variations< non9&utant, non96endelian %enetic structures< throu%h a
population %roupin% over evolutionary ti&e, ithout regard to natural selection, i.e., in a non9
:ar(inian &anner. 4>viously, none of this is 6althusian.5 :over calls that spreadin% on the
asis descried here 4sin%ularly as instances and collectively5 a process of $olecular drive.
1
S%$&iogenesis
@ife on Earth reaches ac" so&e # illion years a%o, and it does so in unro"en continuity
lar%ely due to the role of acteria in the production of a reathale at&osphere 4suitale to
aeroic life for&s5, the &aintenance of a sli%htly al"aline hydrosphere 4especially the oceans5,
and a &ean surface te&perature that creates the conditions of haitaility for plant and ani&al
for&s. 3ote the last re&ar"+ 0oday, the sun.s lu&inosity is rou%hly DCZ %reater than it (as at
the %eolo%ical &o&ent that Earth for&ed and cooled. Without )ualitative develop&ent of the
iosphere N especially acterial and ut also plant life, its increasin% co&ple'ity and %ro(in%
inte%ration (ith the che&ical processes of the at&osphere and oceans throu%h respiration
and transpiration 9 this vastly increased solar radiation (ould have lon% a%o rendered the
Earth unearaly hot, a &etaolically intolerale settin% for any o'y%en respirin% ein%s,
hu&an ein%s in particular, rendered it a dead planet &uch li"e !enus+
0hus, the often &ali%ned acteria lie at the very foundations of life on earthly nature. Recall
that there are no acterial ,individuals/ that are identical as to type, in other (ords, they do not
speciateE and that the various strains of acteria (ith their replicons for& acterial
co&&unities (hich to%ether (ith their %enes constitute a %loal %ene pool, or glo&al geno$e,
that any strain can dra( on at any %iven ti&e. *s 6athieu and Sonea ar%ue in opposition to
6ar%ulis. transposition of a 6althusian9:ar(inian vicious ,stru%%le for e'istence/ ac" into the
evolutionary process of eu"aryosis, this is a decidedly, and essentially cooperative co&&unity,
not in the su1ective sense 4as in hu&an ehavior5 ut in the functional sense that includes a
de facto division of laor in (hich various acterial appenda%es and for&s plays
supple&entary roles that sustain any %iven co&&unity of acterial or%anis&s.
2
If (e %o ac" to the ,ori%inal/ eu"aryosis 4involvin% cyanoacteria, that is, non9oli%ate
aeroic &icroor%anis&s5, (e sur&ise o'y%en (as present< not at&ospherically ut in la"es
or shallo( surface oceans< at rou%hly 2.G illion years a%o. -et co&ple' &ulticellular
eu"aryotes do not appear in the fossil record until aout CO0 &illion years a%o, lar%ely
coincidin% (ith the e%innin%s of the ,Ca&rian e'plosion./ 0his &eans that acteria for&s of
life do&inated the evolutionary history of the Earth< startin% fro& D.F N #.0 illion years
a%o< for as lon% as FCZ of the ti&e of life on Earth or lon%er.
3o( acteria are not only the oldest and lon%est livin% in %eolo%ical ti&e ut also far and
a(ay the lar%est, )ualitatively and )uantitatively, co&&unities of livin% or%anis&s on Earth.
-et the reconstructed fact of sy&io%enesis undercuts the universality of the principle of
:ar(inian96endelian heredity prior to oth the for&ation of pri&itive or%anis&s at their ori%ins
and in constitution of their internal or%anic structures 4or%anelles5. Bacterial trans&ission of
%enetic &aterial is non96endelian, ased on a functionally cooperative &ode of interaction<
1
>ther non96endelian, non9:ar(inian for&s of transfor&ations of the %enetic structure of populations are also
reco%ni=ed, so&e %oin% ac" to the ori%ins of the &odern synthesis in the nineteen thirties such as neutral %enetic
drift 4i.e., rando& fluctuations in %ene fre)uencies in s&all populations that control diversification in these populations.
$ere see :o=hans"y, ,&id 417C15, 1CO.5. With re%ard to population %roupin%s 4species5 %enerally, further %enetically
operative characteristics of evolutionary develop&ent such as e'aptation and punctuated e)uiliriu& have also een
reco%ni=ed. ;or this, see Steven 8ay ?ould, The Structure of 2volutionar% Behavior+
2
6athieu and Sonea, 4ro!ar%otolog%, 779100.
0his is a si&ply hu%e, third assertion of non96althusian, non9:ar(inian and non96endelian
deter&ination of life.
4rogen%, 4roductivit% and Resources
By and lar%e, :ar(in is (ron%, evidentially 4,e&pirically/ as his acolytes &i%ht li"e to say5 and
theoretically 4i.e., inductively %enerali=in%5, and he is (ron% on oth of the t(o sides of his
proposition, that is, (ith re%ard to production of pro%eny to that point at (hich resources are
inade)uate to ani&al need and (ith re%ard to (hatever inherent or innate tendency there is
alle%edly to prodi%ious productivity 4i.e., his is a conceptual product &as)ueradin% as real,
pro1ectin% itself as a deter&inant that actually inheres in natural relations5.
;irst, ani&al species not onl% do not al(ays consu&e availale resources< rarely do they
and then only under a narro( ran%e of conditions... ut are also capale of findin% and shiftin%
to entirely, never efore utili=ed resources in situations (here a %eolo%ical or hu&an event
destroys ori%inal resources, therey &a"in% further nonsense of a pro1ection into nature of a
unilinear relation and its devolution on to the inevitaility of species superfluity 4necessary
overpopulation5. 0hree e'a&ples can e offered instantiatin% this situation. In 6ada%ascar,
the le&ur population fails to consu&e all the food availale to itE and, on Eni(eto" atoll, the
cra population, nearly oliterated y ato&ic (eapons testin%, rered and achieved its for&er
population levels y eatin% the outer fiers of plants to offset the poor supply of al%ae 4also
devastated y the lasts5.
1
Rnder conditions of an incipit cli&ate chan%e (ar&in%, roins are
(interin% in the Rnited States 3orth (ithout access to traditional food sources, (or&s, fresh
fruit, and flyin% insects, eatin% lar%ely seeds, u%s under ar" (here they can e found
4rarely5 and fro=en fruit (here it is still han%in% 4e.%., cra apples5. 0hus, ani&al populations
tend to achieve and &aintain a viale de&o%raphic density despite loss of pri&ary food
resources and the variaility of those resources.
Second, there is no tendency, innate, inherent, %enetic or other(ise, to produce offsprin% in
e'cess of reifyin%ly pro1ected, alle%edly fi'ed and availale resources. Instead, it is ani&al
sociality itself that li&its pro%eny reproduction and li$its it ithout regard to availa&le
resources, y (ay of self9re%ulatory social &ehaviors, i.e., ehaviors that e'press a ne,
sociall% for$ed order of or%anis&ic self9preservation, self9&aintenance and self9
enhance&ent. 0his can e de&onstrated ,e&pirically/ fro& research ai&ed precisely at
decidin% this )uestion.
In an article repulished in 17O7 4ori%inally pulished in 17O25, :.$. Stott revie(ed the findin%
of several studies e%innin% in the 17D0s throu%h the 17C0s that oth in situ and in laoratory
constructed conditions e'a&ined the relations et(een population %roups of species and their
&ilieus. >ne of his conclusions (as that, ,0he popular 6althusian notion that the nu&er
H(ithin an ani&al or hu&an populationJ survivin% fro& year to year is deter&ined y the
current supply of food, (ith the e'cess dyin% fro& starvation, is no lon%er supported y any
student of natural populations./
2
*rticulated in a troulin%ly contradictory conceptual fra&e(or", one that is alto%ether
e'ploded y the evidence presented, this revie( 4thou%h not its theori=ation5 de&onstrates
that any nu&er of &a&&alian species 4sno(shoe hares, ruffed %rouse, le&&in%s, &us"rats,
(ild rats, &ice, and hu&ans5, several species of irds 4ha("s, o(ls, stor"s, cro(s, ea%les,
%uille&ots, herons5, and insects 4specifically locusts5 e'hiit self9re%ulatory ehaviors that li&it
reproduction under conditions 4such as overcro(din%5 that (ould other(ise stretch
1
See Ser%e 6oscovici, 3a sociItI contre nature, 1G291GD for these t(o e'a&ples.
2
:.$. Stott, ,Cultural and 3atural Chec"s on Population ?ro(th,/ in *ndre( P. !ayda 4ed.5, 2nviron$ent and Cultural
Behavior: 2cological Studies in Cultural 7nthropolog%.
i&&ediately accessile food supplies.
1
0he ac)uired adaptive ehavior is understood &ore or
less teleolo%ically 4in ter&s of an ,ulti&ate value/ %overnin% ehavior5, as is typical in
other(ise )uite dissi&ilar neo9:ar(inian adaptive e'planations. In one cate%ory of cases
4incuatory ehaviors of irds such as ha("s, o(ls, stor"s, cro(s, and others5, the ehavior
%uarantees ,that the nu&er of youn% raised should not produce a %eneral HoverJpopulation in
the re%ion,/ ut it is not adaptive, it does ,not< ensure< that such of the particular rood
survive as their i&&ediate food supply per&its./ In %eneral 4a %enerali=ation dra(n fro& the
instance of the reedin% ehavior of ea%les in Lenya resultin% in periodic infertility5, the
e'planation offered is ,not Hin ter&s ofJ< an adaption to conte&porary food9supply, ut< a
&eans of chec"in% population nu&ers efore the dan%er9point is reached./
2
Stott notes ,harass&ent and strife attendant upon overcro(din% &ay produce psychoso&atic
illness in ani&als./ *nother researcher, Chitty, ,arrived at his theory of prenatal da&a%e only
after revie(in% and dis&issin% all other feasile causes, such as disease, food shorta%e,
predation and &i%ration./
D
>f particular interest here is the study of (ild rats, a study the su&&ary of (hich (e shall
)uote at len%th+
HCalhoun
#
J red a colony Hof (ild ratsJ fro& a fe( individuals in a pen of 10,000 s)uare feet,
allo(in% the& an aundance of food at all ti&es. If over the 2F &onths of the e'peri&ent that
had reali=ed their reedin% potential they (ould have nu&ered C0,000. If they had een
content (ith the t(o s)uare feet per rat allo(ed for ca%ed rats in laoratories there could have
een C,000. In fact the population staili=ed itself at less than 200.
$ere (e (ould note that ,society/ in the sense of individual ehavior shaped and for&ed in
and throu%h interaction a&on% 4species5 individuals is not so an e'clusively hu&an feature.
C
So that of para&ount i&portance, the social &ehavior of the rat colony ,li$ited population
groth in three (ays. ;irst, the rats split the&selves up into local su9colonies, et(een (hich
(ere &aintained uffer =ones (ithout urro(s. Second, (ith cro(din% the nor&al do&inance
hierarchy ro"e do(n, leadin% to unstale %roups. 0he effect of this (as reduced fre)uency of
conception and poor viaility of the suc"lin% youn%./ *&on% these youn% in turn, those ,fe(/
that lived eyond the period of (eanin%, ,very fe( in turn had pro%eny of their o(n./ 0hird,
,cro(din% caused increased attac" upon the youn%, and those (ho received severe
punish&ent (ere li"ely to succu&./
O
0hus, an innate 4iolo%ical5 drive the result of (hich is potential, prodi%ious or ,infinite/ species
productivity, de&ystified and de9ideolo%i=ed, is in fact and really so&ethin% )uite different 4its
opposite5E and it is a product of the interaction a&on% species individuals+ * social %eo%raphy,
%roup instaility 4itself derivin% fro& an increasin% population density5 producin% physiolo%ical
restrictions on the occurrences of conception as (ell as on the very viaility of pro%eny, and
1
0he conceptual fault lies in a @a&arc"ian effort to interpret ehaviors in adult species &e&ers and their
reappearance in their youn% as culturally ac)uired characteristics that are %enetically trans&itted< a product of an
,adaptation/ in the :ar(inian sense< fro& one %eneration to the ne't 4e.%., ,Iid,/ 1025, instead of %raspin% the
ehavior an internally %enerated social response to a &ilieu, to ,conditions/ as is said, in the adult %eneration that is
either learned y the offsprin% or is reproduced y the youn% %eneration in confrontin% the sa&e ,conditions./ 0he
e'a&ple discussed of (ild rats in this te't is a case in point.
2
,Iid,/ 7O.
D
,Iid,/ 7G.
#
8.B. Calhoun, ,0he Social *spects of Population :yna&ics,/ Gournal of Ma$$alog%, DD 417C25+ 1D791C7, cited in
,Iid./
C
6oscovici, 3a sociItI contre nature, 1F92#, OG9F#. HIn particular, consult "h% the Stud% of Hu$an 1rigins is
Necessar% to a Revolutionar% and 2$ancipator% 4ro9ect, Part I, ,6eanin% of ,Society/ and E'tent of Presence in
3ature,/ appearin% in 1rigins and 2ndings+ EditorIs note.J
O
Stott, ,Iid,/ 7G97F.
a%%ressivity ai&ed at the sa&e are social in essence, in the stron%est &anner li$it population
%ro(th so that the )uestion of availale resources is never posed, and is forcefully decided+
0his )uestion can and &ust e understood (ithout reference to a &etaphysically i&puted
inherent characteristic of life. But the issue %oes far eyond this+
,0he ehavioral rea"do(n of the rats livin% under conditions of social stress see&s to have
een &any9sided/+ 0hose ani&als that ,had suffered e'cessive punish&ent/ (ere no lon%er
Hale toJ &ade favorale use of their environ&ent, that is, HtheyJ eca&e T&alad1usted,. notaly
y losin% their food9stora%e haits./ ;urther&ore, the ,collapse of the social pattern also had a
detri&ental effect on fertility,/ eyond that of the youn%. ,Rnder conditions of cro(din% the
do&inant rats could no lon%er %uard their o(n fe&ales fro& intrudin% &ales, for the latter
pursued the& and copulated fre)uently. Why the outco&e (as infertility &ay e %athered fro&
the analo%y of Bruce.sH
1
J< e'peri&ents (ith &ice./ In her research, ,a chance oservation,/
na&ely, ,pre%nancy H(hichJ so&eti&es unaccountaly failed in the laoratory,/ ,she (as ale
to estalish the cause as contact (ith a stran%e &ale. *fter &atin% (ith their fa&iliar sire the
fe&ales suffered a Tloc"in%. of the pre%nancy even if they only detected the odor of the
intruder on nestin% &aterial. *fter so&e five days they ca&e on heat a%ain and could
conceive, ut a rea"do(n of social do&inance and e'posure of a succession of stran%e
&ales (ould presu&aly inhiit pre%nancy indefinitely./
2
$ere, (e see cro(din%, ,&alad1ust&ent/ and rat ano&ie if you (ill, essentially social ehavior
and social relations< sociality, ,society/< reachin% ac" and shapin% conception, pre%nancy,
physiolo%y< shapin% iolo%y and nature. In li%ht of this the population la( is utter nonsense.
Still, the issue %oes even further eyond this+
Stott reports, a ,further effect of cro(din% in Calhoun.s e'peri&ental colony (as that T&ore
and &ore individuals (ere stunted despite havin% plenty of food availale. Such stunted rats
see&ed healthy< they si&ply failed to %ro( very lar%e and attained their &ature (ei%ht very
slo(ly.. 0hese stunted rats (ere also characteri=ed y ehavior9disturances. *%ain one &i%ht
infer prenatal da&a%e</ So that, not onl% is the population la a $%stification, it is orse
than useless as an explanation, for hen esta&lished for$s of socialit% decisivel% collapse,
$ore than $erel% adequate food supplies 0availa&le resources5 are si$pl% and utterl%
irrelevant to the entire situation.
Stott concludes,
,0he re%ulatory &echanis&s (hich Calhoun oserved in rats, and Bruce.s Tpre%nancy9loc".
in &ice, ori%inated in the ani&als eco&in% a(are that so&ethin% (as T(ron%. in their
environ&ent. Bruce descried this type of influence as Ie'teroceptive.I @eavin% ter&s aside, it
can e said that a situation of a certain type, na&ely a relationship (ith other ani&als of their
o(n species, (as appraised as unfavorale, and that this act of appraisal initiated
physiolo%ical processes (hich cul&inated in infertility./
D
1
$.6. Bruce, ,* Bloc" to Pre%nancy in the 6ouse Caused y Pro'i&ity to Stran%e 6ales,/ Gournal of Reproduction
and )ertilit%, I 417O05+ 7O910DE and ,;urther >servations on Pre%nancy Bloc" in 6ice Caused y the Pro'i&ity of
Stran%e 6ales,/ Gournal of Reproduction and )ertilit%, I 417O05+ D109D11. Cited in Stott, ,Iid./
2
,Iid,/ 7F.
D
/Iid./
Presu&aly a%reein% in this respect (ith $.6. Bruce, Stott adopts the ter& ,e'teroceptive/ to avoid the ,controversial
ter& Tpsycholo%ical../ But his o(n caution not(ithstandin%, he oviously does not reco%ni=e there is so&ethin%
,psycholo%ical,/ i.e., ani&al ,co%nitive,/ in referrin% to, as he does, ,ani&als eco&in% a(are/ and ,this act of
appraisal./ 0his is at the heart of troulin% conceptual contradictory fra&e(or" (e noted earlier, for here Stott invo"es
so&ethin% li"e ani&al senti&ent of self as a &ediation of ehavior, (hile e'plicitly assertin% an effort to avoid the
ter&inolo%y of a psycholo%y of ani&al consciousness is under(ay.
In referrin% to ,&ental activities/ and ,&ental haits,/ :ar(in also spea"s of ani$al senti$ent of self in discussin%
instinct 4The 1rigin of Species, 1GD, 1G7, 1F05. 0he ter& is $e%elian. 7gainst $e%el, ho(ever, our usa%e is
evolutionary, for (e e'pressly situate &ind 48eist5 and its develop&ent in nature. See our ,Wor" and Speech+ 0he
$o( far does ,society/ reach ac" into nature2 Referrin% to e'peri&ents conducted y a
researcher na&ed Barnett,
1
Stott relates that the for&er de&onstrated that ,the &ale rats in
the unfavorale situation of ein% ullied eco&e su1ect to adrenal cortical depletion, (hich
&ay e follo(ed y death, even thou%h they suffer no actual (oundin%< It (ould appear that
he induced in these ullied rats the condition of Tshoc"9disease. (hich ?reen and Evans H
2
J
descried in the sno(shoe hare durin% the phase of population decline. With @arson, ?reen
&ade a physiolo%ical study of a nu&er of afflicted ani&als,H
D
J and Christian H
#
J< reco%ni=ed
their description of the disease as si&ilar to Selye.s stress adaptation syndro&e+ the ani&als
had died of adreno9pituitary e'haustion./
,Causally,/ the situation is fro& e%innin% to end essential social in nature+ ;or it to recur, the
socially stressful conditions of cro(din% &ust e reproduced+ ,Such a psychoso&atic reaction
to a situation appraised as unfavorale or disastrous does not, in itself, Har%ueJ< for the
continuance of the shoc"9state in suse)uent %enerations, (hich did not e'perience the
overcro(din%. 0his could, ho(ever, result if the state of shoc" interferes (ith the reproductive
processes, causin% the ne't %eneration to suffer da&a%e at the foetal sta%e./
C
$o( far does sociality, ,society,/ reach ac" into nature2 * co&ple' of social relations and
conditions (ithin species individuals produces stress, e&otionally %enerates a deleterious
physiolo%ical condition. 0his co&pletes the dialectically circular relation of society to nature,
for the novel physiolo%ical condition, resultin% in death and thus ter&inatin% social ehavior,
returns us to nature, as conceived y the &odern science of nature, in its &ost asic,
inor%anic sense<
@et us step ac" and for&ulate the si%nificance of this research (ith a vie( to 6althusian9
:ar(in assu&ptions concernin% productivity, resources and population.
0here is, as (e have seen, a roadly ased tradition (ithin the study of ani&al ehavior for
(hich< once the results of this research is stripped of its &ystifyin%ly scientific trappin%s, the
lan%ua%e and concepts of physiolo%ical ani&al psycholo%y is e'orcised< nature and ,society/
are not understood in ter&s of opposition, even if the latter too" shape in an evolutionary
develop&ent that led fro& the for&er to the latter, as in the case of ,&an./
O
;ro& this
>ri%ins of 6an+ * Short Revie( of 0ron :uc 0hao.s ,nvestigations into the 1rigin of 3anguage and Consciousness>
Hand "h% the Stud% of Hu$an 1rigins is Necessar% to a Revolutionar% and 2$ancipator% 4ro9ect, Parts I, II,
appearin% in 1rigins and 2ndings. EditorIs noteJ (here ani&al senti&ent of self is specified in ter&s of asence of
e'plicit a(areness of self for (hich the o1ect is not detached fro& sensory9&otor a(areness ut instead e'ists
indistinctly, only (ithin the field of drives and affects.
1
S.*. Barnett, ,Physiolo%ical Effects of TSocial Stress. in Wild Rats. 0he *drenal Corte',/ Gournal of 4s%choso$atic
Research, D 417CF5+ 1911E and, S.*. Barnett, 8.C. Eaton and $.6. 6cCalllu&, ,Physiolo%ical Effects of TSocial Stress.
in Wild Rats, 2+ @iver ?lyco%en and Blood ?lucose,/ Gournal of 4s%choso$atic Research, # 417O05+ 2C192O0, cited in
,Iid./
2
R.?. ?reen and C.*. Evans, ,Studies on a Population Cycle of Sno(shoe $ares on @a"e *le'ander *rea,/ Gournal
of "ildlife Manage$ent, # 417#05+ 22092DF, 2OG92GF, D#G9DCF.
D
R.C. ?reen and C.@. @arson, ,* :escription of Shoc" :isease in the Sno(shoe $are,/ 7$erican Gournal of H%giene,
2F 417DF5+ 1709212, cited in Stott, ,Iid./
#
8.8. Christian, ,0he *dreno9pituitary Syste& and Population Cycles in 6a&&als,/ Gournal of Ma$$alog%, D1 417C05+
2#G92C7, cited in ,Iid./
C
Stott, ,Iid,/ 77.
O
6oscovici ,&id, li"e us, aleit on different assu&ptions, has atte&pted to elaorate such a perspective. H;or our
criti)ue of 6oscovici, (hich e'hiits has these differences play out, see "h% the Stud% of Hu$an 1rigins is
Necessar% to a Revolutionar% and 2$ancipator% 4ro9ect, Part I!, ,:o $untin% and the @aor of Production Constitute
the >nly ;or&s in Which the Paleontolo%ical Conditions for the E&er%ence of a 3ovel ein% in 3ature >ri%inally
*ppeared2I in 1rigins and 2ndings. EditorIs note.J
;or 6oscovici, ,&id, chapitre II, III, and footnotes 2 and D to these chapters listin% ilio%raphic references, #1F9#20.
In the stilted, &ystifyin% lan%ua%e of social science, Stott, &ore narro(ly, too concludes, ,*ni&al populations (ould
see& to e adapted to their food resources y a variety of uilt9in physiolo%ical and instinctive &echanis&s rather
than y starvation, and these co&e into play in response to si%nals of incipient overcro(din% in advance of serious
shorta%e of food. *&on% these si%nals are certain e'teroceptive or Tpsycholo%ical. sti&uliE that is to say, the
perspective ,society/ does not start off (here nature ends, ,society/ and in the case of ani&al
sociality as (ell as hu&an society, culture, does not develop, overlay, and even &erely enter
into, reshapin% as it (ere, iolo%y. Within this tradition analyses have een developed that,
once theoretically refor&ulated, sho(s that in conte&porary ani&al co&&unities, and (ill
sho( in evolutionary and conte&porary ter&s that a&on% pri&ate and ho&inid populations,
an estalished hierarchy and a settled distriution of functions 4division of laor5, (hich
e&ody a set of species specific s"ills developed over %enerations of en%a%e&ent in
resources e'ploitation< all of hich are decisivel% $ediated &% social &ehaviors and hich, if
disrupted, e.%., y cro(din%, ill explode and led to a disintegration of esta&lished social
relations and for$s of ani$al co$$unit%< allo(ed and allo(s different species to &aintain a
alance et(een population and environ&ent, (here narro(ly understood resources 4food5
fluctuated and fluctuate et(een and, occasionally at, the e'tre&es of scarcity and
aundance.
*&on% pri&ates and ho&inids in particular, social or%ani=ation, or structure, ta"en to%ether
(ith associated &ehavioral practices &ediate et(een population 4co&&unity5 and
environ&ent, %overn reedin%, feedin%, &i%rations and division of laor (ithin their respective
co&&unity, and effectively have a %reater earin% on %enetic develop&ent than
environ&entally &ediated differential se'ual reproduction.
In all cases, neither fi'ed resources nor potential productivity are deter&inate for the staility
and continuity over ti&e of co&&unities of ani&al 4lar%ely &a&&alian5 %roupin%s, and cannot
e said to decisive in the hereditary constitution of those traits or characteristics that &i%ht
place a role in or%anis&ic viaility.
>perative in the "in%do& of ani&alia a&on% the class of &a&&alia 4(here the etter part of
:ar(in.s e'a&ples and evidence ste& fro&5, this is a fourth assertion of an essentially non9
6althusian, non9:ar(inian and non96endelian deter&ination of life.
Hu$anit% in Nature
* set of assu&ptions concernin% life on Earth as it has for&ed in nature as a (hole underlies
the discussion in this section+ 0he pre&ises as (ell as the coherency of our position 4as does
ulti&ately any position5 rest on a deter&inate conception of reality.
1
;or e'a&ple, (e have indicated at various places in the for%oin% that :ar(in operates (ith a
conception of life in its reality that is si&ply undifferentiated. ;or :ar(in, an overall conception
of reality is never e'plicit ut nonetheless tacit, and is constituted y an untenale dualis&
et(een life and dead 4inor%anic5 &atter.
We characteri=e reality as a self9developin%, self9evolvin%, (ell9structured (hole, (hose very
structure is constituted y different orders< in the roadest &anner, y the inor%anic, vital
and hu&an (ith &anifold internal %radations and levels (ithin each order< that is internally
inte%rated fro& the ,lo(er/ to the ,hi%her,/ or, if you prefer, fro& the ,si&pler/ to the &ore
,co&ple',/ in accordin% (ith the principle of increasin%ly inte%ration and co&ple'ification and
(ithin the overall, ate&poral eco&in% of nature.
Within this self9evolvin% (hole, each ne(ly e&er%ent %radation, level and order appears and
for&s itself on the asis of the old and, (hile inte%rated (ith that fro& (hich it e&er%ed, it is
%enuinely novel, i.e., the principles of or%ani=ation and its structuri=ation, are irreducile. *t
the sa&e ti&e, it does e&er%e fro& the ,lo(er,/ ,si&pler,/ and ,older,/ and ecause its
or%ani=ation for&s on this asis, and inte%rates this ase, (hile irreducile it is dependent on
perception y the ani&al of so&e factor in its environ&ent N presu&aly unfavorale in the iolo%ical sense N tri%%ers
off a physiolo%ical or instinctive &echanis& (hich has the effect of reducin% fertility or the survival9rate of the youn%/
,Iid,/ 11D.
1
See the ;ourth Study, Part I!, ,0he 6aterialist :ialectic,/ elo(, (herein the asis of this ar%u&ent is estalished.
that fro& (hich it e&er%ed, that is, dialectically it estalishes its autono&y on the very asis of
that dependency.
In this respect, ,&an/ is a develop&ent (ithin nature+ What distin%uishes her, i.e., (hat &a"es
various %roups of hu&ans different (ithin nature 4ut not separate fro& the rest of it5 are an
inte%rated co&ple' of capacities, aptitudes and practices that not onl% transfor& various
aspects of nature, ut that re&a"e i&&ediately surroundin% nature &% constructing a
specificall% hu$an orld 4uilt environ&ent so9called, &aterial artifacts, ideational and
sy&olic constructs5 in (hich those %roups are situated.
>ur reconstructions
1
indicate that the evolutionary appearance of &an so&e #C,000 years
a%o 4not 1ust anato&ically &odern &an< Ho$o sapiens sapiens< (ho appeared rou%hly
110,000, ut &odern &an (ho over a &illion years of evolutionary self9for&ation, refined and
developed specific co%nitive functions and features on the asis of a practice (e are aout to
%enerally descrie5, introduced into nature a ein% that actively for&s itself y production of a
&ediatin% ter& situated et(een itself and that earthly nature in (hich she is situated. 0he
&ediatin% ter&< throu%h (hich &an relates herself to herself, and on this asis to nature< is
an actively, hu&anly produced socio9historical (orld of hu&an landscapes for&ed (ithin a
hu&ani=ed nature and consistin% in sensuous9&aterial structures, cultural and use o1ects
inclusive of instru&entalities 4e.%., tools5, and si%nifications and &eanin%s in (hich she is
relationally, institutionally and naturally e&edded.
0his &ediatin% ter& renders it i&possile to descrie and e'plain %reater population density
and increasin%ly co&ple' sociality in 6althusian, :ar(inian or 6endelian ter&s as an
adaptation of population to environ&ental resources that are si&ply %iven, ut &ust e
understood in ter&s of activities, and the tools and instru&ental co&ple'es deployed in those
activities, that rearran%e, re&ade and )ualitatively e'pand resources, activities that literally
create ne( resources 4e.%., %rain a%riculture, %enetically for&ed foods5 often y (ay of
rin%in% ne( for&s of ein% into e'istence (ithin nature.
>perative in the hu&an order, this is a fifth, and final assertion of non96althusian, non9
:ar(inian and non96endelian deter&ination of life.
Su$$ation
*&on%st the t(o do&inant for&s of life on Earth today, acteria and hu&anity, 6althusian,
6endelian and :ar(inian deter&inations are, as (e have sho(n, si&ply irrelevant.
Within species life, transposition, %ene conversion and crossover vastly circu&scrie the
:ar(inian and, in particular, the 6endelian deter&ination of life at precisely the level (here
the latter is solely effective. 4*t this level, 6althusian deter&ination has no &eanin%.5
6endelian deter&inations of the %enetic constitution of life are in the&selves restricted to
speciated life, and even here for the &ost part they are superficial 4e.%., eye, hair or fur
coloration in &a&&als5. ;urther&ore, in plants 4fro& the perspective of the roadest
classificatory cate%ory, the plant "in%do& as a (hole5, coloration 4(hich in plants is essential5
is not entirely su1ect to 6endelian %enetics, since the chloroplast, an inte%rated, once
acterial sy&iont, contains its o(n :3* and is only not fully under the control of the cellular
nucleusE si&ilarly (ith cellular respiration in ani&als 4a%ain, fro& the perspective of the
roadest classificatory cate%ory, the ani&al "in%do& as a (hole5, for the &itochondria, also
1
See "h% the Stud% of Hu$an 1rigins is Necessar% to a Revolutionar% and 2$ancipator% 4ro9ect, Part I!, ,$ierarchy
and Social :ivision, 3atural :eter&inis&,/ and The 7ppearance of NSpirit,> oth appearin% in 1rigins and 2ndings
(here the follo(in% position is developed and fully treated HEditorIs note.J *lso see our ,0he Cave in the 6ind+
Consciousness and the Prole& of I*ctiveI 6aterialis& in the :eter&ination of 6odern 6an and the >ri%ins of the
Rpper Paleolithic+ * Critical Reflection on :avid @e(is9Willia&s. The Mind in the Cave+>
an inte%rated, for&er acterial sy&iont, too has its o(n :3* and is not fully under control of
the cell nucleus.
1
*&on% ani&als in the narro(est sense 4the ta'ono&ic class, &a&&alia5, an essential
sociality that rests on social ehavior and social relations deter&ines the relation of the
or%anis& to its &ilieu. 6althusian and :ar(inian96endelian deter&inants are decidedly
secondary, if and (here operative at all.
6ost i&portantly of all, life as a (hole actively shapes, &a"es and incessantly re&a"es the
conditions on (hich it is ased to such an e'tent that it is not only le%iti&ate ut is necessary
to spea" aout the %eophysiolo%y of the Earth, aout processes and relations that are
%eophysiolo%ical as opposed to %eophysical, not ecause the Earth is alive ut ecause of the
deter&inate role of life 4the iota in its entirety5 durin% the entire course of a lar%ely non9
6althusian, non9:ar(inian and non96endelian evolution of earthly nature as a (hole.
So (here does this leave the sciences of evolutionary iolo%y2 0here are t(o parts to the
ans(er offered here.
;irst, to the e'tent it is 6endelian the o1ect of these sciences is vastly constricted in ,space,/
i.e., (ith re%ard to the internal, %enetic ,space/ of the life for&s (hich 6endelian analysis
inade)uately conceptuali=es. 0o the e'tent it is :ar(inian 4(hich &a"es these sciences
6althusian also5, their o1ect is also ti%htly ounded in %eolo%ical ti&e. It is only riefest
%eolo%ically te&poral spans (hen the ecolo%ically inte%rated, &utual penetratin% relations
a&on% species, individuals for&in% species, and the various &ilieus in (hich they live and
interaction have een disrupted y %loal cli&ate chan%e in its various for&s 4transition fro& a
%lacial to an inter%lacial (ithin in a cold re%i&e of earthly cli&ate durin% those short %eolo%ical
durations of %laciation in Earth historyE the e'tre&ely rare, e'traterrestrial i&pact, such as an
asteroid, that, lar%e enou%h, loc"s sunli%ht for an e'tended period or chan%es ocean
che&istryE and, a%ain, the rare transition fro& a cold to a hot &ode of cli&ate and vice versa,
(hich in the for&er event have een rou%ht on initially y volcanic outpourin%s that
dra&atically increase caron dio'ide and &ethane content, a (ar&in% that affect oceanic
circulation and displaces the conveyor currents, the ther&ohaline circulation5. In all case, the
conse)uence is &ass species e'tinction 4in i&pact and (ar&in% e'tinctions, havin% occurred
only five or si' "no(n ti&es over the last O00 &illion years, #0970Z of species life on Earth
has disappeared5. In historical ti&e, (hich (e shall note is not %eolo%ically si%nificant ut
nonetheless is the te&poral fra&e(or" on (hich the sciences of evolutionary iolo%y, lar%ely
un"no(in%ly, ase their 6althusian and :ar(inian clai&s, the occasional severe (inter (ill,
for e'a&ple, threaten a very s&all nu&er of species (ith a lar%e falloff in population, hu&an
activity (ill, a%ain for e'a&ple, transport plant and ani&al for&s fro& one re%ion and cli&ate
=one to another therey te&porarily disruptin% the local and, perhaps, re%ional ecolo%y,
introducin% a ne( predator, species (ithout predation in the ne( locale, etc. 0hese spatial and
te&poral pinholes in the %eophysical evolution of life on Earth si&ply do not, and cannot in
principle, for& the asis for a for& of "no(led%e that offers itself as a universal, theoretical
description of real, e'istential deter&ination of the constitution of life. 0his rin%s us to the
other part of our ans(er.
Second, since it is only under these rare, alto%ether atypical conditions, that the relation of
or%anis& to environ&ent is decisively decided y li&ited, availale resources< conditions
that the crisis of capital is, ho(ever, 4re5introducin% to the (orld and (hich can no( e seen in
1
6itochondrial :3* is doule stranded, ut for&s a closed circle 4unli"e the cell nuclear :3* (hich is lon% and
strai%ht5. 6itochondria reproduce y division, then fusion and redivision 4nuclear :3* is &itotic, it &erely fissions and
fuses.5 Plastid 4here chloroplast5 inte%ration (ith the rest of the eu"aryotic cell has %one &uch further, thou%h this
&uch is clear+ 0he chloroplast or%anelles in plants retain their o(n :3* and R3*, and in so&e case various
functions 4e.%., their &e&rane protein activity5 are not under full control of the cell nucleus. See 6ar%ulis, S%$&iosis
in Cell 2volution, D1#9D1G and DDG9D#D, respectively.
the ehavior of certain species9individuals
1
< 6althusian, :ar(inian and 6endelian analyses
that lay clai& to universality are ideolo%ical, a central function (hich, as (e have sho(n, an
analysis of the internal conceptual structure of these sciences at any rate reveals, and (hich
is disclosed all over a%ain in their practical devolution. We shall ta"e up the latter in our
re&ar"s concludin% this Study.
-et the very reality of the hu&an (orld is historical. 0he structure of the conte&porary
historical (orld sustains 6althusian illusions+ 0he $ove$ent of capital, its crisis and
tendential direction toard reneed i$perialist orld ar and cli$ate change catastrophe<
producin% an e'pansion of drou%ht stric"en, desertifyin% re%ions and arid, (ooded re%ions
visited y increased fre)uency of (ildfires as tropic cli&ates &ove north(ard creatin%
dra&atically decreasin% (ater supplies and producin% %ro(in% loss of a%riculturally productive
lands, increasin%ly re%ular fa&ineE producin% a (ar&in% that %enerates ice cap &eltin% and
(ith it risin% sea levels that (ill create &assive population displace&ents and stateless
population livin% in ca&ps of s)ualor and &iseryE producin% (ater resources fi%hts et(een
re%ions... all intensifyin% internal racial, national social conflict, ethnic cleansin% and %enocides
to%ether (ith al"ani=ation of states and re%ions as i&perialist po(ers stru%%le over &ar"ets
as the production of a%ricultural foodstuffs are su1ect to fre)uent interruption and industrial
ra( &aterials production eco&es less dependale... producin% ne( de&ands on the
infrastructural foundations of capital.s &ove&ent that eco&e increasin% difficult to satisfyE
and 4re5producin% ancient diseases and those confined to re%ions of poverty and de9
develop&ent 4den%ue fever, &alaria, perhaps s&allpo' and polio5 not to &ention diseases
and disorders only recently de9locali=ed throu%h capitalist co&&erce such as (est 3ile that
rapidly spread throu%h de&o%raphical %roups i&&unolo%ically (ea"ened y hun%er, (ar,
fli%ht and a distrau%ht spirit< sustain 6althusian 4and &ediately :ar(inian and 6endelian5
concepts y renderin% their theoretical accounts of a historically specific %loal societal
confi%uration see$ingl% ade)uate e'pressions of the underlyin% asis of society and sociation
itself.
1
Stranded (ithout ice floats over (hich to traverse the other(ise open (aters, *rctic polar ears starve or dro(n in
the open (ater fro& hun%er, and &uscular and i&&unolo%ical (ea"enin%. In this settin%, there have een several
4seven in total5 recently docu&ented cases in (hich &ale ears have een (itnessed drivin% off the fe&ales< not
the very youn% to %et access to the fe&ales< in order to canniali=e, "ill and eat, the cus. ;ro& the standpoint of
species ehavior, this is not nor&al ut suicidal, ut this is the situation to (hich ears have een driven y the
capitalistically %enerated (ar&in%9ased cli&ate chan%e, a develop&ent (hich has at any rate doo&ed the& as a
species. See the article ,6uch @ess Stale Ice for Polar Bears/ appearin% in 3ove&er 2007, accessed at
(((.culturechan%e.or%, 2 :ece&er 2007.
So$e Conclusions
0he devolution of evolutionary iolo%y upon iotechnolo%ies of capital ai&ed at social control
4passports, drivers. licenses and identification cards e&eddin% scannale %enetic
descriptions, eye and ody scans, co&puteri=ed forensic and population %enetic &ar"er
dataan"s, %enetic fin%erprintin%, etc.5 is not happenstance. It is, &oreover, not &erely a
theoretical e'pression of the &ove&ent of capital as it confronts novel prole&s in the course
of that &ove&ent 4i.e., as a re)uire&ent of &assifyin% and re%i&entation social %roups in the
course of pursuin% e'pansion of productive forces5. While, to e sure, affir&in% that the
creation of surplus laor as an o1ective outco&e of capitalist practice has %enerated a
societally deter&inate prole&atic (hich, in turn, has shaped the funda&ental, underlyin%
assu&ptions of evolutionary iolo%y and (hile affir&in% the internal, necessary relation of
science to technolo%y< a relation for (hich the technolo%y of capital in )uestion distills (hat
is scientific ascertainale (ith re%ard to the or%anic ,sustrate/ of hu&anity and crystalli=es
capital.s resolution of the prole&, the creation of &eans of disposin% of surplus laor (ithout
disruptin% the circuits of capital< oth relations 4the devolution of evolutionary iolo%y upon
iotechnolo%ies of capital ai&ed at social control and the internal, necessary ond of science
(ith technolo%y for (hich the for&er theoretically clarifies and illu&ine prole&s of capital that
the latter, as technolo%ies of control, is deployed to resolve5 e'ist, and have ta"en the specific
historical shapes in (hich they have appeared, ecause the practical prole& of surplus laor
4prosaically, ,e'cess/ population5 has haunted capital fro& the &o&ent it e%an to really hold
s(ay over laor 4real do&ination5, and has deepened eco&in% ever &ore prole&atic as the
%ro(th of productive forces accelerates, as the scientifically &ediated prodi%ious productivity
of astract laor is relentlessly developed.
But the relation of science to capital< for that is (hat (e are discussin% here< cannot even
e ade)uately posed in this &anner. Instead, this relation can only e co&prehended in ter&s
of the ein% and reality of the state, as institutionally separate Po(er hierarchically unifyin%
other(ise anta%onistic capitals. Specifically, the relation of science to capital and technolo%ies
of capital 4infor&ational technolo%ies, the io9technolo%y of %enes, etc.5 &ust e %rasped in
ter&s of state policies, practices and interventions that constitute a io9politics of population
elucidated aove.
1
;or capital, the prole& of propertyless &en and (o&en (ithout anchora%e in any productive
activity, e'pressed in ter&s of casuali=ation, has eco&e %loal. Rooted in its very dyna&ics,
the e'pulsion of proletarians fro& production is &erely one side of the central contradiction of
its o(n &ove&ent 4the other, proletariani=ation of petty producers in the periphery5 as it
unfolds today. *s the crisis of capital e%innin% fro& capitalist finance unfolds and deepens<
the old capitalist &etropolises have 1ust e%un to e'hiit for&s of sociality and social
%eo%raphy once thou%ht characteristic only of its periphery< the for&ation of shantyto(ns,
$oovervilles and tent cities alon%side uran %hettos, (a%ed populations a&on%st as &any as
half of (hich can no lon%er find steady (or", the ru&le of sporadic revolt and occasional
%uerrilla styled outursts in its o(n rural hinterlands< this very &ove&ent reverses the
historical pro%ress declared y the earers of science, a conviction (hich e'plicitly
characteri=ed scientific thin"in% at least since the ti&e it had eco&e a(are of historical
develop&ent. But, rooted in its very dyna&ics 4co&petition et(een capitals, e'pansion of
productive forces, devalori=ation of &eans of production and e'ponentially %ro(in%
productivity of astract laor, and the destruction of earthly nature and its reconstruction as a
holdin% area of unprocessed resources for capitalist production5, capital and science cannot
1
See this Study, ,:rosophila and the E'peri&ent in ?enetics,/ aove.
%o eyond this contradiction of si&ultaneous incorporation and e'pulsion of laor, and oth
(ill e su1ect to its conse)uences.
1
1
>f transcendent i&portance, fro& the perspective of the elaoration of consciousness of class a&on% (or"ers, the
lived reality of totali=in% do&ination, the e'perience of casuali=ation, and the role of oth in the reco&position of
(or"ers as a (orld class and as 8esa$tar&eiter o1ectively confrontin% capital, this contradiction &oreover appears
central to the &ove&ent of capital today.
Second Study
"e' (epartures in Science) The Sciences o *ie
Biblio#raphical Sources
Barnes, Will. 1rigins and 2ndings: 8enerali/ed Hu$an 2$ancipation in the 4erspective of a
Ne 2arth. St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWWW. ,0he Cave in the 6ind+ Consciousness and the Prole& of ,*ctive/ 6aterialis& in
the :eter&ination of 6odern 6an and the >ri%ins of the Rpper Paleolithic+ * Critical
Reflection on :avid @e(is9Willia&s. The Mind in the Cave+ Rnpulished, 2007
WWWWWWWWW. ,*lan 6ilch&an.s Essays on the $olocaust, ;oucault and $eide%%er+ * 6editation
on the 3a=i ?enocide, its >ri%ins and its $istorical Conte&poraneity,/ Rnpulished,
200F
WWWWWWWWW. The 8er$an Road to Reneed ,$perialist "orld "ar, *CS(-*TBT+ St. Paul, 200F
WWWWWWWWW. Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ in the 2poch of ,$perialist "orld "ar and 4roletarian
Revolution+ Hrgeschichte 417G7920005. St. Paul, 2000
WWWWWWWWW. Civil "ar and Revolution in 7$erica+ St. Paul, 1777
Braudel, ;ernand. The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean "orld in the 7ge of 4hilip ,,,
!ol. 1. 3e( -or", 17G2
Barrett, Paul $. 4ed.5. The Collected 4apers of Charles Darin+ Chica%o, 17GG
Barrett, Paul $., Peter 8. ?auatrey, Sandra $erert, :avid Lohn and Sydney S&ith 4eds.5,
Charles Darin.s Note&oo!s, *CBQ-*CDD+ Ithaca 43-5, 17FG
Bloch, Ernst. The 4rinciple of Hope+ !ol. 2. Ca&rid%e 46*5, 17FO 4?er&an ori%inal, 17C75
Boo"chin, 6urray. The Third Revolution: 4opulation Move$ents in the Revolutionar% 2ra+
Lol+ '+ @ondon, 177F
Bo(ly, 8ohn. Charles Darin: 7 Ne 3ife+ 3e( -or", 1770
Burro(s, 8. W. ,Introduction/ to The 1rigins of Species+ @ondon 4Pen%uin5, 17G7
Ca&eron, Rondo. )rance and the 2cono$ic Develop$ent of 2urope, *C((-*T*D+ Princeton
4385, 17O1
Chandler, 8r., *lfred. The ,nvisi&le Hand: The Managerial Revolution in 7$erican Business+
Ca&rid%e 46*5, 17GG
WWWWWWWWWW. K0he >r%ani=ation of 6anufacturin% and 0ransportation,/ in :avid 0. ?ilchrist
and W. :avid @e(is 4eds.5, 2cono$ic Change in the Civil "ar 2ra. ?reenville 4:E5,
17OC
:ar(in, Charles. The 7uto&iograph% of Charles Darin+ 3e( -or", 17CF 41FFF5
WWWWWWWWWWWWW. The 1rigin of Species+ 3e( -or", 200# 41FC75
WWWWWWWWWWWWW.The Lo%age of the Beagle. 3e( -or", 17DG 41F#C5
:avis, 6i"e. 3ate Lictorian Holocausts: 2l Ni_o )a$ines and the Ma!ing of the Third "orld+
@ondon, 2002
:a("ins, Richard. The Selfish 8ene+ >'ford 4En%5, 17F7 417GO5
:es&ond, *drain and 8a&es 6oore. Darin: The 3ife of a Tor$ented 2volutionist. 3e( -or",
1771
:o=hans"y, 0heodosius. 8enetics and the 1rigin of Species+ 3e( -or", 17DG 41
st
edition5,
17C1 4D
rd
edition5
:over, ?ariel. Dear Mr+ Darin: 3etters on the 2volution of 3ife and Hu$an Nature+ @ondon,
2000
WWWWWWWWWWWW. ,6olecular :rive in 6ulti%ene ;a&ilies+ $o( Biolo%ical 3ovelties *rise,
Spread and are *ssi&ilated,/ Trends in 8enetics, 2 417FO5+ 1C791OC
WWWWWWWWWWWW. ,6olecular :rive+ * Cohesive 6ode of Species Evolution,/ Nature, 277
417F25+ 111911G
;oucault, 6ichel. The Histor% of Sexualit% 4!ol. 15. 3e( -or", 17GF
RRRRRRRRRRRRRR+ Discipline and 4unish: The Birth of the 4rison+ @ondon, 17GG
?ould, Steven 8ay. The Structure of 2volutionar% Theor%+ Ca&rid%e 46*5, 2002
$a&&ond, Bray. Ban!s and 4olitics in 7$erica+ Princeton 4385, 17FC
$a&&ond, 8.@. and Barara $a&&ond, The Lillage 3a&orer+ @ondon, 1720 417115
$osa(&, Eric. The 7ge of Capital, *CDC-*CS(+ @ondon, 17GC
$ynd&an, $.3. Co$$ercial Crises of the Nineteenth Centur%+ @ondon 17OG 41F725
8a&es, Patricia. 4opulation Malthus: His 3ife and "or!. @ondon, 17G7
Lha"hina, @iya 3i"olaevna. Concepts of S%$&iogenesis: 7 Historical and Critical Stud% of the
Research of Russian Botanists. Edited y @ynn 6ar%ulis and 6ar" 6c6ena&in.
3e( $aven, 1772 4Russian ori%inal, 17G25
@u"acs, ?eor%y. Histor% and Class Consciousness+ Studies in the Marxian Dialectic+ @ondon,
17G1 4172D5
@yell, Charles. 4rinciples of 8eolog%, &eing an 7tte$pt to 2xplain the for$er changes of the
2arth.s Surface, &% Reference of Causes No in 1peration+ D volu&es, 1FD0, 1FD2,
1FDD
6althus, 0ho&as. 7n 2ssa% on the 4rinciples of 4opulation, as it 7ffects the )uture
,$prove$ent of Societ% ith Re$ar!s on the Speculations of Mr+ 8odin, M+
Condorcet, and other "riters. @ondon, 1G7F
6ar%ulis, @ynn. The S%$&iotic 4lanet: 7 Ne 3oo! at 2volution+ *&herst 46*5, 177F
WWWWWWWWWWW. S%$&iosis in Cell 2volution: Micro&ial Co$$unities in the 7rchean and
4rotero/oic 2ons+ 3e( -or", 177D
6ar%ulis, @ynn and :orian Sa%an. Slanted Truths: 2ssa%s on 8aia, S%$&iosis, and 2volution+
3e( -or", 177G
6ar', Larl. E!ono$ische Manus!ripte, *CASU*CQC+ Marx-2ngels "er!e, Bd+ D'+ Berlin 4::R5,
17GD
6ar', Larl and ;riedrich En%els. The Manifesto of the Co$$unist 4art%+ 6osco(, 17G1 41F#F5
6athieu, @Uo ?. and Sorin Sonea. 4ro!ar%otolog%: 7 Coherent Lie+ 6ontrUal, 2000
6oscovici, Ser%ei. 3a sociItI contre nature+ Paris, 17G2
3orth, :ou%lass. The 2cono$ic Develop$ent of the Hnited States, *ST(-*CQ(. En%le(ood
Cliff 4385, 17O1
Peterson, 0ho&as. Malthus. Ca&rid%e 46*5, 17G7
Re=nec", Sa&uel. Business Depressions and )inancial 4anics+ 3e( -or", 17OF
Riesser, 8aco. The 8reat 8er$an Ban!s and their Concentration in Connection ith the
2cono$ic Develop$ent of 8er$an%+ Washin%ton :C, 1711
Sapp, 8an. S%$&iosis &% 7ssociation: 7 Histor% of S%$&iosis. 3e( -or", 177#
Scheler, 6a'. Man.s 4lace in Nature 4die Stellung des Menschen i$ :os$os5. Boston, 17O1
4172F5
Schido(s"i, 6anfred. ,Suantitative Evolution of Bio&ass throu%h 0i&e+ Biolo%ical and
?eoche&ical Constraints,/ in Stephen Schneider and Penelope Boston 4eds.5,
Scientists on 8aia+ Ca&rid%e 46*5, 1771
Shade, Willia& ?. Ban!s or no Ban!s: The Mone% ,ssue in "estern 4olitics, *CB'-*CQA+
:etroit, 17G2
Sooul, *lert. The )rench Revolution, *SCT-*STT+ 3e( -or", 17GC 417O25
Sonea, Sorin. ,Bacterial Evolution (ithout Speciation,/ in @ynn 6ar%ulis and RenU ;ester,
S%$&iosis as a Source of 2volutionar% ,nnovation: Speciation and Morphogenesis+
Ca&rid%e 46*5, 1771
Stott, :.$. ,Cultural and 3atural Chec"s on Population ?ro(th,/ in *ndre( P. !ayda 4ed.5,
2nviron$ent and Cultural Behavior: 2cological Studies in Cultural 7nthropolog%.
?arden City 43-5, 17O7
0estart, *lain. 3es chasseurs-cueilleurs ou l.origine des inIgalitIs. Paris, 17F2
0ho&pson, E.P. The Ma!ing of the 2nglish "or!ing Class+ 3e( -or", 17OO
Ward, Peter. Hnder a 8reen S!%+ 3e( -or", 200G
Willia&s, ?.R. ,?aian and 3on%aian E'planations for the Conte&porary @evel of *t&ospheric
>'y%en,/ in Schneider and Boston 4eds.5, Scientists on 8aia, Ca&rid%e 46*5,
1771
Wri%ht, Se(ard, ,0he Role of 6utation, Inreedin%, Crossreedin%, and Selection in
Evolution,/ 4roceedings of the Q
th
,nternational Conference on 8enetics, I, 17D2
Third Study *Short Study+
Ne( Departures in Science:
The Modern Science of Nature Rene(ed
Three S#etches: Heisen!erg, Born and ,instein
In a &anner that is not &erely a purely for&al (ay of e'pressin% the issue, the &eanin% of an
authentically ne( departure in scientific theori=ations is ound up (ith novel develop&ent in
the order of society, i.e., the prole& of populations as it shaped the sciences of life e'a&ined
in the previous study rose on the asis of the appearance of real do&ination in social practice,
in production as a decisive di&ension of society, as class stru%%le in the countryside
proletariani=ed &en and (o&en, left nearly all i&poverished and &any (ithout (or" (hile at
the sa&e ti&e over the course of its develop&ent rou%ht an end to the era of fa&ines in the
&etropolitan centers of (orld capitalis&.
$istorically presupposin% the necessary connection and the centrality of the our%eoisie to
science at its ori%ins as it transpired in epoch of for&al do&ination,
1
e'plicatin% this relation
4of a ne( departure in science to the appearance of real do&ination in society5 re)uired that
(e elaorate the productive &eanin% and epochal si%nificance of the concepts for&al and real
do&ination 4and, of course, the realities they referred ac" to5.
2
It further re)uires that (e deter&ine the linea&ents of the %ro(in% inte%ration of science into
production, the event in the order of society (hich announced the irreversily develop&ent of
real do&ination+ 0his inte%ration (as and continues to e itself a product of the
autono&i=ation of capital 4(hich, in turn, itself is the outco&e of real do&ination5.
D
>n this asis, the relation of science in its ,purest/ for&s to capital has een ideolo%i=ed<
o1ectively &ystified and ofuscated, and consciously a veil of reifications has een thro(n
over it.
With an eye to this situation, (e have ta"en a detour+ 0hrou%h a series of s"etches or notes,
one )uite len%thy, the follo(in% has een desi%ned to de&onstrate that even the &ost rarefied
scientifically conceptual elaorations are &ediately ut nonetheless fully deter&ined y the
i&peratives of capital, specifically y the underlyin% pro1ect lin"in% science to it, y the
do&ination of nature and, it &i%ht e added, that it is precisely the situation in society that (e
characteri=e as the real do&ination of capital in production, deter&ined fro& the s%ste$atic
and sustained ingression of science and technolo%y into production, on (hich the e'plosion of
develop&ents in the &odern science of nature that coalesce in (hat (e call the ,ne(
physics/< as is &anifest in our discussion of Einstein and theory of special relativity in our
second s"etch< rests.
1
See the Introduction, aove.
2
See the ;irst and Second Interludes, aove and elo( respectively.
D
See the Second Interlude, elo(.
4reli$inar% Re$ar!s
The Modern Science of Nature Reneed as Science ithout )oundations
We shall ar%ue in the Second Interlude 4elo(5 that the &ore real do&ination in production
holds s(ay, the &ore the our%eoisie no lon%er acts as a class ut functions as a
personification of capital.s &ove&entE that, accordin%ly, as (e develop this te'tual account,
(e are thus re)uired to for%o spea"in% of the relation of science to the our%eoisie and &ust
instead delineate the relation of science to capital<
If (e &o&entarily return to science at its ori%ins, hence to the our%eoisie as a class for&in%
and actin% in history, (e can recount the are linea&ents of our ar%u&ent+ 0here is a
necessary, internal relation of science to the our%eoisie that can e seen in the vision of the
(orld pro1ected y science at its ori%ins, in the for&al identity of the conceptual structure of
science to that of the value for&, in the unity of social and preco%nitive telos of science at
those sa&e ori%ins (ith the our%eois tas"s in historyE and in the practical and social
validation of scientific la(s.
Even concedin% our perspective, it &i%ht e o1ected that fro& the turn of the last century
on(ard a Kne(K physics, one that has ro"en (ith the assu&ptions of classical physics and
hence severed science.s ties to the our%eoisie, i.e., to capital, has developed. * )uic"
chec"list of the purely chronolo%ical desi%nated develop&ents in theoretical physics that led to
such an alle%ed reach &i%ht include Einstein.s for&ulation 4170C5 of the special theory of
relativity, 3iels Bohr.s papers 4171D5 proposin% a )uantu& ehavior for ato&s, Wolf%an%
Pauli.s elaoration 4172C5 of a4n5 4e'clusion5 principle concernin% oritin% electrons in the
ato&ic nucleus, and Werner $eisener%.s fra&in% 4172G5 of uncertainty in )uantu&
&echanics. >n this vie(, these events (ould constitute crucial &o&ents in the ,ne(/ physics,
not all co&patile, (hich, actually e%innin% (ith 6a' Planc".s insi%ht 417005 into the
)uantu& character of ener%y e'chan%e, led, so it is su%%ested, to a radical rupture (ith the
universe 4oth conceptual and that pro1ected as real5 of classical physics 43e(tonian
&echanics5.
;or us, there are several historically evolvin% features of the societal totality 4of (hich science
is a decisive &o&ent5 that co&e into play here. 0he fra%&entation of social life, the
develop&ent of institutionally separate spheres 4e.%., fa&ily, (or", or%ani=ed reli%ion, &ilitary5
each (ith their suspheres and all su1ect to their o(n internally elaorated nor&s %overnin%
conduct and activity also characteri=es science... as &uch as any other separate sphere...
(ith its distinct disciplines and their e(ilderin% array of speciali=ed pursuits. Rationali/ation,
frag$entation and speciali/ation are all essential features of capitalist develop$ent+ In each
case, the lo%ic of develop&ent is the sa&e, a specific activity or social process is repeatedly
pursued providin% it (ith a separate identity, the structure of the activity or process is tacitly or
e'plicitly reco%ni=ed y those (ho en%a%e in it or are its earers, others 4those (ho do&inate
the activity or process5 articulate the nor&s that %overn the activity or participation in the
process. In science, a natural pheno&enon is analy=ed (ith a vie( to its &ove&ent or
,ehavior,/ the latter is e'peri&ented on 4i.e., it is astracted fro& the conte't in (hich it
ori%inated and treated separated under artificially constructed conditions5, la(s %overnin% that
&ove&ent or ehavior are for&ulated. In all cases, the unification of separate spheres
proceeds in an increasin%ly &ore astract and %eneral (ay, in an utterly rarefied and
co&pletely for&ali=ed &anner. In all cases, the nor&s and la(s that %overn activities, social
processes, institutions or co%nitive do&ains are self9contained, i.e., split off (ithout %round.
But it is only in crises, often internally %enerated, that this funda&ental irrationality eco&es
visile. With the &odern science of nature this feature is douled, i.e., reinforced and
e'acerated, y its clai&s< continuous since its ori%ins< that it is asent a perspective
%rounded in the practice of daily life 4here capitalist accu&ulation practices5E it or, rather, its
practitioners &as)uerade as %odli"e, proclai& it effectively presuppositionless, &eanin% it is
detached fro& societal pressures, its account truthful, its asis ,factual,/ its descriptions
,o1ective,/ its position ethically neutral.
In this re%ard, there are t(o develop&ents here that re)uire reflection on+ 0hey are Einstein.s
relativistic physics to the e'tent it alto%ether dispensed (ith the 3e(tonian for&ulation of the
central concepts of &echanics, space, ti&e and %ravity, and $eisener%.s uncertainly principle
4(hich, a&on% other features, ties scientific "no(led%e to the develop&ent of scientific
instru&ents5
1
for (hich )uantu& &echanics funda&entally challen%es a central
episte&olo%ical assu&ption of classical physics.
2
The% de$and an accounting in ter$s of our
theori/ation, since they indicate, as so it appeared and still does appear, directions in
conte&porary physics that si%nify departures so radically novel that they &ust have ro"en
(ith early, &odern science and, (ith it, any relation to the social class in (hose life it (as
ori%inally rooted, or &ore precisely as capitalist develop&ent has eco&e auto&atic and
autono&i=ed, to the social, class pro1ect 4nature do&ination5 (hich once lin"ed the one
4our%eoisie5 to the other 4science5. We shall ar%ue other(ise. 0hese develop&ents do not
constitute novel departures in the co&prehensive sense+ 0he social, class pro1ect of the
our%eoisie has not disappeared, since it continues to or%ani=e the internal structure of
science, even as the our%eoisie has disappeared as social a%ency. 0he re&oteness of the
ne( physics is &erely the other side of the autono&i=ation of capital< ;or in this respect
even the atte&pt to develop a unified theory of science that has do&inated conte&porary
physics &ore or less since the &iddle of the short t(entieth century, or even the on%oin%
elaoration of a te&poral develop&ental cos&olo%y of the universe at its ori%ins, has not
si%nified a rea" (ith the asic assu&ptions of the &odern science of nature first for&ulated
y ?alileo. In this re%ard, a third s"etch has een appended pole&ically tyin% the entire
ar%u&ent to%ether.
In respect to these t(o to(erin% intellectual achieve&ents, a chronolo%ical presentation of the
prole&, not al(ays indicatin% the inner direction of historical develop&ent, is decidedly
1
Crudely, ?alileoIs telescope %ave hi& a ne( perspective on the EarthIs &oon as (ell as producin% discovery of the
&oons of 8upiter, and refine&ents of it %ive us a vast nu&er of ne( stars at various %reat distances. While the
follo(in% (as not the only conclusion that could have een dra(n in the era of CastileIs decline, the victory of
our%eois parlia&entary forces in En%land and the rise and initial consolidation of the &odern science of nature,
these stars are not, accordin%ly, arran%ed spherically around the Earth and their distances are not fi'ed. In other
(ords, ?alileoIs telescope %ives us the theoretical pro1ection of a centerless, i.e., non9Earth centered, perhaps infinite
universe. 3*S*Is Cos&ic Bac"%round E'plorer 4C>BE5 satellite %ives us te&perature fluctuations in the cos&ic
&icro(ave ac"%round, vi=., it %ives us KripplesK in the ui)uitous ener%y speculatively asserted to have een left
over fro& the creation of the universe. 0hese KripplesK are said to have unalanced the Ks&ooth te'tureK of the
pri&ordial soup, causin% the universe to lu&p to%ether and, 1D.G illion years later, ta"e its current for&. In other
(ords, C>BE detection of ,hotK and KcoldK spots in the cos&ic &icro(ave ac"%round confir&s, so it is ar%ued, asic
theoretical propositions of the Bi% Ban% theory of ori%ins. 40his confir&ation, should e noted, is alto%ether &oot+ 0he
i&&ense stars %enerated in the for&ation of %ala'ies (ould have over the course of hundreds of &illions of years
fused the heliu& 4fro& hydro%en5 that is no( oserved in the universeE have e'ploded into supernovas, dispersed
and spread out that heliu& throu%h spaceE s&aller &ain se)uence stars (ould have for&ed out of this heliu&E and
the ener%y the %i%antic stars %enerated (ould have een soa"ed up y interstellar dust (hich, in turn, (ould e&it the
&icro(ave ac"%round. 7nd none of this ould require the a&surd h%pothesis of a creation ex nihilo or, in our
lan%ua%e, Nature could and should &e considered endless ate$poral &eco$ing+5
2
0he si%nificance of )uantu& &echanics for physics and for society is (ell captured in the follo(in% re&ar" y the
nuclear physicist, !ictor Weiss"opf+ ,0he )uantu& revolution caused a &a1or rea"throu%h in our vie( aout the
structure of &atter and opened up &any ne( hori=ons. Within a fe( years after the for&ulation of )uantu&
&echanics, prole&s that had een considered unsolvale for decades N such as the nature of &olecular onds, the
structure of &etals, and the radiation fro& ato&s N (ere finally understood. 0his sudden %ro(th of "no(led%e and
understandin% of the structure of &atter opened up &any ne( (ays of dealin% (ith &aterials+ it led to (ay to ne(
for&s of ener%y, ne( "inds of &aterials, and &any ne( technical possiilities in che&istry, electronic, and nuclear
technolo%y/ ,3iels Bohr, the Suantu&, and the World,/ 17920.
secondary. $ere shall e%in (ith )uantu& &echanics and then turn to the relativistic physics
that preceded its historical appearance.
;irst S"etch
The NNe> 4h%sics: Heisen&erg, Bohr and Ouantu$ Mechanics
With )uantu& &echanics the rea" (ith classical physics is &ost profound and self9
conscious, that is, it (as the founders and advocates of )uantu& &echanics, in particular its
Copenha%en interpretation ri%htfully associated (ith the na&es of 3iels Bohr and Werner
$eisener% 4Bohr.s &ost ori%inal, advanced and pro&isin% student and, later, his peer5, that
&ost e'plicitly, syste&atically and radically opposed their theory to classical physics. But 1ust
ho( radical, or thorou%h%oin%, is this discontinuity, and to (hat e'tent has the Kne(K physics,
especially )uantu& &echanics, aandoned classical assu&ptions2
0his aandon&ent as such has een discussed y $eisener% as (ell as Bohr
1
<
We should pause here and specify that ,classical physics,/ ,classical &echanics/ and
,classical theory/ each and all have the a&i%uous sense of theori=ations that e%in (ith
?alileo and are syste&ati=ed y 3e(ton, that reach an apo%ee in the late nineteenth9early
t(entieth century (or"s of Bolt=&an, his for&ulation of the close relation of the la(s of
ther&odyna&ics to statistical re%ularities displayed y &echanical syste&s, of Rutherford, his
discovery of the ato&ic nucleus containin% nearly the entire &ass of the ato& relative to its
e'ceedin%ly s&all volu&e, and of Planc", his analysis of the la(s of ther&al radiation that led
to the discovery of the )uantu& character of ener%y e'chan%eE that, in other (ords, reached
its hi%hpoint in this short historical duration<
;or classical physics, (e can %ive a description of oth the initial position and the velocity of a
%iven ody, e.%., a planet. *ccordin%ly, these &easure&ents (ould une)uivocally and
unerrin%ly predict the future course of that ody. Results of this nature (ere, &oreover,
e'pected to hold %ood for every order of the universe, ran%in% fro& the ato&ic ri%ht up to the
&acrophysical, to stars, %ala'ies and, &ost i&portantly, for the universe as a (hole. 0hus,
%eneral causality and a ri%orous deter&inis& (as a crucial feature of classical physical theory.
With the advent of )uantu& &echanics, thou%h, (e find a different situation holds for
suato&ic structures.
0o de&onstrate this ne( situation 4(hich he.d already arrived at $athe$aticall%5, $eisener%
constructs an ideal situation, i.e., he i$agined a reasonaly possile e'peri&ent. *ssu&in%
the very concept of an electron orit is not duious, it ou%ht at least in principle to e
oservale. With a hi%h9resolve &icroscope, (e can e'a&ine the electron in its ,orit/ around
an ato&ic nucleus.
2
4We (ould note that the e'peri&ent re$ains to this day i&a%inary, a
8edan!enexperi$ent, ecause ,oservation/ of su&ato$ic particles is elo( the po(er of
resolution of the electron &icroscope, the latter failin% to ,e'tend do(n/ even to the %enetic
deter&inants of cellular or%anelles as they $olecularl% differentiate.5 <
$eisener% assu&es the Bohr ato&+ >n the asis of the study of %lo(in% hydro%en %as as it
%ives off li%ht, in 171D 3iels Bohr had, counterintuitively and radically, su%%ested that
electrons in ato&s adopt stale states only at specific ener%ies, that, accordin%ly, electrons
&ust &ove fro& one state 4inappropriately, an ,orit/5 (ith a different potential ener%y to
another instead of &ovin% over a continuous ran%e of ener%y. ElectronsI ,ehavior/ e'hiits a
,preference/ for states of lo(est ener%y, for these states are (here they nor&ally asse&le. In
&a"in% such a &ove, an electron does not traverse the distance fro& one state or ,orit/ to
another, ut disappears fro& the initial state only to reappear in the ne(, hi%her ener%y state.
D
1
4h%sics and 4hilosoph%. ;or Bohr.s (or"s in this re%ard, see the footnotes that follo(.
2
,&id, #G9#F.
D
In a later for&ulation, Bohr says, ,*n ato&ic syste& possesses a certain &anifold of states, the Tstationary states,. to
(hich corresponds in %eneral a discrete se)uence of ener%y values and (hich have a peculiar staility. 0he latter
sho(s itself in that every chan%e in the ener%y of the ato& &ust e due to a Ttransition. of the ato& fro& one
stationary state to another./ ,*to&ic 0heory and 6echanics/ 4172C5 appearin% in 3iels Bohr, 7to$ic Theor% of the
Description of Nature, D1.
In $eisener%Is thou%ht e'peri&ent descried elo(, it is the very oservation, if you (ill the
,insertion/ of the 9ray photon, that e'cites the ato& to ,1u&p/ to a ne( state. In ter&s of daily
e'perience, all this &ay e i=arre, perhaps even unintelli%ile, ut it (ell e'plains a (hole
ran%e of suato&ic ehavior, particularly in relation to li%ht, and it is entirely inconsistent or
incon%ruent, if you (ill, (ith the classical theori=ation... Return to $eisener%.
!isile spectru& li%ht (ill not allo( us to see the electron, ut a &icroscope usin% 9rays
&i%ht per&it us to accurately descrie it. In &a"in% the oservation, at least one )uantu&
4photon5 of 9ray li%ht (ill stri"e the electron, deflectin% its &otion. 0his is (hat (e ,see./ In a
second oservation, (e can find the electron, ,seein%/ it a%ain as it is deflected y the 9ray
photon. In each oservation, (e can locate the electron, deter&ine its position 4i.e., the
electron in its stale state as it has een deflected5, ut in each case the deflection chan%es
the direction of its &otion, its velocity< Recall that since ?alileo, velocity is unifor&, strai%ht9
line &otion. Chan%e of direction as (ell as acceleration 4or deceleration5 is chan%e in
velocity<
* 9ray photon is a short (avelen%th, hi%h9ener%y photon. In stri"in% the electron, it deflects it
to another, ,e'cited/ )uantu& state, rando&ly chan%in% its &otion. $eisener% could have
also used a lon% (avelen%th, lo( ener%y photon, say a radio (ave. 0his (ould not chan%e the
direction of the electron.s &otion ut, then, it (ould also not per&it us to accurately descrie
the position of the electron. Its &icroscopic location (ould e ,fu==y,/ indeter&inate< So that
the election.s position or its velocity can e &easured, ut not oth< In $eisener%.s
i&a%inin%, the position of the electron can e accurately descried ut its velocity cannot<
0he situation outlined here is characteristic of any e'a&ination conducted suato&ically.
4E'pressed &athe&atically, $`x`vph, &eanin% the s&aller the uncertainty concernin%
position, the %reater the uncertainty concernin% velocity, and vice versa< h is Planc".s
constant+5< *s a &atter of fact, for us to do the e'peri&ent < today (e can, thou%h it still
entails an i$agining? (e (ould e re)uired to shine a ea& of li%ht and e'tract the
infor&ation statistically ased on ho( all the photons, not 1ust one )uantu& of 9ray li%ht,
interact (ith the electron, and in practice the e'peri&ent (ould e conducted (ith a nu&er of
electrons. In principle, (hat (e are i$agining is the &ini&al interaction, e'a&inin% the
electron (ith 1ust a sin%le photon... 6oreover, it should e noted that $eisener% does not
assu&e an ontolo%ical pri&acy of the electron, the latter does not ,represent/ a ,&aterial
point/ or point &ass susistin% in ,real/ space and ti&e. 4While this in turn &ay e
prole&atic, it had een the situation in physics since at least the 1FG0s, since the ti&e of
8a&es Cler" 6a'(ellIs unification of electrical and &a%netic pheno&ena, after (hich at est
one could ,realistically/ assert the pri&acy of electro&a%netic fields vis9P9vis ato&istically
conceived ,&aterial/ ele&ents.5 Rather, as (e shall have occasion to indicate elo(, the
entire suato&ic situation recounted aove descries 4and this description is &athe&atical5,
for hi&, a series of proailities all of (hich are possile...
Basin% ourselves on the situation descried y $eisener%, the follo(in% features are
note(orthy since, in their &athe&atical for&ulation, they descrie the essential ele&ents of
the &icrophysical situation.
;irst, there are the necessary, Kpartially undefined and irreversileK interactions of the
instru&ent of &easure&ent or the co&ple' of &easurin% apparatuses, as the case &ay e,
and the oserved suato&ic situation< ,Strictly spea"in%,/ Bohr indicates, ,the idea of
oservation elon%s to the causal space9ti&e (ay of description<
1
0his feature already
constitutes a tacit criti)ue of the classical pro1ect of the nature KdiscoveredK 4i.e., constructed5
in physics+ 0he nature "no(n throu%h )uantu& &echanics depends upon the conditions
1
,&id, OG.
under (hich state&ents &ade aout it can e verified.
1
Classical physics, on the other hand,
held a do%&atically realist position, affir&in% that any and all contents of state&ents aout
nature do not depend upon the conditions under (hich they can e verifiedE or, for classical
physics, in our ter&s 4since the very episte&olo%ically careful for&ulations e&ployed here
elon% to )uantu& &echanics and not to classical physics5, nature is a closed, self9contained
syste& e'istin% Kin9itself,K and "no(led%e of it is entirely independent of oservation,
calculation and &easure&ent y the scientist.
Second, either the electron.s position or velocity as it &oves et(een t(o oservations cannot
e precisely indicated. >r, in $eisener%Is roader and so&e(hat &ore radical for&ulation,
(e &ay say that, K)uite %enerally there is no (ay of descriin% (hat happens et(een t(o
consecutive oservations.K Either (e "no( the position of the electron or its &o&entu&, ut
not oth. 0hus, since it is i&possile to "no( (hat path the electron (ill traverse, our
description of it as it &oves et(een t(o consecutive oservations (ill indicate a series of
possiilities. 0his state&ent (ill ta"e the &athe&atical for& of a proaility function, and (hat
is descried (ill not e KactualK ut &erely Kpossile.K
2
0his position, too, is (ildly at variance
(ith classical physics. ;or the latter, %iven the initial 4"no(n or at least in principle "no(ale5
condition 4"no(n or in principle "no(ale5 natural la(s entirely deter&ine the future state of
structures ran%in% fro& the suato&ic situation to the universe as a (hole. Philosophically
spea"in%, the universe as classically understood is real 4and not &erely possile5, and
relations internal to it are not 1ust causally decided ut full deter&ined. It is self9contained,
closed and lac"in% in all fluidity. It is, as (e say, deter&inistically structured. ;or )uantu&
&echanics, ho(ever, the &icrophysical (orld is funda&entally fluid or, etter, its structure
et(een oservations is undeter&ined... ;or the sa"e of this discussion, (e can &a"e a
distinction et(een the strictly deter&inistic causality of classical physics, and a &ore for&al
notion of causality for (hich all events are connected y natural processes and occur as the
result of other events and for (hich over ti&e the lon%er ter& conse)uences of an ori%inal
event in any %iven se)uence &ay e indeter&inate... 0he latter concept (ill not even e found
in $eisener%. *t any rate, it is classical causality that has een aandoned.
D
0hird, )uantu& &echanics Kdoes not si&ply descrie and e'plain natureE it is a part of the
interplay et(een nature and ourselves.K ;or it, nature, is descried in ter&s of its Ke'posureK
Kto our &ethod of )uestionin%.K
#
0he K&ethod of )uestionin%K (e ta"e to refer to the peculiar
e'peri&ental condition in (hich nature is lar%ely, artificially constructed in order to e
understood. $eisener% specifically understands here the inescapale presence of our
instru&ents in the oservational situation, a situation he referred to as Kinterference.K It is
oservationally %rounded KinterferenceK that renders our "no(led%e of the suato&ic (orld
1
$eisener%, 4h%sics and 4hilosoph%, #F, F19F2.
2
Si&ilarly, Bohr+
,While, (hen follo(in% the &otions of free particles, (e can visuali=e the lac" of causality y considerin% our lac" of
si&ultaneous "no(led%e of the )uantities enterin% into the classical &echanical description, the li&ited applicaility of
classical concepts is i&&ediately evident in our account of the ehavior of ato&s, since the description of the state of
a sin%le ato& contains asolutely no ele&ent referrin% to the occurrence of transition processes, so that in this case
(e can scarcely avoid spea"in% of a choice et(een various possi&ilities on the part of the ato&./ Bohr, ,&id, 1D
4e&phasis added5< @ater 4,&id, 179205 in the sa&e discussion Bohr addresses the episte&olo%ical difficulties in
lin%uistic usa%e that i&parts a ,free choice on the part of nature/<
>r, a%ain, Bohr re&ar"s, ,In fact, the indivisiility of the )uantu& of action de&ands that, (hen any individual result of
&easure&ent is interpreted in ter&s of classical conceptions, a certain a&ount of latitude e allo(ed in our account
of the &utual action et(een the o1ect and the &eans of oservation. 0his i&plies that a suse)uent &easure&ent
to a certain de%ree deprives the infor&ation %iven y a previous &easure&ent of its si%nificance for predictin% the
future course of the pheno&ena/ ,&id, 1F.
D
$eisener%, 4h%sics and 4hilosoph%, #F.
#
,&id, C0.
Kuncertain.K
1
>ur "no(led%e of the &icrophysical situation (ould, then, appear to e
conditioned y the sophistication and the develop&ent of the instru&ents, apparatuses or
instru&ental co&ple'es (e deploy in oservations. Stated philosophically, (e can say that
"no(led%e of nature need not e pro%ressive, i.e., cu&ulative, and, perhaps &ore radically,
our "no(led%e of nature is at once a product of our 4instru&ental5 interaction (ith it and
relative to the instru&ents (e e&ploy 4thou%h it appears none of these assertions (ould e
a&enale to $eisener%5.
2
Rncertainty as a principle (ould e inad&issile for classical
physics. ;or the latter, there are no structurally conditioned, inescapale lind spots in our
"no(led%e of nature, not at least in principle. *s a deter&inistic syste&, the universe of
3e(tonian &echanics can e in principle "no(n fro& the s&allest suato&ic particle ri%ht up
to the lar%est &acro structures.
Bohr.s Discussion of the )oundations of Ouantu$ Mechanics
Bohr does not see eye to eye (ith $eisener% on all issues that e&er%ed in the discussions of
)uantu& &echanical pheno&ena, (hich, stated differently, &eans the Copenha%en
interpretation itself (as not unitary.
What is note(orthy aout Bohr.s position is its radicalis&. *pproach this, y recallin%
$eisener%.
Bohr ta"es e'ception to $eisener%, to his for&ulations of the relation constitutin% the
e'peri&ental situation in ter&s of ,interference./ ,I (arned especially a%ainst phrases, often
found in the physical literature, such as Tdisturin% of pheno&ena y oservation. or Tcreatin%
physical attriutes to ato&ic o1ects y &easure&ent../
D
;or Bohr, &a%nitudes derived fro& the analysis of )uantu& pheno&ena cannot e detached
fro& the conditions under (hich they are %enerated. ,H0hisJ crucial point< i&plies the
i$possi&ilit% of an% sharp separation &eteen the &ehavior of ato$ic o&9ects and the
interactions ith the $easuring instru$ent (hich serve to define the conditions under hich
the pheno$ena appear./
#
Conse)uently, he (rites in the sa&e (or", ,a&i%uity HarisesJ in
ascriin% custo&ary physical attriutes to ato&ic o1ects./
C
What Bohr is o1ectin% to is the
hypostati=ation of relational features that otain only for the total e'peri&ental situation 4(hat
he calls the ,(hole e'peri&ental arran%e&ent/5+ 0he &ere interplay et(een &easurin%
instru&ental and e'peri&ental conditions does not per&it us to assert that real relations
otain et(een separate o1ects. Instead, the &ethods e&ployed in the deter&ination of
e'peri&ental situation are of a ,for&al/ nature only, that is, they provide us (ith certain
nu&ers or &a%nitudes that e'press these relations, ut they surely do not per&it us to state
that such and such ,o1ective/ processes or events underlie the appearance of these
nu&ers.
O
0he relations, and (hat characteri=es the& 4i.e., their nu&erical e'pressions5 (ill
1
In this re%ard, ho(ever, see the re&ar"s y Einstein, Podols"y and Rosen cited y ;eyeraend, Realis$,
Rationalis$ and Scientific Method, D07, n. D1, and ;eyeraend.s co&&ents for (hich the concept of interference
4thou%h not the duality interpretation of )uantu& &echanics5 is dispensed (ith.
2
3or, althou%h patently ovious, indeed to al&ost all scientists. ?aston Bachelard, not incidentally in this re%ard a
che&ist turned philosopher, is an e'ception+ Referrin% to ,tensor calculus,/ aleit as a co%nitive ,instru&ent,/ as the
&atri' of all relativist thin"in%,/ he states, ,Conte&porary physical science has een created y this instru&ent, &uch
as &icroiolo%y (as created y the &icroscope/ 4and, (e &i%ht add, 6ar%ulis. evolutionary sy&iotic theory (as
created y the electron &icroscope5. The Ne Scientist Spirit, CO.
D
Cited y ;eyeraend, ,&id, 2C1, n. 11
#
3iels Bohr, 7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an :noledge, D79#0. E&phasis in ori%inal.
0his for&ulation is repeated verati& in BohrIs contriution to a celeratory volu&e, 7l&ert 2instein: 4hilosopher-
Scientist e'cerpted in ,0he Bohr9Einstein :ialo%ue/ in Niels Bohr: 7 Centenar% Lolu$e, 122912D+
C
7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an :noledge, OD9O#.
O
0he for&ulation is &ore or less ;eyeraend.s 4,&id, 2GF5 citin% fro& an early essay y Bohr 4i&portant ecause it
(as (ritten in the &idst of on%oin% efforts to %rapple (ith the &eanin% and si%nificance of )uantu& pheno&ena, prior
to the solidification of the various interpretations5, ,ker die *n(endun% der Suantentheorie auf den *ufau. I. :ie
chan%e (hen the total e'peri&ental situation chan%es 4as a function of a chan%e in any of its
decisive &o&ents5E they are not properties of ontolo%ically distinct o1ects. What Bohr (ants
to eli&inate is a &etaphysics of sustantially different, preconstituted su1ect and o1ect, i.e.,
the naYve realis& of the &odern science of nature 4and this, (hether or not he ever e'plicitly
stated it in these ter&s (ith reference to classical physics5. Where does this leave us, i.e.,
(hat purpose does this theori=ation serve, say, specifically in relation to the ends of classical
physical theori=in%2 If (e are not atte&ptin% to understand an event that transpires in the
,real/ or ,outer/ (orld, (e are oriented to(ard prediction (ithin the conte't of orderin%
classical concepts 4e.%., the (ave concept of li%ht5 that other(ise cannot render )uantu&
pheno&ena intelli%ile
1
< 0his unintelli%iility &ust e ta"en seriously, for in a visuali=ation or
pictorial presentation of a photon.s ,ehavior,/ as an 4i&a%ined5 e'peri&ent (herein a &irror is
placed in the (ay of &ovin% photon, and there are t(o possiilities for the direction of that
&ove&ent 4t(o photo%raphic plates (hich it &i%ht stri"e5, (e are co&pelled to state the
suato&ic o1ect al(ays ,chooses/ one of t(o (ays ut ehaves as if it had passed &oth
(ays< In this re%ard, it should e noted that Bohr 4consistently (e add5 holds that concept
does not e'haust e'perience< *t any rate, the re1ection of the ontolo%ical realis& of classical
physics and (ith it the &etaphysics of counterposed sustantial o1ects is the first &o&ent of
Bohr.s radicalis&. We shall co&e ac" to this
2
<
In respect to this difference et(een ne( and old physics, Bohr notes the si&ilarity et(een
physics 4i.e., )uantu& &echanics5 and psycholo%y 4at least a non9reductionist psycholo%y that
too" the (hole person as its ,o1ect/ as it (as oth theori=ed and practiced in so&e circles,
e.%., in S(it=erland, ?er&any, :en&ar" and else(here at the end of the lon% nineteenth
century, chronolo%ically in the early part of the t(entieth century5. 0hus, he states, ,(e are
continually re&inded of the difficult% of distinguishing &eteen su&9ect and o&9ect+/
D
But the
su1ect in physics is not consciousness, that of the scientific oserverE rather it the actual,
,&aterial/ instru&ent of &easure&ent itself that for&s this a%ency, and this sensuous
N$aterial> instru$ent incorporates the equall% sensuous-$aterial 0i+e+, sentient5 su&9ect ith
its sense organs: In lan%ua%e forei%n to Bohr, it is inclusive of the incarnate, perceiving
su&9ect 4a ody su1ect5. 0his e'tension of the oserver to include the &easurin% instru&ent
4(hich is to read Bohr ac"(ards, i.e., he starts fro& the instru&ent and incorporates
e&odied su1ectivity5 is a radical conception indeedE it has echoes of the 3ei& that laors,
that instru&entali=es itself in (or" as a 3ei&-:Vrper, and 4as such5 of an o1ectively practical
su1ectivity.
#
What is prole&atic is that no one, includin% Bohr hi&self, understands this
relation in this &anner.
?roundpostulate der Suantentheorie,, Feitschrift fPr 4h%si!, 1D 4172D5+ 1D1.
1
$ere, see the 1oint paper authored y Bohr, $.*. Lra&ers and 8.C. Slater, ,0he Suantu& 0heory of Radiation,/
4hilosophical Maga/ine #G 4172#5+ GFC, cited y ;eyeraend, ,&id, 2G7. Bohr (as consistent in this re%ard, for in
paper concernin% the application of )uantu& theory cited aove 4,ker die *n(endun% der Suantentheorie auf den
*ufau/5 he ar%ued that )uantu& analysis, thou%h for&al unli"e the clai&s &ade y classical physicists on ehalf of
3e(tonian &echanics, is nonetheless an aid in the tas"s of predictin%, a re&ar"ale one (e &i%ht add and one that
has had si%nificant technolo%ical i&plications also, e.%., it &ade invention of the laser possile.
2
Bohr, 7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an :noledge, C09C1 4for the i&a%ined e'peri&ent (hich (as EinsteinIs5E C2 4for
ac"no(led%&ent that reality cannot e ade)uately and (holly conceptually reproduced5.
Re1ection of the naYve realis& of &odern science can 4say in Bohr, thou%h not in $eisener%5 lead to a refusal of the
ontolo%i=in% anticipation of reality as a &athe&atical (orld in itself.
D
7to$ic Theor% and the Description of Nature, 1C. E&phasis in ori%inal. Earlier in the sa&e te't he states, ,the finite
$agnitude of the quantu$ of action prevents altogether a sharp distinction &eing $ade &eteen a pheno$enon and
the agenc% &% hich it is o&served/ 4,&id, 11. E&phasis in ori%inal5.
#
;or a %eneral indication of Bohr.s readin% of the &aterial instru&ent and the oserver, ,&id, 7F, 11O911G. Consistent
(ith the failure to raise this prole&atic as such to a ,level/ of e'plicit a(areness, Bohr hi&self utili=es an e'a&ple of
feelin% one.s (ay in the dar" e&ployin% a stic" in hand that instantiates the practical concept of a 3ei&-:Vrper, ,&id,
77.
While $eisener% &ay e 4unfairly5 open to the criticis& of su1ectivi=ation, this peculiar
understanding of the asence of su1ectivity characteri=in% the total e'peri&ental situation is
the second &o&ent of Bohr.s radicalis&<
1
Bohr.s understandin% of the funda&ental situation in )uantu& &echanics differs fro&
$eisener%.s also 4thou%h, in our vie(, this is a difference in e&phasis, not sustance5. Bohr
%rasped this situation in ter&s of the duality of the e'peri&ental outco&es concernin% li%ht
and &atter.
2
0hese outco&es appear in t(o for&s, the first of (hich are facts of the order of
the Co&pton effect.
D
0he first can e e'plained thorou%hly and fully on the asis of the
assu&ption that li%ht 4or &atter5 consists in particlesE the second includes those facts that can
e e'plained thorou%hly and fully on the asis of the assu&ption that li%ht 4or &atter5 consists
in (aves. 0he t(o outco$es as outco&es are contradictory+ 0hose facts e'haustively
accounted for in ter&s of particles cannot e rendered intelli%ile in ter&s of (aves, and vice
versa.
#
4>ne sees here the sa&e situation descried y $eisener% in ter&s of position and
;or a )ualitative develop&ent of this radicalis&, see our "h% the Stud% of Hu$an 1rigins is Necessar% and "h% it is
,ndispensa&le for a Revolutionar% and 2$ancipator% 4ro9ect 4in 1rigins and 2ndings5, (here the constitution of this
su1ectivity is estalished on the asis of an evolutionarily theori=ation 4(here, for e'a&ple, it is de&onstrated that
hu&an reality cannot e understood fro& scientific accounts, anato&ically, physiolo%ically, etc., that, e.%., the rain
cannot e understood as a physical o1ect situated in Cartesian space of &odern science, ut only as or%anic
sustrate of e&odied su1ectivity, of an o1ectively practical ein%5, and the i&plications of this theori=ation for the
,sciences of &an/ are spelt out. HEditorIs note.J
1
$ere, (e elieve, (hat is intended y ,su1ective/ is aritrary deter&ination. What $eisener% has in &ind is an
inescapale interaction et(een &ethod of oservation and its o1ect+ 0here is no such &ethod that doesn.t interact
(ith the oserved o1ect, e.%., the photon (ith the electron. 0he choice of (ords, ,interference,/ (as unfortunate and
a han%over fro& the traditions of science (ith it detached ,o1ectivity/ in (hich he (as trained.
2
$ere (e are follo(in% ;eyeraend, ,&id, D1#9D1G.
0he prole& is succinctly su&&ari=ed y Bohr in the 172C essay. Else(here he states that fro& e'peri&ental
outco&es it follo(s that (e are ,not faced (ith a &odification of the &echanical and electro9dyna&ical theories
descriale in ter& of the usual physical concepts, ut (ith an essential failure of the pictures in space and ti&e on
(hich the description of natural pheno&ena has hitherto een ased/ 47to$ic Theor% and the Description of Nature,
D#9DC5.
D
In the classical theori=ations, li%ht of sufficient intensity (ill accelerate a char%ed particle (ithin an electric field to
relativistic speed causin% radiation9pressure recoil 4the electrons recoil5 and an associated :oppler shift of the
scattered li%ht. 0his is called a 0ho&son scatterin%. But, at lo( enou%h li%ht intensities this effect (ould eco&e
aritrary, re%ardless of (avelen%th (hile, classically, it is predicted the scattered (avelen%ths should e e)ual to the
initial (avelen%th. $ere it is i&portant to recall that, classically, photons have (ave characteristics, in particular
(avelen%th and fre)uency.
In 172D, *rthur Co&pton 4,* Suantu& 0heory of Scatterin% of V9Rays y @i%ht Ele&ents,/ The 4h%sical Revie 214C5,
172D+ #FD9C025 set up an e'peri&ent of this sort, one in (hich hi%h9ener%y photons, '9rays, collided (ith a caron
tar%et, ato&s (ith loosely ound electrons on their outer shells. 0he scattered radiation (as found to have a lon%er
(avelen%th than that incident upon the tar%et. 0he increase in (avelen%th did not depend on the (avelen%th of the
incident photon 4i.e., the (avelen%th of the scattered li%ht (as different fro& the incident radiation5. 0his difference or
increase in (avelen%th is the Co&pton shift 4the entire situation ein% referred to as the Co&pton effect5. It is this lo(
intensity shift in (avelen%th that cannot e e'plained classically.
What is proposed, and &athe&atically descried, is that photons not only have (ave characteristics, such as
(avelen%th and fre)uency, ut have particle or ,&aterial/ characteristics as (ell, ener%y and &o&entu& as
characteristics of &ass.
>n this asis the e'planation offered for the Co&pton effect is that individual photons (hich collide (ith loosely ound
sin%le electrons transfer so&e of their ener%y and &o&entu& to the electrons, (hich in turn recoil. In the instant of
the collision, ne( photons of less ener%y and &o&entu& are produced that scatter at an%les the si=e of (hich
depends on the a&ount of ener%y lost to the recoilin% electrons. 0he entire shift can e &easured purely in ter&s of
the an%le at (hich the photon %ets scattered, and since ener%y and (avelen%th are related in photons 4the ener%y of
photons is directly proportional to their fre)uency and inversely proportional to their (avelen%th, so lo(er9ener%y
photons have lo(er fre)uencies and lon%er (avelen%ths5, a proportionality constant for the (avelen%th shift can e
derived.
#
In his account, ;eyeraend further states, ,0here e'ists, at least at the present &o&ent, no syste& of physical
concepts (hich can provide us (ith an e'planation that covers and is co&patile (ith all the facts Hin re%ard toJ< li%ht
and &atter/ 4,&id, D1C5. See Bohr.s for&ulation of the prole& 4,&id, 10G5. We shall return to this in the 0hird S"etch.
&o&entu&. 6oreover, (e can relate this to the nature of the ato& as understood y Bohr+ In
its stale or )uantu& states, an electron can e said to ehave as a particle, ut in its e'cited
states as ener%y is supplied to it and it reaches or ,1u&ps/ to the ne't )uantu& state, this
particle can e said to ehave as a (ave, as a specific viration of an electron (ave restricted
y electric attraction that inds it to a ,space/ &ore or less close to the nucleus.5
0here are t(o si%nificant features of the &anner in (hich Bohr understands this duality of
e'peri&ental outco&es.
0he first concerns the role of theory in those outco&es. * theory is not 1ust ex post facto
syste&ati=ation, a conceptual fra&e(or" that allo(s us to unify (hat &i%ht other(ise e
unconnected ,facts,/ that is, e'peri&ental results. 0heory enters into the constitution of these
e'peri&ent results, so to spea", in advance, i.e., it shapes the very construction of the
e'peri&ent. 0his is clear in (ave e'peri&ents, cases that involve ,interference/+ In such
cases, li%ht &ust &ini&ally e partly coherent 4in the spectral sense5. 0hus, in settin% up
these e'peri&ents it is necessary to pay heed to the relative phases of the (ave se)uence,
&eanin% that "no(led%e and understandin% of (ave theory is already e'plicitly operative in
the scientist.s 4scientific tea&.s5 preparation of the e'peri&ent.
1
While &erely instancin% our
o(n vie( that the &odern science of nature rests on the pro1ection of the really real, nature,
as an asse&la%e of odies in &otion calculale in advance for purposes of nature
do&ination y (ay of prediction, a pro1ection that itself is co&ple'ly and &ediately %rounded
in the class practices of the our%eoisie, and thou%h failin% to dra( out the roader
episte&olo%ical ra&ifications of this feature, this is nonetheless the third &o&ent of Bohr.s
radicalis&. 4In precisely (hat sense (e %rasp this as instancin% our o(n perspective (ill
eco&e clear in the ne't section (herein (e e'hiit the continuities et(een the ,ne(/ and
old physics.5
0he second si%nificant feature is indeter&inateness 4uncertainty5, (hich circuitously rin%s us
ac" to $eisener%. ;or Bohr, a chan%e fro& conditions that per&it e&ploy&ent of the (ave
analysis to conditions that allo( for use of the particle analysis cannot e anticipated in
advance, cannot e theoretically "no(n. 0hey cannot e la(fully for&ulated 4those la(s
(ould e statistical5, si%nifyin% that chan%e is indeter&inate, the conditions under (hich each
ta"es place 4fro& one (ave to particle and vice versa5 are irreducile. 0hus, the duality of
(ave and particle features that alternately characteri=e the total e'peri&ental situation 4in
$eisener%.s ter&s, position and &o&entu&5 (ill not, for Bohr, provide a co&plete, fully
ade)uate and transparent description of the state of a physical syste&E such is, in other
(ords, unachievale in principle. 0hus, that situation never possesses the sa&e deter&inistic
character that otains in classical physics.
Bohr.s perspective on the situation in )uantu& &echanics is, unli"e $eisener%.s, lar%ely
)ualitative, to a certain e'tent even philosophical. Indeed, as (e shall have occasion to note
i&&ediately elo(, this is a central difference. *s $eisener%, in his triute to Bohr, re&ar"s
that, ,I noticed that &athe&atical clarity had in itself no virtue for Bohr. $e feared that the
for&al &athe&atical structure could oscure the physical core of the prole& and< (as
convinced that co&plete physical e'planation should asolutely precede the &athe&atical
for&ulation./
2
But there (as no disa%ree&ent on the relation of )uantu& &echanics to classical physics.
1
0he e'a&ple is ;eyeraend.s.
2
In S. Rosenthal 4ed.5, Niels Bohr, His 3ife and "or! as Seen &% his )riends+ 3e( -or", 17OG+ 7F 4cited in
;eyeraend, ,&id, 2G#5.
Continuit% &eteen Ouantu$ Mechanics and Classical 4h%sics
0his discontinuity et(een the old 4classical5 and ne( 4)uantu&5 physics descried y
especially y $eisener% is not, ho(ever, asolute, even for the first )uantu& physicists
4especially Bohr (ho (as &ost careful to for&ulate this relation5. Bohr and $eisener% oth
insist that, thou%h the concepts and la(s of classical physics are not valid in the suato&ic
universe, nonetheless descriptions of )uantu& &echanical e'peri&ents are to e stated in
ter&s of classical concepts and la(s. ;or it is only at the classical level that defined
e'peri&ental results are achieved 4thus presupposin% the ,%eneral correctness/ of concepts
operative at this level5.
1
:iscursive de&onstration of this non9validity 4of classical physics
concepts and la(s considered suato&ically5 proceeds via use of instru&ents constructed
accordin% to sa&e concepts and la(s.
2
In Bohr.s (ord, ,reco%nition of the indivisiility of the )uantu& of action, and the deter&ination
of its &a%nitude, not only depend on an analysis of &easure&ents ased on classical
concepts, ut it continues to e the application of these concepts also that &a"es it possile
to relate the sy&olis& of the )uantu& theory Hi.e., its &athe&atical for&ulationJ to the data of
e'perience/E
D
or, concisely and une)uivocally, Nhoever far the pheno$ena transcend the
scope of of classical ph%sical explanation, the account of all evidence $ust &e expressed in
classical ter$s+>
D
0his, then, is the first $o$ent of continuit% et(een the t(o physics.
In Bohr, in fact, this relation of )uantu& theoretical sy&olis& to e'peri&ental data has the
specific sense of a theori=ation that see"s to render intelli%ile that (hich 4)uantu&
pheno&ena5 classical physics cannot, and this for the purposes of prediction:
Suantu&9/&echanical for&alis&< represents a purel% s%$&olic sche$e per$itting onl%
predictions< as to results otainale under conditions specified y &eans of classical
concepts./ >r, to paraphrase ;eyeraend, )uantu& &echanics is a predictive device for the
proper orderin% of classical concepts.
C
4In this re%ard, fro& early on )uantu& &echanics
elucidated in depth the ondin% of electrons in ato&s and &olecules, penetratin%ly e'hiited
the for&ation and reactions of ato&ic nuclei, and inte%rated proaility la(s for spontaneous
radioactive decay into the statistically e'pressed )uantu& &echanical account, none of (hich
(as in principle achievale (ithin a classical fra&e(or". In BohrIs for&ulation of the relation,
,)uantu& &echanics presents a consistent %enerali=ation of deter&inistic &echanical
description (hich it e&races as an asy&ptotic li&it in the case of physical pheno&ena on a
scale sufficiently lar%e to allo( the ne%lect of the )uantu& of action./
O
5 0his, the effort to
salva%e the predictive character and po(er of classical physics, then, is the second $o$ent
of continuit% et(een the t(o physics. ;or it is internal to the &odern and conte&porary
sciences of nature and, for the&, y far the &ost i&portant &o&ent.
Bohr further indicates that, despite the li&itations of classical &echanics in ade)uately
accountin% for e'peri&ental results at the suato&ic level, )uantu& &echanics nonetheless
&aintains the conservation la(s of ener%y and &o&entu&,
G
(hich in the classical theori=ation
1
,<HItJ is only at the classical level that definite results for an e'peri&ent can e otained, in the for& of distinct
events (hich are associated in a one9to9one correspondence (ith the various possile values of the physical )uantity
that is ein% &easured. 0his &eans that (ithout an appeal to a classical level, )uantu& theory (ould have no
&eanin%< )uantu& theory presupposes the classical level and the %eneral correctness of classical concepts in
descriin% this level./ :avid Boh&, Ouantu$ Theor%, O2C.
2
4h%sics and 4hilosoph%, CD, especially CO9CGE C.;. von Wei=sQc"er, The Hnit% of 4h%sics, 1F291FGE 6a' 8a&&er,
The Conceptual Develop$ent of Ouantu$ Mechanics, D2CE Bohr, 7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an :noledge, D7, FF9F7.
D
7to$ic Theor% and the Description of Nature, 1O.
#
,0he Bohr9Einstein :ialo%ue,/ 122+ E&phasis in ori%inal.
C
Bohr, 7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an :noledge, #0 4e&phasis added5E ,0he Bohr9Einstein :ialo%ue,/ 12DE ;eyeraend,
Realis$, Rationalis$ and Scientific Method, 2G7.
O
,&id, G#.
G
7to$ic Theor% and the Description of Nature, 11D.
are essential foundations of the account of %eneral causality in nature. 0his is the third
$o$ent of continuit% et(een the old and ,ne(/ physics.
Both Bohr and $eisener% 4the one startin% fro& a &ore or less philosophical reflection, the
other fro& a &athe&atical analysis5 su&&ari=e re1ection of the classical theory y reference
to the naively realist character of the ontolo%y pro1ected as (ell as KarrivedK at in it. 0he
i&plications of the ne(ly e&er%in% vie( of nature that drove physicists to this rea" %ave rise
to astonish&ent and perple'ity. $eisener%Is account captures these senti&ents (ell+
I re&e&er discussions (ith Bohr (hich (ent throu%h &any hours till very late at ni%ht and
ended al&ost in despairE and (hen at the end of the discussion I (ent alone for a (al" in the
nei%horin% par" I repeated to &yself a%ain and a%ain the )uestion+ ,Can nature possily e as
asurd as it see&ed to us in these ato&ic e'peri&ents2/
1
What (as so asurd2 $eisener% indicated, Konly such e'peri&ental situations can arise in
nature as can e e'pressed in the &athe&atical for&alis&K 4vi=., in the e)uations of )uantu&
&echanics5. $ere, he (as loo"in% for a physical interpretation that (ould provide the
4&athe&atical5 for&alis& (ith an operational &eanin%, i.e., an interpretation that (ould allo(
e&pirical relations 4Ke'perienceK5 to e for&ulated in ter&s of a )uantu& &echanical,
a'io&atic analytic apparatus 4the K&athe&atical for&alis&K5. -et on the face of it, the cited
proposition is asurd. 0o render it intelli%ile, it should e rephrased in a conditionally
interro%atory for&+ KIf our e'peri&ents necessarily re)uire a &athe&atical for&ulation of their
results, then, (hen (e pose )uestions to nature, (hat is it aout (hat (e are doin% that
i&poses this re)uire&ent2K <Bohr, a%ain far &ore radical, indicated that the for&alis& defied
une)uivocal e'pression in classical physical lan%ua%e<
2
3ote that scientific practice
4e'peri&ent5 is at issue, since in our daily practice (e often interact (ith the surroundin%
natural (orld, yet the understandin% therey achieved never in principle need 4and rarely
actually does5 ta"e a hi%hly for&ali=ed, &athe&atical for&. 0he e'peri&ent is 4and this is no(
co&&only understood5 a posin% of a )uestion to nature, and that posin% is also 4not so
co&&only understood5 involves construction of natural pheno&ena.
D
1
4h%sics and 4hilosoph%, #2.
2
,<HInJ the indeter&inacy relation< (e are dealin% (ith an i$plication of the for$alis$ hich defies una$&iguous
expression in ords suited to descri&e classical ph%sical pictures. 0hus, a sentence li"e T(e cannot "no( oth the
&o&entu& and the position of an ato&ic o1ect. raises at once )uestions as to the physical reality of t(o such
attriutes of the o1ect, (hich can e ans(ered only y referrin% to the conditions for the una&i%uous use of space9
ti&e concepts, on the one hand, and dyna&ical conservation la(s, on the other. While the co&ination of these
concepts into a sin%le picture of a causal chain of events is the essence of classical &echanics, roo& for re%ularities
eyond the %rasp of such as description is 1ust afforded y the circu&stance that the study of the co&ple&entary
pheno&ena de&ands &utually e'clusive e'peri&ental arran%e&ent./ 7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an :noledge, #09#1
4,:iscussion (ith Einstein on Episte&olo%ical Prole&s in *to&ic Physics,/ e&phasis added5. In the case this
for&ulation leaves so&ethin% to e desired, Bohr e'plicitly states else(here 4,&id, GD5 that (hat is &utually e'clusive
are the conditions for the very use of space9ti&e concepts to one side and dyna&ical conservation la(s to the other.
0o state this is to clearly understand (hy it is necessary to suordinate )uantu& &echanics to classical physics 4first
&o&ent of continuity5, and the central role of prediction in achievin% this ai& 4second &o&ent of continuity5.
D
,&id+
0hus $eisener% states 4,&id, CF5, ,What (e oserve is not nature in itself ut nature e'posed to our &ethod of
)uestionin%./ $ere (e &i%ht note ?aston Bachelard, The Ne Scientific Spirit, 1OG91G1 4also 1DD, 1OC5, (here the
active, constructivist character of the &odern science of nature revealed y the ne( physics is e'plicitly detailed. In
the conclusion to this (or", Bachelard, a philosopher of science trained as a che&ist, atte&pts to %round a non9
Cartesian episte&olo%y on the ne( physics. 0o de&onstrate the radical difference so9called in &ethods et(een
classical and the ne( physics, he syste&ically contrasts :escartes. analysis of a piece of (a' 4Discourse on Method5
to a si&ple, conte&porary scientifically e'peri&ental construction, he calls its ,co&position,/ of (a'. $ere, in this
e'e&plary instance Bachelard, so to spea", lets the cat out of the a%+ 3ature %rasped scientifically has asolutely
nothin% to do (ith the nature as lived and e'perienced in daily life. 0he reader need not e over(hel&ed (ith the
sense that this ,nature/ is a thought-&ased 0often i$agined5, la&orator% construct, a co&ple' product of a disciplined
Suantu& &echanics, oth as &odel and e'e&plar of conte&porary physics, constructs nature
,physically,/ as odies in &otion, as K&atter.K It is K&atterK that is, if possile, even KthinnerK
than the K&atterK constituted in classical physical theory. ;or there can e no &ore rarefied
astraction that )uantu& &echanical K&atter.K While in classical physics K&atterK had the
sense of a real ody in &otion essentially deter&ined as an e'tended thin% 4res extensa5,
K&atterK in )uantu& &echanics, (hether as particle or (ave, has not only lost its attriution of
e'tension and its character of thin%liness 4and to this point )uantu& &echanics has een
triu&phant as all of conte&porary physics ta"es its cue in this prole&atic fro& it5, ut even its
status as real, since the proaility functions that descrie K&atterK in the &athe&atical
for&alis& of )uantu& &echanics should e treated as descriptions of possi&ilities 4i.e., of
possile relations a&on% ele&ents &ovin% in a field5. 0hus, the sa&e series of initial
astractions fro& the )ualitative character of the sensuous thin% that distin%uished the
treat&ent of perceptual pheno&ena in classical physical theory are also presupposed in
)uantu& &echanics. 0his is the fourth $o$ent of continuit% et(een the old and ne( physics.
;or classical physical theory, the astraction fro& the sensuous )ualities of the thin%, and its
treat&ent as a &ere ody in &otion essentially deter&ined as an e'tended thin%, 1ustified the
denial of the i&&anent presence of e&otive or valuative )ualities in the thin%. ;or )uantu&
&echanics as (ell as the entirety of conte&porary physics, this 4series of5 astraction4s5 has
the sa&e function+ 0he sa&e clai&s to Kethical neutralityK 4usually co&ined (ith prattle aout
the Kpursuit of truthK5 are present in )uantu& &echanics, to this day in conte&porary physics.
0his out(ard appearance, vi=., the entire discourse concernin% value9free science, re&ains
the pheno&enal for& characteristically concealin% 4and revealin%5 an inner structure (hose
essence is class9%rounded and utilitarian9practical, i.e., is our%eois and technolo%ical.
1
*ccordin%ly, the so9constituted instru&entalist character of conte&porary physics necessarily
renders it a productive force in capital accu&ulation and an ideolo%ical (eapon of our%eois
do&ination. 0his is the fifth $o$ent of continuit% et(een the old and ne( physics.
0he )uestion as to (hy produce the series of astractions in the first place receives the sa&e
ans(er as it did in the case of classical physics+ 0he astractions are %enerated for purposes
of &easure&ent, calculation and prediction, that is, it ai&s at control of natural pheno&ena,
or, it is %iven (ith the societal pro1ect of nature do&ination. 0hus, the sixth, decisive $o$ent
of continuit% et(een the old and ne( physics is that conceptually and teleolo%ically oth
"no(led%e for&ations, as predecessor and successor, are &otivationally %rounded in the
sa&e lar%ely hidden social intentionality, the societal pro1ect of the do&ination of nature that
&ar"s our%eois civili=ation...
practice. Bachelard, callin% it ,artificial e'perience/, hi&self refers to the artificial, constructive intent of the experi$ent
4,&id, 1OG91OF, 1O75, the end product of an entire series of astractions. 0he only si%nificant )uestion is, ,to (hat
end2/ *nd, in this re%ard, Bachelard provides &ost of the ans(er, ,&odern science coordinates its oservations in
search of the )ualities< Hto re&a"e or ,construct/J &atter/ 4,&id, 1G05. Why the e'peri&ent2 Why re&a"e &atter2
0his, of course, rin%s us ac" to our theori=ation of internal necessary relation of science to the our%eoisie.
1
>f course, this attitude, as scientific false consciousness and ad faith, is even &ore decisive today than at the
ori%ins of the &odern science of nature. ;or instance, (hile ein% held y *llied forces at the end of last i&perialist
(orld (ar, ?er&an physical theorists 4a&on% the& Werner $eisener% and Carl ;riedrich von Wei=sQc"er5 heard that
an ato&ic o& had een dropped on $iroshi&a y the *&erican i&perialists. 0he %roup, huddled to%ether for
closed &outh discussions, (as horrified... >ne (onders ho( &uch horror $eisener% e'perienced since, as a for&er
&e&er of a )rei :orps &ilitia soldier and the youth "andervogel fro& 17D7 to the end of the (ar, he headed the
3a=i ato&ic (eapons develop&ent pro%ra&... Reflectin% on this %enocidal act, von Wei=sQc"er re%ur%itated the sa&e
pap that characteri=ed the &odern science of nature at its ori%ins, affir&in% ,our tas", no( as in the past, is to %uide
this develop&ent Hof scienceJ to(ard the ri%ht ends, to e'tend the enefits of "no(led%e to all &an"ind, not to prevent
the develop&ent itself./ Recalled and cited y $eisener% in his 4h%sics and Be%ond, 17C. Co&pare von
Wei=sQc"er.s re&ar"s (ith those of Bacon cited in the Introduction 4,Ele&ents of the Conceptual Structure of
Science/5, aove.
Reco%ni=in% this o1ectively ofuscated &otivation per&its us, y the (ay, to provide the
ans(er to the Kasurd )uestionK posed y $eisener%+ ,>ur e'peri&ents necessarily re)uire a
&athe&atical for&ulation of their results ecause, (hen (e pose )uestions to nature, (hat
(e are doin% is atte&ptin% to do&inate it. ?iven that to do&inate (e have found it &ost
efficacious to treat nature astractly as an a%%re%ate totality of odies in &otion and there(ith
to )uantify, &athe&atical for&alis& provides us (ith the &ost efficient, effective, and
syste&atic &eans (e have discovered in pursuit of this pro1ect, and at the sa&e ti&e its
re&oved, self9contained intellectual structure neatly dovetails (ith our self91ustificatory ad
faith in and throu%h (hich (e deny that (e are en%a%ed in anythin% other than the pursuit of
truthK...
0he ne( physics, and for that &atter conte&porary physics in its entirety, prescrie Kla(sK for
&anipulation of sensuous nature as K&atter.K Suantu& &echanics, since it prescries pure
possi&ilities for said tas", &i%ht, it can e ar%ued, e considered the hi%hest for& of this
intellectual Kart,K i.e., science, of &anipulation. In other (ords, to the e'tent it confor&s to its
&odel and e'e&plar, in ai&in% at prediction, in e'pressin% itself in ter&s of classical
&echanics, thus at once treatin% nature as K&atterK and i&&anently connected to the
historically do&inant class of the our%eoisie, it is as such technological in the &odern sense,
that is, orders nature as standin%9reserve, ready9to9hand ra( &aterials 4Stoffe5 for capitalist
co&&odity productionE or, in Bachelard.s (ords, ,3ature.s true order is the order e put in it
(ith the technical &eans at our disposal,/
1
i.e., science orders nature for the reproduction of
societies of capital, the %loal syste& of (hich ta"en to%ether for& capitalist civili=ation.
1
The Ne Scientific Spirit, 10F.
Second S"etch
2instein, Si$ultaneit% and Relativit%, Technological Civili/ation
If )uantu& &echanics ro"e (ith the space9ti&e coordination of ato&ic processes and (ith
the universal causality of natural processes as underlay the classical theory e%innin% fro&
?alileo, this (as not the case (ith the relativity theory 4in particular %eneral relativity5.
1
0he
prole& of the relation of science to capital is )uite different here 4since EinsteinI co&&it&ent
to universal causality &a"es his (or" the co&pletion of classical physics and not its
aandon&ent5.
2
0his can e developed y e'hiitin% the relation of science to that society,
capitalist, in (hich it has developed, the sole society in the lar%e historical sense (ith (hich it
is fully con%ruent.
In the analyses and perspective developed here, the internal necessary relation of our%eois
science to capital.s technolo%y holds for even the &ost rarefied, re&oved scientific conceptual
elaorations. $ere in offerin% a sin%le, sin%ular instance, (e can reestalish those other(ise
hidden foundations, that internally and necessary refer science ac" to its asis in the
practices of accu&ulation, no lon%er those of the our%eoisie as a class ut &ore and &ore
as the central feature of the dyna&ics of capitalist develop&ent as a syste& of social
relations...
In 170C, Einstein pulished four si%nificant papers, three se&inal in the history of physics one
of (hich, at the center of this discussion, has stood out &ore than all the rest. We are referrin%
to ,>n the Electrodyna&ics of 6ovin% Bodies/ (herein Einstein posed the )uestion of the
fra&e of reference in (hich the la(s of electro&a%netis& are valid, na&ely the )uestion, ,(ith
respect to (hat fra&e of reference li%ht &oves at speed c2/
0heoretically for&ulated, the )uestion (as one of the &eanin% of ti&e itself 4in the narro(
)uantitative sense5, and it arose in the historical and technolo%ical conte't to (hich this
for&ulation referred ac"+ 0his cultural at&osphere (as pla%ued y the prole&s this
)uestion su&&ari=ed+ ;ro& the &ost &undane, si&plest difficulty of coordinatin% train
schedules< ho( can the various ti&es, G+#C here, G+#D here, G+ #G there in the various sleepy
ha&lets alon% the line fro& ?eneva to BArich (hile a tele%raph connection revealed G+#O at
the &etropolitan ter&inus, all e ri%ht2 Which one is ri%ht2 < throu%h the i&perialist &ilitary
re)uire&ents of coordinatin% troop &ove&ents< a prole& that had deeply othered the
?er&an ?eneral Staff %oin% ac" to von 6olt"e.s ca&pai%ns that had &ade ?er&an national
unification a reality< to the vital issues of i&perialist po(er restin% on facilitation of
international co&&erce< an intense co&petition to technolo%ically estalish that ti&e y
creation of e'tensive net(or" of undersea tele%raph cales, that, in turn, allo(ed the victor to
fi' lon%itudes and redra( the %loal &ap, i.e., to facilitate he%e&ony a&on% i&perialist rivals
stru%%lin% over territory 4East *sia as a (hole, i.e., the Philippines, Indochina, the Lorean
Peninsula, and China in particular5, the victorious outco&e of (hich secured direct access to
natural resources to e appropriated as ra( &aterials and provided the %uaranteed
opportunities for capital e'port and hu%ely profitale lendin% aroad< all involved directly and
i&&ediately the &eanin% of ti&e, and none could e effectively e resolved until the )uestion,
posed ade)uately, per&itted of resolution.
0hat is (hat Einstein did.
*s (as prosaically e'hiited in the daily coordination of train travel, the funda&ental prole&
is that t(o different reference syste&s 4e.%., the ,official/ cloc" at the Bern station
counterposed to the one in ?eneva, not to &ention the one at -verdon5 can, and did, at one
and the sa&e ,ti&e/ provide t(o different readin%s 4i.e., ti&es5 for the sa&e ,physical syste&/
1
Bohr, 7to$ic Theor% and the Description of Nature, CD, 7G.
2
*s Bohr too notes, *to&ic Physics and $u&an Lno(led%e, 2C, G0.
4e.%., the train as it pulls into a sleepy ha&let, -verdon, rou%hly half (ay et(een the t(o
cities5.
Einstein achieved a theoretical restate&ent of this )uestion that, %ivin% rise to its o(n
resolution in the for& of a state&ent of the &eanin% of si$ultaneit%, provided procedural
resolution through electro$agnetic cloc! coordination+++ a procedural resolution, &ind you, for
(hich ,ti&e/ is a convention, ascertained &% $easuration+ 0his is a lon%, lon% (ay fro&
classical concepts such as 3e(tonIs for (ho& ti&e is asolute, for (ho& space is a
sensoriu& of ?od. EinsteinIs (or" unfolded ,in the years efore 6ay 170C/ in the conte't of
,si&ultaneity tal" HthatJ (as %ro(in% denser a&on% physicists as they %rappled (ith the
electrodyna&ics of &ovin% odies. Si&ultaneity procedures lay thic" in philosophical te'ts, in
the cityscape of Bern, alon% train trac"s throu%hout S(it=erland and eyond, in undersea
tele%raph cales, and in the application in9pile at the Bern patent office. In the &idst of this
e'traordinary &aterial and literary intensification of (ired si&ultaneity, physicists, en%ineers,
philosophers, and patent officers deated ho( to &a"e si&ultaneity visile. Einstein did not
con1ure these various flo(s of si&ultaneity out of nothin%E he snapped a 1unction into the
circuit enalin% the currents to cross. Si&ultaneity had lon% een in play at &any different
scales, ut Einstein sho(ed ho( the sa$e flashed si%nal of si&ultaneity illu&inated all of
the&, fro& the &icrophysical across re%ional trains and tele%raphs to overarchin%
philosophical clai&s aout ti&e and the Rniverse./
1
Ran%in% fro& the &ost prosaic to the
&ost e'alted, in a co&prehensive state&ent of the &eanin% of si&ultaneity all these threads
could e rou%ht to%ether.
0he entire, inherited 3e(tonian fra&e(or", that of universal underlyin% ether &loc!ed insi%ht
into this solutionE for, if there (as a asic sustance itself at rest to (hich all o1ects in &otion
(ere related, then there (as si&ilarly a universal fra&e of reference that defined the te&poral
di&ension of their &otion.
0his universal fra&e of reference re)uires a sin%ular ,correct/ ti&e y (hich, say, all cloc"s
can e set and reset. In the history of late nineteenth century physics, atte&pts to elaorate a
coherent description of electro&a%netic and optical pheno&ena disclosed that oservers in
&otion, &ovin% relative to each other at hi%h rates of speed, (ill or%ani=e events differently
the one fro& another. 0(o oservers (ill 1ud%e events that occur at distinctly different points
,in/ space differently in the )uantitative sense, one 1ud%in% the& to e, say, si&ultaneous, the
other transpirin% at different &o&ents. Effectively, this situation undercuts the vie( operative
and e'plicit in classical &echanics that space and ti&e are asolute, that li%ht propa%ates
instantaneously, thus per&ittin% us to situate those odies enco&passin% and around us
(ithout re%ard to their velocity and to arran%e events in a sin%ular, universal te&poral fra&e of
reference. But all physicists 4and 6ichelson, 6orley and Rutherford (ere (ell positioned to do
other(ise5 prior to Einstein proceeded cautiously and e'tre&ely conservatively, %ivin% no
indication of the necessity of a rea" (ith the classical conceptions of space 4and ti&e5.
In the paper referred to aove Einstein a&andoned the concept of an underlyin% sustance,
ether, at rest in relation to (hich o1ects are in &otion, so it (as lon% thou%ht, declarin% it a
fiction.
2
40his (as a &o&entous paradi%& shift.5 $e restated, conservatively, the principle that
the la(s of physics, the la(s of &otion, the la(s of electro&a%netis& are valid for all
oservers in unifor& &otion, all fra&es of reference in unifor& &otion are e)ually %ood places
to do physics, there is no preferred state of &otion, no place is special at least as lon% as the
1
Peter ?alison, 2instein.s Cloc!s, 4oincarI.s Maps: 2$pires of Ti$e, 2O1. E&phases in the ori%inal.
2
,0he introduction of a Tlu&iniferous ether. (ill prove to e superfluous inas&uch as the vie( here to e developed (ill
not re)uire an Tasolutely stationary space. provided (ith special properties, nor assi%n a velocity9vector to a point of
the e&pty space in (hich electro&a%netic processes ta"e place./ *lert Einstein, ,>n the Electrodyna&ics of 6ovin%
Bodies./
&otion is unifor&.
1
43o paradi%& shift here.5 0he special theory of relativity applied to this
special case of &otion, e'clusively to unifor& &otion, not to acceleratin% &otion, not to
rotatin% and circular 4or elliptical5 &otions such as planetary &otion, not to odies 4e.%., an
airplane5 su1ect to turulence. ;or this special case 4(hich concerns us al&ost e'clusively in
our daily lives5, all oservers in unifor& &otion (ill &easure the sa&e value for the speed of
li%ht, even if they are &ovin% relative to each other. We can conclude, and the conclusion it
should e noted is anythin% ut conservative, if I &easure the speed of li%ht (hile (al"in% at D
&ph, and you do the sa&e in a 1et &ovin% at G00 &ph or, for that &atter, in a hypothetical
starship &ovin% at a )uarter the speed of li%ht, in each case as instances of unifor& &otion
the speed of li%ht (ill e sa&e, ecause the speed of li%ht 4c n D00,000 "ilo&eters per
second5 is constant, a position (ithin the history of physics that follo(ed fro& a fa&ous set of
e)uations developed y 8a&es Cler" 6a'(ell in the 1FO0s that identified li%ht as a for& of
electro&a%netic radiation.
0here (as another ,thou%ht e'peri&ent/ 48edan!enexperi$ent5 involved here+ While on a
trolley car ridin% to (or", Einstein i&a%ined the car speedin% up, faster, still faster,
approachin% the speed of li%ht, as the car and he &oved a(ay fro& a cloc" to(er as it
approached noon. $e i&a%ed hi&self &ovin% at that speed, c, effectively ridin% a (ave of
li%ht, li%ht in the visile spectru&, (hich in the physicalist sense ,carried/ the ,infor&ation/ that
it (as noon+ 0hat cloc" (ould not &ove, yet his poc"et (atch tic"ed a(ay the seconds,
su%%estin% to hi& that ti&e itself (as relative to the fra&e of reference of the oserver.
0his is called ti&e dilation. It can e e'hiited+ I&a%ine t(o parallel &irrors (ith a pulse of li%ht
reflectin% et(een the&, each traversal constitutin% a ,tic"/. If a cloc" li"e this (as to &ove
rapidly past an oserver at rest, the oserver at rest (ould see the pulse follo(in% a sa(tooth
pattern. Each point traversed y the &ovin% cloc" (ould follo( a lon%er 4dia%onal5 path than
in the strai%ht up9and9do(n path of a si&ilar cloc" oserved y so&eone &ovin% in loc"step
(ith this fra&e(or". Since li%ht travels at the sa&e speed in every fra&e of reference,
Einstein concluded that a tic" in the &irror fra&e (ould e &easured as ta"in% lon%er than a
tic" in the rest fra&e. 0herefore, the rest oserver &ust conclude ti&e runs slo( in the &ovin%
fra&e of reference.
0his ti&e dilation &a"es little or no calculale difference in daily life, ut it (ould &a"e a
difference if hi%h speed travel 4as in fantasi=ed spaceship travel5, rou%hly at speeds in e'cess
of O0Z c. In space travel i&a%ined at these speeds those aoard a spaceship (ould not a%e
as rapidly as those livin% out their lives on Earth.
>ther effects are also ,oservale./ ;irst, an o1ect accelerated to the speed of li%ht (ould
have its len%th shortened to =ero 4this has een ,oserved/ in suato&ic ,ehavior/ in particle
accelerators5E second, the &ass of the sa&e o1ect as it approached c (ould approach
infinity. It (ould constitute, as it (ere, a sin%ularity, an infinitesi&al point (ith infinite &ass.
0hus, no o1ect (ith &ass can travel at the speed of li%ht. 0hese insi%hts< dra(n out
speculatively ut lo%ically y Einstein (ere all %iven, i&plicitly, (ith his concept of si&ultaneity,
the ne( paradi%& e'plicatin% the &eanin% of ti&e<
0he paradi%& shift stands at the foundations of Einstein.s insi%ht. * reconstruction of the
history of physics late in the lon% nineteenth century &i%ht su%%est that discardin% the ether
(as a old, ut lo%ical step. 0he 6ichelson96orley e'peri&ent underta"en over the course of
the 1FF0s, atte&ptin% to &easure the &ove&ent of the Earth throu%h the ether so9called, had
failed to detect its presence. -et Einstein &a"es only the va%uest allusion to it, and at the ti&e
there is no evidence that he (as actually fa&iliar (ith the e'peri&ent+ If this is hard to elieve,
1
,H0heJ sa&e la(s of electrodyna&ics and optics (ill e valid for all fra&es of reference for (hich the e)uations of
&echanics hold %ood./ ,Iid./
note that no(here at this &o&ent does he &ention it, no(here in his pulications, in his
correspondences or, in his (or" reports, to his confidants.
Was he not a(are of it at the ti&e2
1
Whether this re&ar"ale analysis and co&ple' of insi%hts
(as for&ed, so spea", (ithout a history or it too" shape (ithin the fra&e(or" of prole&s
posed y the &odern science of nature as he understood it, they cannot e %rasped in ter&s
of a pro%ressive develop&ent of "no(led%e... Einstein did later reconstruct the logical
develop&ent of the prole&atic that led hi& to the theory of special relativity and he hi&self
clai&ed he (as reachin% ac" to resolve a asic aporia of 3e(tonian &echanics...
2
3onetheless, as the (hole (ei%ht of our analysis indicates, it is fanciful to account for this
decisive paradi%& shift y uncoverin% a lo%ic of the develop&ent of physics that &ade it
necessary, a(aitin% only Einstein, and fro& (hich al&ost everythin% else follo(ed+ Situated
ithin the order of capital, it is onl% the total cultural context, and a grasp of the technological
pro&le$s of the age, that per$its to understand hat had transpired+
But return to si&ultaneity.
What did Einstein hi&self have to say2 ,If (e (ish to descrie the $otion of a &aterial point,
(e %ive the values of its co9ordinates as functions of the ti&e. 3o( (e &ust ear carefully in
&ind that a &athe&atical description of this "ind has no physical &eanin% unless (e are )uite
clear as to (hat (e understand y Tti&e../
D
With no ether at rest as the asis on (hich one
ti&e (ill appear privile%ed in relation to all others, (ith no concept of a uni)ue &easure of
ti&e that does not depend upon a fra&e of reference, the te$poral 0i+e+, cloc!5 s%ste$s of
ever% inertial fra$e of reference are equivalent, one as valid or true as an% other. 0hey only
need e synchroni=ed. What Einstein provided (as a ne( definition of si$ultaneit%+
#
*s
stunnin%ly si&ple as this sounds... to us... it too" the paradi%& shift 4eli&ination of ether and
1
It is hard to elieve+
R.S. Shan"land 4,Conversations (ith *lert Einstein,/ 7$erican Gournal of 4h%sics, D1, 17OD+ #Gf.5 related the entire
170C paper on special relativity ,is rather stran%e in the respect that Einstein reveals very little aout (hat he "no(s
to e e'peri&entally verified and that he &a"es no specific reference to the (or" of others. 0he paper in fact
represents an eni%&a in that it is very difficult to see ho( &uch is an inference fro& e'peri&ental results 4or a
theoretical for&ulation of the&5 of (hich Einstein had "no(led%e< , 4cited y ;eyeraend, Iid, 2GC, n. O0. E&phasis
in ori%inal5. Shan"land (ent on to pointedly indicate that Einstein had hi&self critici=ed $ilert for failin% to e'pressly
state the &ethods on the asis of (hich he achieved his results. Inconsistency indeedh
2
Einstein traced out the lo%ical develop&ent of the prole& (hich led to relativity and inti&ated, not e'pressly statin%,
that the theory of special relativity ori%inated in a reflection on 6a'(ellIs e)uations (hich unified electricity and
&a%netis&... easily and countless ti&es verified, 6a'(ell provided a for&ula for the %eneration of &a%netic fields
fro& chan%in% electrical ones and vice versa, and, notin% that these chan%es propa%ate, a"in to li%ht or to (aves
&ovin% at li%ht speed, proposed these (aves are li%ht... It (as the pheno&enon of li%ht (hich Einstein focused his
attention on. See Einstein, 2ssa%s on Science, 1G91F, DC9DF, #D9#C for prole& and its develop&ent, and #7, (here
he effectively ac"no(led%ed lon% after the fact that 6ichelsonIs e'peri&ent ,proved/ the e)uivalent le%iti&acy of all
inertial fra&es of reference 4instantiated in the prole& of different train ti&es, aove5. 3ote also, ,&id, #F, (here he
states, ,the theory of relativity... is no revolutionary act ut the natural continuation of a line that can e traced throu%h
centuries./
D
Einstein, ,Iid./ E&phasis in ori%inal.
#
,If at the point * of space there is a cloc", an oserver at * can deter&ine the ti&e values of events in the i&&ediate
pro'i&ity of * y findin% the positions of the hands (hich are si&ultaneous (ith these events. If there is at the point B
of space another cloc" in all respects rese&lin% the one at *, it is possile for an oserver at B to deter&ine the ti&e
values of events in the i&&ediate nei%horhood of B. But it is not possile (ithout further assu&ption to co&pare, in
respect of ti&e, an event at * (ith an event at B. We have so far defined only an T* ti&e. and a TB ti&e.. We have not
defined a co&&on Tti&e. for * and B, for the latter cannot e defined at all unless (e estalish &% definition that the
Tti&e. re)uired y li%ht to travel fro& * to B e)uals the Tti&e. it re)uires to travel fro& B to *. @et a ray of li%ht start at
the T* ti&e. t* fro& * to(ards B, let it at the TB ti&e. tB e reflected at B in the direction of *, and arrive a%ain at * at the
T* ti&e. t.*.
In accordance (ith definition the t(o cloc"s synchroni=e if
tB N t* n t.* N tB.
,We assu&e that this definition of synchronis& is free fro& contradictions, and possile for any nu&er of pointsE
and that the follo(in% relations are universally valid+
(ith it the concept of asolute ti&e5 to %enerate this insi%ht, to rin% the &etaphysics of ti&e
done to Earth, to assert a procedural resolution ased on &easuration.
Einstein (as attuned to his a%e, as the entire prole&atic of si&ultaneity cut ac" and forth
across the era+ If it (ei%hted heavy on physicists as &anifested in their te'ts, if it also ran
across the trac"s spreadin% out fro& Bern to the rest of S(it=erland and eyond, and if it (as
si&ilarly present in the under(ater tele%raph cales that connected %eo%raphically distinct
&etropolitan centers of capital other(ise oceans apart, in the cloc" to(ers that hi%hli%hted
that city.s architectural landscape, in the applications su&itted to the Bern patent office, the
conundru&s of the prole& of si&ultaneity (ere in the air, that is, they (ere neatly e&edded
in a cultural9ideal at&osphere co&pletely saturated and fully char%ed (ith the e&inently
practical prole&s of a scientific society, our%eois civili=ation, to (hich solutions (ere
continuously offered 4a%ain, (itness the patent su&issions in Bern5+
If the train on (hich 6ichele Besse 4Einstein.s %ood friend5 pulled into the Bern station at F a&
on a return trip fro& BArich, the ti&e of his arrival could e %iven in ter&s of
electro&a%netically synchroni=ed cloc"s, none of (hich ,occupied/ a privile%ed position vis9P9
vis the others.
Einstein.s theori=ation e&er%ed very late in the lon% nineteenth century 4or, if you prefer,
chronolo%ically the early 20
th
century5 as the do&inant fra&e(or" for physical analysis not
only ecause, startin% fro& the la(s of electro&a%netis& for&ulated y 6a'(ell, it (as the
&ost consistent, thorou%h%oin% and e'planatorily po(erful develop&ent of the &echanics at
the heart of our%eois science of nature ut ecause, (ith his ne( concept of si&ultaneity, he
had (or"ed out the practical, technological pro&le$ that had confounded the leadin% ele&ents
of European and 3orth *&erican societies of capital for the previous thirty years. 0he
coordination of ti&es (as an e&inently practical prole& of a scientific civili=ation, not &erely
a 8edan!enexperi$ent+ It (as decisive for the capitalist (orld.s &ost dyna&ic fir&s, the
sy&ols and e'e&plars of the t(ili%ht era of for&al do&ination, railroad capitalsE it (as crucial
to i&perialist &ilitariesE and, not to e sli%hted, it (as of overridin% si%nificance for the S(iss
cloc" industry<If the deter&ination of the &eanin% of ti&e provided practical resolution to
technolo%ical prole&s at the level of civili=ation, at the sa&e ti&e it also illu&inated the entire
intellectual landscape of foundational science 4physics5.
1
Well, not )uite. * prole& still
re&ained+
If the first la( of ther&odyna&ics holds for each and every oservational fra&e of reference,
then total ener%y &ust e constant (ithin a physical syste& (ithout re%ard to the specific
reference fra&e (ithin (hich an oserver is situated. But if &ass increases (ith velocity
4&ar"edly as a &ovin% ody approaches the speed of li%ht5, then the ener%y of this o1ect,
"inetic ener%y, does not confor& to the first la( 4of ther&odyna&ics5. 0his could not e.
So&ethin% had to e asent fro& the ener%y alance sheet.
0he first la( refers to closed syste&s (here the universe itself is conceived as such. Einstein,
fervently elievin% the universe is a closed syste&, one in (hich a universal causality prevails
,1. If the cloc" at * synchroni=es (ith the cloc" at B and also (ith the cloc" at C, the cloc"s at B and C also
synchroni=e (ith each other.
,2. If the cloc" at B synchroni=es (ith the cloc" at *, the cloc" at * synchroni=es (ith the cloc" at B.
,0hus (ith the help of certain i&a%inary physical e'peri&ents (e have settled (hat is to e understood y
synchronous stationary cloc"s located at different places, and have evidently otained a definition of Tsi&ultaneous,.
or Tsynchronous,. and of Tti&e.. 0he Tti&e. of an event is that (hich is %iven si&ultaneously (ith the event y a
stationary cloc" located at the place of the event, this cloc" ein% synchronous, and indeed synchronous for all ti&e
deter&inations, (ith a specified stationary cloc"./ ,Iid./ E&phasis in ori%inal.
1
0hus, for e'a&ple, in his patent office (or" Einstein had eco&e an e'pert on %yroco&passes to such an e'tent that
he had contriuted to one of the &a1or patents of *nschAt=9Lae&pfe, a fir& en%a%ed in the production of advanced
electrical &achinery. ?alison, ,&id, 2C1.
4,?od does not roll dice/5,
1
pondered the sorts of )uestions raised y the line of thin"in% in the
last para%raph. * fe( &onths after pulishin% the 170C paper under discussion here, he
penned a note in (hich he resolved this dile&&a. 0he ener%y alance sheet (ould preserve
its e)uationary sy&&etric character 4no ne( &ass (ould e created in the universe5, if the
entire &ass of a &ovin% ody could e converted into ener%y. It (as &ass itself that had een
&issin% fro& that alance sheet. 3o lon%er+
6athe&atically for&ulated, &ass possesses a rest ener%y that is the precise e)uivalent of its
rest &ass, $, &ultiplied y the speed of li%ht, c, s)uared. E n &c
2
.
See&in%ly at the furthest re&ove of the ,con1uncture/ (e have descried here< the
necessary, internal relation of science to the our%eoisie, or, in the era of real do&ination as
the our%eoisie increasin%ly functions and appears as a personification of capital, of science
to capital< the )uantitatively ulti&ate e'pression of the funda&ental structure of the universe,
its underlyin% principle of intelli%iility, si&ultaneously perfectly and precisely articulates ane(
the si%nificance and hidden teleolo%y of science as a class theory of nature do&inationE for, as
(e shall see,
2
it raise to a ne(, the hi%hest e'istin% level the &eanin% and i&port of capitalist
hu&anity.s relation to nature, a relation that is asically disclosed in capitalist &odernity.s
technolo%y.
1
,<o der liee ?ott (Arfelt./
2
Postscript, Part III, ,Capitalis& and 0echnolo%y,/ elo(.
0hird S"etch
Bohr and 2instein
,<o der liee ?ott (Arfelt./
0he discussion in (hich this re&ar" occurred< Einstein %ently ut &oc"in%ly posed it as a
)uestion< too" place in Brussels in >ctoer 172G at the ;ifth Physical Conference of the
Solvay Institute. Einstein, Bohr and Ehrenfest, a&on% others, participated in this specific
discussion. 0he point at issue (as a philosophical reflection on the )uantu& &echanical
aandon&ent of causality,
1
and (ith it the peculiar realist &etaphysics characteristic of a
science that identifies the funda&ental structure of the real (ith a conceptually %enerated
&athe&atical pro1ection 4all the (hile assertin% that the pro1ection as real e'ists
,independently/ of us5.
2
...*fter 171C, Einstein increasin% turned to cos&olo%ical speculation and increasin%ly insisted
on &ethodolo%ical deductivis&...
D
(e could call the latter a ,corollary/ of the for&er... In the
sa&e &anner, the affir&ation of this &ethod constituted a self9&isunderstandin% of his o(n
(or" prior to this ti&e can e said to e a ,corollary/ of the pro1ection of nature as a
&athe&atical (orld in itself evinced in such state&ents as, ,...pure &athe&atical construction
enales us to discover the concepts and the la(s connectin% the&, (hich %ives us the "ey to
the understand of nature... I hold it true that pure thou%ht can %rasp reality/...
#
In discussion (ith Bohr, Einstein e'pressed a ,feelin% of dis)uietude/ (ith the aandon&ent of
universal causality in )uantu& &echanics...
C
E'istentially, this had eco&e such a prole& for
hi& that he ca&e to annual conferences such as Solvay ar&ed (ith su%%estions, ar%u&ents
and proposed e'peri&ents the purpose of (hich (as to de&onstrate the necessity of a
reinstate&ent of causality and space9ti&e coordination in )uantu& &echanics...
Einstein had atte&pted to finesse, if you (ill, the prole& posed y Co&ptonIs (or" y
su%%estin% ,a control of the &o&entu& and ener%y transfer, involved in a location of the
particle in space and ti&e, HcouldJ< e used for a further specification of the state of the
particle after it< HpassedJ throu%h the hole,/ referrin% to the insertion of a second diaphra%&
4et(een the first and the photo%raphic plate5 in the conte't of an e'peri&ental set up that
involved a narro( slit in a diaphra%& ehind (hich (as a photo%raphic plate. Bohr
de&onstrated 4clearly on his account5 that there (as no escape fro& the prole&, for ,there
could e no other (ay to dee& a lo%ically consistent &athe&atical for&alis& as inade)uate
than y de&onstratin% the departure of its conse)uences fro& e'perience or y provin% that
its predictions did not e'haust the possiilities of oservation, and Einstein.s ar%u&entation
could e directed to neither of these ends./
O
0hus, Einstein.s futile re&ar" aout a deity+ It stron%ly su%%ests he a%reed and, unale to
&ount a coherent rational response, (as left (ith )ueryin% irony... Bohr had, it &i%ht e noted,
responded (ith e)uivalent cos&ic sutly, y pointin% to the %reat care (hich ancient thin"ers
used in ,ascriin% attriutes to Providence in everyday lan%ua%e./
G
$ere one thin"s not so
1
Bohr, 7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an :noledge, #D9#G, esp. #G.
,3ot(ithstandin% all novelty of approach, causal description is upheld in relativity theory (ithin any %iven fra&e of
reference, ut in )uantu& theory the uncontrollale interaction et(een the o1ects and the &easurin% instru&ents
forces us to a renunciation even in such respect./ ,0he Bohr9Einstein :ialo%ue,/ 12#.
2
Co&pare, or if you (ill counterpositionally contrast, ,3ature is the reali=ation of the si&plest conceivale
&athe&atical ideas/ (ith ,0he elief in an e'ternal (orld independent of the perceivin% su1ect is the asis of all
natural science./ Einstein, 2ssa%s on Science, 1G, #0.
D
,&id, 1O,1G, 1F.
#
,&id, 1F.
C
Bohr, 7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an :noledge, CO.
O
,&id, CGE ,0he Bohr9Einstein :ialo%ue,/ 1DC.
G
7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an :noledge, #G.
&uch of ancient thin"ers 4i.e., ?ree" philosophers5 ut of the >ld 0esta&ent in1unction a%ainst
the use of the na&e of ?od...
Einstein.s reputale for %enius as a physical theorist (as not the conte&porary vie(... as late
as 17D# Einstein hi&self appears to have thou%ht the (or" of 8a&es Cler" 6a'(ell &ore
si%nificant that his o(n 4he indicated the for&erIs (or" rou%ht aout ,the %reatest chan%e in
the a'io&atic su9structure of physics... since 3e(ton,/ (hile he referred to %eneral relativity
as ,the last step in the develop&ent of the pro%ra& of the field9theory/ inau%urated y
6a'(ell5... and e&phatically does not e'tend to philosophical theori=in% (here, contrary to a
(holly uncritical, fa(nin% opinion, his reflections %ave e'pression to a contradictory and
untenale position, to a naYve realis&+
1
In other (ords, his cos&olo%ical speculations (ere
un(arranted, scientific %enius does not auto&atically %ive license to coherent philosophi=in%,
does not a philosopher &a"e...@et.s return to the Co&pton effect.
*ove (e noted its &eanin% thusly, the facts that e'haustively descrie this situation in ter&s
of particles cannot e intelli%ily descried in ter&s of (aves, and vice versa.
2
1
Einstein, ,&id, #0, DG.
;ro& the perspective of the past three )uarters of a century, Einstein.s &a1or achieve&ent appears as the theory of
%eneral relativity.
;or it, the special case of unifor& &otion is a li&ited instance. 3o( at a theoretically %enerated re&ove, it rested on
the sa&e paradi%& shift that &ade the refor&ulation of the concept of si&ultaneity possile, and it too also too" for
%ranted that nature is an essentially &athe&atical reality in the &anner ori%inally for&ulated y ?alileo. But his theory
of %ravity for (hich it is synony&ous (ith spaceti&e curvature itself produced y &ass 4y the &ass of spatial
odies5, (as anythin% ut intuitively ovious. *nd this is the point.
Rnli"e any nu&er of scientific theori=ations, electro&a%netis& in 6a'(ell for e'a&ple, confir&ation ste&s fro& a
&ass of data, countless e'peri&ents and oservations. Predictions that per&it of validation of EinsteinIs %eneral
theori=ation have een e'ceedin%ly li&ited. $is theory predicts, for instance, the universe is e'pandin%. Confir&ation
did not co&e for years, first and si%nificantly, ecause onl%, in the oservations resultin% fro& the (or" of Ed(in
$ule in 1727, (hen, ased on spectral analysis of redshifts, $ule sur&ised that %ala'ies in the universe are
recedin%, (here recession (as ta"en to e produced y the e'pansion of space 4and not, say, y the &otion of
%ala'ies5. *s (ith so &uch of the theory of %eneral relativity 4e.%., the assu&ption that the universe is ho&o%eneous,
that on really lar%e scales &atter is spread evenly throu%hout it5, the redshifts and e'pansion of the universe,
ho(ever, are open to several other e'planations...
3early all of EinsteinIs (or" after 171C is cos&olo%ically speculative 4and ele&ents of this enter into the theory of
%eneral relativity also5.
0hus, he holds li!e 4eripatetic natural philosophers that the universe is finite and self9enclosed 42ssa%s in Science,
C25, that li!e the 4eripatetics (hat hold cos&olo%ically in the universe at lar%e 4i.e., spaceti&e curvature5 does not
hold terrestrially on Earth, that li!e the 4latonists 0inclusive of 8alileo5 reality in its inner&ost essence is &athe&atical
4,&id, 1G5. 4By the thirties Einstein (as %oin% to %reat len%ths to rehailitate 3e(tonIs asolute space, the ,ether,/
ar%uin% in a for&al sense it (as not inconsistent (ith %eneral relativity. ,&id, 7F9111.5...
EinsteinIs ,de&onstrations/ (ere carried out in a hi%hly otuse &athe&atical fashion+ In pulicly presentin% the
theory of %eneral relativity, the 3e( -or" Ti$es related, perhaps apocryphally perhaps not, that Einstein hi&self had
told his pulishers that there (ere ut a do=en people in the (orld that could %enuinely %rasp his theori=ation. 0here
are t(o points (orth &a"in% here, oth (ith a vie( to their relation to the social totality and to%ether see&in%ly
contradictory. 40hey are related in ter&s of ofuscation to ofuscated5. ;irst, oservationally uninfor&ed &athe&atical
de&onstration is the precise historical analo% to Scholastic speculative dialecticsE and, second, &athe&atical
for&alis& constitutes the &ost efficient, effective, and syste&atic &eans (e have discovered in pursuit of the pro1ect
of nature do&ination. 4$ere, for elaoration (e point ac" to the final para%raphs in the ;irst S"etch discussion of
$eisener%, aove.5
2
,0here e'ists, at least at the present &o&ent, no syste& of physical concepts (hich can provide us (ith an
e'planation that covers and is co&patile (ith all the facts Hin re%ard toJ< li%ht and &atter/ 4;eyeraend ,&id, D1C,
and also BohrIs for&ulation of the prole& cited in ,&id, 10G5. 0his is a true today as it (as in 17F1 (hen ;eyeraend
penned the re&ar". *nd, it characteri=es perhaps the last (ell "no(n philosophical effort to resolve the issue, that of
Larl Popper 4Ouantu$ Theor% and the Schis$ in 4h%sics, 2C5 (ho had fervently hoped other(ise. 4Sources cited in
this te't date fro& as late as 17GF.5 0he effort to overco&e the (ave particle dualis&< (ith the intent of preservin% a
realist scientific &etaphysics< can, as in Popper, lead to so&e stran%e conse)uences 4e.%., a%ain, the effort, as in
Einstein, to resurrect asolute space5. See the relevant footnoted discussion in the ;ourth Study, Part III, ,*stract
:ialectic of Concepts./
0he Co&pton e'peri&ent 4and others reproducin% its results5, de&onstratin% li%ht can also
ehave as a strea& of particle9li%ht o1ects 4)uanta5 (hose ener%y is proportional to the
fre)uency (hich is a ave characteristic and (hich to%ether e'hiits the irreducile,
necessary dual nature of e'planation of suato&ic ehavior, is today interpreted to e'clusively
support a particle interpretation of li%ht.
;ro& the &id917O0s, &athe&atical for&alis& 4)uantu& field theory or )uantu&
electrodyna&ics unifyin% particle and (ave characteristics of ,&atter/5, not a syste& of
physical concepts, developed initially y Paul :irac and later elaorated y ?erard Tt $ooft,
has een understood to for& the foundations of an ele&entary particle physics (hich since
this ti&e, developin% &ost forcily in the later seventies, has underlain the astrophysical
direction of the &odern science of nature for the past four to five decades< Write this do(n
to, first, the internal develop&ent of conte&porary physics itself, including the clai&, lon% a%o
no lon%er tenale yet &ade y any nu&er of )uantu& physicists, that theirs (as a co$plete
theori=ation of the suato&ic situation, a position refuted y the ,discovery/ of several
particles s&aller than the electron and proton, particles on (hich this theori=ation ori%inally
ased itself, and to the further, lo%ically re)uired theori=ations of several distinct levels of
&icrophysical interaction 4includin% stron% or nuclear and (ea" or decay interactions,
electro&a%netic and %ravitational forces5E and (rite it do(n to, second, the success of
e'peri&ental collisions in elaorate instru&ent co&ple'es 4particle accelerators5, i.e., to
e'plicit efforts to e'hiit the ,ne( physics./ practical si%nificance for capital 4(hat i&&ediate
si%nificance &i%ht an account ased on the irreducile dualis& of particle and (ave have
(hen contrasted (ith one startin% fro& the e)uivalence of &ass and ener%y25, especially its
value for technolo%ies of capital specifically those associated (ith &ilitary (eaponry
develop&ent< 0his orientation de&ands a different understandin% of the history of )uantu&
theory, one (hich starts, coherency e da&ned, fro& an o&literation of the episte$ological
pro&le$ for&ulated y Bohr and $eisener%< 0his could not e &ore clearly e'pressed than
in Bohr.s discussions (ith Einstein.
1
In the end, thou%h, Einstein thre( in the to(el as evidenced y his re&ar"s in response to
Bohr.s reasoned insistence on the funda&ental necessity of )uantu& &echanical principles
for lo%ically orderin% results of suato&ic e'peri&ents+ ,0o elieve this Hthat in principle
)uantu& &echanics offers the &ost e'haustive description of these pheno&enaJ is lo%ically
possile (ithout contradictionE ut it is so very contrary to &y scientific instinct that I cannot
for%o the search for a &ore co&plete Hi.e., universally causalJ conception./
2
0hus, Einstein<
0hose discussions (ere not, ho(ever and as indicated, si%nificant for the direction of physics+
;ocused e'clusively on one class of pheno&ena 4and thus i%norin% so styled ,interference/
pheno&ena5, the Co&pton effect has een elevated to such an e'tent that it is presu&ed to
e'haust the &eanin% and si%nificance of )uantu& pheno&ena.
D
In 171D, t(o asic particles (ere said to co&pose the ato&, electron and proton. *s the
conse)uence of &ore and &ore sophisticated particle accelerators, at last count there so&e
t(enty9four inclusive of ,flavors/ or classes of )uar"s and leptons+ *s (e have ar%ued 4and
1
,:iscussions (ith Einstein on Episte&olo%ical Prole&s in *to&ic Physics/ 417#75 in 7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an
:noledge+
2
,Physics and Reality,/ Gournal of the )ran!lin ,nstitute, 221 417DO5+ D#7, cited y Bohr, 7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an
:noledge, O1. *lso see EinsteinIs re&ar"s 42ssa%s in Science, #D9#C5 recountin% 6a'(ellIs contriution (herein he
e'pressed his dissatisfaction (ith )uantu& &echanics 4especially in :iracIs for&ulation5 (ith its refusal to &a"e any
,clai& to descrie physical reality itself/ 4,&id, #C5.
D
*s scattered '9rays are said to have orne ,the pattern of an%les and ener%ies HthatJ (as un&ista"aly HthatJ of
collidin% particles+> 4@eonard Suss"ind, The Blac! Hole "ar, D10, e&phasis added.5 0hat.s it, prole& solved.
Suss"ind.s is a decidedly populari=ed (or", essentially pap, (ritten in the vein of naYve scientific realis&, here the
philosophically crudest of physicalis&s+
this is one of the conclusions e dra( fro& )uantu& &echanics5, scientific "no(led%e of
nature is a function, first, of instru&ents deployed in, second, posin% )uestions to it 4(hich
lo%ically is first, in advance of any e'peri&ent or results5, i.e., ele&entary particle physics has
its o(n prole&s, not the least of (hich is the apparent infinite divisi&ilit% of ,funda&ental/
particles, division conditioned only y the sophistication of instru&ents used in the
e'peri&ent< Rnless, of course, one (ishes (hich to ar%ue < in accordance (ith the
e)uation e n &c
2
< the enor&ous ener%y released y a s&all a&ount of &ass in accelerator
collisions creates )ualitatively s&aller a&ounts of ne &atter< in accordance (ith the
e)uation & n eac
2
. 0his position 4(ithout reference to the e)uation5 (as in fact ta"en y
Roert *ndre(s 6illi"an, an *&erican physicist. 6illi"an su%%ested, consistently (e &i%ht
add, that a ,reconversion/ of ener%y to &atter occurs in nature< the conditions specified (ere
space9ti&e e&ptiness, the interstellar void, as Bachelard on (ho& (e are dra(in% puts it, an
,asence of all thin%s/ so that ,&atter is created fro& radiation Hi.e., ener%yJ, that an o1ect is
created/ y &otion, y "inetic ener%y if you (ill<
1
In the constructions of conte&porary
astrophysics, &atter is created, not in an ,interstellar void/ ut in the ener%y factories of youn%
stars, thou%h oddly, in relation to (hat transpires in particle accelerators, this is e&phatically
not the ar%u&ent &ade y ele&entary particle physicists, (ho are content to reassert the
ato&is& and naYve &etaphysical realis& that the &odern science of nature is inured to...
2
Contrary to Bachelard, his editor points out that ,Einstein.s theory/ did allo( for the co&plete
conversion of &atter to ener%y, and refers us to the ato&ic o& 4dropped ei%ht years after
Bachelard pulished the (or" in )uestion5.
D
0his is correct, Einstein.s theori=ation does not
have a residue+ 0oday.s physicists olstered y philosophers of capital li"e Larl Popper
#
< to
e sure retrospectively fully a(are of the array of ne( particles, in 17F2 Popper divines that at
a later &o&ent in 17C0 Einstein (as ri%ht a%ainst Bohr ecause there &ay e ,deeper layer of
physical reality,/
C
realist i%otry if it has even een spo"en< ho(ever, have not only retreated
fro& Einstein.s contradictory position 4they have never %otten as far as Bohr.s entirely
coherent one5, ut have returned to a naYve classical realis&, renderin% the& &erely co%nitive
functionaries of capital. Witness Suss"ind<
But the issue here is that< (ithout re%ard to his theori=ation, a%ain (e refer to the
discussions (ith Bohr partially recounted aove< Einstein could not accept Bohr.s fully
ade)uate state&ent of the position. 0he point can e driven ho&e y riefly e'a&inin% the
lo%ical si%nificance of concept of &ulti9di&ensional space9ti&e developed y Einstein in his
theory of %eneral relativity.
;or classical &echanics, an electron.s position and its velocity can e &easured. We "no(
this is not the case for )uantu& &echanics. ;or the for&er, the electron is a ,real,/ ,&aterial/
o1ect e'istin% in ,real/ space and ti&eE for the latter, it is a &o&ent in the total e'peri&ental
1
Bachelard, ,&id, G1, G2 4citation5.
Bachelard notes that 6illi"an &ade these re&ar"s in an address at a %atherin% of industrial che&ists in 3e( -or"
City, and ironically co&&ents ,(hat %reater %uarantee of positivis& could there e than the co&ination of che&istry,
industry, and the Rnited States of *&erica/ 4,&id, G15. In point of fact, there is no irony here at all, &erely the veil
&as"in% the inti&acy of the relation of science to capital has een ripped aside.
2
0hou%h (e e re&iss if (e did not note that this ar%u&ent (as &ade y the cos&olo%ist ?eor%e ?a&ov 4The
Creation of the Hniverse+ 3e( -or", 17C25 (ho, startin% not fro& particle accelerators ut fro& the ato&ic (eapons
tested in 3e( 6e'ico 4and Rtah and 3evada5 after the last i&perialist (orld (ar, reco%ni=ed the utter novelty of
stran%e isotopes and particles that appeared 4the &ost ovious case ein% plutoniu&, oth fuel and yproduct of
uraniu& ased e'plosions5. ?a&ov ar%ued that if in a &icrosecond ato&ic (eaponry %enerated ne( ele&ents, then
the universe at its ori%ins could have e%un in the sa&e &anner. $e effectively for&ulated an early version of the ,i%
an%/ theory.
D
,&id, G2, n. 11.
#
See the ;ourth Study in its entirety, elo(.
C
Ouantu$ Mechanics and the Schis$ in 4h%sics, O9G.
situation and the analysis of this situation allo(s the physicist to &a"e predictions (ith a hi%h
de%ree of success. What is it aout the ,real/ o1ect or, etter, the ,reality/ of space and ti&e
4since it is the status of the latter (hich secures that of the for&er52 In the for&er case 4a ody
for classical &echanics, a solid< not a li)uid or %as< e'tended, (ith entirely intrinsic< not
conte'tual< properties5, its situation at any &o&ent can e deter&ined ecause a strict
universal causality prevails. It is for this reason that an initial location and a velocity can e
%iven. With the ,ne(/ physics (hat hold &icrophysically, also holds 4for different reasons5
&acrophysically+ >n Einstein.s account, space9ti&e is unitary, so to spea" aout a state of the
universe (ith reference to distinct spatial and te&poral coordinates is, (ell, it.s
&eanin%less
1
< *tte&ptin% to locate a discrete o1ect oth (ith re%ard to position and velocity
presupposes an asolute space and a universal te&poral continuu&< But for %eneral
relativity, the only state that it &a"es sense to spea" of is a sin%le three9di&ensional cross
section ,in/ space9ti&e that &ay or &ay not i&pin%e on neary three9di&ensional cross
sections, ut then the physicist is as li"ely as not ale to deter&ine that such is the case< >r,
a%ain, the presence of dense, lar%e ody (ithin a ,re%ion of space/ (arps space9ti&e<
analo%ically and &etaphorically, so&ethin% li"e the surface of a soft &attress that has a
o(lin% all laid in its &iddle< so that the relation et(een this ody and another, say, for
e'a&ple, an asteroid, is not that of the attraction of the lar%er, denser ody pullin% as it (ere
the s&aller ody (ith far less &ass into orit around it, instead the relation of the t(o odies is
decided y the hi%hly locali=ed curvature of space9ti&e created y the presence of the lar%e,
dense ody+ It is this structure, not the %ravitational attraction of the lar%er ody, that accounts
for the ,orital/ relation of the one to the other, or, stated differently, this curved structure
created y the &ass of the lar%er ody is %ravity. 0his too is a strai%htfor(ard ra&ification of
Einstein.s theory of %eneral relativity, and locali=ed (arpin% of space9ti&e is inco&patile (ith
asolute space in the traditions of &odern science, a space that is a condition of a full,
ri%orous causality 4i.e., deter&inis&5 operative (ithin it 4and a theory for (hich, (hile re1ectin%
the deter&inis&, &etaphysical realists such as Larl Popper, and later Einstein hi&self, revived
asolute space in order to save conte&plative, our%eois science5.
2
*nd (hat Einstein (anted, as indicated in his discussions (ith Bohr 4and else(here5, (as a
universe that is causally deter&ined in a ri%orous (ay. But the causality that is operative here
is not classical ut &athe&atical 4(e dare say, a function of tensor calculus5, %enerated y
(ay of lo%ical deduction, and not a ,real/ physical deter&ination revealin% so&ethin% li"e a
universal causality, (hich, re%ardless of his speculative considerations, is not possile on his
theori=ation.
D
@et.s push this a little further. In the theori=ations of the ,ne( physics,/ relativity theory and
)uantu& &echanics, the o1ect, e.%., an electron, appears to lose its individuality. Bachelard
cites 6arcel Boll in this re%ard+ With the ,ne(/ physics, (e &ust ,aandon the notion of o1ect
or thin%, at least as far as ato&ic physics is concerned. Individuality is a property of
co&ple'ity, and an isolated particle is too si&ple to e endo(ed (ith individual )ualities./
#
Bachelard, further follo(in% Chester Ruddic",
C
attriutes this ,de9reali=ation/ 4our ter&5 of the
individual o1ect to the ,statistical la(/ that susu&es it as an instance, the la( itself for&ed
on the pre&ise that ,one &e&er of the %roup is as li"ely to satisfy certain conditions as any
1
0his i&plication (as developed y the &athe&atician Eli Cartan 4,@e parallelis&e asolu et la thUorie unitaire du
cha&p,/ Revue de $Itaph%sique et de $orale, 8anuary 17D1, cited y Bachelard, ,&id, 10C.
2
*%ain see the ;ourth Study, in particular, Part I, ,*stract :ialectic of Concepts./
D
0he distinction is Cartan.s, ,&id, 10O.
#
,&id, 12F. 0his sa&e hold true for &acro physical pheno&ena as conceptuali=ed y Einstein (ith his theory of
%eneral relativity, ,&id, 127.
C
Chest 0. Ruddic", ,>n the Contin%ency of 3atural @a(,/ Monist, 8uly 17D2, cited in ,&id, 12G.
other,/ the o1ect losin% its individuality, havin% it ,(iped a(ay/ in the susu&ption as an
ele&ent of a lo%ical class.
1
It is not chance coincidence that this has echoes of the ,conservative/ 4i.e., philosophically
anti9rationalist, politically ri%ht(in%5 funda&ental ontolo%y of $eide%%er (ith its ,das 6an/ or
the si&ilarly ,conservative/ philosophical sociolo%y 4Revolt of the Masses5 of >rte%a y ?asset,
all of (hich as theori=ations 4that of Bachelard, Boll, Ruddic", $eide%%er, >rte%a y ?asset,
and eyond the&, $eisener%5 are developed at rou%hly the sa&e historical &o&ent+ 0he
underlyin% reality to (hich each and all of these theori=ations response, the utterly novel
ac"drop a%ainst (hich they are for&ulated, is a socio9historical (orld in (hich the tendential
direction of the (hole societal develop&ent can &ost ade)uately e descried fro& the
perspective of the autono&i=ation of capital, the deepenin% penetration of the value for& into
every di&ension of daily life, &anifested &ost forcily in the reduction of individuals &o&ents,
aspects, spheres (ithin, institutions and social relations constitutin%, and concrete individuals
as earers of that daily life, to interchan%eale co&ponents (ithin the totality of this
develop&ent all suordinate to the lo%ic of its &ove&ent 4not to &ention that at the center of
that historical &o&ent at (hich all these authors (rote capital.s autono&ic &ove&ent, as it
(ere, collapsed, i&ploded and the syste& of social relations e%an to disinte%rate, a reality
other(ise "no(n as the ?reat Slu&p5.
We are not su%%estin% that so&eho( the entirely of intellectual life ,reflects/ a &ore asic
reality. Rather, (hat is at issue here is the total and totali=in% reality of capitalis& once it has
een estalished on its o(n foundations. *part fro& it, are there historical instances of
co&&unities or societies in (hich concrete individuality, specificity or particularity are<
across the (hole entire spectru& of conceptual reflection (here it e'ists< theori=ed as
asent content, identical, interchan%eale2 :o the reconstructed ,&ytholo%ies/ of hunter
%ather co&&unities that for&ed si&ultaneously (ith the develop&ent of a%riculture and the
rise of the state e'press such a situation2
2
:o those of ancient triutary for&ations2
D
What of
the for&s of thou%ht characteri=in% diverse social for&ations in the interstices in (hich
capitalis& in its era of for&al do&ination for&ed2
#
>r for&s of thou%ht in &odern triutary
for&ations2
C
$o( aout theoretical reflections on society and nature as they co&e do(n to us
fro& the uran enclaves that developed on the ,ed%es/ of ancient triutary for&ations2
O
What
of the ,&ytholo%ies/ funda&entally articulatin% the relation of archaic co&&unities to nature
and the (orld, as these co&&unities no( appeared at the &o&ent of ,contact/ do(n to a fully
1
The Ne Scientific Spirit, 12G 4Ruddic"5, 12F 4Bachelard5. Bachelard continues, ,:eprived of their individuality, the
ele&ents of the real eco&e indistin%uishale fro& one another, ut collectively they ehave in (hat &ay e
considered a rational &anner, since reason is capale of predictin% (hat (ill happen/ 4,&id, 1D05.
But the actual description of ,the ele&ents of the real/ is so&ethin% )uite different, not relations of e'teriority and
susu&ption, ut a dialectic of &o&ent and totality+ Writin% aout the co&ponent structure of the ato&, Bachelard,
citin% a che&ist na&ed Carera 4,Para&a%nUtis&e et structure des ato&es co&ines,/ 7ctivation et structure des
$olecules, 172F5, states, ,.valence is so&ethin% &ore co&ple' than once thou%ht, (hich to do (ith the staility of
ne( dyna&ical confi%urations of the outer electrons resultin% fro& the &utual perturation of ato&s in contact (ith
one another. It is clear that the details of this confi%uration and the de%ree to (hich it is stale depend on the structure
of the ato&s involved, so that, strictly spea"in%, valence is not a property of each isolated ele&ent ut of all the ato&s
in a co&pound/ 4,&id, 1C791O05.
2
:avid @e(is9Willia&s, The Mind in the Cave: Consciousness and the 1rigins of 7rt 4@ondon, 20025< Steven 6ithen,
7fter the ,ce: 7 8lo&al Hu$an Histor%, '(,((( 6 A((( BC 4Ca&rid%e 6*, 200D5.
D
$enri ;ran"fort, :ingship and the 8ods 4Chica%o, 17GF5E *lfred 6etrou', The Histor% of 4eru 43e( -or", 17O75E
>(en @atti&ore, The ,nner 7sian )rontiers of China 4Boston, 17C15.
#
6arc Bloch, )eudal Societ%. 2 !ols. 4Chica%o, 17O15.
C
Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ 0Hrgeschichte5, Second Study+
O
Christian 6eier, 7thens 43e( -or", 20005E 6oses ;inley, 7ncient Slaver% and Modern ,deolog% 4@ondon, 17F05E The
Histor% of )lorence and the )lorentine Repu&lic, Boo" II of Revolutionar% 1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch of Capital#s
)or$al Do$ination of 3a&or in 4roduction+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5 HEditorIs noteJ.
developed capitalist &odernity in the last )uarter of the short t(entieth century2
1
>r (hat
aout the very for&s of thou%hts that are characteristic of social %roups early in capitalis&.s
era of for&al do&ination2
2
In each and every case, the response is e&phatically ,no./ 0he situation (e have descried is
uni)ue to a (orld 4societies of capital5 deter&ined y the autono&i=ation of capital, for this is
a orld in hich science is at ho$e and ithout hich it ould &e a stranger ithout a ho$e
0hence, theoreticall% &arren5, i+e+, hich constitutes the societal presuppositions of science#s
full develop$ent and ithout hich it could not &e developed+
1
$Uline Clastres 3e Terre sans $al: le prophItis$e Tupa-8uarana 4Paris, 17GC5E Pierre Clastres, 3e SociItI contra
l.\tre 4Paris, 17GG5.
2
The 2nglish Civil "ars and the Birth of )reedo$, Boo" III of Revolutionar% 1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch of
Capital#s )or$al Do$ination of 3a&or in 4roduction+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5. HEditorIs noteJ.
Third Study (Short Study)
"e' (epartures in Science) The !odern Science o "ature Rene'ed
Biblio#raphical Sources
Bachelard, ?aston. The Ne Scientific Spirit+ Boston, 17G# 417D#5
Boh&, :avid. Ouantu$ Theor%+ Princeton 4385, 17C1
Bohr, 3iels. ,0he Bohr9Einstein :ialo%ue/ in *.P. ;rench and P.8. Lennedy 4eds.5, Niels Bohr:
7 Centenar% Lolu$e+ Ca&rid%e 46*5, 17FC
RRRRRRRRR+ 7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an :noledge+ 3e( -or", 17C7
WWWWWWWWW. 7to$ic Theor% of the Description of Nature+ Ca&rid%e 4En%.5, 17D2
Einstein, *lert. 2ssa%s in Science+ 3e( -or", 17D#
WWWWWWWWWWWW. ,>n the Electrodyna&ics of 6ovin% Bodies,/ D0 8une 170C. *ccessed online
at (((.four&ila. ch
;eyeraend, Paul. Realis$, Rationalis$ and Scientific Method+ 4hilosophical 4apers, L+ ,+
Ca&rid%e 4En%.5, 17F1
?alison, Peter. 2instein.s Cloc!s, 4oincarI.s Maps: 2$pires of Ti$e+ 3e( -or", 200D
$eisener%, Werner. 4h%sics and Be%ond+ 3e( -or", 17G1
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR+ 4h%sics and 4hilosoph%. 3e( -or", 17CF
8a&&er, 6a'. The Conceptual Develop$ent of Ouantu$ Mechanics+ 3e( -or", 17OO
Ne Mor! Ti$es, ,@i%hts *ll *s"e( in the $eavens,/ 3ove&er 10, 1717
Popper, Larl. Ouantu$ Theor% and the Schis$ in 4h%sics+ ;ro& the 4ostscript to The 3ogic
of Scientific Discover%. Edited y W.W. Bartley, III. 0oto(a 4385, 17F2
Suss"ind, @eonard. The Blac! Hole "ar. 3e( -or", 200F
von Wei=sQc"er, C.;. The Hnit% of 4h%sics+ 3e( -or", 17G1
Weiss"opf, !ictor. ,3iels Bohr, the Suantu&, and the World/ in *.P. ;rench and P.8. Lennedy
4eds.5, Niels Bohr: 7 Centenar% Lolu$e+ Ca&rid%e 46*5, 17FC
Second Interlude
0he tendency of the value for& to e'pand eyond production, to astractly unify the various
rationali=ed institutional spheres of capitalist society and suordinate the& to its lo%ic, is a
develop&ent as it eco&es actual that transcends real do&ination itself+ ;or, as (e shall have
occasion to point out, society is not production, production is not society, the historical
tendency of capitalist develop&ent to reduce social relations to productive ones
not(ithstandin%. 0his develop&ent introduces a ne( o1ect and a ne( order of e'ploitation
that (e call totali=in% do&ination. 6oreover, the auto&ati=ed and autono&ic &ove&ent of
capital 4i.e., a &ove&ent that, ecause it is not actively challen%ed and, further, not aolished,
appears autono&ous5 necessarily leads to catastrophic rupture in the faric of earthly nature
as the asic presupposition of all life, includin% hu&an life.
In this novel historical constellation, it is no lon%er possile to thin" the o1ect of capitalist
e'ploitation 4and potential a%ency of its aolition and transcendence5 are productively distinct,
national proletariatsE it is no lon%er possile to thin" of the e'traction of surplus value solely in
asolute and relative ter&sE and it is no lon%er possile to thin" of the transfor&ations of
earthly nature that capital %enerates as partial, such as those achieved y the natives of 3orth
*&erica in urnin% (oodland areas to create %rass lands, therey transfor&in% an ecolo%ical
niche in order to attract certain types of %a&eE or those carried out y a social class, far&ers,
(ho transfor&ed forests into pasture land over lar%e parts of EuropeE or y s&all %roups of
different classes and social layers in production to construct da&s to divert a river course or
provide electricityE etc. 0hese, and others li"e the&, constitute &erely partial, hi%hly li&ited
transfor&ations. 0oday, ho(ever, capital is provo"in% chan%es that are alterin% the iosphere
as a (hole, chan%es that, (ithin the D.G N #.0 illion year old history of life on Earth, have
hitherto ta"en &ini&ally thousands of years and in so&e case over hundreds of &illions of
years, in other (ords, chan%es in the interrelated aspects of earthly nature 4at&osphere9
ocean, caron and nitro%en cycles, etc.5 that have al(ays in the past preceded over
%eolo%ical ti&e are no( unfoldin% over hi%hly co&pressed historical ti&e. 3o for& of life on
Earth< and, as (e shall su%%est, in the end that includes hu&anity itself< is evolutionary
constituted or socially and technically productive enou%h to acco&&odate or overco&e, as
the case &ay e, such a si&ply e'traordinarily rapid pace of total, natural chan%e en%endered
y capital as it has eco&e a %eolo%ical force.
Startin% fro& the &ove&ent of capital as real do&ination, (e shall in turn consider each of the
&o&ents and conse)uences of totali=in% do&ination.
Real Do$ination, ,
The Real Su&su$ption of 3a&or under Capital
"here the producer? (hether in a%riculture or in uran crafts, accordin% to 6ar' it $a!es no
difference? hi$self assu$es the role and function of capitalist? hirin% He'ploitin%J laor and
roin% his for&er co&patriots, (or"&ates, fello( laorers, si&ilarly situated producers, of
their independence as producers, reducin% the& to proletarians in the fullest sense, i.e.,
introducing changes into the or! processes &% a% of their reorgani/ation, ne inputs or
&oth? the reall% revolutionar% a% to capitalist develop&ent on its o(n asis opens up<
1
Rnder propitious &ar"et conditions, particularly increased de&and, the capitalist e&ploys
&ore (or"ers. 0he %ro(th of de&and also leads to enlar%e&ent of the scale of production. *t
a certain point, a point different for each industry and at least initially in the historical sense for
1
In point of fact, historically it has &ade a hu%e difference (hether the producer (as a capitalist far&er or a &aster
crafts&an, as (e ar%ued aove. ;or 6ar', :apital, ,,,, D#G, (here he states, M:ies ist der (ir"lich revolutionierende
We%./
each capitalist, this increase in the volu&e of capital e&ployed co&&its the capitalist 4(ho
had previously &erely supplied &eans and &aterials of production to KhisK laorers5 to directly
ta"in% control of the process of production itself. 0his co&&it&ent transfor&s hi& fro& a
&erchant into an industrialist, a capitalist (ho actually intervenes in and or%ani=es the for&s
laor ta"es in the (or"place, and (ho transfor&s the &eans of production y rin%in% to ear
on the& ne( technolo%ical inputs 4&achinery5. 0he capitalist no( preferentially e'tracts
surplus value relativel% y &eans of increases in laorIs productivity. $e loses his individual
character, i.e., he increasin%ly ehaves as a personification of capital 4he has assi&ilated and
internali=ed the lo%ic of accu&ulation, see elo(5, (hile capital itself assu&es direct social
proportions. Production itself calls forth a %ro(th in population, ne( ranches of industry
&ultiply and diversify their suspheres, a %reater productivity of laor and cooperation of laor
on a &assive scale and an increasin% &ass of e'istin% and novel co&&odities no( all appear.
Each of these features in turn calls forth the others<
In this specific respect, the advent of the railroads (as the decisive event in the develop&ent
of real do&ination in production. It rou%ht into ein% the lar%est per&anent (or"forces to
date in the history of capitalis&, it re)uired a )ualitative increase in the division of laor (ithin
the enterprise, pushin% eyond national oundaries fro& the %et9%o its scale (as continent in
scope, it re)uired fundin% on a scale never previously encountered and (ith novel &eans of
financin%, and it created a ne( for& of capitalist or%ani=ation of the fir&<
1
0his (hole &ove&ent, in the strict sense, inau%urates the capitalist production proper or, the
real susu&ption of laor under capital, call it real do$ination.
0he central feature of this develop&ent, (hich secures capitalis& as a syste& of social
relations and &a"es its pro%ress irreversile, is the s%ste$atic and sustained, direct
application of science and technolog% to the production process. By the &iddle of the
chronolo%ical nineteenth century, the &a%nitude of strictly capitalist operations (as lar%e
enou%h to call forth this develop$ent 4(hich at any rate, as (e have ar%ued, is %iven (ith the
very character of science itself5, for in this su&9ection of production holl% to scientific
deter$ination capitalis$ esta&lished itself on its on foundations?
In this respect, (e &i%ht as" if the (orlds of ancient and &odern triutary for&ations "ne(
iron, copper, lead, silver and %old, ho(, apart fro& the scientific e'ploitation of &ineral
resources, &i%ht have &an%anese, nic"el, coalt and alu&inu& een discovered, utili=ed,
and then eco&e incorporated into specific, industrial processes early in the epoch of the real
do&ination of laor under capital2
Reco%ni=in% that at its ori%ins this in%ression of science into production (as 4and is al(ays5
carried out y hu&an ein%s as earers of scientific theories, concepts and practices en%a%ed
in productive activities, science entered production in one of t(o (ays.
;irst, the relation (as irre%ular as in the case 4discussed elo(5 of 8osiah Wed%(ood the
china &anufacturer and 8oseph Priestly scientist and che&ist,
2
the latter (ho as a scientist
consciously, delierately and (ith a vie( to utilitarian outco&es pursued science lar%ely as
e'peri&entation 4in the fully &odern, not ?alileo.s, sense5. In this &anner, a nu&er of
i&portant innovations and inventions restin% on scientific "no(led%e and understandin% (ere
e&odied in devices, processes and procedures et(een, say, 1GO0 and 1F2C. ;or e'a&ple,
Claude Berthollert created chlorine leach, (hich, as Rondo Ca&eron indicates,
D
for&ed the
foundations for heavy che&ical industry throu%hout the early epoch of real do&inationE and,
even if 8a&es Watt (as not especially scientifically adept, (or" (ith his stea& en%ine and its
1
*lfred Chandler, The Lisi&le Hand, F191##.
2
See ,$istorical ;or&s of Real :o&ination in Production,/ elo(.
D
Ca&eron, )rance and the 2cono$ic Develop$ent of 2urope, ##. Si&ilarly, Eric $osa(& 4The 7ge of Capital, #25
re&ar"s, ,the artificial dye9stuffs industry< ca&e fro& the laoratory to the factory./
develop&ents for&ed the asis for elaoration of the la(s of ther&odyna&ics, particularly the
second proposed y Rudolf Classius in 1FC0.
Second, the relation (as syste&ati=ed &% the state throu%h the estalish&ent and fundin% of
hi%her educative and technical schools. 0hese schools e&ployed reno(ned scientists as
faculty. 0o students, faculty i&parted the &ethods of &easure&ent 4e.%., the &etric syste&5,
calculation and classification ori%inally developed in the sciences of nature and &athe&atics.
Students (ere &ethodically trained in various fields of constructive hu&an endeavor. 0hese
included, &ost i&portantly, &ineral e'traction 4&inin%5E surveyin%, road and rid%e and rail,
canal and port, civil and naval architectural and fortifications constructionE etc., (ith the sa&e
ai&s, no( institutionally incarnated, of advancin% scientific "no(led%e for the purposes of
e'ploitin% the Earth, understandin%, harnessin% and even creatin% 4ne(5 &aterial processes in
nature. >viously, the civil en%ineer occupied pride of place in all these develop&ents, and
the ;rench< startin% fro& the Convention of .729.7D and fro& 3apoleonic decree< (ere the
first to estalish a (hole series of schools, institutes and facilities (hich e&odied these
ai&s,
1
(hich trained &ilitary and civilians en%ineers, technicians and scientists en%a%ed y
private fir&s, all of (ho& in turn rou%ht scientific concepts, &ethods and rationality directly to
ear on production. *road, not 1ust (ithin the territorial confines of ;rance, the various courts
and re%i&es of Europe and further afield e&ployed ;rench en%ineers and scientists for so&e
of the &ost i&portant productive develop&ents fro& 1F2C do(n to the advent of i&perialis&
in the arena of the (orld 41FG05+ ;rench en%ineers developed the coal and steel industries of
Russia 4includin% today.s Polish Silesia5E introduced the Besse&er converter and an
internationally co&petitive loco&otive factory in *ustriaE (ere responsile for the advance of
iron &anufacture 4introduction of the rollin% &ill, i&prove&ents in puddlin% process5 and a
%ood deal of the industrial infrastructure of central ItalyE developed safety and technical &inin%
procedures in WestphaliaE undertoo" and (ere in char%e of infrastructural develop&ent in
northern E%ypt 4irri%ation, e&an"&ent and da&&in% in the lo(er 3ile, and road, canal and
port construction in *le'andria5E and si&ilar infrastructure 4roads, rid%es, ports, pulic
uildin%s and sanitation syste&s, and rail(ays5 in Wallachia 4Ro&ania5, and uilt, havin%
desi%ned, rid%es spannin% &ost of Europe.s %reat rivers as (ell as haror and doc" (or"s
for half Europe.s seaports.
2
Students fro& all over Europe studied in ;rench schools, and in
this (ay our%eois notions of order, efficiency and rationality, and &aterial pro%ress, (ere
diffused throu%h the traditional intelli%entsias, &erchants and retailers, fled%lin% industrialists,
the usiness classes %enerally, on the continent and in areas of colonial penetration.
0his (as 4and is5 the &ove&ent fro& science to capital 4%eneratin% it in its fi'ed for&5 at its
ori%ins. But the &ove&ent (as 4and is5 reciprocal+ >nce scientific procedures or%ani=ed (or"
processes, and once &achines constructed on the asis of scientific principles (ere deployed
in production, the &astery of (or", production and &achinery re)uired and de&anded the
assi&ilation of the co&&on understandin% of science of the day 4at (hatever level this
understandin% e'isted5, and, as in the case of the stea& en%ine alluded to aove, even
occasionally (as the point of departure for novel scientific theori=ations. In the sa&e &anner,
capital invest&ent (here there had een none or little efore constituted as such a diffusion of
science and &odern technolo%y. 4*nd, si&ilarly, (here (or", production and &achinery have
already een fully placed on scientific foundations, capital invest&ent that incarnates
advanced or even novel scientific principles raises the level of that co&&on understandin%,
1
Ca&eron, ,&id, #D, #C9C#.
2
,&id, CG, CF, CC, C7, 7D, 7C, 7O, 101.
0hose seaports included *nt(erp and Beeru%%e 4Bel%iu&5, @ison and >porto 4Portu%al5, C[di= 4Spain5, @e%horn
4@ivorno5 and ?enoa and 0rieste 4Italy5, ;iu&e 4Re1e"a, Croatia5, Salonica 4?reece5, and Constantinople 4Istanul,
0ur"ey5 a&on% others. ,&id, 101, n. C#.
infusin% social a(areness (ith a physicalist vision of reality,
1
or there is no &astery of
production and (or"5< ,t as at this precise $o$ent, that at hich inputs to 0$achiner% in5
production require scientific understanding and aareness to $ini$all% operate and $aintain
the$, that real do$ination in production, the develop$ent of capitalis$, capital as capital,
&eca$e irreversi&le? 0here is here a &ove&ent fro& capital ac" to science, (hich
co&pletes an incessantly %ro(in% and developin% circle that is necessary for and essential to
the e'panded reproduction of capital. 0his is the service science renders capital,
de&onstratin% their internal affinity and inseparaly, (hich eco&es ever ti%hter the &ore real
do&ination develops as a periodi=ation in the history of capitalis&<
With the syste&atic in%ression of science into production, the fa&iliar face of capitalis& no(
appears or, stated differently, (hat no( appears is the su1u%ation of the (or" processes
the&selves to capitalist rationality. 0his su1u%ation is achieved throu%h scienti=ation of (or"
rhyth&s and te&pos. It has as its conse)uences the constant revolutioni=in% of production
itself, and the loss of actual (or"er control over and understandin% of oth instru&ents of
production and that process as a (hole. 0endentially, producers e%in to appear as a
Kcollective (or"erK 48esa$tar&eiter5, increasin%ly appenda%es to the production process as a
(hole, no lon%er K&erelyK su1u%ated to e'chan%e, the &ar"et and the capitalistE co&&unities
under%oin% societal a&al%a&ation tendentially lose their co&pactness and distinctness in
relation to the ,econo&y,/ the deter&inants of the structure and &ove&ent of the latter
increasin%ly and directly shape the for&er, the cate%ories of the criti)ue of political econo&y
are first reflectively %rasped and e'plicated 4as in 6ar'5 on this very asis as science passes
into and reshapes production.
*t the sa&e ti&e, this in%ression has the further conse)uence of rationali=in% activities (ithin
society 4in order to achieve penetration of the value for&, to co&&oditi=e and &ar"et aspects
or o1ects connected (ith those activities and the activities the&selves, to produce the&
accordin% to a capitalist lo%ic, i.e., in accordance (ith the (a%ed relation and &ini&al socially
necessary laor ti&e in order to %enerate surplus value5+ Rationali=ation recreates social
activities as distinctive institutional spheres (ithin society &ediately suordinated to the lo%ic
of capitalist develop&ent, to accu&ulation, distinctive ecause in their very rationali=ation they
develop their o(n nor&s and rules (hich %overn hu&an ehavior (ithin these ne(ly for&in%
institutions. 0his &ove&ent 4rationali=ation5 that creates this develop&ent creates society, i.e.,
transfor&s co&&unities into a syste& of social relations, (hich, hardened and con%ealed
4i.e., institutionali=ed5, for& a net(or" of see&in%ly separate institutions that are connected
throu%h e'chan%e y their &ediate su1u%ation to the lo%ic of accu&ulation. Societ%, (hose
for&ation is a si&ultaneously %enerated product of the sa&e &ove&ent of capital that creates
an econo&y 4i.e., the thin%ly, o1ectively institutional connective thread5, no( necessarily
appears as a syste& into (hich individuals as astract units are inserted, and (hich can e
scientifically analy=ed and &athe&atically descried on the &odel of the &odern science of
nature,
2
creatin% o1ectivistic psycholo%ies 4such as ehavioris&5, ,econo&ics/ that e'plains
social develop&ent in ter&s of ,consu&er choice,/ etc., (hose ,infor&ation,/ ,data/ and
,facts,/ in turn, are utili=ed in producin% technolo%ies of social control 4e.%., the instru&ents,
(eapons, procedures and techni)ues e&ployed y the state.s ar&ed force, cops, %endar&es
and soldiers, in dealin% (ith lar%e %roups of people in the presence of politically i&portant
persona%es, durin% spectacular events, in ,riots,/ and in other for&s of resistance and
upheaval5<
1
;or physicalis&, see the ;ourth Study, Part III, ,0he 6aterialist :ialectic,/ elo(.
2
Losi", Diale!ti! des :on!reten, F#.
0his analysis is the asis for understandin% the develop&ent of sociolo%y as a science in the e&pirical sense. See
the ;ourth Study, Part I!, ,0he Criti)ue of $istoricis&,/ elo(.
In the (hole course of history (ith e'ception of those co&&unities that are i&plicated in the
i&&ediate run up to capitalis&, a &assive, reified institution, con%ealed social relations
for&ed in and throu%h productive activity, an Necono$%,> has not separated itself out fro$ the
co$$unit%, has not for$ed an institutionall% distinct sphere+
1
;or these co&&unities,
productive life si&ply does not possess the autono&y and i&&anence, and has not the
socially deter&inate (ei%ht, that it does for capitalist societies estalished on the asis of real
do&ination in production. ;or here, the econo&y has not only eco&e differentiated out fro&
the activities of daily life that constitute the co&&unity, it is not institutionally separate, it does
not tendentially for& an autono&ous re%ulator of social life in its entirety.
0his is crucial+
In e&er%in% and e'pandin% capital creates itself as a &ove&ent that appears (ithout a%ency,
or as self9a%ency (ithout foundation. 0his &ove&ent rests on the astraction of laor in
production+ Be%innin% fro& concrete, purposive laor, ut as the capacity to laor e&ployed
and deployed in production, laor is rendered astract, i.e., %enerali=ed 4unspecific5,
te&porally )uantified, &ateriali=ed and o1ectified as Kvalue,K as the sustance of products
produced for e'chan%e, as co&&odities, a surplus of (hich is reali=ed as such only in its
pheno&enal for& as profit that in turn can e reinvested y purchasin% capacity to laor,
&eans of production, ra( &aterials, (hich in this sense &eans that ,value/ is capital. 0his
process 4valori=ation5 %enerates the actual, effective shift in societal practice fro& concrete
hu&an ein%s as (or"ers to capital. Capital is the real su1ect of society under capitalist
production<0his &ove&ent and its &o&ents 4co&&odities, price, profit, as (ell as the hi%her
order astractions, stoc"s, onds, their &ar"ets, etc., &ere astract &o&ents of a social
relation appearin% as things, yet historically constituted real astractions5 for& the foundations
for the collectively constituted institutional astractions 4such as (or"places e&odyin%
productive &aterials, instru&ents and &achinery 4i.e., plant and e)uip&ent5, usiness fir&s,
industries, re%ulatory a%encies, etc.5, that, ta"en to%ether, (ith this &ove&ent and its
&o&ents, constitute this Kecono&yK+ 0he econo&y is the o1ective institutional conte't in
(hich capital.s personifications, capitalists, function and operate< In reshapin% social life in
its o(n i&a%e, capital literally creates the Kecono&y.K 0he Kecono&yK does not i&&ediately
appear as the practice of social %roups and the social relations that arise on those practices
and therey for& it+ 0he Kecono&yK is reified, appears thin%ly, a real &ove&ent that shapes
(hat it see&in%ly enco&passes. It is autono&ous and self9re%ulatin% ecause it is in an
i&&ediate, practical sense a &ystified and o1ectivistically understood sphere of society.
In its relentless drive to create surplus value, capitalIs &ove&ent tendentially reduces all
social relations to productive relations, to those of the ,econo&y./ 40hat is to say, social
relations, such as et(een parent and child, student and teacher, etc., tend to not only find
their &odel in the relation et(een (a%e earner and capitalist ut eco&e &ediately
suordinate to the lo%ic of accu&ulation.5 0o the e'tent productive relations have co&e to
do&inate social relations, to that e'tent capital accu&ulation is the internal, hidden yet
o1ective lo%ic or%ani=in% societ%+ Rnder conditions of real do&ination in capitalist production,
capital is the su&9ect of society. 0his see&in%ly autono&ous &ove&ent ai&ed at e'traction of
surplus value constitutes the &eanin% and si%nificance of spea"in% of capital as capital, as
self9valori=in% value. 0o the e'tent productive relations have co&e to do&inate social
relations, to that e'tent capital accu&ulation 4valori=ation5 is tendentially the internal, hidden
yet o1ective lo%ic or%ani=in% societ% as a hole.
1
Rnder capitalis&, institutional differentiation is, as already su%%ested, not restricted to the econo&y+ In the practice
of daily life, separate activity conte'ts e%innin% (ith (or" ta"e on a life of their o(n, each (ith distinctive nor&s
%overnin% ehavior and e'pectations. In this sense, (e spea" of the institutionally separate spheres of the fa&ily,
education, etc., and &ost i&portantly the state.
Real Do$ination, ,,
Capital Si$pl% as Capital
0he principles %overnin% scientific practice, its funda&ental theori=ations 4such as those
desi%ned to for&ulate a concept of &atter in &otion in relation to the pro1ect of nature
do&ination5 and specifically 4as (e shall sho( later5 &odern technolo%ical relations to nature,
are e&edded in the social practices that for& and rene( society itself, and are
co&prehended y the concept of capital, a concept that, in turn, refers ac" to a real,
historical totality of relations et(een social %roups in production, only one of (hich 4in the
(hole history of divided societies5 is capale of historically si%nificant action.
What is capital2 Capital is at once a social relation &eteen groups of age la&orers and
those ho e$plo% the$, the production process in hich this relation is for$ed, and a product
of this relation+
0he concepts of co&&odity, capacity to laor, concrete laor, astract %eneral laor, value,
e'chan%e value, etc. are all astractions that refer us ac" to the actual production process in
(hich they are constituted. So let.s e%in (ith the relations for&ed in that process, al(ays
(ith a vie( to elaoratin% an understandin% of the essential features of those relations.
Propertyless, (a%ed (or"ers e'chan%e their capacity to laor for the &onetary &eans to
sustain the&selves. In producin% co&&odities our laor is reduced or astracted, that is, it is
%enerali=ed and )uantified, &eanin% it is &easured in units of ti&e, laor is reduced to
)uantitative &easurale units, (hich, since this process is at the heart of capitalis&, it is or
should e ovious that rationali=ation of the sort is structurally con%ruent 4i.e., ho&olo%ous5
(ith the rationali=ation of activity and creation of institutionally separate spheres of social life,
and (ith the division of nature into separate and see&in%ly autono&y spheres in science each
(ith a distinct "no(led%e of their respective o1ects.
3o( it is not, in fact, the concrete, purpose incarnate laor of (or"ers that a oss, e&ployer or
capitalist purchases. @aor under conditions of capitalist production is, as indicated, capacity
to laor or laor po(er. ;or it is not the product of concrete laor that capitalists are interested
in 4and it is decidedly not or!ers the&selves5, ut the return over their invest&ent in this
capacity to laor, profit, or (hat (e call the surplus of ,value/ that is or can e reali=ed in
sellin% the product &ade y (or"ers. 0o oot, the product in its specificity is not %er&ane, any
product (ill do and that is (hy, prosaically, specific products identifiale in ter&s of
appearance, (ei%ht and si=e 4or if i&&aterial such as a ,service/ in ter&s of description5 and
purpose are called ,product/ or, if you prefer, co&&odities. So co&&odities are astract in the
sense that all specific characteristics and desi%nations< e'ceptin% of course that return, the
profit, %enerated in their actual sale< are irrelevant to the capitalistE si&ilarly, the laor that is
e&odied in the& in producin% the&, is e)ually astract, it is a&stract la&or+ It is %enerali=ed
4unspecific5, )uantified 4&easured in )uantitatively te&poral units, so &any hours in
production5, and o1ectified and &ateriali=ed in co&&odities. Call it ,value/+ E&odied in
co&&odities y and as a&stract la&or, reali=ed in their sale, value is the su&stance of
co$$odities.
*s a %roup rarely do capitalists achieve &onopoly conditions in sales of their products
4co&&odities5. Product scarcity can %enerate &onopoly, ut such a situation runs in a
direction opposite of the actual course of the historical develop&ent of capitalis&, (hich tends
to(ard superfluity and overproduction. Rather, it is co&petition that characteri=es this
develop&ent, co&petition that co&pels capitalists to technically innovate, and co&petition that
%enerates the scientifically shaped and structured &achine inputs that in the hands of
a&stract la&or create product superfluity. Co&petition is the funda&ental condition that all
capitalists confront, for in their o(n lan%ua%e they &ust &atch or etter the price of the
co&petition. It is said in the stoc" &ar"et investors "no( only t(o e&otions, fear and %reed.
0his state&ent is, thou%h, &erely a specification of the affectivity of all capitalists 4for it is
capitalist co&petition (hich drives the& to invest in ne( technical and technolo%ical inputs to
achieve that faled co&petitive advanta%e5, so that flo(in% fro& this asic condition is
capitalists. funda&ental affect or e&otion, fear of co&petitive ruin. 3o( in &ar"ets (here
advertisin%, ,sales&anship,/ additional utilities, etc., have no i&pact, that is, in those countless
situations and e'chan%es (here co&&odities sell si&ply as co&&odities< a situation that
e'e&plifies the nature of &ar"et co&petition and the conditions under (hich co&&odities are
produced< the follo(in% situation otains+ *l(ays fearful of ein% co&petitively (rec"ed,
capitalist strive &i%htily, and often frantically, to achieve a cost advanta%e vis9P9vis one
another in the production of their co&&odities. If (e desi%nate the avera%e costs of
production in any %iven industry the socially necessary laor ti&e e&odied in any %iven
co&&odity, then capitalists only profit if they attain lo(er costs, if their co&&odities e&ody
less socially necessary laor ti&e, if their costs of ra( &aterials, laor or &eans of production
are lo(er than the industry avera%e< In any %iven industry, there are those capitalists that do
achieve lo(er costs and those that don.t. >ver ti&e, these e)uali=e producin% a tendential
avera%e, those (ho attain the lo(er costs do so lar%ely te&porally 4they stay in usiness5 and
those that don.t %o elly up< *%ain, over ti&e it is rare indeed that any capitalist consistently
otains lo(er9costin% &eans of production or ra( &aterials< these too are lar%ely
co&&odities that sell strictly as co&&odities< so that the only consistent &anner of otainin%
co&petitive advanta%e is in lo(erin% laor costs. $ere, (e add, the real character of profit, the
&anner in (hich it is achieved, eco&es &anifest.
It is &anifest in the effort< )uite relentless really< that capitalists e'pend to drive do(n their
costs of laor. *ssu&in% it is successful 4and oviously at this point class stru%%le or its
asence eco&es the decisive deter&inant5, such a reduction secures capitalists. profitaility
&ecause laor e&odied in a co&&odity 4as )uantified and &easured te&porality5 have een
forced do(n elo( the level that on avera%e is socially necessary to produce it. In other
(ords, since (hat characteri=es co&&odities as co&&odities is the value 4i.e., astract and
%eneral, te&porally )uantified, and o1ectified and &ateriali=ed laor5 they e&ody, the
achieve&ent of a reduction in laor costs is )uite &undane, it occurs y di&inishin% the
)uantity of ti&e re)uired in production of the co&&odity at hand asent, of course, an
,e)uivalent co&pensation/ to the producers. Call this an increase in the ,productivity of laor./
0here are only t(o (ays to reali=e it 4actually there are three5+ It is achieved either in
len%thenin% the (or"in% day to au%&ent the &ass of co&&odities produced, or in
restructurin% the laor processes 4either restructurin% the pace, te&pos, rhyth&s or
or%ani=ation of (or" and (or"ers or introducin% novel technical inputs, (hich, additionally, as
a rule renders a portion of the e'istin% ody of (or"ers redundant5 to produce &ore
co&&odities in the sa&e or shorter period of ti&e 4or in oth len%thenin% the (or"in% day and
restructurin% the laor processes5. In all cases, the productivity of laor so9called increases
ecause the &ass of co&&odities increases 4and only if that &ass is sold, if value is reali=ed5
and only if (or"ers are not co&pensated for the increases, so this lac" of co&pensation is not
an asence of a su1ective capitalist act of reco&pense ut is a syste&ic feature that can e
said to occur if and only if the au%&ented &ass of co&&odities are in fact sold. 0hus, this
unco&pensated relation is an essential, necessary feature and structural condition of capital
accu&ulation. It is neither aritrary nor su1ective. We call it exploitation. 0he e'cess of value
4surplus value5 created throu%h increased productivity is reali=ed as such and appears
pheno&enally 4as profit5 (hen the co&&odity is sold. >nce sold, profit, actually e'cess or
surplus value, can no( e returned to the capitalist.
;orcin% do(n laor costs 4y co&petitively positionin% the&selves in the &ar"etplace in order
to insure their profitaility5 is acco&plished y capitalists in &anifold, often overlappin% (ays,
includin% speed9ups, i&position of &ore onerous production nor&s, su1u%ation to &achine
rhyth&s 4(here they hadn.t previously e'isted5, even harass&ent, and certainly in outri%ht
(a%e cuts and enefit reductions or losses 4(here they had previously e'isted5. 0hese &eans
and &ethods< al&ost al(ays or%ani=ed scientifically< siphon off (or"ers. creativity,
ener%ies and our very hu&anity< nu&in% our sensiilities, repressin% our affects,
suppressin% our thou%hts and e'perience 4(hich, for capitalists, at any rate, &erely %et in the
(ay, i&pede their &ain o1ect (hich is, of course, producin% co&&odities at a co&petitive
advanta%e y lo(erin% laor costs5. 0hese &ethods and &eans capitalists. deploy %ive special
&eanin% to the production processes in and throu%h (hich concrete laor 4purchased y the
e&ployer as the &ere capacity to laor5 is literally recreated as astract laor. In its o(n (ay,
this process of astraction carried out in production is as &iraculous as reli%ious fantasies of a
%odly e&odi&ent in read and (ine, for it is precisely specifically hu&an aspirations,
concerns, sensiilities, and even &undane hu&an products such as s(eat, that are
transustantiated into astracted and %enerali=ed, )uantified, o1ectified and &ateriali=ed,
e&ptied 4socially necessary5 ti&e, i.e., into KvalueK<
@et.s pause, ta"e stoc" and en%a%e in an inco&plete su&&ation+
)irst, the succeedin% are &o&ents in the production of co&&odities+ 0he entire (or" process
itself on the asis of (hich co&&odities are produced, inclusive of Kinputs,/ of &eans of
production 4tools, instru&ents, &achinery and other e)uip&ent5 that are directly used in the
production of co&&oditiesE %oods 4ra( &aterials5 that are incorporated into a final product
durin% the (or" process e%innin% (ith their purchase as co&&oditiesE structures 4plant,
(arehouse, office, etc.5 e&ployed in the production of co&&oditiesE the institutional for&s
4fir&s, corporations5 that &a"e up the socio9le%al conte't in (hich co&&odities are producedE
and, the &oney on the asis of (hich these various co&ponents of the production process are
purchased. Because they each and all are e&ployed or en%a%ed in the production processes
in and throu%h (hich capitalis& as a syste& is created and reproduced, they are all capital.
But these co&ponents in the production of co&&odities do not e'haust, really they do not
even %et at capitalIs real nature. We shall co&e ac" to this shortly...
Second, capital as an o1ective process e%ins su1ectively (ith insatiale desire, that is, (ith
the co&pulsion of the capitalist to accu&ulate, to turn &oney into capital and capital into
)uantitatively &ore &oney. 4In the social practice of daily life, as an e'tant process it is
dialectically circular, i.e., it has no e%innin% since all its &o&ents are si&ultaneously present
and, for this syste& of social relations, capitalis&, to function at all, si&ultaneously produced
and reproduced.5 Considered as an o1ective process, this for&ula is inverted, since it e%ins
(ith capital, capital is transfor&ed into &oney, and it e&er%es fro& the process as
incre&entally %reater capital. *nd, it is e'actly this inversion 9 capital as o1ective process 9
that appears so forcily in all its i&&ediacy in the practice of daily life. *ccordin%ly, capital
does not i&&ediately appear as a social relation, ut as a thin% or, etter yet, capital appears
as a su&9ect, as societyIs real su1ect, that is, not only as a ein% endo(ed (ith (ill,
consciousness, and the capacity for action 4as a su1ect5 ut as that ein% that presents the
appearance of responsiility for the unfoldin% and develop&ent of the entire syste& of social
relations called capitalis& 4as societyIs real su1ect5.
Third, capital is value, i.e., con%ealed, astract and %eneral, )uantitatively te&porali=ed and
o1ectified laor, as (ell as the process of its Kvalori=ation,K y (hich (e &ean and intend, the
social relation of (or"ers and capitalists that at once enco&passes the practices in and
throu%h (hich astraction is for&ed< this is the valori=ation process proper in (hich the
capacity to laor is reduced, astracted, and reappears as value e&odied in co&&odities<
and, only then is it indivisily and only analytically distinct, the suordinate (or" process, its
various &o&ents and co&ponents 4&eans of production, ra( &aterials, etc., enu&erated
aove5 as (ell as its useful end products. Since, as this discussion has su%%ested, capitalist
production tendentially enco&passes the social practices that for& and rene( society itself,
capital and its $ove$ent, its production and expanded reproduction, its valori/ation,
constitute societ%#s intelligi&le structure and for$ its real =su&9ect=?
)ourth, at once driven y the desire to a&ass capital and fearin% co&petitive ruin, the
capitalist strives to lo(er costs of production of his co&&odity elo( that of his co&petitors.
But each and every capitalist as a capitalist is oth driven and &otivated y the sa&e desire
and fear. Each and all pursue the sa&e practice of drivin% do(n costs 4of the production of
co&&odities they see" to produce5. 0he activity of all capitalists ta"en to%ether e'ercises a
co&pulsion on each one, creatin% an o1ective necessity eyond the control of any individual
capitalist, a syste&s lo%ic that co&pels each and all individuals (ho enter 4or are trapped in5
the (a%ed laor9capital relation. @et us call this o1ective necessity the lo%ic of accu&ulation.
It is a te&poral lo%ic, one that unfolds historically+ It is synony&ous (ith the &ove&ent of
capital, (ith capitalist develop&ent. ;or the capitalist (ho confronts this necessity 4as (ell as
for proletarians en%a%ed in (a%ed laor5, production appears to have a la(li"e character
4Kla(li"eK in sense of unchan%in%, i&&utale natural la(, not positive or statutory la(5.
)ifth, since each and every capitalist is co&pelled to force do(n production costs, the a&ount
of socially necessary laor ti&e e&odied in each co&&odity chan%es. It is not static over
ti&e, it di&inishes 4as the &ass of co&&odities produced is au%&ented5. But this sa&e
di&inution also confronts each and every capitalist as an o1ective necessity, an event of a
total societal production process utterly eyond his control, (hile re&ainin% and precisely as it
re&ains the outco&e of the sa&e capitalistsI, each and every one.s, co&pulsion to reduce
production and specifically laor costs. 0hus, each capitalist is 1ust as necessarily forced to
produce &ore to co&pensate for declinin% prices. 0he purpose of production ,is that the
individual product should include as $uch unpaid la&or as possi&le, and this is only achieved
y producing for the sa!e of productionK 4our translation, e&phases in ori%inal5.
1
0his
pervasive and unavoidale pursuit au%&entin% production leads to an i&passe, to a crisis, to
a situation in (hich, considerin% their enor&ous &ass, not all co&&odities availale for
purchase can find uyers. Si&ilarly i&&ense resources are poured into preventin% 1ust such a
crisis of overproduction. 40hin", for e'a&ple, of the &assive a&ounts of profits that are
diverted into advertisin% ca&pai%ns in order to create ne( needs to asor the &ass of
potential co&&odities readily availale (ith e'istin% productive capacity.5 But the real dan%ers
of a crisis of overproduction are depression, social unrest and (ar as the last hundred and
t(enty9five years have de&onstrated. 4Witness the %reat depressions of 1FGD91FGG, 1F7D9
1F7G, 1727917D7 and the t(o i&perialist (orld (ars.5 In syste&Is ter&s, ho(ever, the crisis of
overproduction is an inte%ral phase of capitalist develop&ent+ Both outco&es are for&s of
crisis resolution, the characteristic and ui)uitous underutili=ation of productive capacity
durin% a depression results in &assive deflation, a collapse of e'istin% prices (hich effectively
devalues enor&ous a&ounts of e'istin% capital, and (ar produces an e)ually &assive
destruction of capital in its sensily e&odied for&s 4hu&an life as potential capacity to laor,
plant, e)uip&ent, ra( &aterials, and co&&odities5< Crisis &eans that lives are ruined as,
first, (a%e levels decline precipitously, une&ploy&ent follo(s, standards of (or"in% class life
collapse, i&poverish&ent and i&&iseration co&pel &asses of &en and (o&en to stru%%le
a%ainst the o(ners of capital, as the full force of the state, its repressive a%ents and or%ans
4cops, prosecutors, courts, the &ilitary5 is rou%ht to ear to protect the order of capitalE (ar,
1
MIhr B(ec", daq das ein=elne Produ"t etc. &c%lichst viel un&e/ahlte 7r&eit enthalte, und dies nur erreicht durch die
4rodu!tion u$ der 4rodu!tion (illen., 6ar', MResultate des un&ittelaren Produ"tionspro=esses.,
(orld (ar, &ay follo(< In the end 4a te&porary one, to e sure5 resolvin% the crisis &ay
re)uire that those (ho carry, as it (ere, (ithin the&selves these social relations are no(
different 4in (ar, (or"ers and still others, cannon fodder in rulin% class stru%%les over
surpluses that circulate internationally, die5, ut this destruction of attained levels of social
develop&ent 4not 1ust the &ass of circulatin% co&&odities, or plant and e)uip&ent, ut also
the &an9&ade landscapes to the e'tent they can e distin%uished fro& structures housin%
industry, finance, service, co&&unications and transportation institutions5 per&its the
production process to e%in ane(, constitutes a devalori=ation achieved throu%h the very
dyna&ics of capitalist develop&ent 4achieved throu%h crisis ased destruction of capital in
these various for&s5, a devalori=ation in (hich and throu%h (hich the entire syste& of social
relations (e call capitalis& is for&ed to rene( itself, that is, to e%in ane(.
Identical (ith rene(ed e'pansion of productive activity, (hat ree&er%es is, of course, the lo%ic
of accu&ulation that drives this entire develop&ent. It is, in other (ords, the unity of su1ective
and o1ective lo%ics, the activity of co&petin% capitalists out of (hich ori%inates that
co&pellin% o1ective necessity that suordinates each and every individual capitalist.
Capitalis& is, then, a syste& of social relations eyond the reach of capitalists the&selvesE it
is, &oreover, a syste& (hose the very &ove&ent creates itself y (ay of (renchin%
contraction and e'pansion. Capitalis& unfolds and develops throu%h this cyclical process of
e'pansion and contraction. In the syste&ic sense, contraction, then crisis, is, pheno&enally at
least, a product of overproduction, an inaility of e'istin% &ar"ets to asor co&&odities as
products of e'istin% 4productive5 capacity, an inaility to reali=e surplus value throu%h
e'chan%e, thou%h in point of fact (hat is essentially at issue is capitalIs increasin% inaility to
valori=e laor 4the ,under/ or insufficient production of surplus value5 (hile confrontin%
co&&odity surfeit and overproduction.
;or, in all this, (hat is &ost forcily apparent is the lac" of conscious a%ency. >nly if the
(renchin% &ove&ent produces such a(areness can the syste& in principle e overthro(n,
aolished and transcended.
Real Do$ination, ,,,
Historical )or$s of Real Do$ination in 4roduction
We can very riefly recount the &a1or for&s of real do&ination in production as they initially
e&er%ed in history.
0he factor% first appeared circa 1GO0 in En%land. Its develop&ent, its creation as the nodal
point of syste& of capitalist social relations, (as inseparaly ound up (ith the production of
&echanical po(er fro& stea&.
1
Particularly in te'tile production, the e&er%ence of lar%e fir&s to &eet increased de&and that
resulted fro& de&o%raphical %ro(th constituted the first s%ste$atic insinuation of %enuinely
capitalist &ethods into production+
2
Wa%ed laor, that of KsurplusK fe&ale laor fro& the
countryside, e%an to appear for the first ti&e on a per$anent asis, al&ost e'clusively in
te'tile production (hich, as our presentation has su%%ested, had deep roots in productive
activity in Europe %oin% ac" to rise of &erchant po(er in ;lorence, Barcelona and the @o(
1
$o(ever, it (as already anticipated in plantation a%riculture in toacco production over one hundred years earlier in
the British 3orth *&erican colony of !ir%inia. See the re&ar"s in the section, ,Eras of Capital.s :o&ination in the
$istory of Capitalis&,/ elo(.
2
$ed%ed y %uilds here, patent re)uire&ents e&anatin% fro& states every(here, ar%ualy there (as, &oreover, a
certain slo(ly evolvin% ,technolo%ical/ dyna&ic that (as, (hen vie(ed continentally 4@yons, Rouen, Beauvais,
*&inesE ;lorence, !icen=aE SilesiaE the different En%lish and :utch centers5 evinced in te'tile production in its various
phases 4(oolens, sil", fustians5 and for&s 4dyein%, finishin%, printin%5 starting especially fro$ the period 41C7091OF75
(e have called the inner historical si'teenth century. See, e.%., Ciriacono, ,6ass Consu&ption ?oods and @u'ury
?oods,/ C09CC.
Countries follo(in% on the popular, uran suordination of the %reat sei%niorial lords of the
surroundin% countrysides. In En%land efore the ;rench Revolution, in the production of
clothin%, existing $achine technolog% in spinning and eaving processes ere integrated in a
single structure or &uilding in a single locale and there&% generated qualitativel% greater
output in each process. -et (hile the resultant isolation of (or"ers fro& the ele&ents
constituted a rea" (ith the seasonally ad1ust&ents traditionally &ade in a%ricultural and craft
laor, the li&ited attention to the (or" processes en%a%in% (a%ed (or"ers entailed in early
te'tile production, the partnership structure of the fir&, and e&ploy&ent of traditional doule
entry for&s of oo""eepin%, and, aove all, the integration of production processes as
opposed to their rationali/ation 0frag$entation or su&division5 did not %ive rise to the constant
transfor$ation of production and its or%ani=ation that is essentially characteristic of fully
industrial, &ass production &ethods.
1
Based on a pri&itively hori=ontal inte%ration of
production, this develop&ent< aleit also characteri=ed y personal oppression, y
paternalis&, not &erely y the (a%e relation< (as the first for& of real do&ination in
production.
0he factory syste& rou%ht &asses of hu&an ein%s to%ether under one roof to en%a%e in
production as &ere operatives. In fact, at its ori%ins, factory (or" in cloth, te'tile and %ar&ent
production (as carried out y youn% (o&en, far& %irls, (hose fa&ilies, accusto&ed to ho&e
(or" and a%ricultural laor on a s&all plot, had een proletariani=ed< the patriarchal
e'tended fa&ily far& (ith its pri&itive non9&echanical tools 4plou%h, hoes5, natural po(er
4horses, o'en5, seasonal (or", and production for self9sufficiency (ith s&all surpluses for sale
on the &ar"et 4(hich in a%riculture (as tradition itself5 (as %one+ S&all copyholds had een
stolen, e'propriated y force of la(, access to co&&ons to %ather dead (ood for fuel and
%leanin%s 4corn5 for food had een denied y enclosures< >ver ti&e factory o(ners (ould
introduce ne( &achines to )uantitatively i&prove (or"er output, called ,productivity./
0e'tiles (as not, ho(ever, the only for& of productive activity su1ect to the ne( capitalist
&ethods in En%land. 8osiah Wed%(ood 4Charles :ar(in.s &aternal %randfather5, a &aster
potter (ith a pronounced scientific ent, had uilt a cera&ic, earthen(are and china factory in
Bursle& 4near Bir&in%ha&5 in the 1GO0s. $e e&ployed che&ical processes and treat&ents in
his (or"s that (ere directly related to his scientific interests. *fter 1GF0, he (as in close
contact (ith 8oseph Priestly 4after the latter set up his &inistry in Bir&in%ha&5, supplyin% hi&
(ith e)uip&ent for his laoratory, susidi=in% his e'peri&ents. Priestly.s e'peri&ents, in turn,
afforded Wed%(ood (ith insi%ht that, related to clay and color, i&proved output in his china
factory.
2
>ther facets of industrial production, iron 4one of the &ost advanced industrial
processes5 for e'a&ple, had under%one i&portant technical chan%e efore the end of the
century+ 0he use of co"e, instead of charcoal, had eco&e &ore co&&on 4and (ould e
ui)uitous y 1F1C5. Puddlin% furnaces and rollin% &ills to enhance last furnace products
had een in use since 1GFD. It should also e noted that the stea& en%ine (as deployed in
&inin%, &etallur%ical factories, re(in% and distillin% as (ell as te'tile production.
D
En%land.s ,industrial revolution/ (as essentially co&pleted y 1FD0, (hile so$e of the
develop&ents (hich it had passed throu%h (ere still on%oin% in ;rance, Bel%iu& and the
(estern ?er&an spea"in% statelets alon% the Rhine 4industry that o(ed its develop&ent to
the aolition of feudal le%al codes, internal custo& arriers and e'clusive local privile%es, the
1
Chandler, The Lisi&le Hand, OG9OF. 0his situation (as even &ore characteristic of 6assachusetts circa 1F20 than in
En%land early in the era of the so9called Industrial Revolution.
2
*drian :es&ond and 8a&es 6oore, Darin, G9F.
D
Rondo Ca&eron, )rance and the 2cono$ic Develop$ent of 2urope, G.
civil code (ith its protection of contract, and the alienaility of property in production achieved
throu%h 3apoleonic con)uest5.
1
* second for&, a develop&ent of real do&ination in production< and this (as not restricted
to En%land, ut (as ,universal/ as every country, state or re%ion that ca&e to capitalis& after
1FD0 and efore the first i&perialist (orld (ar e'perienced it< (as centered on a sin%ular
co&ple' of technolo%ical inputs that revolutioni=ed production. We refer to the advent of
universal $achiner%.
Presupposin%, of course, the historical e'pansion 4&uch of (hich (as still on%oin%5 of
infrastructural 4particularly roads, canals and rails5 and e'tractive industrial 4&inin%5
develop&ent, as (ell as specific and very asic industrial activities such as iron 4later steel5
production developed in foundries and &ills, and e&ployed in &etal(or"in% operations 4&ost
i&portantly in this era, the &anufacture of loco&otives, frei%ht and passen%er carsE stea&
en%ines especially those of shipsE te'tile &achineryE lathesE etc.5, universal &achines had
three &a1or co&ponents, the lathe, capstan and turret. 6ost i&portant (as the lathe+ Rotatin%
the piece (or"ed around a hori=ontal a'is, shapin% the iron 4later steel5 (ith a sharp ed%ed,
fi'ed cuttin% tool, the use of the lathe re)uired %reat s"ill and de'terity that (as ac)uired
throu%h years of a theoretically &ediated practice 4a&on% other thin%s, the physics and
che&istry of &etals and alloys ca&e into play here5. 0he turret is a fastener, a revolvale and
pivoted holder attached to the lathe and securin% the piece (or"ed on. 0he capstan is a
stationary piece of e)uip&ent, a &achine (ith (hich the (ei%ht of the pieces to e (or"ed
(as hoisted and &oved aout y (ay of a (indin% cale (rapped around a rotatin% vertical
dru& po(ered y stea& 4in later applications y electricity5. With these pri&ary &achines,
(or" could e cut to any shape, the &achines (ere not fitted to any specific production
sche&a 4hence, the desi%nation ,universal/ &achine5. 0he s"ill developed had so&ethin% in
the nature of a craft aout it+ Wor"&an apprenticed for C9G years efore they could e dee&ed
,s"illed./ 3o( the e'tensive use of universal &achinery< it entailed precision (or", the s"illed
stratu& that (as en%a%ed (ith it constructed loco&otives and ship en%ines, the historically
&ost i&portant products of the a%e, this phase of real do&ination in production< transfor&ed
the (or"in% class of the factory era. If artisans stood outside the industrial proletariat in 1F2C,
in 1FG0 they no lon%er didE instead, the (or"in% class (as deeply divided, split into t(o strata,
a tiny hi%hly s"illed, %enerally native and uran layer that (as hereditarily proletarian in the
road sense and a vast stratu& of uns"illed, often i&&i%rant (or"ers (ith peasant, se&i9
peasant and even serf social for&ations. 0hese differences (ere profound, and rendered the
class internally anta%onistic.
2
0he (or" processes here (ere une)uivocally deter&ined y the
real do&ination of capital over laor in production, ut in ter&s of a periodi=ation of the history
capitalis&, this era for&ed a Kt(ili%ht =oneK so&e(here et(een the period of for&al
do&ination of laor y capital, delineated in class ter&s y the lon% historical stru%%le in (hich
e&ployers ca&e into ein% as e&ployers y strippin% artisans of their o(nership and control
over the &eans of production and the period of the real do&ination, (hich, defined in ter&s of
the revolutioni=ation of production throu%h transfor&ation of the laor processes, had its
deepest roots in the latter half of the lon% nineteen century and (hose decisive &o&ent (as
the failed stru%%le of (or"ers a%ainst e&ployer9introduced, technolo%ically driven &ass
production, dilution and Kdes"illin%,K a later develop&ent in real do&ination shaped y
i&perialist (orld (ar and shapin% proletarian revolution.
1
,&id, 7, 2F9D0, D27.
2
In the 0sarist (orld 4the capitalist &ilitary sector5, these differences (ere so deep that they found lin%uistic
e'pression+ S"illed (or"ers (ere e&ployed in plants 4/avod%5, the uns"illed ,&asses/ in factories 4fa&ri!i5. See our
Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ in the 2poch of ,$perialist "orld "ar and 4roletarian Revolution 0Hrgeschichte5, ;irst
Study, Part I, Section III+
3o( ,s"illK is an historically relative cate%ory, and the industrial (or"ers in )uestion here (ere
to for& the s"illed stratu& (hen Ks"illK still had the &eanin% of the "no(led%e and $aster% of
the &achines, tools and e)uip&ent that &ade up those &eans of production (ith (hich
(or"ers have a livin%, non-alienating relation. 0he asence of estran%e&ent in (or" and the
condition of &astery (as uni)ue to the history of capital as capital, and %ave rise to its
overridin% historical i&port and si%nificance+ In the confrontation over the technical
transfor&ation 4so9called5 of the (or" processes, this stratu&< fro& St. @ouis, Chica%o, and
3e( -or", throu%h ?las%o(, @ondon, Paris and 0urin to Berlin, $a&ur% and !ienna,
Budapest and Petro%rad< for&ed the ac"one of the revolutionary, councilar &ove&ents
that posed the %reatest challen%e to e&ployer do&ination of (or" in the history of capitalis&.
1
* third for& and develop&ent of real do&ination, itself li"e the others an outco&e of the
victory of first the our%eoisie, then capital, in fierce class stru%%le, e%an, at least in ter&s of
effective history, at Bethlehe& Steel in the last years of the chronolo%ical nineteenth century+
;rederic" 0aylor fou%ht (ith< ar%ued, ullied, and disciplined< s"illed (or"ers over (ho
(ould control production. $e also dili%ently studied the relation et(een &en at (or" and
&achines they used. @i"e his conte&porary $enry ;ord 4and later @ord Leynes5, 0aylor (as a
van%uard of capital. $is &a1or (or" entitled 4rinciples of Scientific Manage$ent is testi&ony
to his place and role in the class stru%%le. 0here is at least one very stri"in% ad&ission in this
(or". It %oes li"e this, Kthe shop (as really run y the (or"&en, and not y the osses. H0hat,
of course, created the prole& (hich lay in theJ i%norance of the &ana%e&ent as to (hat
really constituted a proper dayIs (or". H;orJ althou%h he (as fore&an of the shop, the
co&ined "no(led%e and s"ill of the (or"ers (ho (ere under hi& (as certainly ten ti&es as
%reat as his o(n.K
2
0aylor (as to enunciate three central principles of his theori=ation,
principles that ;ord &aterially e&odied in his first really successful auto asse&ly line that
opened in $i%hland Par" in 171#. 0hose principles included separatin% (or"9processes fro&
(or"er s"ills, detachin% e'ecution fro& conception, and estalishin% &ana%e&ent i&posed
and enforced rules, la(s and for&ulae %overnin% (or"er response to the ne( &achines
deter&ined rhyth&s and te&pos. 0he function of these principles (as to tear "no(led%e and
understandin% fro& the (or"er, to de9s"ill hi& or dilute his s"ill and to push the "no(led%e
for&ed in and throu%h s"illed activity up(ard into layers of &ana%e&ent and o(nership. K*ll
of the plannin% (hich under the old syste& (as done y the (or"&an, as a result of this
personal e'perience, &ust of necessity under the ne( syste& e done y the &ana%e&ent.K
D
*chieved y reor%ani=in% the (or" processes, plannin% had the for&al structure of scientific
&ethodE it entailed a pro1ection in advance, &ethodical, syste&atic and duly calculated, of all
the aspects of the laor processes actually involved in (or". 0his, in turn, (as dialectically the
pre&ise and outco&e of actual &aterial e&odi&ent, the reconstruction of (or" y (ay of
speciali/ed $achiner% as the &asis of continuous flo production+ Because successfully
e'ecuted, this pro1ect of reor%ani=in% (or" roed (or"ers of s"ill and "no(led%e, rendered
the& &achine &inders (ho could learn fra%&ented, partial tas"s, e trained, in a &atter of
(ee"s.
#
Materiall% these principles ere incorporated into and ani$ated the ver% sensuous
construction and organi/ation of the nel% launched, $ass production $achine technolog%+
0hese &ass production &achines (ere lar%ely introduced durin% the first i&perialist (orld
(ar, especially in &unitions and truc", aircraft 4and at the very end of the (ar, tan"5
1
,&id, ;irst Study as a (hole.
2
The 4rinciples of Scientific Manage$ent, #F9#7.
D
,&id, DF.
#
K0he net result of the application of these principles is the reduction of the necessity for thou%ht on the part of the
(or"er and reduction of his &ove&ents to a &ini&u&.K $enry ;ord, M% 3ife and "or!, F0.
production. 0hey (ere no lon%er &achines individual (or"ers could &aster, their desi%n
&ilitated a%ainst this, and, accordin%ly, it too" (or"ers decades of shopfloor stru%%le to lean
a%ain ho(< here only &ar%inally< to control the pace and te&po of the laor processes.
=Hniversal= $achines such as the pre(ar lathe and turret, that is, those not fitted to an%
specific production sche$a and as such the $aterial pre$ise of craft $o&ilit% and !noledge,
ere replaced &% =speciali/ed= $achiner%, that is, $achines sequentiall% arranged and
connected - each $achine perfor$ing a single operation on a single aspect of a product+ 3o
a&ount of preparation, trainin%, and apprenticeship per&its an individual (or"er to &aster this
&achinery. 0hese ne( &achines allo(ed for and de&anded the production of a ne( type of
(or"er, call her a $ass or!er+ The% required 0and the% still require5 a speciali/ed or!er, one
tied to a single, frag$ented tas! on a single $achine, one hose ever% $otion is dictated &%
that single $achine< a product of desi%n lar%ely on the asis of stop &otion studies also
inau%urated y 0aylor< and one for (ho& an apprenticeship in the traditional sense is
&eanin%less and irrelevant. Such &achinery is se)uentially arran%ed, functionally inoperative
in isolation, constructed to perfor& e'clusively sin%le operations and paradi%&atically found in
and ta"en to%ether constitutes continuous flo( asse&ly line production.
We can desi%nate the e'traordinary develop&ent of real do&ination in production, this
,event,/ as capital.s technical revolution. Wa%ed in and over production, it (as not y and
lar%e a stru%%le (on at the i&&ediate point of production+ In the inter(ar period, e$plo%ers
esta&lished continuous flo production onl% through repression of or!ers# organi/ations+
Restin% on the politically achieved dis&antlin% or ruin of (or"ers or%ani=ations 4e.%., the IWW
in the Rnited States5, the &ass &urder of &ilitants 4fascist &oili=ations in Italy and
?er&any5, and the destruction of a proletarian oppositional culture as the case &ay have
een, this technical revolution re$ained the historicall% significant, qualitative develop$ent of
capital.s real do$ination in production ecause it did not &erely result in a te&porary solution,
ut transfor&ed the very structure of, reco&posed &aterially and politically, the (or"in% class
at the level of the (orld.
Real Do$ination, ,L
"or!ers. Struggles against )or$s of Real Do$ination in 4roduction
0he victory of the our%eoisie over (or"ers in its various vicious fi%hts to introduce ne( inputs
4&achinery5 into production and to reor%ani=e the (or" processes in the effort to achieve
efficiency and &a'i&al output is at the sa&e ti&e really and in fact the victory of capital over
the our%eoisie, the disappearance of the latter.s su1ectivity and a%ency in history. We shall
return to this later,
1
ut, for no(, (e (ish only to riefly recall that the institution of real
do&ination in production (as not an auto&atic process.
0he factory syste& (as a product of the triu&ph of industrious, scientifically &inded &en, li"e
8osiah Wed%(ood, in a len%thy stru%%le a%ainst laorers of the villa%es, &en and (o&en
(ithout stale positions in a%ricultural production, ut really ra&ped up in truly sava%e conflict
(ith estalished, s"illed &en, croppers and (ool co&ers in contradistinction to earlier te'tile
(or"ers, factory operatives lar%ely (o&en. It (as these s"illed %roups of (or"ers, (ho, in a
life and death stru%%le a%ainst the o(ners, a%ainst the loss of s"ill, (or" and livelihood the
ne( &achines represented, rou%ht into ein% a syste&atic, or%ani=ed opposition in the
@uddite &ove&ent.
2
0he factory syste& (as a historical for& of the real do&ination of capital over laor in
production. While it has not disappeared ne(er for&s have appeared, so that (here it e'tends
do(n to the historical present, it characteri=es the &ost ac"(ard sectors of capitalis& 4e.%.,
1
See ,Real :o&ination and *utono&i=ation of Capital,/ elo(.
2
E.P. 0ho&pson, The Ma!ing of the 2nglish "or!ing Class, #G29O02, esp. C#Gff.
%ar&ent production5. It (as, in fact, in (hat (e called the t(ili%ht era 41FG09171#5 of for&al
do&ination as a period in the history of capitalis& that the factory syste&, e'istin% in the
,space/ of the econo&y alon%side facilities uilt around universal &achines, found its &ost
e'tensive e&ploy&ent in that history. While the factory syste& has for the %reatest part of its
econo&ic e'istence %enerated (or"er resistance, that for& of real do&ination in production at
the center of (hich (e find the universal &achine did not to our "no(led%e ever occasion
(or"er opposition a&on% those (ho actually deployed this &achinery 4as opposed to those,
the vast &ass of uns"illed, ne( proletarians, (ho at the sa&e historical &o&ent (ere su1ect
to strictly factory laor5. 0he reason should e ovious+ 0his (as perhaps the only for& of
&achinery in the four hundred year lon% history of capitalis& (hich not only did not rest on
des"illin% laor ut dra&atically elevated the role and function of s"ill, "no(led%e and
e'perience and the (or"er (ho developed the& in production.
0he elli%erent and deadly stru%%le of capitalist states a%ainst each other in i&perialist (orld
(ar provided the occasion and 1ustification for the introduction of continuous flo( production to
secure &ass production of (eaponry and &unitions. In Britain, Russia, in ?er&any 4and
*ustro9$un%ary, in the Rnited States and to an e'tent in Italy5, it also %enerated a (or"ers
stru%%le, first, a%ainst dilution, then a%ainst capitalist control in production and finally a%ainst
the (ar, thou%h thorou%h%oin% only in Russia.
In Britain,
1
a shop ste(ards &ove&ent had co&e into ein% in late 171C. It (as for%ed in a
dual stru%%le a%ainst (ar9%enerated dilution and the conservative craft union leadership. @ed
y revolutionary (or"ers, the &ove&ent (as ased a&on% and for the &ost part confined to
en%ineers, turners, and fitters in the &etal industries, particularly a&on% ar&a&ent producers.
:urin% 8anuary 171F, the &ove&ent roadened and ca&e (ithin a reath of lin"in% the
stru%%le a%ainst dilution to that of a rapidly %ro(in% anti9(ar &ove&ent. Instead, it
de%enerated into a sectional stru%%le a%ainst the conscription of s"illed (or"ers.
In ?er&any, syste&atic (or"ersI opposition appeared only often the collapse of the last %reat,
sprin% 171F offensive of the $i%h Co&&andIs ar&ies on the (estern front. Spearheaded y
Berlin &etal(or"ers, this opposition really ra&ped up and e%an to effect a transfor&ation of
?er&an society after $indenur% and @udendorf suddenly and dra&atically announced the
(ar (as over and an ar&istice (ent into effect in early 3ove&er 4the 11
th
5 171F+ 0he LaiserIs
autocracy... a &ilitari=ed constitutional &onarchy in (hich the %enerals and their i&&ediately
suordinate co&&anders e'ercised de facto, close to asolute control over ?er&an society...
collapsed, lar%e vocal tendencies (ithin the Social :e&ocracy for&ed ne( centrist and
revolutionary parties 4the Independents, the Co&&unist party5, and the Social :e&ocrats
the&selves (ere installed in the state, headin% up a fi% leaf parlia&entary re%i&e+ ;or ehind
the Social :e&ocratic ri%ht 4Erert, Schneider&ann and, aove all, 3os"e5 stood the various
fra%&entary officersI corps %roups, co&in% to%ether as the fascistic and terrorist )rei :orps
4and ehind the&, the lar%e industrialists and %reat 8un"er lando(ners5. * revolutionary
confrontation developed &ore or less in all &a1or cities N Bre&en, $a&ur%, Berlin, etc. 9 and
sa( the for&ation of (or"ersI councils, the develop&ent of dual po(er and an ill9fated, if not
entirely aorted insurrection+ 0he ?er&an Revolution (as dro(ned in the lood of leadin%
(or"ers, &ilitants and revolutionaries in 8anuary 1717.
2
In Russia,
D
startin% fro& the stru%%le a%ainst the revolutionary de&ocrats on the heels of their
assu&ption of po(er follo(in% the collapse of the 0sarist re%i&e, (or"ers created factory
co&&ittees 4the political parties reestalished soviets5 in atte&pts to assert control over and
1
8a&es $inton, The )irst Shop Steards Move$ent, 2CC92G2E Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ 0Hrgeschichte5, ;irst Study,
Part III, Section !.
2
Pierre BrouU, The 8er$an Revolution,GD92CF.
D
Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ 0Hrgeschichte5, ;irst Study, Part II.
restrict the &ost deleterious effects of an i&&ediate return to production on a (arti&e asis.
In this stru%%le, s"illed (or"ers for&ed an internal class van%uard &ediatin% the relations of
the lar%est part of the class 4na&ely, uns"illed, ,ne(/ or nonhereditary proletarians5 to the
party of Bolshevi"s, a &ediation, developed no(here else, that (as a necessary condition for
the reali=ation of revolutionary possiilities %enerated y the crisis< $i%hly s"illed Russian
(or"ers (ho played leadin% roles in the factory co&&ittee &ove&ent of 171G (ere, then, not
isolated fi%ures. 0hou%h lac"in% a craft9ased conte't of s"ill for&ation and thus differin%
si%nificantly fro& their counterparts in the rest of the capitalist (orld, the thin layer of s"illed
(or"ers in Russia (ere nonetheless &e&ers of the political van%uard of a (orld (or"in%
class, (ith their counterparts as (e have &entioned in ?las%o( and Coventry, $a&ur%,
Bre&en and Berlin. In fact, &a1or industrial centers do&inated y si&ilar s"illed strata had
developed in the latter 17th century fro& Petro%rad in the east to St. @ouis in the (est and all
&a1or uran centers of capitalist develop&ent in et(een. 0he crafts (ere e'clusive and
(or"er associations (ere usually occupationally ased, (ith occupation itself ased upon
years9lon% apprenticeship, and (or" or%ani=ed into a hierarchy of apprentice, 1ourney&an,
and fore&an. -et this (as not a craft conscious ac"(ater ut a political van%uard involved in
creatin% councils, (hich for&ed and for&ed itself out of a historically specific life practice, one
(hich, in turn, (as ine'tricaly ound up (ith a historically specific phase of real do&ination,
and a for& of capitalist technolo%y 4universal &achinery5 in production. 0he type of (or"er
risin% fro& this life practice (as doo&ed to e'tinction (ith the KtechnicalK revolution of capital
4continuous flo( production5 that e&ployers i&posed on (or"ers every(here in the after&ath
of the i&perialist (orld (ar.
1

2ras of Capital.s Do$ination in the Histor% of Capitalis$
Capitalist production only appears in history lon%, lon% after the e&er%ence of a%riculture,
social stratification ased on ri%idly fi'ed positions in production, and institutions 4in particular,
the state5 that intensify and e'acerate the central prole& of hu&an e'istence 4social
division5 this develop&ent has created. Because it is restless &ove&ent 4a cannial
consu&in% all that is other in its relentless )uest for surplus9value5, capital poses this central
prole& strictly in historically specific (ays that rise fro& the historical for&s of its do&ination
in production< 0he prole& of social division can only e resolved y &oili=in% societal
resources in order to transcend those for&s, ut capital, and earlier the our%eoisie, has
never een ale to resolve this prole&, only &a%nify and a%%ravate it< It is &anifestly socio9
historically he%e&onic for&s of do&ination in production 4for&al, real and totali=in%5 that are
at issue here. *s actually do&inant and deter&inate, these for&s further create a
periodi=ation of eras of do&ination in the history of capitalis&<
0he cate%ories of for&al and real for&s of the do&ination of capital over laor refer to oth a
productive ased sense 4for (hich for&al do&ination conceptuali=es the &erchant and
landlord activity, uninvolved directly in production, of e'tractin% surplus value asolutely y
len%thenin% the (or"in% day, and for (hich real do&ination conceptuali=es the industrialist
directly intervenin% in the laor processes, (hich includes not 1ust &achine inputs ut the
reor%ani=ation of the (or" processes, and e'tractin% surplus value relatively5, and the sense
of epochs in the history of capitalis& that, thou%h ori%inatin% se)uentially, can e found to
si&ultaneously spatially and, or, %eo%raphically coe'ist+ >nce real do&ination in production
has developed, at any particular ti&e in the history of capitalis&, in any specific ranch of
industry, any industry, even in a sin%ular (or"place, these for&s can e'ist, have e'isted and
do e'ist at the sa&e ti&e. 0he tendency a&on% capitalists to e'tract surplus value at once
asolutely and relatively is universal.
1
,&id, ;irst Study, Conclusion.
0here are t(o )uestions here, thenE first, (hat decides (hich for& is &ost i&portant, pri&ary
and deter&inate for capitalis& at any &o&ent in its historyE and, second, at (hat point does,
or did, for&al do&ination pass over into real do&ination as an era in the history of capitalis&.
Consider the first prole& fro& the perspective of situations that have e'isted at different
ti&es in the history of capitalis&.
4lantation agriculture is actually very old, a for& of productive activity that not only predates
real do&ination ut reaches ac" to the earliest phases of capitalis& and e'tends do(n to the
present.
*t its ori%ins, as Castilian "in%ship entered decline and national states pursuin% &ercantile
policies e%an to appear, the early !ir%inia settler colony in British *&erica 4and the
Cariean colonies of the ,West Indies/5 pursued ,3e( World/ plantation a%riculture that (as
a part of capitalist develop&ent fro& its very e%innin%+ 0he production of staples 4especially
toacco and su%ar, ut also indi%o, dyestuffs, and cotton5 on the asis of plantation a%riculture
(as called into ein% y the ne( sensiilities of the e&er%in% &ourgeois societies of En%land
and $olland. In fact, fro& its e%innin%s, plantation a%riculture (as distinctively capitalist+
Rnli"e conditions that %enerally otained under laor.s for&al susu&ption 4(herein
handicraft or ,puttin% out/ production (as usually far&ed out to individual laorers (or"in% out
of their ho&es5, the plantation a%ricultural settin% actually anticipated 4y rou%hly one9hundred
and fifty years5 the industrial factory+ It involved (or" of a specific, ne( sort, that is, closely
supervised laor 4and, thus, en%a%in% &erchants (ho ori%inally or%ani=ed this laor directly in
this supervision, so that they did not stand at all outside productive activity si&ply see"in% to
e'tract &oney9(ealth fro& the e'chan%e, as in for&al do&ination5. * capitalist for& of
econo&ic rationality appeared for perhaps the first ti&e in the or%ani=ation of laor. >n this
asis, the laor process itself, or%ani=ed in the for& of (or" %an%s (ho toiled for lon% hours
durin% lar%e parts of the year at odily de&andin% tas"s, constituted a re%i&e of laor that
achieved a ne( order of e'ploitation. ;inally, this e'ploitation (as &ultiplied y the
rationali=ation of tas"s and their si&plification in toacco and su%ar production as (ell. 0he
laor e&ployed in the earliest plantation a%riculture (as, &oreover, not fully servile 4slave
laor5E rather, as onded laor, in a hi%hly &ediated sense it (as (a%ed<
1
1
;or plantation a%riculture, see the Preface to our Civil "ar and Revolution in 7$erica, the section entitled ,3e(
6erchants and the :istinctively, 6odern Capitalist 3ature of Production/ as (ell as the sources cited therein.
-es, settler colonial a%riculture 4especially toacco and su%ar5 in !ir%inia, in Barados and else(here in the West
Indies 4Cariean5 achieved a ne( order of e'ploitation y (ay of carefully &onitored and supervised laor so that
(e are spea"in% aout transfor&ation of the laor processes throu%h reor%ani=ation of laor itself. But one should e
careful here. 0he follo(in% caveats are in order+
0his (as not real do&ination of capital over laor in production, first, ecause after 1O70 it (as onded 4less and
less5 and, or, 4&ore and &ore5 slave laor and not (a%ed laor that (as e'ploited. Call this ne%ation 4of real
do&ination5 a ,deduction/ fro& an a'io&atic laor theory of value. So e it. But, second, it (as not real do&ination
ecause in the precise sense it (as isolated and episodic, i.e., it did not lead to the continuous develop$ent of real
do$ination across the societies of the orld 4transfor&in% do&ination in production into a periodi=in% deter&inant in
the history of capitalis&5, there&% continuous increases in the productivit% of a&stract la&or, hence endless expansion
of productive forces. 0here (ere no &achine inputs in colonial a%ricultural production 4not even the use of che&ical
fertili=ers5 and this points to the first of t(o li&its in increasin% productivity, (hich at any rate is the i&port of real
do&ination+ 0he ,achieve&ent/ of continuously increasin% productivity requires syste&atic scientific and technolo%ical
inputs. It is the o1ective, historical role and function of the &odern science of nature in relation to its foundations in
capitalist production.
0he second li&itation on colonial a%ricultural production is this+ *sent &achine inputs, class stru%%le at the point of
production (as un&ediately decisive. 4I&&ediately decisive ecause (or" could never e su1ect to &achine
rhyth&s and te&pos, and thus restrict stru%%le.5 So that productivity (as su1ect to rhyth&s and te&pos of the
suordinate class as it fou%ht ac" even if it never aolished its condition 4especially as enslaved5. 0hus, increases in
productivity (ere entirely depended on the day to day outco&es of this stru%%le, and (ere neither consistent nor
reliale and (ere al(ays reversile. 0his can e seen clearly in the slave %an% (or" in South Carolina lo( country
rice production 4;or this, see 8ohn StrictlandIs ,I3o 6ore 6ud Wor"I/5.
7ntediluvian for$s of capital can reappear+ 0he role of the "ula", not a capitalist far&er ut an
usurer in the Soviet Rnion, circa 172F, is a case in point.
1
Si&ilarly, there (as so&ethin% of an usurious e'ploitation in the sharecroppin% tenancy that
developed in the Rnited States in the after&ath of Reconstruction 4circa 1FF0917#05 &ore
than a century after for&al do&ination eca&e %enerali=ed at the level of the (orld, and as
real do&ination in production had e%un its ascendancy.
2
In the conte$porar% gar$ent industr% in South *sia, at :ha"a, in various production sites in
Ban%alore, :ha"a, Phno& Penh, Sai%on or Shen=hen 4China5, it is &i%rants fro& the
countryside, a%ain over(hel&in%ly fe&ale, (ho do the se(in%, sortin%, (ashin%, etc.
0echnolo%ical inputs 4not 1ust se(in% &achines, ut plant also5, thou%h industrial, are not ,hi%h
tech/ and vastly less capital intensive at least relative to auto plants 4not 1ust ,i% factory/
co&ple'es li"e those of ;ord in :etroit or the ;iat 6irafiori plant in 0orino once (ere5, far
s&aller ones li"e those such as the ;ord, $onda, 6itsuishi, Proton and :aihatsuaPerodua
plants in 6alaysia or si&ilar ?6, $ino, $onda, 6itsuishi, 3issan and 0oyota plants in
0hailand. In the conte&porary South *sia %ar&ent industry, there is little, if any, asse&ly line
laor in the sense of continuous flo( production. 0he &achines do not deter&ine the pace
and te&po of (or" 4thou%h they do decide (or"er rhyth&s5. It is the supervisor (ho,
personifyin% capital in &ediatin% o(ner i&peratives, holds the process, as a process of the
e'ploitation of laor in the capitalist sense, to%ether. *nd, in so doin%, the supervisor, to oot,
re9introduces personal do&ination throu%h inti&idation, se'ual harass&ent and the threat of
violence. 0hus, ele&ents of oth for&al and real do&ination are present in the sa&e laor
process, ut there is also actual reversion to for&s of do&ination in production that predate
capitalis&, in the sense 46ar'.s5 that for&al do&ination in production ,eli&inates all
patriarchal, political or even reli%ious connections to the relation of e'ploitation./
D
In addition,
(e can also &ention the e'tensive use of child laor (hich appears to &ar" these production
processes as instances of for&al do&ination. Hoever, if e contextuall% shift fro$ the
i$$ediate point of production to the level at (hich capitalis& operates, to the orldide
netor! of capitalist relations, it &eco$es apparent that the cheap consu$er goods 0such as
!nit shirts, !ha!i pants, etc+5 produced in such lo-tech factories that for$ the gar$ent
industr% in South 7sia 0and China5 are part of a glo&all% functioning organi/ation and s%ste$
of production, distri&ution and circulation, and consu$ption, that is an%thing other than
technologicall% &ac!ard and la&or intensive, one thorou%hly and i&&ediately per&eated y
the ,la( of value./
#
;or&al do&ination, thou%h fully inte%rated into the circuits of production,
distriution and consu&ption of co&&odities shaped y real do&ination, is i&portant to
capital precisely for the surpluses it %enerates. 6i%rant (or"ers, i&&i%rant (or"ers and
ethnically distinct (or"ers (ho function as &inorities outside their ,ho&elands,/ as (ell as
%ar&ent (or"ers, are i&portant to capital precisely ecause they are en%a%ed in the dirtiest,
&ost dan%erous and lo(est paid (or", that is, ecause in a (orld in (hich the real do&ination
1
;or this, see Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ 0Hrgeschichte5, Second Study+
2
Civil "ar and Revolution in 7$erica, chapter 10 in its entirety.
D
6ar', ,Resultate des un&ittelaren Produ"tionpro=esses/ 4cited aove5.
*t the sa&e ti&e, in these ,lo( tech/ operations there is &ore< &ore than the &ost oppressive for&s of personal
ause 4e.%., se'ual lac"&ail5 in (hich the reassertion of asolute surplus value e'traction is clothed< at sta"e for
capital, na&ely, its o(n &oility and opportunity to utterly &a'i&i=es all prospects for e'ploitation+ ,Industriali=ation in
the South is very different fro& early industriali=ation in Britain, (hose rise, consolidation and decay occurred over si'
%enerations. By contrast, the %ar&ent industry in :ha"a did not e'ist ten years a%o Hcirca 17FCJE if cheaper laor can
e found else(here, it &ay not e'ist ten years fro& no(./ 8ere&y Searoo", ,n the Cities of the South, 2G.
#
We intend here the roadest sense of this usa%e, na&ely, the tendential reduction of social relations to productive
ones, that is, the disciplinin% and re%i&entation of for&er y the latter i&plied in the re%ulation of production of
co&&odities and the rene(al and au%&entation of capital y socially necessary laor ti&e.
of capital over laor rei%ns these (or"ers are su1ect to the &ost rutal for&s of the e'traction
of asolute surplus value.
Such specific production sites, industries, industrial ranches and laor processes that are
lo(9tech and laor intensive are inte%rated and inte%ral features of capitalIs real do&ination at
the level of the (orld, as &uch so as desi%n of co&puter soft(are in Bellin%ha&, Washin%ton
or the production of co&puter chips in Silicon !alley. It is the syste& of social relations at the
level of the (orld, as (e say, the operation of the la( of value, and the co&ple' net(or"s of
production, circulation and consu&ption in (hich it is %rounded and on (hich it operates that
deter&ine the reality and pri&acy of one for& and era of do&ination over another.
So, in a &ini&al sense (hen (e spea" aout the he%e&ony of real do&ination (e are
spea"in% aout its tendential universality in the actual or%ani=ation of production, (hich is
decisive for deter&inin% the periodi=ation of the history of capitalis&< @est it e for%otten, no
for& of capital.s do&ination in production is ever instituted (ithout a stru%%le a%ainst (or"ers
and, accordin%ly, since the periodi=ation of any era of do$ination in the history of capitalis&
depends on the predo&inance of a specific for& of capital.s do$ination in production, the
estalish&ent of the for&er is, $utatis $utandis, si&ilarly dependent upon capital.s success
in &a1or class confrontations a%ainst (or"ers< In a &ore enco&passin% sense, real
do&ination is constituted in reshapin% not 1ust production, ut is penetration of other
institutional spheres 4e.%., fa&ily, state, &ilitary5 and its tendency to re9structure the&
accordin% to the lo%ic of value accu&ulation, a tendency (hich once it eco&es actual
inau%urates a still ne(er for& of do&ination of capital.
1
* connection et(een the t(o senses of for&al and real do&ination 4as desi%nations of for&s
of surplus value e'traction or do&ination in production counterposed to si%nification in ter&s
of eras of the history of capitalis&5 (ould allo( us to specify a &o&ent at (hich the one
passed over to the other.
Such a specification has a rather sin%ular &eanin%ful reference.
2
1
;or this, see the various discussions of totali=in% do&ination, elo(.
2
We shall for%o an e'tended discussion and criti)ue of capitalist retro%ression, ,decadence,/ for (hich assi%nin% a
date to the passa%e fro& for&al to real do&ination as eras in the history of capitalis& has the sense of a passa%e
fro& an ascendant to a ,decadence/ phase or epoch of capitalist develop&ent. $ere (e can offer only the follo(in%+
0he sense or &eanin% for ,decadence/ theori=ations is that capitalis& as a syste& of social relations develops
throu%h a (renchin% &ove&ent of e'pansion and contraction, and only re9e)uilirates itself throu%h the periodic
destruction of the &ass of o1ectively e&odied values 4plant and e)uip&ent, hu&an capacity to laor, the &ass of
co&&odities especially as they enter as inputs into the &eans of production5. In capitalis&.s ascendant phase, this
devalori=ation (as carried out throu%h a deflationary collapse e%innin% (ith a%ricultureE in its decadent phase,
throu%h destruction of the &eans of production as in i&perialist (orld (ar. * date at (hich capitalis& entered its
decadent phase, na&ely, 171#, is %enerally assi%ned.
* test of this theori=ation, then, (ould e a de&onstration that the last i&perialist (orld (ar resulted in an
unprecedented destruction of the &eans of production 4as distinct fro& uran and hu&ani=ed natural landscapes that
did not e&ody fi'ed capital, (hich (ere often devastated5 creatin% a serious decline in and restriction of productivity
in the capitalist sense. But (hat is de&onstrale is that in &ost of the capitalist co&atant countries, the capacity to
produce re&ained unchan%ed at the end of the (ar 4or actually surpassed that at (ar.s outset5. It (ould ta"e us too
far afield to sho( this 4thou%h it can e sho(n5, ut the prole&s that confronted capital in the (ar.s i&&ediate
after&ath (ere ottlenec"s in fuel provision, transportation of ra( &aterials and finished %oods, distriution of food,
and, less i&&ediately and less narro(ly econo&ic, the return and reinte%ration of returnin% political prisoners and
slave laorers. 4roductivit% as not lost as a result of so-called destruction of the $eans of production 4"illed in
co&at, &urdered en $asse as %enocides delierately carried out, even ith the destruction of hu$an &eings as
Nproductive forces>5< 0he failure to assess that &o&ent at (hich real do&ination 4it (as not 171#5, hence capitalist
retro%ression so9called, eco&es effectively actual in the sense of an era of real do&ination e'hiits a propensity
to(ard a theori=ation for (hich historical contents do not enter into it and shape it. *lternately, the qualitative
deter&ination of the &eanin% and si%nificance of real do&ination in ter&s of the e'ponential %ro(th in a&stract laor.s
productivity not so &uch as technically innovative develop&ent 4(hich can e understood narro(ly5 ut as syste&atic
incorporation of science and technolo%y into production, offers no (ay to validate this affir&ation, no (ay in (hich to
&easure it a%ainst social and historical develop&ents, no (ay in (hich to connect that t(o senses in (hich for&al
It refers to the historical &o&ent eyond the i&&ediate process of production at (hich all
other do&ains of social e'istence and spheres of activity no lon%er possess the internal
coherency to &aintain a considerale de%ree of autono&y fro& the la( of value, ut instead
eco&e tendentially su1ect to it+ Social relations of all "inds 4for e'a&ple, in educational
institutions the relations et(een student and teacher5 are under increasin% pressure, they are
increasin%ly su1ect to a lo%ic that or%ani=es the& on the &odel of the relation et(een (a%e
earner and capitalist, and they &ore and &ore eco&e directly suordinate to the i&peratives
of capital. But the overridin% i&port of real do&ination is that, on the asis of the
transfor&ation of i&&ediate production processes, it, real do&ination, has eco&e effectivel%
actual in lar%e parts of the developed capitalist (orld, that is, a&stract laor.s productivity has
eco&e %reat enou%h to transfor& the (orld in its entirely accordin% to the old 6ar'ist notion
of universal aundance. It is at that &o&ent that capitalis& is truly ,redundant,/ that, in an
older lan%ua%e, the &aterial presuppositions for socialis& had fully &atured. $o(ever, real
do&ination did not hold s(ay over production even in the &ost advanced citadels of
capitalis& even at that &o&ent 471#5 at (hich the short t(entieth century (as inau%urated, if
(e ta"e this do&ination to &ean effectively actual in the sense 1ust for&ulated.
0his can e de&onstrated &eginning fro$ an account of the reor%ani=ation of laor processes
4capitalists directly intervenin% to reor%ani=e (or", its rhyth&s and te&posE scientific and
technolo%ical inputs, especially continuous flo( production5 in the &etropolitan centers of
capitalis&.
0he e&er%ence of the factory syste& is the historical point of departure for the appearance
real do&ination in production. But (ith a vie( to the structure of (or", the factory syste& circa
1GO091F#0 cannot e identified (ith the &ass production asse&ly line in the Rnited States
e'e&plified y ;ord so&e ei%hty years later, or the lar%ely hori=ontal rationali=ation that too"
place in ?er&any in the latter 1720s. 0hat is, real do&ination has, as (e have sho(n, e'isted
in difference for&s in the i&&ediate production processes. -et it has not een 1ust any for& of
real do&ination that has &ade capitalis& ,redundant,/ socialis& in the narro( sense 4i.e., (ith
a vie( to its so styled &aterial presuppositions5 really pre%nant (ithin the e'tant confi%uration
of production. It has only een continuous flo( production ased on se)uentially arran%ed,
speciali=ed &achinery and &achine co&ple'es that has raised a&stract laor.s productivity
e'ponentially, and in so doin% created real do$ination as a periodi/ing deter$inant of the
histor% of capitalis$ as such.
Real do&ination ased on this for& of or%ani=ation of production (as, not to overstate the
case, socially isolated in 171#+ ;ord.s $i%hland Par" facility, the first &ass production co&ple'
in the (orld, opened in < 171#. Rntil the early t(enties in the R.S. it (as confined to steel,
auto&oiles 4fro& (hence it e'panded into production of a%ricultural &eans of production,
tractors, co&ines, reapers, truc"s, etc., and &anufactured durales such as radios and
refri%erators5 and li%ht &anufacturin% final asse&ly 4e.%., ?.E..s Schenectady li%ht ul
plant5, (hile the (ei%ht of technolo%ical inputs had e%un to reor%ani=e other, hi%hly
advanced sectors such as &inin% in Butte, 6ontana, thou%h not alon% the lines of continuous
flo( production. In ?er&any, the ne( production econo&y of fi'ed costs, an internal ti&e
econo&y ased on continuous flo( production (as developed y the %reat carteli=ed capitals
at the heart of rationali=ation &ove&ent that seriously e%an in 172C. ;or all @enin.s late life
rants aout the necessity of ,applyin%/ 0aylorist &ethods to Soviet production, in the early
thirties Soviet technicians could e found inside the ;ord.s :etroit River Rou%e plant as
oservers &onitorin% asse&ly lines in an effort to unloc" the secret of continuous flo(
production. In 17#O, the once &assive Renault (or"s at Boulo%ne9Billancourt (as the sole
&a1or plant and facility in ;rance that, fully rationali=ed, (as syste&atically or%ani=ed alon%
and real do&ination are utili=ed.
lines of continuous flo( production. Rntil 17O0, 3issan had een entirely dependent upon
&anual laor in auto asse&ly producin% DD,000 passen%er cars in 17C7. ?earin% up for
&ass production, in 17O0 it purchased its first (eldin% &achines. In 17O#, 3issan
&anufactured 21D,000 autos<
In line (ith the sense of this specification, (e can fi' a date, aout 17C0, as that &o&ent at
(hich a revolutionary proletariat could have levera%ed the (orld to socialis& 0never $ind that
proletariat ould have &een productivist, and that socialis$ constructed on a productivist
$odel of endless develop$ent of productive forces and technologies of capital ai$ed at
nature do$ination forecloses on a genuine general hu$an e$ancipation5, that &o&ent in
(hich real susu&ption of laor under capital had eco&e effectivel% actual in lar%e parts of
the (orld, capitalist productivity %reat enou%h, to transfor& the (orld accordin% to the old
6ar'ist notion of universal aundance. It is at that &o&ent that in principle a funda&ental
tendency of capitalist develop&ent under conditions of real do&ination eca&e necessary
and unavoidale, even thou%h it (ould not eco&e historically real for over another decade.
0his is the tendency of capital to e'pel laor fro& production (hile si&ultaneously
incorporatin% strata ,outside/ the (a%ed laor 9 capital relation 4especially petty producers in
the capitalist periphery5 into that relation, su%%estin% at this point that one specific and
i&portant sense of co&&unis&, co$$unis$ as the suppression of or!, had an actual
foundation in the production process of capitalis& at the level of the (orld<
Real Do$ination and 7utono$i/ation of Capital
*s (e indicated aove, the central societally &anifest feature of the develop&ent desi%nated
as the real do&ination of capital over laor is the s%ste$atic, sustained and direct application
of science and technolog% to the production process. It is this develop&ent that secures
capitalis& as a syste& of social relations and &a"es its pro%ress irreversi&le 4rene(in% the
concept of ,pro%ress,/ no( understood strictly linearly5+ 0he very &ove&ent of capital places
itself on its o(n foundations, i.e., capitalist develop&ent proceeds and can only proceed on
the asis of (hat is specifically capitalist, na&ely, the constant revolutioni=in% of production, in
other (ords, the incessant transfor&ation of (or" processes y (ay of their re%ular
reor%ani=ation, and of instru&ents and instru&ent9co&ple'es such as asse&ly lines,
sophisticated &achinery, plant and uildin% housin% &achinery y (ay of ne( &achine inputs.
In all this, capitalis& has the entire history of its o(n develop&ent as its pre&ise 4inclusive of
the necessary conditions of its ori%inal appearance in history, i.e., the alienation of property
and the creation of ,free/ (a%e laor5, and, it reproduces those pre&ises in and throu%h that
develop&ent 4that is, it patently, visily, reproduces the &ost advanced &o&ent of that
develop&ent (hich contains con%ealed the entire previous develop&ent5.
1
In this (ay
capitalist develop&ent eco&es autono$i/ed, i.e+, that develop$ent requires no external
causation, it exists on its on foundations and it cannot exist apart fro$ its on develop$ent
as its on necessar% pre$ise, and it &eco$es auto$ati/ed, i+e+, tendentiall% a&sent a
1
*ccordin% to 6ar', antediluvian pre&ises 4e.%., the &ove&ent of &oney as &oney ut not as capital5 disappear...
MSoald also die noch ausserhal der Be(e%un% des ir!lichen Lapitals lie%enden !orausset=un%en des in Lapital
Aer%ehenden ?eldes versch(unden sind... von denen es in der Produ"tion aus%eht... u& sich als Lapital =u set=en
N =u den antidiluvianischen Bedin%un%en des LapitalsE =u seinen historischen !orausset=un%en, die een also soch
historisiche Lorausset/ungen ver%an%e sind.../ 4,*s soon as those presuppositions of &oney have disappeared,
presuppositions that are in the process of passin% over into capital ut still lie outside the &ove&ent of real capital<
HthenJ the conditions (hich for& its startin% point in production< elon%< a&on% the antediluvian conditions of
capital< to its historic presuppositions, (hich, as historic presuppositions and precisely as such, are past and %one./5
6ar', 8rundrisse, bRnsprAn%liche *""u&ulation des Lapitals,/ in E!ono$ische Manus!ripte, *CASU*CAC: DG19DG2
4our translation5... So (e disa%ree (ith 6ar'+
0hose historical presuppositions that for& the essential pre&ises of its ori%inal appearance as part of its &ove&ent
are 4and, not al(ays latently, co&pressed, con%ealed and5 reproduced in the on%oin% develop&ent of capital.
contravening opposition 0hich can onl% ta!e shape as conscious agenc%5 generated &% its
on develop$ent, it is self-regulating, self-correcting and reproduces itself as a $atter of
course. Self9correction, thou%h, is li&ited, contradictory and tendentially self9annihilatin%+ It
occurs syste&ically, that is, on the asis of cyclical develop&ent and in particular throu%h
crisis, contraction and devalori=ation, (hich, if unchec"ed 4lac"in% that conscious opposition5,
tendentially devolves to(ard (orld(ide social conflict 4i.e., the real possiility of rene(ed
i&perialist (orld (ar5 that, ta"en to%ether (ith cli&ate chan%e %enerated natural
transfor&ations< the&selves %rounded in the dyna&ics of capitalist develop&ent< opens up
the %enuine prospects of the levelin% destruction of the order of capital in its entirety<
0he lan%ua%e in (hich this real social develop&ent is here theoretically for&ulated and
e'pressed lac"s any concept of a ,su1ect,/ that is, a conscious and volitional a%ent that
throu%h its action is responsile for the develop&ent. 0his is not a failure of (ords or an
inherent lin%uistic deficiency, ut conceptually captures and fi'es the actual situation as it
socially and practically unfolds+ 7s conditions of real do$ination have $ore and $ore ta!en
hold, as this develop$ent has &eco$e autono$ic and auto$atic, capital itself has &eco$e
the Nsu&9ect> of societ% and a &lind process governs societal develop$ent+ 0he our%eoisie no
lon%er e'ercises control over its o(n fate or the fate of societ%, as society, today %loal, (hich,
asent that contravenin% conscious a%ency %enerated y its o(n develop&ent 4i.e., (ithout a
revolutionary proletarian transfor&ation of society5, tendentially develops to(ard a dual,
uni&a%ined catastrophe, i&perialist (orld (ar intert(ined (ith a cli&ate chan%e cataclys&.
0here are t(o decisive aspects that for& this situation, historical and syste&ic.
Historicall%, the our%eoisie and science no lon%er have the sa&e relation to each other deep
into the era of real do&ination as they did as oth first appeared far earlier in the era of for&al
do&ination+
*s (e have already noted, y the &iddle of the lon% nineteenth century, the scale and the
reach 4%eo%raphically and societally5 of strictly capitalist operations (as lar%e enou%h to call
forth this entire novel develop&ent 4real do&ination5+ But there has een another, other(ise
note(orthy 4and until no( unnoted5 feature that also reveals the inner reality of this &ove&ent
4autono&i=ation5+ The $ore extensivel% real do$ination has shaped production, alternativel%,
the further real do$ination develops in its epochal significance 4i.e., not &erely as the
deter&ination of capitalist production, ut as a periodi=ation in the develop&ent of capitalis&
that funda&entally tends to shape social reality in its entirety and its i&&ediate natural or
earthly settin%, and in so doin% %oes eyond itself5, the $ore that social class agenc% in and
through hose activit% capitalis$ originated has disappeared as a social agent, i.e., the &ore
the our%eoisie has een co&pelled< as the ,price/ of its e'istence< to assi&ilate,
internali=e and ehave 4no lon%er acting5 on the asis of the lo%ic of capital 4here the lo%ic of
accu&ulation5. 7s this class. existence has increasingl% resolved itself into a function of the
$ove$ent of capital, its &ehavior has increasingl% ta!en on the for$, exhi&iting no other
content than that, of a functionar%, i+e+, it has co$e to &ehave in all significant social events
and historical develop$ents as a personification of econo$ic categories, and this re%ardless
of the individual eliefs and convictions of this or that capitalist, (ithout re%ard even to the
vie(s of all capitalists a%%re%ately. 40his is e&phatically not to say that capitalists or, for that
&atter, any other %roup in society are asent eliefs and convictions. It &eans &erely (hat is
stated, that in all social and historically si%nificant events and in a (hole lot &ore that are not
si%nificant, it is the internali=ed i&peratives of capital, not those eliefs and convictions, that
deter&ine capitalistsI ehavior.5
1
... What, for e'a&ple, has the appearance of class strate%y
1
It ou%ht to e ovious fro& the te'tual presentation aove that capital cannot e'ist (ithout a personification. Without
livin%, reathin% hu&an ein%s, and yes capitalists 4no &atter ho( in(ardly dead they are5 are livin%, reathin%
hu&an ein%s, there is no social relation and (ithout the (a%ed laor social relation there is no capital.
and creativity in open confrontations, in lar%e scale stru%%les a%ainst (or"ers, is nothin% &ore
than class refle'es, &echanical applications of tried and tested solutions to ,laor prole&s/...
*t the &o&ent of its triu&ph as it has irreversily secured capitalist production, the
our%eoisie e%ins to 1ust as irreversily fade as historically effective societal a%ency.
1
It is at
this &o&ent the our%eoisie, the individuals defined y this class relation as a class 4i.e., as
proprietors of &eans of production and of &oney (ealth functionin% as capital in relation to
those deter&ined only as no&inally free, (a%ed laor y their propertylessness and their
capacity to laor5, e%ins to under%o the &ystifyin% process 4&ystifyin% ecause it is under
i&pact of its o(n activity, its o1ectively deter&ined su1ective co&pulsion to accu&ulate5 of
losin% its o(n class creativity, a condition that could not e &ore clear today in its auto&atic,
&echanic responses to< all of (hich e'acerate, intensify and a&plify< cli&ate chan%e...
Society is s%ste$icall% shaped y the autono&ic and auto&ati=ed &ove&ent of capital+ ,t is a
s%ste$, a functional, yet contradictory unity of various partial spheres and susyste&s
astractly unified in that &ove&ent, an internally differentiated unity characteri=ed y &utual
dependency of those partial spheres,
2
ut a syste& that itself has, in the o1ectively necessary
aleit illusory sense, eco&e independent of the activity in and throu%h (hich it is produced
and reproduced. What does not ,fit,/ i.e., is not s&oothly inte%rated as a functional ele&ent, is
What is tacit, ut in our vie( nonetheless )uite clear, is that the our%eoisie can no lon%er e'ercise control over its
o(n fate or the fate of society 9 (or"ers to the e'tent (e as (or"ers constitute ourselves as a class are the only
%roup in society (ith the creative capacity to carry out a revolutionary transfor&ation 4see the ,0ra1ectory of
Conte&porary Capitalist :evelop&ent, I+ ?esa&tareiter and the Stru%%le a%ainst Capital,/ elo(5 9 and society,
(hich today is %loal, asent that revolutionary chan%e (ill spiral headlon% to(ard a dual, uni&a%ined catastrophe,
i&perialist (orld (ar intert(ined (ith a cli&ate chan%e cataclys&.
1
0he &o&ent fro& (hich the disappearance of the our%eoisie as a historical a%ency co&&ences can e specified
as that &o&ent at (hich late in the era of for&al do&ination the real susu&ption of laor under capital in production
4real do&ination5 e%ins to ta"e hold in the &ost technically advanced industries. *t this &o&ent, a&on% our%eois
individuals oth ele&ents< those of the %reatest class creativity and the (itherin% and loss of su1ectivity as a
personification of capital< are present.
0his counterposition can e seen star"ly in the ehavioral contrast et(een the Periere rothers 4E&ile and Isaac5,
&en of lar%e vision en%a%ed in the inau%uration of rail construction in Europe at the ori%ins of real do&ination in
production and founders of CrIdit Mo&ilier 0the creative, institutionally capitalist force in &id9nineteenth century
Europe5, and their ne&esis 8a&es Rothchild, invest&ent an"er par excellence, asent vision, slo(, reactive,
adverse to ris", concerned only aout uildin% his financial e&pire, and of course entirely ruthless (ith a vie( to his
co&petition 4see Rondo Ca&eron, )rance and the 2cono$ic Develop$ent of 2urope, 20#92G#, 2FC9D2C, esp. 20O9
20G5. In this contrast, Rothchild typically hi%hli%hts the character of a our%eois as functionar% of capital+
2
Larel Losi", Diale!ti! des :on!reten, FC9FO.
0he contradictory character of the syste& of social relations (e call capitalis& is e'hiited in and %overns the very
&ove&ent of capital. 0he contradictions are oviously syste&ic, they and their structure can e theoretically resolved,
or so it appears, throu%h analysis of the e'cess of capitalist clai&s 4&ost of the& speculatively %rounded5 on the total
&ass of surplus value as it circulates internationally. But this is an appearance onl%, since it is ased on the
understandin% of this syste& o&9ectivisticall%, i.e., solely in syste&s ter&s, and does not %o to the root issue and
cannot as such indicate the possiilities for its practical resolution. 0he sa&e criticis& holds for the understandin% for
(hich these contradictions flo( fro& the asic irrationality of the syste& as it is e'pressed in the unhin%in% of the
creation of real (ealth fro& the production of value, thou%h this &anner of %raspin% and posin% the )uestion %ets
si%nificantly closer to the real issue to the e'tent that ,the production of value,/ the co&pulsion e'ercised on astract
laor, i&plies the activity of o1ectively practical su1ectivity, or, in the ter&s of reference deployed here, of livin%,
concrete laor.
,t is the contradictor% situation of or!ers as la&or for capital, as a&stract la&or, that underlies the contradictor%
character of the s%ste$ and underpins ever% phase in the $ove$ent of capital. In (or" and activity, (e, (or"ers,
produce and in producin% (e act, i.e., (e for& ourselves as intersu1ectively active, as a su1ect operatin% under a
syste&s co&pulsion that, under such conditions, is si&ultaneously a passive o1ect for capital+ We are co&pelled to
act, to create or innovate 4in the ety&olo%ically precise sense to pro-duce, &eanin% to rin% forth so&ethin% ne(5,
i.e., to %enerate the &eans, the resources, the (here(ithal to reali=e o1ectives that are alien, those of the
capitalist4s5, and in doin% so, (e for& an intersu1ectivity that is unitary in opposition to capital and depth9
psycholo%ically confronts it, and that, in a $ass struggle against capital, generated &% its, the latter.s ver% $ove$ent,
pushes this preco%nitive understandin%, forces it, into consciousness.
e'pelled or asored. 4In this re%ard, our%eois e%ois& is the prosaic %lue that holds the
syste& to%ether.5 0his is not to say that there is not a(areness and su1ectivity< surely not
our%eois in the historical sense, and unfortunately not proletarian< ut it is not the
consciousness of class that can transfor& the syste&, aolish it as a syste&. Instead, it is
purely personal and hi%hly individuali=ed, and this is (hat is asored. ;ro& the standpoint of
the transcendence of capitalis&, it is conte&plative+ *s personal and individuali=ed it is (ell
inte%rated, that is, the cultivation of su1ectivity of this sort< the proliferation of personal
needs< does &uch to fuel capitalist develop&ent throu%h the production of socially useless
%oods and services, i.e., the production of %ara%e, pap and s(ill. But it is not &erely a
)uestion of the e'cessive, nay profli%ate production of trin"ets and 1un"+ If the elaoration of
the criti)ue of science, spea"in% pe1oratively, reduces to sterile, arcane and convoluted
pole&ics in (hich hardened positions clash on invitations only Internet lists 4as opposed, say,
to crystalli=in% in an analysis that, illu&inatin% the class situation of productively si%nificant
layer of stri"in% (or"ers, connects (ith those (or"ers5, it contriutes nothin% to the
elaoration of that consciousness of class and re&ains conte&plative.
;or, a%ain, it is only this consciousness eco&e practical that can reor%ani=e society, and
(hich the &ove&ent of capital in %eneratin% its o(n opposition, produces, not as fact ut, as a
real historical possiility<
1
@i"e the capitalist (ho no lon%er, as it (ere, &a"es hi&self throu%h his o(n activity 4at least
accordin% to our%eois le%end5, science is too characteristically asent foundations< 0he
revelation, thou%h, is not science.s o(n 4it is hidden to scientists5, ut has &ost recently een
disclosed throu%h the prolon%ed crisis of capitalis& 4171#917#C5< 0his ho&olo%y, thou%h, is
not &erely for&al+ ,t is not possi&le for a social group to act in histor%, if the theor%< in the
co&prehensive sense descried in our prefatory re&ar"s to the 0hird Study aove< that
$ediates its activit% lac!s foundations, i+e+, cannot &e s%ste$aticall% related to the life of that
class, that is, cannot &e said to 9ustif% the role of this class in societ% and histor% &oth to itself
and to the other classes and strata in societ%.
Totali/ing Do$ination, ,
Real Do$ination, Totali/ing Do$ination at its 1rigins
In the history of capitalis&, the estalish&ent of novel productive for&s of capital.s do&ination
over laor are lar%ely coe'tensive (ith periods of (or"in% class reco&position instituted as
the outco&e of stru%%le in &a1or class confrontations that have ended in (or"er defeat<
In a narro(ly o1ective, syste&s sense, the foundations of totali=in% do&ination in production
itself lie in the astoundin% productive capacity of laor, collectively, that has developed in the
last one hundred and t(enty years, and in particular since the end of the last i&perialist (orld
(ar. 0hese foundations presuppose the in1ection of an e'tre&e concentration of capitalist
unity and resources, na&ely, the state, into the circuits of capital itself, at once to insure
outlets for this a&a=in% productive capacity and to secure the loyalty of the popular &asses in
society< We shall co&e ac" to this<
But totali=in% do&ination has its actual historical pre&ise in real susu&ption of laor under
capital, in the &ass (or"er, capital#s Kne( &an,K &ut onl% as Nhe> exists the other side of the
end of the upsurge of or!ers in the last international c%cle of class struggle, and on this
&asis &e%ond the era of the N&ig factor%,> sta&le or! and high ages and, ith these, on the
&asis of the disintegration of social life (e see unfoldin% all around us+
2
1
See the concludin% discussion to ,So&e Re&ar"s on the Role of the Wor"in% Class in $istory./
2
International cycles of class stru%%le are retrospectively discernile, for the &ost part i&&ediately related to
)uestions that e%in fro& conditions of real do&ination in (or". 0hey can e desi%nated y the historical &o&ents at
(hich they have occurred. 0hey are+ 170#9170C, centered in Bel%iu&, the 3etherlands, Poland and European Russia
What had happened2
0he ,i% factory/ first appeared in the t(ili%ht in era of for&al do&ination, in lar%e sites such
as the Pulitov Wor"s in St. Petersur% (hich had e&ployed over 10,000 (or"ers y 1702. But
it (as only estalished in (or"places, and it only si%nified a %enerali=ed re%i&e of (or"
4continuous flo( production (ith it the ,&ass (or"er,/ and on its asis relative surplus value
e'traction5 pervasively found across the developed capitalist (orld, in the &ost advanced
sectors 4autos, far& &achinery, consu&er durales at sites li"e those of ;ord, International
$arvester and ?eneral Electric in the Rnited States, in the various sites of steel production at
!ereini%te Stahl(er"e, Lrupp and ?utehoffnun%shAtte in ?er&any, and later else(here5 in the
capitalist life and death fi%ht a%ainst councils, (or"ers. co&&ittees, and &ass or%ani=in% in
the t(enties, in particular in the e&ployers. offensive that follo(ed the collapse of the
revolutionary (ave itself lar%ely a response to the i&perialist (orld (ar.
>nce %enerali=ed on the asis of continuous flo( production 4itself the foundation of relative
surplus value e'traction in its &ost effective, i.e., e'ploitative, for&5, the enor&ous surpluses
%enerated posed, for capital and for the first ti&e in the history of capitalis&, the prole& of
overcapacity and overproduction as a daily reality that pervaded the or%ani=ation of
production, e'chan%e and distriution 4and not &erely as the outco&e of a len%thy phase of
develop&ent cul&inatin% in cyclical capitalist crisis5. 0his situation e&er%ed first in the Rnited
States. *nd, as it (as e%innin% to e&er%e, industrial union ased or%ani=in% and the
&oili=ation of thousands of (or"ers in stri"es co&pelled the state to provide le%al sanction
43ational Recovery *ct, 17DD5 to an e'plosion of &ass activity that s(ept the *&erican
industrial landscape.
Willy nilly, to preserve itself capital, its personifications, adopted a novel strate%y. Wa%es (ere
allo(ed to rise 4in order to push up effective de&and5, e&ploy&ent (as reduced throu%h
pulic e'penditure and unioni=ation (as encoura%ed on condition that (a%e increases (ere
lin"ed to productivity %ains 4a lin"a%e that, in turn, institutionali=ed trade unions as %uarantors
of syste& staility5. 0he o1ective, historical outco&e (as the develop&ent of class stru%%le,
canali=ed y an e&er%ent trade union ureaucracy and reduced to a li&ited stru%%le for
(a%es and enefits, as the central dyna&ic of syste&s groth, i.e., of capitalist e'pansion,
itself.
In the (ave of prosperity follo(in% the last i&perialist (orld (ar, capital e'tracted a fateful
series of trade9offs+ Rnion leaderships only too ea%er to co&ply, aove all to secure their o(n
ureaucratic po(er, then their privile%es and to prove their 1in%ois& and loyalty to capital.s
state, %ave up or%ani=ed stru%%le for control at the point of production in return for the (a%es
and enefits necessary to sustain a consu&erist pro1ect 4and, su1ectively pro1ected, (ith
these enefits ca&e, a&on% &e&ers, the efforts to fulfill aspirations and fantasies that
%ivin% irth to the &ass stri"e and (or"ers. councilsE 171G91720, startin% fro& the stru%%le a%ainst dilution and &ass
production the lar%est revolutionary upsur%e in historyE 17#O917#F, appearin% in the developed capitalist (orld in
stru%%les a%ainst (ar9ased production nor&s and suppression of (or"ers. (a%es 4Britain, Rnited States5, a%ainst
the re%i&es that conducted i&perialist (ar in the first place 4Italy, ;rance5, and little "no(n a%ainst occupation
re%i&es 4?er&any, 8apan and Lorea5< for this see, Belfra%e, Seeds of Destruction, :avid $alerstra&, The
Rec!oning, 1#791FG 4&ass stru%%le at 3issan5, and Bruce Cu&in%s, 1rigins of the :orean "ar, !. I, 27C9DF1< and
17OC917GF, particularly in the Rnited States 4producin% the (ildcat5, in Italy 4producin% the autono&ists5 and, aove
all, in ;rance 46ay 17OF5.
Whether the &ost recent (or"er upsur%e 4200C9200G5 alon% the *sian industrial arc 4in particular, India, Ban%ladesh
and !ietna&5, precisely ecause it for&ed in (or"er response to industriali=ation and real do&ination in once ,less
developed/ re%ions in this part of %loal capitalis& 4here see ,0(o Poles of Proletarian *ctivity in World Capitalis&/5
ithout ever challen%in%, even tacitly, the order of capital, can e characteri=ed as an international cycle of class
stru%%le is at est deatale+ ;or such e'plosions of %i%antic class stru%%le for& those &o&ents in the history of
capitalis& as a orld syste& at (hich it co&es under the &ost stress, and< fro& the perspective a potentially
conscious challen%e to capital.s he%e&ony< those &o&ents at (hich the %reatest opportunity for a rea"throu%h
that initiates a &ove&ent eyond capitalis&, opens up.
drea&ily underlay the& and have re&ained lon% after the prosperity that &ade the& possile
disappeared5. 0he daily perfor&ance of si&ple, repetitive, and fra%&ented tas"s (ithout
connection to the production process as a (hole under conditions of continuous flo(
productive (or", su1ectively 4here e&otionally9psycholo%ically5 creatin% a (or"er indifferent
to the content and the activity of (or", prepared the %round for this e'chan%e, as it
si&ultaneously prepared the %round for the si'ties. and seventies. (or"er aspirations to
suppress or!. *t the sa&e &o&ent capital, reactin% to the threat of overproduction created
y its o(n technical ,advance,/ has inundated us (ith advertisin% in every conceivale for&at
and &ediu&, (ith television and fil&ic fantasies, etc. In so doin%, it has provided the &aterial
to nourish drea&s of a hu&an co&&unity in the for& of i&a%ined satisfactions of other(ise
infinite lon%in% and insatiale need.
Revolt a%ainst capital, li"e the &ove&ent of capital itself, is not 4yet5 conscious, still part of
capital.s &ove&ent, if you (ill, a restless, contradictory &ove&ent that %enerates its o(n
astract ne%ation, its o(n opposition< 0he aspirations to suppress (or" constituted the first
%li&&erin% of historical a(areness, ut this opposition, the lived foundations of the last
international cycle of class stru%%le, (as defeated+
0otali=in% do&ination, then, does not unifor&ly characteri=e the entire capitalist (orld, thou%h
it do&inates this (orld even if it has only co&e into ein% (here (or"ers... startin% fro& the
i% factory and the pri&acy of relative surplus value e'traction... have suffered historical
defeat in &a1or class confrontations, and of course startin% fro& (here the real do&ination of
capital over laor has proceeded the furthest, in the old capitalist &etropolises. In the Rnited
States, for e'a&ple, (e can retrace these develop&ents.
0he failure of the &ove&ents of the si'ties to cohere, and in particular the failure of any of
the& to coalesce (ith a series of (or"in% class initiatives... at the level of the (orld startin%
fro& the %i%antic upheaval in ;rance in 6ay 17OF, these initiatives included in the R.S. the
17OF :od%e Rou%e stri"e in :etroit, the 17G0 (ildcat y postal (or"ers, the nation(ide
0ea&ster (ildcat of 17G0, ?6Is difficulties (ith asenteeis& cul&inatin% in @ordsto(n Chevy
!e%a plant (ildcat of 17G2, and, returnin% to the %loal conte't, e'tendin% nearly the decade
of the seventies (ith countless Italian (or"er actions... isolated a nascent or!ers. $ove$ent
ai$ed at the suppression of or! fro& other di&ensions of social stru%%le and therey
%uaranteed it (ould re&ain &erely a laor ,&ove&ent/ 4i.e., a plurality of ureaucratically
do&inated unions, effectively if not for&ally controlled y the state throu%h their inte%ration, in
the Rnited States, into the :e&ocratic party, see"in% the est deal for laor as an o1ect of
capital5. 0he penulti&ate international cycle of class stru%%le 4e%innin% circa 17OC5 ca&e to a
close 4in 17GF5 (ith the stale&ated coal &iners. stri"e in the Rnited States, and,
conco&itantly, the rise of neo9Ri%ht po(er affir&ed y the defeat of the &ost si%nificant
refor&ist initiative 4the E)ual Ri%hts *&end&ent5 offered y social &ove&ents detached fro&
(or"ersI actions. *%ainst this ac"%round in the Rnited States, socially isolated, (or"ers (ere
eaten in series of &a1or class confrontations fou%ht lar%ely as industrial stru%%les. 0hese
loses (ere, of course, the counterpart to that political ree&er%ence of rulin% class social
%roups of the Ri%ht, represented y Ronald Rea%an (ho, as national E'ecutive, sat atop the
(hole pile of shit. 4In Britain, it (as 6ar%aret 0hatcher and in ?er&any, $el&ut Lohl5 0he end
of that cycle of class stru%%le to%ether (ith this ree&er%ence %ave the si%nal for an
e&ployersI offensive announced (ith the P*0C> firin%s y Rea%an in 17F2. Wor"ers
defensive stru%%les a%ainst capital, &ediated y the refle' reaction of its personifications,
included the losses at ?reyhound, :od%e9Phelps, $or&el and Eastern *irlines in the &id9
17F0s, and closed (ith closin% (ith defeats in the :ecatur, Illinois ,(ar =one,/ first Caterpillar
in 1772, then Brid%estonea;irestone. 4In Britain, the 17F# coal &iners. stri"e (as the decisive
event and defeat.5 0he sa&e defeats, aetted y the total adication of union leaderships,
(ere, so to spea", ,co&ple&ented/ y the rea"up of the Soviet Rnion 4(hich, in the $ost
perverse, re&nant, and ossified for&, e&odied an inverted and ureaucrati=ed idea of
proletarian, societal he%e&ony5.
*%ainst this entire historical ac"%round, these losses ta"en to%ether a&ount to a historical
defeat, here, for *n%lo and R.S. (or"in% classes, and inau%urated the era of the totali=in%
do&ination of capital, an era, rou%ht into ein% y si&ilar defeats, that &ore or less has its
conte&poraneous reality in other older &etropolitan centers of (orld capitalis& 4in 8apan and
?er&any5.
Totali/ing Do$ination, ,,
4roduction and the Structure of "or!
0he totali=in% do&ination of capital over society starts fro& production in its &ost historically
advanced for&+ Continuous flo( asse&ly e'hiits the deepenin% rationali=ation of the (or"
processes of capitalis& as &o&ents of this process have een divided, separated and
isolated, and this division, separation and isolation have een incorporated in the desi%n and
construction of &achinery. >n the asis of serial &achinery, the unity of production has een
sundered and reconstructed as distinct operations and separate tas"s. 0hus, in a &ore
pri&itive asse&ly line set9up one (or"er (elds on a fra&e, another inserts a piece atop the
fra&e, another attaches olts that secure the fra&e and the piece to%ether, etc. Where
continuous flo( production has not een auto&ated 4say, (ith roots perfor&in% tas"s
previously carried out y (or"ers5, and even (here they have, (e can say each (or"er
o1ectively e&odies a position (ithin production orne y a so&eone (ho, for capital, is a
&ere functionary, one (ho attends to such and such a partial tas". In its voracious pursuit of
surplus value, capital su1ects &ore and &ore once independent activities to the (a%ed laor9
capital relation, to itself, to its lo%ic, and to rationali/ation, to frag$entation and parceli/ation
of tas!s+ In each site of production, functions and tas"s that &a"e up (or" in different
industries and spheres of production have historically een reunified on the asis of
suordination to the lo%ic of capitalist develop&ent 4a reunification that is pyra&idally
achieved y various &ana%e&ent layers also as functionaries or, if you prefer, y
personifications of capital5. 6oreover, different industries and spheres of production are
unified throu%h capitalist concentration and centrali=ation of production, the latter y (ay of
vertical and hori=ontal inte%ration 4all su1ectively unified in the e'ecutive persons of top
&ana%ers5, and throu%h the &ar"et. 0his &echanical, astract inte%ration of production fro&
aove and outside production itself renders it &ore and &ore difficult to identify specifically
(hich, if any, %roups of (or"ers produce the co&&odities (hose sale reali=es surplus valueE
that is today, increasin%ly it is laor or%ani=ed, coordinated and synchroni=ed y capital that
has eco&e the real a%ency in the production of surplus value, a real a%ency that follo(in%
6ar' can e identified as the collective (or"er 48esa$tar&eiter5...
?o ac" to capital.s voracious appetite for surplus value.
0he penetration of the value for& into areas previously not or%ani=ed y capitalist production,
and their rationali=ation, has spread eyond the (or" processes, reor%ani=in% these other
di&ensions of social life+ *s the (or" processes, production or (hat is called the valori=ation
process< the activities of laor in (hich capitalists e'tract a surplus fro& (or"ers called
,value/ that is actually laor )uantified as ti&e, &ateriali=ed and e&odied in co&&odities<
&ore and &ore assert their pri&acy in relation to society, the tendency or direction over ti&e
is to(ard a reduction of social relations to productive ones. In other (ords, social relations
such as et(een parent and child or student and teacher tend to not only find their &odel in
the relation et(een (a%e earner and capitalist 4a relation characteri=ed y hierarchy,
un)uestioned authority and the capitalist.s po(er over the persona%e of individual (or"ers as
individuals5, ut social relations eco&e &ore and &ore suordinate to the lo%ic of the
accu&ulation of capital 4so that the rationality of decisions, say, in education are deter&ined
y efficiency and costs not y the learnin% re)uire&ents of students5. In other (ords, society
as a (hole &ore and &ore eco&es su1ect to this lo%ic, to the &ove&ent of capital. 0o this
e'tent< that productive relations have co&e to do&inate social relations< capital
accu&ulation 4valori=ation5 is the internal, hidden yet o1ective lo%ic or%ani=in% societ% as a
hole. It is at this &o&ent, that at (hich capital tends to or%ani=e all of society accordin% to its
o(n re)uire&ents, that (e spea" of the totali=in% do&ination of capital over society. 0otali=in%
do&ination is further, and inseparaly, constituted in the deeper psycholo%ical penetration,
reshapin% and reconstruction of this real a%ency, the 8esa$tar&eiter.
@et.s see if (e can e &ore specific.
Beyond the ,i% factory,/ ;ordis&, &ass production for socially %enerali=ed &ass consu&ption
and the pri&acy of the production of relative surplus value, the totali=in% do&ination of capital
over society is not &erely the prosaically old, capitalist econo&y (ith a vie(, say, to
e&ploy&ent of (a%ed laor, ut, as (e shall see, achieves so&ethin% ne( startin% fro&
continuity (ith older for&s of capitalist production+ 0he net(or"ed co&puter (ith its (or"flo(
soft(are reproduce the sa&e (or"place structure characteristic of &ass production
technolo%y
1
as ,(hite collar/ (a%ed laor has eco&e su1ect to the sa&e continuous flo(
production that has its &odel and e'e&plar in the asse&ly line.
Co&prehensile and descriale throu%h the analyses of t(o characteristic (or"places under
conditions of totali=in% do&ination, the call center and the &ana%ed care &edical facility, the
(or"site of ne(er spheres of a tendentially rentier econo&y... (hich at the level of the (orld
for&s one of the t(o poles of capitalist develop&ent today...
2
has een re9or%ani=ed throu%h
the utili=ation of so&e very old capitalist ,techni)ues,/ y separatin% (or" processes fro&
(or"er s"ills throu%h careful study y restructurin% ,en%ineers/ (ho deco&pose various
aspects of (or" into discrete activities< 0his is, then, rene(al of a di&ension of capitalist
rationali=ation of production that every(here is pursued in the co&pulsion to e'tract surplus
value %enerated y astract laor, and to hasten the pace of that e'traction< So astracted
fro& the total (or" conte't, these aspects are, in turn, re9conceptuali=ed for translation into a
soft(are pro%ra& that deter&ine te&po, pace and spontaneous content of (or" 4throu%h,
e.%., for&ali=ation of carefully ,scripted dialo%ues/ (ith clients contacted in the call center,
throu%h co&puter deter&ined staffin% levels in hospital (ards and route stops of drivers in
pulic sector usin% and transportation5, and then &echanically re9unified in the soft(are
pro%ra& that is controlled y an ,ad&inistrator,/ y &ana%ers 4functionaries of capital,
nu&erous layers of (ho&, (ith the increasin%ly centrali=ation of (or" ased dialectically on
its increasin% rationali=ation achieved ,di%itally,/ are the&selves often rendered redundant or
proletariani=ed5. ,E&eddin%/ s"ill and "no(led%e once e&odied in the persons of (or"ers,
conte&porary co&puters (ith their enor&ous po(ers of &easure&ent can no( effect, eyond
&ere inte%ration of different aspects of (or" (ithin, for e'a&ple, a%ain the call center,
inte%ration of that center itself (ith purchasin%, order pullin% and shippin%, credit issuance,
illin% and receivales, (ith the repair and servicin% of consu&er durales, and further (ith
syste&s of (or"er &onitorin% and surveillance of operations. 0hese have een typical
features of fir&s that do not &erely operate ,&ulti9nationally/ ut glo&all%, of a &ove&ent of
capital< production, circulation and distriution< that is (orld(ide in natureE and, it has
eco&e &ore and &ore characteristic of fir&s (ho, adoptin% this ,&odel,/ &erely function
(ithin a sin%le re%ion. 3o( the vast over(hel&in% &a1ority of (or"ers e&ployed under
1
Si&on $ead, The Ne Ruthless 2cono$%, #09##, FC97#.
2
See this Interlude, ,Structure of the World Econo&y,/ elo(.
conditions of the totali=in% do&ination of capital over society are casuali=ed, i.e., under these
conditions the econo&y is est understood not 1ust in ter&s of capitalist rationali=ation of (or"
as activity, ut si&ultaneously in ter&s of a reco&position of the (or"in% class as an o1ect of
capitalist e'ploitation.
1
If co&puteri=ed or%ani=ation of net(or"ed (or" %overns (a%ed laor accordin% to the
i&peratives of capital as e'pressed in 0aylori=ed or scientifically &ana%ed (or", as a function
of totali=in% do&ination di%itally or%ani=ed econo&ic activity co&es into its o(n in syste&s of
(or"er surveillance throu%h (hich not 1ust &ar%inally ,inefficient/ (or"ers, ut casuali=ed (or"
itself< not too lon% a%o considered peripheral to the dyna&ics of capitalist production< can
e inte%rated into those dyna&ics and e su1ect to relentless pressure and discipline to
increase its ,productivity./ @in"ed to the detailed scriptin% of call center (or"ers or clerical
(or"ers in offices of all sorts, for e'a&ple< and &uch li"e the situation of nurses in the lar%er
&edical 4hospital, outpatient, &ana%ed care and other au'iliary services5 co&ple'es or food
service (or"ers and retail cler"s in chain operations< real ti&e &onitorin% allo(s capital.s
representative to focus on a (or"er.s ,soft s"ills,/ her (ar&th, a&icaility and civility, to
deter&ine (hether her co&port&ent creates and then reinforces the loyalty of custo&er to the
fir& e&ployin% her. While the couplin% of different aspects of production and distriution 4and
all the various &ana%erial structures that have een interposed (ithin and et(een production
and distriution (ith centrali=ation and concentration of capitals5 can e inte%rated throu%h the
sa&e, net(or"ed and (or"flo( soft(are, it is ar%ualy si&ilarly inte%rated syste&s of (or"er
surveillance that offer capital the opportunity to en%a%e in a ne order of exploitation, thus
distin%uishin%, ithin the overall context of capitalist social relations, the activities of the
rentieri=ed econo&ies (here totali=in% do&ination is &ost advanced fro& those of the older,
disappearin% &ass production econo&y of the ,i% factory./
$ere it (ould also e appropriate to consider the fate of the ,i% factory./
0a"e the ?eor%eto(n, Lentuc"y auto co&ple' that uilds 0oyotas, Ca&rys specifically, and
contrast it (ith a ,i% factory,/ say the ;ord Ran%er plant in St. Paul, 6innesota. Both plants
are in the Rnited States, ut this &ay e there only si%nificant si&ilarity.
2
*t the 0oyota plant in ?eor%eto(n, production is carried out y a s&aller (or"force 4relative to
those auto plants that operated in the hi%h era of the i% factory and their re&nant for&s such
as the Ran%er plant5, specifically y tea&s (ho produce a sin%le vehicle fro& the startin%
point of asse&ly to co&pletion as a finished product. 0his is distinctively different fro& the
continuous flo( production ased on a series of speciali=ed &achines and lines such as the
Ran%er plant, (hich forces each (or"er to repeat the sa&e ti&e9&otion study deter&ined
action 4e.%., placin% a seat in the front passa%e side5 for the entire shift. 0oyota uild its auto
co&ple' )ualitatively cheaper 4su%%estin% less sophisticated technical inputs5 than that, say,
1
0he casuali=ed and casuali=ation can perhaps e est %rasped in ter&s of historical contrast.
In the era follo(in% the end of the last i&perialist (orld (ar, *&erican fir&s developed a syste& of hirin% and
pro&otion fro& (ithin the fir& that e&phasi=ed the internal develop&ent of the (or"force. Characteri=ed y
pro&otion ladders and relatively clear rules and procedures %overnin% (or"place ehavior and &ana%e&ent
e'pectations, the result (as a relatively stale, Kfull9ti&eK (or"force, includin% (a%e earners, (hich could &ore or
less ta"e for %ranted 1o security and had %uaranteed access to the fir&Is enefits pro%ra&s, (ho in this conte't
achieved a nor& of a F9hour day, #09hour (or"(ee" 4a&on% (or"ers su1ect to the hi%hest rates of relative surplus
value e'traction often honored only in the reach5. Casuali=ed laor, on the other hand, presupposin% the end of the
post9(ar oo& and the unfoldin% decline the old &etropolitan centers of (orld capitalis&, is characteri=ed y the
asence of full9ti&e, enefited and stale (or". Casuali=ed laor is neither stale nor enefited. It is not or%ani=ed
4unioni=ed5. It is paid lo( (a%es, and is part9ti&e, seasonal or te&porary. Casuali=ed (or"ers re%ularly laor at t(o
and so&eti&es three 1os. 4* &ore co&prehensive analysis can e found in ,0he Wor"in% Class, World Capitalis&
and Crisis+ * ?eneral Perspective./5
2
;or the follo(in%, see 8a&es Wo&ac", et al, The Machine that Changed the "orld< and aove all, ,0he 3e( ;aces
of @aor and Capital in the *&erican South./
of the technolo%ically sophisticated ?eneral 6otors Saturn plant in Sprin% $ill, 0ennessee uilt
at aout the sa&e ti&e, (ith lines that are not only non9rootic ut (ere, even then,
considered antiquated 4and less &echanically ,advanced/ that the far older Ran%er plant5.
Recruitin% non9proletarians previously en%a%ed in &ar%inal a%riculture (or" 4toacco
far&in%5, contin%ent (or"ers, lots of rural fol", these ,participatory/ sche&es have een
effective, since the ne( (or"ers, en%a%ed in &a"in% a (hole product, are not su1ect to the
&ost de%radin%, fra%&enti=in% effects of continuous flo( production. 0he anti)uated line and
tea& production increase the productivity of laor, and (ith this increase the need for a very
thin layer of ,s"illed/ laor declines, particularly on the shopfloor.
*s a type, the (or"er re)uired 4and produced5 in this "ind of production, the 8apanese call her
an ,inte%rated (or"er,/ has fe( identifiale s"ill+ Educationally or vocationally the &ain
re)uire&ent is a fit (ith the ,tea&/ 4in the Rnited States, these (or"ers are not hereditarily
proletarian, they hail al&ost to a person fro& the northern Butternut elts re%ions, southern
upcountry and cotton producin% lo(lands of the Civil War9Reconstruction era, that is, they are
as a rule hostile to union or%ani=ation, identifyin% the&selves, not as (or"ers ut as
Christians, Repulicans, and part of the stru%%lin% ,&iddle class,/ a neat fit (ith paternalistic
and non9union or%ani=ed capitals5. 0he s"ill and "no(led%e that is for&ed is collective, a
product of the activity of the tea&E and, it, this achieved insi%ht, can e incorporated into the
physical asse&ly y a uilt9in ,feedac",/ as a &e&er of the tea&, on occasion, stops the
line and tea& &e&ers and supervisors evaluate the ,criticis&./
0hus, the re)uire&ents 4and product5 of (or" e'pel residue s"ill 4in the historical sense5 fro&
the production process 4holdin% do(n the re&uneration of laor as a cost of production5, and
the structure of (or" and interaction allo(s for continuous incre&ental i&prove&ent that
per&its capital, in this case auto capital, to "eep reducin% its cost (ithout novel technolo%ical
inputs. 0here is, &oreover, a fle'iility that is asent in the speciali=ed &achinery ased &ass
production line+ Products chan%eover is, relatively spea"in%, far easier, can e done in
)ualitatively shorter ti&e 4and doesn.t re)uire a t(o or three (ee" shutdo(n of production5,
&ore fre)uently and at far less cost. 0o oot, in a li&ited sense, atch 4as opposed to &ass5
production is possile, since the line and tea& structure per&it it and less e'pensive
technolo%ical inputs &eans per unit costs do not re)uire )uantitatively &assive product runs.
0he structure of the fir& of this sort rest on further, i&portant features that differentiate it fro&
,i% factory/ &ass production fir&s, startin% (ith hori=ontal inte%ration, that is, the presence
on9site of co&ponent and parts &anufacturers (ho, entirely dependent upon the %reat capital,
do not share its o(nership. 0o the contrary, on9site co&ponent &anufacturers are al(ays
s&aller, e&ploy far fe(er (or"ers &ost of (ho& are casuali=ed. But their presence &a"es
possile a final, si%nificant feature, the pro&pt, on de&and delivery of parts< ,1ust in ti&e/<
per&ittin% the %reat capital to dispense (ith the hu%e inventories and their attendant costs that
character traditional &ass production capitals. Call it ,lean production,/ this capitalist activity is
not 1ust another for& of the &ass production that characteri=ed the era of real do&ination 4i.e.,
it is characteristic of an on%oin% transition (e have called totali=in% do&ination5.
$ere, thou%h, (hat is crucial is the re9construction of ,soft s"ills,/ the effort to reshape
personality, the develop&ent of the ,inte%rated (or"er./ ;or it is not individual (or"ers or
(or"er %roups that are e'ploited in totali=in% do&ination, ut indistin%uishaly the entirety of
the (or"force 4as a &echanical asse&la%e5 (hich for&s the collective (or"er and (hich
cannot e understood in ter&s of a sin%le (or"site, industry or co&ple' of related industries
ut constitutes a planetary relation of %loal capital to a (orld proletariat.
Totali/ing Do$ination, ,,,
The Totali/ing Do$ination of Capital over Societ%
$ere and in the ne't section, (e shall first identify and then atte&pt to specify the three
decisive features of totali=in% do&ination.
)irst, the (hole of society is &ore or less i&&ediately... no lon%er in a co&ple'ly &ediated
fashion... lin"ed to production, and therey to e'ploitation+ 6ore prosaically, the (hole of
society is directly &oili=ed to sustain the econo&y ecause the &ove&ent of capital, the
value for&, has so deeply penetrated, reor%ani=ed and reshaped society in its totality+
0he restructured capitalist econo&y (ith its fir&s predicated on casuali=ation and lean
production does not si%nify anythin% ne( in the sense that it %oes eyond capitalis&. Rather,
it is novel in that it )ualitatively deepens the iron %rip of capital over hu&an sensiilities.
Capital no lon%er &erely he%e&oni=es production and accordin%ly, and our era can no lon%er
e defined &erely in ter&s of production, as the real susu&ption of la&or under capital 4real
do&ination5+ 0oday capital holds societ% as a hole in its %rasp e%innin% (ith do&ination of
classes do(n to their individual &o&ents, persons in their affective and need ased
foundationsE hence, our characteri=ation of the era in ter&s of the totali/ing do$ination of
capital over societ% 0or, e'pressed differently, societies of capital (here these societies are, in
fact, &o&ents in the %loal order of capital, capitalist civili=ation if you &ust5.
$istorically and o1ectively, capital.s response to %enerali=ed opposition itself a product of its
&ove&ent, especially (or"ers. opposition, arisin% in the last cycle of international class
stru%%le 417OC917GF5, and (ith its to the enor&ous productivity of astract laor %enerated y
the (orld(ide %enerali=ation of &ass production< thus, and this is the decisive feature of the
entire develop&ent, pheno&enally at least, the threat of overproduction and syste&ic crisis,
collapse and devalori=ation as a conse)uence< has een to inte%rate the individual into the
order of capital, therey to effectively re&a"e society as a (hole alto%ether eyond
production. 4Bour%eois e%ois& and the relentless capitalist effort to en%ender proliferation of
endlessly diverse, &inutely differentiated need structures are at the heart of this
develop&ent5. 0he &ove&ent of capital has e'hiited radical develop&ent, i.e., it has ta"en
ai&, so to spea", at the root of society (hich the entire history of its develop&ent has
produced, na&ely, the individual< not the producer, &e&er of the fa&ily, or the citi=en, for
e'a&ple, as it appears in Popper.s philosophically lieral theori=ation. 0hese astractions all
i&poverish the e'perience and content of daily life, and ays&ally fail to apprehend the
radical character of this novel for& of capitalist do&ination... Instead, capital.s &ove&ent ai&s
at the individual in her essential sociality, as an internali=ed ense&le of social relations (ith
its foundations in hu&an need and affect, and accordin%ly its e'ploitation ai&s at
reconstructin% the essential sociality of the individual, its ein% as a co&ponent of the
collective (or"er as it has for&ed under conditions of techno9scientific production.
So, second, capital e'ploits the collective (or"er, and in so doin% hei%htens astract
individuality. 0his is a dialectical develop&ent+ En%a%ed in the (or" processes, in
,production,/ it is in &echanically asse&lin% laor that %loal capital successfully e'ploits it
4the collective (or"er5, ut in ,society/ it is the proliferation and fulfill&ent of o1ectively
ho&o%eni=ed needs that fuels capitalIs &ove&ent, that provides the &otive force for its
develop&ent. 0hus, this &ove&ent creates increasin%ly vacuous individualities as astract
co&ponents of the collective (or"er, the needs are for&ally identical, differentiated only y the
are facticity of this or that ,I/ as their earers+
0otali=in% do&ination can e understood fro& the depth9psycholo%ical penetration of the value
for&, the iron %rip that capital has co&e to e'ercise over the ,(hole person/ y (ay of the
for&ation of hu$an sensi&ilities, not 1ust the conscious aspect even if here consciousness is
practical and refers to speech and ehavior.
0he do&ination of this astract and alienated, asocial for& of sociation, society, has
developed throu%h capitalIs invasion of the odily sustructure of a historical for& of hu&anity
4e%oistic individuality5 specific to capitalis&, in particular, on capitalIs infusion and i&plantation
into the culturally for&ed need structure of &en and (o&en+ ;or it is capital itself that for$s
this culture that in9for&s needs and interests. 3eeds are not anthropolo%ically or
physiolo%ically %ivenE instead, capital literally &a"es up and &a"es over this su1ect.s socio9
historically specific character.
0he penetration of the value for& e%ins fro& the confi%uration of hu&an needs in very, very
youn% children, needs crystalli=ed as, inter(oven and interloc"ed (ith, and functionally depth9
psycholo%ical surro%ates that stand in for dearth, lac"s or asences. 40hus, the ter& ,needs./5
0o e ,needy/ is to e'perience this asence, and (e can say need is a ne%ativity that co&pels
the person to see" to ,fill in/ this dearth, lac", asence. Specifically, fillin% in need is
overco&in% the asence of uni)uely affir&ative love and a elon%in% that alto%ether
transcends the narro( confines of the our%eois fa&ily. It can e seen early on in the parental
sustitution of su%ar 4chocolate, candy, soft drin"s, etc.5 or the visual &edia 4especially,
television5 for love and affection, in the canali=ation of and sustitution of that love and
affection into uyin%, and in the culturally trans&itted conviction 4trans&itted y the visual
&edia, in &usical C:s and fil&ic :!:s, in video %a&es, in children.s oo"s, etc.5 that
satisfactions derive fro& the possession and displa% of novelty that is purchased. *t the very
&o&ent a child is &asterin% itself, creatin% its o(n &otility and preo1ective spatiality 4learnin%
to stand up upri%ht, then (al"5, and in &asterin% itself eco&in% a self< in assi&ilatin%
speech, in for&in% defined affective and "inesthetic i&pulses< the child intuitively %rasps it is
these canali=ations and sustitutions (hich she is to see" (hen feelin% ,needy./ ;or&s and
&odes of canali=ation 4suli&ation5 literally ta"e vital root, are physiolo%ically intert(ined (ith
affects.
Such asences or needs are the for&ative outco&es of the narro(, co&petitive social
relations in (hich (e are all e&edded, and functionin% in the conte't of the& hardens the
personality+ Such social relations are parentally reproduced in and are constitutive of
our%eois, nuclear fa&ilies, for&in% the aidin% ele&ents of their real relational content.
Product of the culture of capital, this content defines itself as ne%ativity+ 0his ne%ativity is lived
and e'perienced as co&pulsion, as an asolutely insatiale need to consu&e co&&odities.
0he assi&ilation and internali=ation of canali=ations and sustitutions constitutes a character9
for&ative, repressive desuli&ation of those asences. 40his suli&ation is co&pulsive and it
is repressive, that is to say it is affectively yo"ed to the reproduction of capital and its
reactionary social order, ecause it is a refle', i.e., needs and asences as they are %enerated
in daily life are split off, their real si%nificance is preco%nitive, the %enuine asences they rest
on are repressed, have never een (or"ed throu%h and are at est partially, often
sy&olically understood and unintelli%ily recalled as in drea&s5.
3eed is ,fulfilled,/ i.e., incessantly re)uires satin%, in havin% and possessin% (hatever ne(ly
appears on the &ar"et, yet this inco&plete ,fulfill&ent/ is actually e'perienced as ineffale
lon%in% and dissatisfaction that, pursuin% its satisfaction throu%h the culturally availale
&eans, is yo"ed to the consu&ption of co&&odities.
In all this capital.s &edia spectacle is si&ply crucial, and it in this there is a doule &ove&entE
first, capital.s spectacle is the &ediu& throu%h (hich the intense desire yo"ed to the incessant
consu&ption of co&&odities as a &eans of fulfill&ent is announced, pro&oted and achievedE
and, second, it is increasin%ly and infor&ally inte%rated into the state as its propa%anda
ad1unct, affir&in% the eternal reality of capital and its state, and insurin% &ass loyalty to oth.
@ived and e'perience as such, insatiale need is the asis and the &echanis& for confi%urin%
or re9structurin%, as the case &ay e, the ,inner life of T&an./ in its entirety. $avin% insinuated
itself into ,&an/ as a ein% (ith needs that are for&ed in the social practices of hu&ani=ation
4here, sociali=ation5, it is precisely in the historically deter&ined for& of activity, alienated and
(a%ed laor, that the &eans to an inco&plete and never fulfillin% satisfaction &ust e found.
$ere the ai& of capital eco&es visile+ In rene(in% ourselves throu%h and as astract laor,
the syste&s i&perative, the lo%ic of capital e'ecuted y its personifications, is to render
resistance to it, capital, (holly individual and cooptale, resistance itself co&&odified and
&ar"etale. 0his develop&ent is &ost fully reali=ed a&on% casuali=ed layers of the (or"in%
class, and it e'e&plifies that situation (hich the (or"in% class has yet to %rasp, na&ely, that it
no lon%er produces a culture of daily life of its o(n, ut instead has assi&ilated the culture of
capital &ediated y the usiness classes<
Because need in this culturally specific for& is insatiale, it is also co&pulsiveE and that is
(hat secures our incorporation into capital.s orit+ I&a%ined for us in advertisin%, in &ass
&edia venues of all sorts, pro1ected as fantasy &ade real 4y see&in%ly endlessly novel
develop&ents of spectacle entertain&ent5, its satisfaction is achieved in an a%%ressive, thin%ly
cathected, refle' suli&ation of ause, (ounds, hu&iliations, offenses, and resent&ents that
are the re%ular diet, the sole steady and reliale features of life lived in all the central activity
conte'ts of societies of capital 4fa&ily, school, (or", and various social venues of
consu&ption5.
Capitalist practices of surveillance in the (or"sites of casuali=ed (or"ers and atte&pts to
reconstruct (or"ers. personalities throu%h &odification of (or"ers. ,soft s"ills/ are sea&lessly
a piece (ith for&ation of (or"ers as passive ,consu&ers/ in societies of capital throu%h the
&ass culture of the spectacle. Si&ilarly, that culture, iotechnolo%y and the sciences of life as
infinitely &alleale %enetic &aterial underpinnin% it, and paternalistically authoritarian
practices at all levels of the state 4startin% at its lo(er levels (ith &unicipalities, school districts
and counties5, are perfectly con%ruent (ith and are decisive &o&ents of the totali=in%
do&ination of capital over society.
Tra9ector% of Conte$porar% Capitalist Develop$ent, ,
8esa$tar&eiter and the Struggle against Capital
Third, (hile sites of e'ploitation (ithin the laor processes are in principle identifiale, (ho is,
or (hat %roups of (or"ers as %roups are, e'ploited can no lon%er e specified. Instead, in the
&erely for&al sense it is the collective (or"er, the 8esa$tar&eiter, the various layers and
strata of (or"ers (ho are en%a%ed in various for&s of (or" (ithin the laor processes of
capitalis& as a %loal syste& of social relations, (ho is the su1ect and o1ect of capitalist
e'ploitation+
Casuali=ation is perhaps the "ey develop&ent of totali=in% do&ination. It su%%ests all other
si%nificant trends, in particular the %ro(in% lac" of coherency of (or"ers as a class especially
in those re%ions of the capitalist (orld that are &ost fully characteri=ed y the do&ination of
capital over society.
*s &erely the conte&porary for& of capitalis&, the distinctiveness of the totali=in% do&ination
as the for& of capitalist control over society in and eyond production, and increasin%ly as an
era in the history of capitalis&, rests on the pervasive and deepenin% penetration of science
and technolo%y, not as ,inputs/ that are ,applied/ to production and enter into it fro& outside
as if the &odern science of nature and capitalist technolo%y (ere essentially distinct, self9
enclosed realities, ut as techno9scientific production that is cut fro& the sa&e cloth as the
culture of daily life, that cloth ein% the order of capital that or%ani=es science, technolo%y,
production, leisure so9called and venues of consu&ption, or%ani=es society, and (hich,
shapin% daily life, ceaselessly, techno9scientifically for&s and refor&s the souls and odies of
those individuals, na&ely, us. 3o(, it is the fi%ure of the casuali=ed (or"er (ho out(ardly
sy&oli=es< a sy&ol created y the &edia spectacle< all these develop&ents and
personifies this capitalist culture of daily life, ut capital does not start fro& the casuali=ed,
fro& the individual, inte%rated (or"er in specific (or"sites. It only functions e%innin% fro& its
glo&al $ove$ent, production that is international, co$$odities and surpluses extracted in
exploitation of la&or that circulate orldide, distri&ution hich is universal: Capital is a
planetar% realit% in hich the 2arth in its entiret% is incessantl% undergoing re-for$ation as,
and transfor$ation into, a holding area of unprocessed resources for capitalist production of
co$$odities+ The la&or that it exploits confronts it glo&all% as a collective or!er
08esa$tar&eiter5.
Casuali=ed laor epito&i=es the situation of (or"ers under conditions of totali=in% do&ination,
ut in so doin% it is an out(ard for& that &as"s 4(hile in part revealin%5 the real totalitarian
dyna&ic of the (orld econo&y, especially its &etropolitan pole+ It is the proletariani=ed
populations of the (orld (hich are collectively &oili=ed for e'ploitation, at the heart of (hich
is scienti=ed (or" and all those au'iliary activities connected (ith 4even &ediately5 and
necessary to it 4includin% &asses of the casuali=ed5.
Rnli"e the s"illed laor in the era of for&al do&ination and the &ass (or"er of the era of real
do&ination, in the era of the totali=in% do&ination of capital over society, the e'traction of
surplus value carried out in production cannot e separated fro& its preparation across the
various spheres of society+ Capital e'tracts surplus value ,pri&ordially/ 4it is Hr$ehrert5, and
this e'traction is ,totali=in%/ as it tends to(ard co&plete do&ination of &o&ents and totality,
the individuals and society as a (hole.
1
Production is no lon%er &erely the o1ect of capitalE
rather, needs and affect structures, psyche and ody of individuals 4solely as astract class
co&ponents5 have eco&e entirely o1ects of capital in their pri$al holeness, are in the
&anifold activity conte'ts of daily life 4fa&ily, school, venues of consu&ption and
entertain&ent, church and &ilitary5 shaped and for&ed to e predisposed to(ard e'ploitation
y capital, and this prior to initial entry into (or", so that this e'ploitation, is achievale in
principle in all laor that is perfor&ed on the asis of the ne( technolo%ies of production and,
once that production achieved societal do&inance, all laor tout court, (hether those
technolo%ies only &ediately deployed y that laor or are actually e&ployed in and directly
for& it< >perative at the level of the (orld, this at once constitutes a ne o&9ect and ne
order of exploitation+++
*ove (e noted that the rationali=ation of (or" processes has created a situation in (hich
each earer of a function and each position is an isolated or astract &o&ent of the (or"
processes. Effectively, each persona%e is o1ectively a Teil$ensch, an ,ele&ent/ (ithin
collective (or", and each position itself e&odies the role and function of layers of ,(or"ers/
(ithin the collective (or"er, (hile production is &echanical and astractly inte%rated fro&
aove and outside itself 4y supervisors, &ana%ers, y &achinery, y di%itali=ed &achinery,
y co&puter soft(are pro%ra&s5.
0his, the %ro(in% and on%oin% fra%&entation of (or", is one of t(o develop&ents that
characteri=e the e'pansion of capitalis& historically and %eo%raphically once real do&ination
in production 4and, (ith its further totali=in% develop&ent as do&ination of society as a (hole5
e%an to ta"e hold. *t the sa&e ti&e, the re9unification of partial tas"s in (or" and society has
een achieved throu%h a pyra&idal or%ani=ation of laor and social processes at the top 4y
those very sa&e supervisors, &ana%ers, ad&inistrators, etc.5. 0his is the other develop&ent.
It, the latter, deepens o1ective stratification (ithin the (or" processes that are su1ectively
assi&ilated and internali=ed y superordinate personnel (ithin (or" and society. -et it is onl%
1
In past (or"s, (e have referred to this develop&ent (ithin capitalis& as ,asolute/ do&ination. 0his is a
&isapprehension of the pheno&enon, since (hat is at issue here is the tendential direction of develop&ent+ It is not
finished or co&pleted 4and in principle cannot e5, hence neither ,asolute/ nor ,total./
ithin the order of capital these that o1ectively distinct positions (ithin production and society
are necessary &o&ents of the division of laor.
Effectively, in the laor processes these positions are %enerated, first, y the &achine ased
confi%uration of (or" as processes since in their very construction those &achine sensuously
e&ody the i&peratives of capital 4hierarchy in the for& uilt up in an endless rationali=ation
peculiar to capitalis&5 and, second, y science throu%h its &assive inputs into production that
reconstitute it as sea&lessly a piece (ith that production, throu%h the over(hel&in%ly decisive
role of scientific "no(led%e in the very construction of &achine co&ple'es deployed in
production, &achines that &ore and &ore incarnate (or"ersI s"ill 4(ithout the possiility of
(or"er &astery5 leavin% (or"ers des"illed functionaries perfor&in% partial tas"s, and throu%h
the scientific re)uire&ent that "no(led%e of &achines, their construction, their (or"in%s, their
capacities, their ra( &aterial inputs and the processes (ithin production they en%ender e
e&odied in still other layers of specialists, technicians and ad&inistrators, all &inions of
capital. In this respect, e&odyin% capitalist hierarchy the &achines the&selves and science
&aterially incorporated into the& and into production are 4efore they are ever ideolo%ical5
o1ectified9&ateriali=ed defenses of the privile%es and prero%atives of the osses. In this
respect, ai&ed at recreatin% nature as a ra( &aterials asin and achieved throu%h the
technolo%ical processes of production, science as nature do&ination is ine'tricaly tied to the
e'ploitation of (a%ed laor.
1
Within the order of capital these o1ectively distinct positions (ithin production and society
for& a situation that &a"es it, as (e noted aove, &ore and &ore difficult to identify
specifically (hich, if any, %roups of (or"ers produce the co&&odities (hose sale reali=es
surplus valueE that increasin%ly it is laor or%ani=ed, coordinated and synchroni=ed y capital
that has eco&e the real a%ency in the production of surplus value< 6ar' calls this a%ency
so/ial !o$&iniertes 7r&eitsver$Vgen, socially co&ined laor po(er or (hat is the sa&e
thin%, &echanically asse&led astract laor, and he also refers to it as the collective (or"er
48esa$tar&eiter5<
2
3o( this is a purel% e$pirical, positivist account, one asent the deeper
1
Such is the underside of science onded to class e'ploitation throu%h it achieve&ents 4nature do&ination as the
foundations of e'pansion of productive forces5 that 1ustify and stren%then capitalIs hold over society. 4;or this, see the
Retrospect and *nticipation, aove.5
If a ne( science and a concrete technolo%y of alliance (ith nature 4see the Postscript, elo(5 are essential &o&ents
of the aolition of capital, and they are, then the &achines, techni)ues and technical processes so9called are at issue,
or, &ore to the point, they too &ust e overco&e, transfor&ed, since they are inseparale fro& ecause constitutive
ele&ents of technolo%ies of capital. 0his is not ,@uddite/ fantasy. It can e de&onstrated throu%h a detailed
e'a&ination of the &ost i&portant cate%ories of &achines, techni)ues and processes in the various decisive
institutionally rationali=ed spheres of society, in production, distriution and transportation, co&&unications, and
consu&ption.
0o elieve other(ise is to tenaciously hold to the conviction that it is necessary to e, in *dorno.s (ords 4appropriatin%
Baudelaire, thou%h in oth cases (e could (ell e &ista"en5, a&solutel% $odern, &eanin% (e ta"e our stand on the
&ost advanced technical achieve&ents of capitalis&, those achieve&ents for& the &aterial foundations of a %enuine,
%eneral e&ancipation.
0o the contrary, it is instru&ents, &achines and devices that can e found on the frin%es of capitalist develop&ent,
that are ypassed or re1ected in that develop&ent 4not to &ention the theori=ations they incarnate5... re1ected
precisely ecause their construction does le%iti&ately portend the foundations of a develop&ent freed of capital or
ecause its i&peratives are not incorporated into the& or oth... that for& the asis of a %eneral e&ancipation.
2
M:a &it der Ent(ic"lun% der reellen Su&su$ption der 7r&eit unter das :apital oder der spe/ifisch !apitalistischen
4rodu!tionseise nicht der ein=elne *reiter, sondern &ehr und &ehr ein so/ial !o$&iniertes 7r&eitsver$Vgen der
ir!liche )un!tion@r des ?esa&tareitspro=esses (ird, und die verschiedenen *reitsver&c%en, die "on"urrieren,
und die %esa&te produ"tive 6aschine ilden, in sehr verschiedener Weise an de& un&ittelaren Pro=ess der Waren9
oder esser hier Produ"tildun% teilneh&en, der eine &ehr &it der $and, der andre &ehr &it de& Lopf areitet, der
eine als &ana%er, en%ineer, 0echnolo% etc., der andre als overloo"er, der dritte als dire"ter $andareiter, oder %ar
loss $andlan%er, so (erden &ehr und &ehr )un!tionen von 7r&eitsver$Vgen unter den un&ittelaren Be%riff der
produ!tiven 7r&eit und ihre 0rQ%er unter den Be%riff der produ!tiven 7r&eiter, dire"t vo& Lapital aus%eeuteter und
seine& !er(ertun%s9 und Produ"tionspro=ess Aerhaupt untergeordneter *reiter einran%iert./
si%nificance of the concept, i.e., the lived realit% it refers &ac! to, the active su&9ectivit% on
hich the hole process rests, and on hich it necessaril% depends: It is a strictly for&al
deter&ination of the concept, 8esa$tar&eit, for (hich collective laor is ine'tricaly and
necessary ound up (ith science shapin% production and is constituted in the various for&s of
(or" (ithin the laor processes of capitalis&, and (here 8esa$tar&eiter &erely refers to the
various layers and strata of (or"ers (ho are en%a%ed (ithin those processes. 0his
deter&ination is laor solely as it e'ists for capital, so &any econo&ic cate%ories of laor
po(er deployed in its service, and it rests on o1ectivistic and functional analysis and for
hich it is i$possi&le to coherentl% affir$ the possi&ilit% of the transcendence 0a&olition5 of
capital...
;ro& the standpoint of the revolutionary aolition of capital, the various fixed positions (ithin
the division of laor in capitalis& constitute nothin% &ore than &o&ents of a functionall%
necessar% parceli=ation of tas"s+ *nyone (ho has een en%a%ed in (a%ed laor as part of a
lar%e (or"force doin% hi%hly sociali=ed (or" understands class stru%%le is &ost intense at the
i&&ediate point of contact et(een (or"ers and supervisors, that the latter consciously ear
(ithin the&selves the i&peratives of capital, that a&on% the& the disdain for (a%ed laor
rivals that of the %reat o(ners, and that supervisory personnel (ithin capitalis& 4(hether in
laor or social life5 are supernu$eraries. 0he (or" supervisors, technicians and
ad&inistrators do today could and (ill e asored into the activity of revolutionary councils+
Where the (or" itself is necessary 4not redundant, not destructive, and not (or" profli%ately
and e'cessively ai&ed at producin% %ara%e, 1un" and trin"ets5, the tas"s (ill e functionally
asored and rotated a&on% &e&ers of asse&lies and councils, carried out cooperatively
4and not on the asis of hierarchy5. 0his is not delirious fantasy, ut (ill occur as a real
&ove&ent of (or"in% class self9active, self9transcendence 4proletarian self9aolition as a
class and classes as such5...
Rnder conditions of totali=in% do&ination, the lo%ic and &ove&ent of capital ai&s at recreatin%
(or"ers collectively in all aspects of daily life 4not 1ust in (or"5 as a &echanically asse&led
4a%%re%ated5 (hole, ut the livin% reality that capital e%ins fro&, that it relentlessly e'ploits,
and that it ai&s to recreate is a reality )uite different+ 0his e'ploitation ai&s at the effective
social &urder of productively coordinated concrete living and &reathing, sentient and aged
hu$an &eings+ *s productively connected, concrete (or"ers, capital forces us to function as
socially asse&led, &echanically synchroni=ed laor9po(er, a socially co&ined capacity to
laor 4ein so/ial !o$&iniertes 7r&eitsver$Vgen5... 0here is contradiction at the very heart of
the situation of astract laor+ In (or" and activity, (e produce and in producin% (e act, (e
for$ ourselves as su&9ects (hile at the very sa&e ti&e renderin% ourselves passive o&9ects
for capital... *sent proletarian resistance, capital reduces us to the passive side of this
contradiction, collectively to an utterly insustantial social fi%ure, a reasse$&led $echanical
a&straction 4of (hich casuali=ed laor is a &ere co&ponent5 en%a%ed in the production of the
total social product 4capital5.
1
,0hus, (ith the develop&ent of the real su&su$ption of la&or under capital or the specificall% capitalist $ode of
production it is not the particular (or"er ut rather sociall% co$&ined capacit% to la&or that is &ore and &ore the real
executioner of the laor process as a (hole, and since the various capacities to laor (hich, in cooperatin%, for& the
entire productive &achine participate in very different (ays in the i&&ediate process in (hich the co&&odity or,
etter, the product is for&edE one &ore (ith his hands, another &ore (ith his head, one as a &ana%er+ en%ineer or
technician, etc., the other as overseer, the third directly as a &anual (or"er, or even a &ere laorer, &ore and &ore
of the functions of the capacit% to la&or are susu&ed under the i&&ediate concept of productive la&or, and their
earers under the concept of productive or!ers, (or"ers directly e'ploited y capital and alto%ether su&ordinated to
its valori=ation and production process/ 4our translation, e&phases in ori%inal5. 6ar', MResultate des un&ittelaren
Produ"tionspro=esses.,
1
While it is the historically contin%ent develop&ent of astract laor that has &ade a %enerali=ed hu&an e&ancipation
possile, it is not astract laor that either (e or 6ar' (ish to lierate 4his position... his analysis here can e
0he stru%%le a%ainst e'ploitation is a stru%%le a%ainst this reduction. 0he reco&position of the
(or"in% class across the (orld has vastly fra%&ented the various for&s of class stru%%le,
stru%%les a%ainst this reduction, a%ainst e'ploitation+ Collective (or" can e found in the
casuali=ed laor of the 1anitor, fast food coo", and the &edical and educational attendants in
the &etropolisesE in the supere'ploited laor of the ,infor&al econo&ies/ of the slu&s, arrios
and shantyto(ns of the %reat cities of the capitalist peripheryE in the industrial ;ordist
industries (here they e'ist, in those capital intensive centers of autos in 8apan, Lorea, in the
RS South, and in the hi%h tech e'port industries of ?er&anyE in the ne( consu&er %oods
&anufacturin% co&ple' of ?uan%don% province, and the te'tile concentrations around Cairo
and :ha"aE in infor&ational technolo%y9ased sectors of @udhiana and Ban%alore, and their
call centers and those spread across the Rnited StatesE in the state and pulic sector
every(here, especially office (or"ers and &unicipal proletariatsE in university laoratories and
capitals. R`: centers housin% la technicians and other scientific (or"ersE in the recently
e'pandin% industries of the old capitalist &etropolis such as health careE and, a&on% &i%rant
(or"ers around the (orld fro& the oilfields of *raia to the industrial a%riculture of the
Californian Central !alley.
In all these sites of (or" and types of laor, the various for&s in (hich collective (or" e'ists
are %reatly splintered, ro"en up and isolated, as is class stru%%le ran%in% fro& personali=ed
ro(s, )uarrels over personal di%nity and control of (or", fi%hts a%ainst rationali=ed (or"
nor&s, throu%h industrial attles, to efforts to resist capitalIs efforts to technolo%ically reshape
soft s"ills and assertions of the arest hu&anity a%ainst the i&&ediate representatives of
capital. -et it is in and throu%h these &ultifarious confrontations that a 8esa$tar&eiter is
counterposed to capital at the level of the (orld. * revolutionary stru%%le a%ainst capital is a
)uestion of (hether these other(ise fra%&entary s"ir&ishes can< in the course of the lon%
dra(n out crisis of capital< cohere into an e'plicit opposition to e'ploitation, oppression and
rutali=ation, (hether the un&ediated resistance of the collective (or"er to capital can raise
itself to consciousness and transfor& itself into a direct stru%%le for a novel councilar po(er.
;or it is only on this %loal terrain that the self9activity that can produce the a(areness to
illu&inate these stru%%les can unfold and (ill eco&e conscious of itself.
Tra9ector% of Conte$porar% Capitalist Develop$ent, ,,
Structure of the "orld 2cono$%
*s a novel era of capital.s do&ination in the history of capitalis&, the totali=in% do&ination of
capital over society is characteri=ed y return to c%clical develop$ent< the end of the
usiness cycle so9called, develop&ent throu%h oo&s 4lar%ely ased upon speculatively
%rounded, fictitious accu&ulations, ,ules/5 and increasin%ly severe contraction and
devalori=ation e&anatin% fro& those re%ions (here totali=in% do&ination has under%one its
%reatest develop&ent. 0he syste& of social relations (e call capitalis$ is, in other (ords,
increasingl% su&9ect to deter$ination &% crisis.
Within this fra&e(or", the tendential direction of capitalist develop&ent is today decidedly
shaped, first, y the enor&ous and increasin% productivity of astract laor (ithin the capitalist
syste& of social relations at the level of the (orld, (hich has led to the %ro(in% e'pulsion of
contrasted to his intent... (as contradictory5, ut the concrete (or"er stru%%lin% a%ainst astraction, precisely the
practical, vital, reathin% and sufferin% hu&an ein% possessed of affects and needs as (e have descried ourselves,
not the enor&ous productivity of &echanically asse&led astract laor. We distin%uish and oppose our concept of
the 8esa$tar&eiter? a (orld class of productivel% connected, aged, concrete living and &reathing, sentient hu$an
&eings++. to this productivist sense for (hich co&&it&ent to a vision of a ,free society/ is co&&it&ent to a hi%hly
rationali=ed capitalis& ased on unli&ited pro%ress and develop&ent of productive forces. H>n this, see The Critique
of 4roductivis$ and Malthusianis$ in 1rigins and 2ndings+ EditorIs note.J
;or 6ar', see ,Iid.,
(a%ed laor fro& production and ine'oraly to an asolute nu&erical decline of industrial
laor relative to the total nu&er of (a%ed (or"ers, and to, asent a proletarian challen%e to
the order of capital, the (anin% political (ei%ht of industrial (or"ers (ithin the (orld econo&y.
;or e'a&ple, 1ust t(o internationally operatin% fir&s, Caterpillar and Lo&atsu, &anufacture
and provide the vast &a1ority of earth &ovin% &achinery for construction pro1ects in the (orld
today, (hile si&ilarly Sie&ens and ?eneral Electric provide nearly all the turines utili=ed
across the %loe in %eneratin% hydroelectric po(er fro& da&s. *ll four fir&s have dis&antled
their i% factories, all en%a%e in far &ore e'tensive international operations, %enerate
consideraly %reater volu&e and operate (ith vastly s&aller (or"forces than in the recent
past. 0his is characteristic of the entire situation of %loal capitalis&. So that, in these ter&s,
the Chinese proletariat alone is productive enou%h to satisfy the use value re)uire&ents of the
entire (orld. In this sense, it is this develop&ent of the productivity of astract laor that
secures a regi$e of casuali/ation and the increasing destruction of coherenc% of 0the
historical industrial core of5 or!ers as a class+
0he tendential direction of capitalist develop&ent is today deter&ined, second, y the
rapacious plunder, despoliation, ho&o%eni=ation and transfor&ation of earthly nature into
u%lified ra( &aterial asins 4denuded forests, open &ines, desertified %rasslands, etc.5 at the
start of a cycle of co&&odity production and to'ic (astelands 4(etlands turned into landfills,
decayin% uran centers, vast stretches of ocean densely littered (ith plastic refuse, etc.5 at
the end of that cycle, i.e., (ith co&&odity consu&ption< Return to the first deter&ination.
It is in this conte't that (orld capitalis& today tendentiall% e'ists at t(o poles.
*t one pole, there are the old &etropolitan centers of the syste& no( do(nsi=ed and
hollo(ed y the past four decades of restructurin%s and outsourcin%s, centers that have
tendentially eco&e rentier econo&ies, centers that are at least in part financed y the
underconsu&ption of vast proletarian populations outside the &etropolises, centers that, li"e
so &uch else in capitalis&, are under&inin% the very iospheric foundations of life on Earth,
centers (herein the consu&ption, often profli%ate, of &iddlin% and increasin%ly narro(er and
narro(er layers a&on% &etropolitan proletarian populations for& y and a(ay the lar%est
&ar"ets in the (orld for a syste& of social relations (hose le%iti&acy increasin%ly, and
contradictorily, rests on its e'traordinary capacity for co&&odity production< 0his
consu&ption in turn rests on a hidden technolo%ical dyna&ic already &entioned and to (hich
(e shall shortly return... ;ully haituali=ed to capitalist production, situated in this socio9
econo&ic conte't that is tendentially ut in a decisive sense rentier, the industrial proletarian
cores of the old &etropolitan centers of capitalis& have su1ectively and o1ectively lar%ely
een destroyed... In the Rnited States, casuali=ation, une&ploy&ent and lu&penproletarian
activities account for nearly t(o thirds of an actually and potentially (a%ed (or"force, active
proletarian layers such as nurses and &unicipal (or"ers for& si%nificantly less than one in
t(enty9five (a%ed (or"ers, and that traditional core is no lon%er capale of ,stor&in% the
heavens./
*s deter&ination of the %loal capitalis& is &ore and &ore su1ect to cyclical develop&ent
and crisis, (ithin the old &etropolitan re%ions of the (orld syste&, financial %roups (ithin
rulin% classes increasin%ly do&inate specific national states. 4:ialectically, there is a doule
&ove&ent, the financiali=ation of the state and the statification of financial capital, (hich is
&ore and &ore carried out throu%h internationally constituted or%ani=ation of financial
capitalist unity.5
1
0his he%e&ony insures the continuin% accelerated su1u%ation of even the
&ost re&ote aspects of nonproductive activity 4in the capitalist sense5 of various institutionally
distinct real&s of society to deter&ination y the &ove&ent of capital and suordinate to the
la( of value under conditions of totali=in% do&ination.
1
0his is not, ho(ever, state capitalis&. See our ,State Capitalis&+ 0heses./
*t the other pole, there is the productively en%a%ed, recently e&er%ent industrial co&ple' of
East and South *sia.
If (e consider this ne( industrial center of %ravity (e can note a rou%hly se&i9circular arc that
stretches alon% the *sian continental coastline fro& the Lorean Peninsula in the north and
east to the Indian sucontinent in the south and (est. 0hat arc, call it the *sian industrial arc,
&ore or less e%ins at Seoul at one end and &ore or less ends at Ban%alore at the other end.
In et(een, (e find the &a1or industrial centers, cities and re%ions that include Rlsan 4Lorea5,
Shan%hai, the Pearl River et(een ?uan%=hou 4Canton5 and Shen=hen 4i.e., ?uan%don%
province5, Sin%apore, Sai%on and Ban%"o", and :ha"a and 3e( :elhi, and so on. 0o either
side, ut especially to the south and east, secondary and tertiary =ones 4e.%., in 8a"arta,
Colo&o5 e'ist as ele&ents of the chain of suppliers to the central industries alon% the arc. *
t(ofold productive center is constitutive for this arc, na&ely, those sites at (hich non9
he%e&onic, suordinate i&perialist foci of (orld accu&ulation that rival the dispersed R.S.
and European centers have e&er%ed. 0hey consist in, first, a line that runs fro& $on% Lon%9
0aipei in the south to >sa"a90o"yo in the north, and, second a co&petin% center of
accu&ulation 1ust the other side of the East China Sea alon% a line that runs fro& Shen=hen
in the south to Shan%hai in the north. *ll those centers of conte&porary industrial production
that do not fall directly alon% these lines< (hether te'tiles in :ha"a, co&puter electronic
co&ponents in Sai%on, autos in Ban%"o", etc< are inte%rated in contradictory fashion (ith
the&, either as suppliers of industrial co&ponents or as co&petitors in the &ar"ets of the
capitalist (orld.
1
Behind these centers 4and for(ard of the& as the arc in the south e%ins its end (est(ard5,
a vast rural hinterland is populated y peasants and tenants, petty capitalist far&ers, even
nu&erous %roups of isolated and scattered peoples (ithout developed a%riculture e'istin%
lar%ely outside the state syste&s of the re%ion. In these re%ions a%ricultural foodstuffs and
industrial ra( &aterials are also produced, feedin% the populations and the factories of the
&a1or &etropolitan centers alon% the arc, the pal& plantations of the provinces north(est of
8a"arta in central Su&atra, the su%ar plantations of northern @u=on and @ayte in the
Philippines, in Central and West Lali&antan province in Borneo and else(here in the
archipela%o (here coffee, ruer and tea are produced, on plantations in 6alaysia and
0hailand (here ruer is produced, in lar%e estates in Ben%al and *ssa&, northeast Indian
provinces (here tea is produced, and in Lerala in south4(est5 India (here oth private and
state9o(ned plantations produce ruer, tea, coffee and carda&o&E and, on nu&erous
estates in 6onera%ala and :ic"oya producin% ruer and in Pussella(a in Sri @an"a (here
tea is produced. *ll of these a%ricultural products are processed on site or in factories in
locales (ithin the countries (here production ta"es place as part of that chain of suppliers.
0he free peasants that occupy lands ehind and in front of the arc 4e.%., in 6alaysia, 0hailand,
Ca&odia, etc.5 are ceaselessly ein% dispossessed of their lands, their villa%e co&&unities
destroyed, they the&selves transfor&ed into ,free/ 4(a%ed5 laor e&ployed in industrial
e'port processin% and asse&lin% sites in order to &a"es (ay for developers intend on
providin% housin% and venues of consu&ption for spra(lin% &e%acities, hotels and
restaurants for touris&, in order to acco&&odate lo%%in% concession and to then plant
&onocultural crops. In all this, &ostly &ilitari=ed states insure capitalist develop&ent is
pursued (ith a ven%eance, nature destruction is carried at a &a'i&al fren=y, and any
resistance (here it for&s is ruthlessly crushed.
1
Within this pole of capitalist develop&ent, the re%ion.s industrial dyna&is& has created de&and for ra( &aterials
and industrial inputs that have dra&atically accelerated a secondary re9industriali=in% capitalist develop&ent in
different parts of the (orld 4*ustralia, Bra=il, Chile, Canada, (hich is also acceleratin% the "inds of ecolo%ical
destruction, in the *&a=on and in and around the *rctic Circle, that is enhancin% (ar&in% induced cli&ate chan%e5.
0he t(o poles of capitalist develop&ent are ine'tricaly lin"ed, they are not loosely ound
to%ether, y the 0ai(anese, Lorean and Chinese coastal e'port industries (hich have een
central to this entire develop&ent... already y 177C a full F0Z of the industrial proletariat in
the (orld could e found in East *sia...
1
and (hose pri&ary purpose has een the
&anufacture of consu&er %oods for the old capitalist &etropolitan centers in the West 4Rnited
States, Britain and Europe5 and 8apan.
*s these ne( sites of capital accu&ulation have ta"en shaped and developed, especially as
the various recently for&ed secondary centers of industry and co&ponent part producers
have for&ed, and as a very old plantation a%riculture has een fully inte%rated into the arc, the
entire historical process &ar"ed y the dis&antlin% of the ,i% factory/ &ass production
co&ple'es of the old &etropolises has eco&e irreversile+ @eadin% this develop&ent, the
R.S. econo&y as a (hole has een transfor&ed fro& the (orld.s industrial center and
loco&otive to a for&ation ased, &ost i&portantly or so it appears, on financial services,
insurance, real estate, and entertain&ent for (hich the creation of fictitious financial assets,
ta"en to%ether (ith &iddle strata consu&ption, see& to e decisive, ut veil, as (e said, a
hidden technolo%ical dyna&ic not infre)uently ased on undersi=ed capital intensive
productive units 4relative to the i% factory5 and s&all (or"forces.
In contrast to ;ordist industry ased upon relative surplus value e'traction 4as it once e'isted
in the old capitalist &etropolises and as it e'ists especially alon% the East *sian industrial arc5,
today productive dyna&is& also ta"es another for& that is perfectly co&patile (ith, nay
de&anded y, (holesale casuali=ation of proletarian populations and rentieri=ation of
individual ,national/ econo&ies ta"en separately, astractly. *t the sa&e ti&e, it is i&portant to
reco%ni=e that technolo%ical dyna&is& 4specified in a %eneral (ay i&&ediately elo(5 does
not stand outside of ut is inte%rated (ith &ass production industries alon% the *sian
industrial arc 4as (ell as industries that, as thro(ac"s, inte%rate for&s of e'ploitation that
predate capitalist do&ination5. In this re%ard, it is also necessary to note that rentieri=ation is
perfectly co&patile (ith poc"ets of re%ional re9industriali=ation 4as in the *&erican >ld South
(here the auto industry has under%one a renaissance of sorts y (ay of invest&ent lar%ely y
8apanese capital.5
0echnolo%ical dyna&is& today is reali=ed in a novel productive9societal elaoration,
2
technolo%ies of capital ased on &assive scientific inputs to production that ta"e the specific
for&s of teleco&&unications and infor&ational 4at the core of (hich is soft(are develop&ent5,
&aterials 4incorporatin% en%ineerin% as (ell ,applied/ physics, and includin% co&posites,
cera&ics, nanotechnolo%y products and &icro devices5 and io%enetic 4includin% &edical
laoratory5 technolo%ies. 0here is no pri&ary technolo%y at the heart of this develop&ent.
0hey are fully inte%rated as each for& deeply penetrates the others and none is possile
(ithout the others,
D
and this ela&oration is full% consonant ith, is a sea$lessl% a piece ith
the pri$al for$ of exploitation that characteri/e totali/ing do$ination and the functionall%
totalitarian political for$ that has e$erged along ith it< @ar%ely &ilitarily driven, this novel
technolo%ical co&ple' is the foundation of R.S. he%e&ony in the (orld syste& of social
relations. But it is a he%e&ony threatened y %ro(in% co&petition as the %reat R.S. ased
capitals no lon%er have the resources to en%a%e in lon% ter& research and develop&ent and
as the R.S. state itself is &ore and &ore co&pelled to li&it the sa&e in its efforts to &ilitarily
1
"orld Develop$ent Report *TTA, 1G0.
2
;or a &ore e'tensive discussion, see the Conclusion to ,@aor Stru%%les in the 0(in Stru%%les, 200C92010./
D
;or e'a&ple, the se)uencin% of %ene 4io9technolo%y5 presupposes po(erful co&puters and sophisticated soft(are
4infor&ation technolo%y5 to construct the se)uence, novel plastics and &etal alloys that e'ist no(here in nature
4&aterials technolo%y5 to construct the e'traordinarily &iniaturi=ed instru&ents and devices 4such as &icroscopes
and ca&eras5 and to carry out the actual operations of laoratory (or", to visit the real ,sensuous/ correlate 4a %ene5
that for&s the actual asis of ideal se)uencin%.
&aintain that he%e&ony, and oth to finance its o(n failin% social syste& 4decayin%
infrastructure, &assively susidi=ation of entire sectors such as a%riculture and an"in%,
cli&ate chan%e induced destruction of uran landscapes5 and to secure the financially ased
po(er of the do&inant rulin% class social %roups 4(holesale an"in% ailouts, interest on a
alloonin% national det5<
If the structurally si%nificant co&ponents of the syste& of social relations on a (orld9scale
e'ist, as (e thin", at different &o&ents 4eras5 in the history of capitalis& 4(orld history itself
re&ains the arena of not9fully9synchroni=ed histories of the periodi=ation of capitalist
do&ination5, and the old &etropolitan centers are su1ect to the totali=in% do&ination of capital
over society, then the ne( centers of accu&ulation of (orld capitalis& in East and South *sia
as a (hole can at once e situated in the t(ili%ht of for&al do&ination 4in a%riculture5 and the
advent of real do&ination of laor y capital 4in industry5, as they si&ultaneously entertain
totali=in% do&ination throu%h capitalist e'ploitation ased on the &ost technolo%ically
advanced for&s of collective (or",
1
and as totali=in% do&ination or%ani=es the (orld syste&
of social relations as a (hole.
-et in those old &etropolitan re%ions of (orld capitalis& (here develop&ent of totali=in%
do&ination has %one the furthest, the penetration and reshapin% of production y science and
technolo%y has developed to such an e'tent that it appears to rest on its o(n foundations.
0his is, of course, a develop&ent that rests on real do&ination, that is, on the autono$i/ation
of capital. But today it is technolo%ies, not industries, (hich are at the center of this novel
productive9societal elaoration. 0hese technolo%ies, in turn, have reshaped the very asis of
production in the o1ective sense, transfor&in% the for& and content of the &eans and
instru&ents and instru&ent9co&ple'es of production. But it is not &erely a )uestion of the
shape and &aterial of capital.s productive forces, since totali=in% do&ination %oes eyond the
other, historical for&s of capitalist control of laor+ It ai&s at the production 4recreation5 of
hu&anity and hu&ani=ed nature as o1ects of e'ploitation as such, &ore specifically, at
renderin% hu&anity incapale of conscious resistance, at reducin% revolutionary action to
&ere revolt, throu%h ,i&plantin%/ in, &a"in% and re&a"in%, hu&an ein%s as depth9
psycholo%ically heterono&ous, personally sensitive and self9indul%in% su&9ectivities that
reali/e the$selves through the consu$ption of co$$odities, (hich, ecause they have een
for&ed as e'istentially dependent personalities, can only function in the conte't of
paternalistically authoritarian social relations. 0o this end, totali=in% do&ination o1ectively and
historically also ai&s at re&ovin% fro&, oliteratin% in, nature all traces of hu&ani=ed
otherness... In this respect, it has dra&atically reinforced unfoldin% and acceleratin% cli&ate
chan%e catastrophe<
Tra9ector% of Conte$porar% Capitalist Develop$ent, ,,,
The Conte$porar% ,$passe: ,ntertining of Capital.s Move$ent, 2cological Catastrophe
and a Cli$ate Change Catacl%s$
0here is a %enuine confusion that is ende&ic to all for&s of thou%ht for (hich hu&anity and
nature are counterposed.
It is o1ectively %rounded in the structure and or%ani=ation of a society in (hich capitalist uilt
environ&ent is so &assive and i&&ediate that surroundin% nature disappears, appears only
in hu&ani=ed landscapes, and reappears in its &ore ele&ental for&s, as (e are fond of
sayin%, only in the visual &edia of the spectacle. 0his confusion is e'hiited in the vie( that
the crisis of capital is so&eho( distinct fro& the reduction of earthly nature to ra( &aterials
1
*nd of course (ith this develop&ent co&es casuali=ation, no lon%er socially ui)uitous in 1ust the old &etropolitan
centers ut in the ne( ones also. * sin%le e'a&ple is %er&ane here+ By the end of the year 200G, a full O0Z of the
Lorean (or"in% class had een casuali=ed. ;i%ure provided in @oren ?oldner, ,0he Lorean Wor"in% Class./
asin for capitalist production of co&&odities. 0hey are not. Both the crisis of capital and the
transfor&ation of nature as an u%lified sin" of destructured, unprocessed &atter are %rounded
in the sa&e dyna&ics of capitalist develop&ent.
;ro& that &o&ent at (hich real do&ination e%an to effectively hold s(ay over the (orld,
capitalis& has and can only develop throu%h technolo%ical9scientific inputs that destroy
nature.s sustance and recreate it as ho&o%eni=ed, unrefined and unfinished resources and
&aterials, a standin% reserve, to provision capitalist production. Capitalist develop&ent
proceeds y (ay of the disruption, dislocation and in all cases tends to(ard destruction of the
self9coherin%, self9re%ulatory character of earthly nature 4risin% at&ospheric C>2 and C$#
levels, poisonin% in the for& of acidification of the oceans, shutdo(n and shift in locale of
ther&ohaline circulation (hich has already e%un5. Capital.s representatives lac" the class
creativity and have proven unale to even ade)uately pose, &uch less ta"e up, cli&ate
chan%e issues. "ithout the revolutionar% proletarian overthro of capital, and the
esta&lish$ent of a glo&al 0i+e+, councilar5 fra$eor! in hich these pro&le$s can &e
addressed, a&on% the& not only cli&ate chan%e ut those ende&ic to capitalist civili=ation
4&assive (ealth ine)uality, fa&ine and starvation, national rivalry and conflict issuin% in
'enophoic &ass &urders and %enocide, etc.5, a radical, thorou%h%oin% natural
transfor&ation (ill ensue reducin% hu&an populations, social develop&ent and o1ective
sustance 4productive forces, uran landscapes, &aterial and intellectual culture5 elo( a
level that &ade these develop&ents possile and (ithout any of the resources in nature on
(hich they (ere ori%inally ased.
0his si&ply astoundin% productivity of technolo%ically &ediated, a&stract laor reduces
turnover ti&es and the period of a develop&ental cycle, so that (ithin each cycle resources
are voraciously consu&ed at a pace that is rapidly outstrippin% the rate of technical innovation
(ithin capitalis& re)uired to shift the earthly resource ase a(ay fro& hydrocaron fossil fuels
and create a ne( order of ra( &aterials on (hich the entirety of capitalist develop&ent can
rest<. it is increasin%ly &anifest that technical innovations (ithin capitalis& (ill not "eep pace
(ith that chan%e, and capital.s sciences and technolo%ies are not capale of addressin% it in
its scale and co&ple'ity< What is descried y the ter& ,voracious resource consu&ption/
has created a situation (ithin earthly nature in (hich the latter is ho&o%eni=ed, reduced to
u%lified ra( &aterial asins descried aove. 0his ecolo%ical catastrophe, (hich includes
(ithin it, on%oin%, the si'th &ass species e'tinction in the nearly four illion year old
%eolo%ical history of life on Earth 9 a iolo%ical re%ression reversin% tens of &illions of years of
natural evolution and under&inin% the asis of life itself includin% hu&an life 9 is unfoldin%
(ithin the still roader conte't of %loal cli&ate chan%e itself occurrin% at an e'traordinarily
rapid pace 4historically as (ell as %eolo%ically5. 0he initial onset of rapid cli&ate chan%e< it is
hei%ht of folly to thin" that it is not already under(ay < (hich has occurred in the past in
transitions fro& %lacials to inter%lacials, is characteri=ed today as in the %eolo%ical past y
(hat is &edia spectacularly dee&ed ,e'tre&e (eather/ 4increased intensity of cyclonic and
hurricane stor&s and the tornadic events they spa(n, increased fre)uency of drou%ht and
(ildfires, unseasonale a&ounts of precipitation and periods of severe cold and intense heat,
&a1or floodin% all fro& re%ion to re%ion and (ithin re%ions, etc., %enerally, increasin%ly elastic
seasonal (eather re%i&es to%ether (ith disappearin% seasonal (eather patterns5, ut
pro&ises &uch &ore+ In the co&in% decades, as the ?reenland and *ntarctic ice caps &elt,
risin% sea levels 4as &uch as seventy five &eters5 (ill dro(n every &a1or uran coastal
&etropolis in the (orld fro& 3e( -or" to Shan%hai and inundate, renderin% useless, every
acre of lo( lyin% a%riculturally productive land conti%uous (ith oceanic (ater(ays. ?lacial
&elts at &ountainous altitudes across the (orld (ill reduce runoff in the %reat rivers of the
(orld fro& the *ndes and Roc"ies to the $i&alayas and the 0ietan Plateau and turn once
lush a%ricultural re%ions alon% those rivers in Peru, the Rnited States, Pa"istan, !ietna&,
Ca&odia, China and else(here into arid and desertified asins. By the ti&e they reach O_ C
410.F_ ;5, risin% te&peratures (ill &a"e life unearale (ithin today.s te&perate =ones
co&pellin% population &ove&ents into the hi%her latitudes.
In the face of this (hat, to the contrary, characteristically e'hiits the tendential direction of
conte&porary develop&ent of capital is the creation, enlar%e&ent and refine&ent of
technolo%ies of social control, and their inte%ration (ith that ai&, the social control of
underlyin%, especially proletarian, populations< In respect to this develop&ental direction,
scientific integration into production is vastl% accelerated, the do$inance of capital.s state
over science has and continues to rapidl% increase and science itself further continues to &e
reduced largel% to a pro9ect of creating and refining technologies of capital< 0he very fact that
io%enetic, infor&ational and &aterials technolo%ies for& the &ost dyna&ic societal
productive co&ple' (ithin conte&porary capitalis& ele%antly spea"s to the issue at hand+ 0he
elaoration of the &eans and (here(ithal of a novel type of totalitarian control si%nifies
capital.s retrench&ent. 0he operative rulin% class assu&ption is that is it necessary to pour
societal resources into preparation for a &aelstro& of social chan%e 4%enerated y natural
chan%e5. 0hese resources, societal (ealth, are neither intended for nor ai&ed at &eetin% and
curtailin% the &ost dan%erous effects of cli&ate chan%e.
>ver the co&in% decades, our situation (ill, asent a proletarian overthro( of the order of
capital and the creativity of this potential class su1ect 4a creativity or%ani=ationally incarnate
in the council as the only social for& that can in principle for&ulate, pursue and coordinate a
%loal response to cli&ate chan%e5, further (orsen+ 0he re%i&entation and repression of
do&estic (or"in% populations (ill e )ualitatively ratcheted up to assure confor&ity (ith
(ar&in% re)uired, harsh restrictions on ener%y usa%es of all sortsE drou%ht and fa&ine,
enor&ous pointless deathE depopulation of coastal areas around the (orld, dislocation and
forced relocationE creation of hu%e frontier =ones and ca&ps of displaced, ho&eless persons
alon% national orders< at this point the reality of surplus populations (ill eco&e acutely
prole&atic for capital< refu%ees in the tens and perhaps hundreds of &illions aandoned,
livin% in filth and s)ualor (ithout hopeE resource (ars et(een states, ethnic cleansin% and
%enocides as a re%ular feature of daily life. * cli&ate chan%e catastrophe (ill &a"e access to
resources i&&ensely &ore difficult, disrupt production of a%ricultural foodstuffs and introduce
undependaility and far %reater infre)uency into their production as (ell as that of industrial
ra( &aterials, (ill place de&ands that cannot e &et on the infrastructural foundations of
capitalis& (hich capital.s &ove&ent at once produces and (hich capital re)uires to
reproduce itself on an e'panded asis. *s they unfold, all these prole&s, )ualitative, utterly
novel and unprecedented, (ill hei%hten inter9i&perialist rivalries, tensions and stru%%le.
Cli&ate chan%e is and (ill continue to< dra&atically< narro( the asis in earthly nature for
hu&an activity in its conte&porary capitalist for& to a point fro& (hich it cannot e sustained.
Second Interlude
Biblio#raphical Sources
Barnes, Will. 1rigins and 2ndings: 8enerali/ed Hu$an 2$ancipation in the 4erspective of a
Ne 2arth. St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWWW. ,@aor Stru%%les in the 0(in Cities, 200C92010+ Industrial :ecline and the 3e(
Productive @andscapes of Capitalis&+/ St. Paul, 2010
WWWWWWWWW. ,So&e Re&ar"s on the Role of the Wor"in% Class in $istory/ in The Crisis in
Societ% and Nature and the "or!ing Class in Histor%+ St. Paul, 200792010
WWWWWWWWW. ,0he Wor"in% Class, World Capitalis& and Crisis+ * ?eneral Perspective/ in The
Crisis in Societ% and Nature and the "or!ing Class in Histor%. St. Paul, 200792010
WWWWWWWWW. ,State Capitalis&. 0heses./ Rnpulished, *pril 2007
WWWWWWWWW. ,0he 3e( ;aces of @aor and Capital in the *&erican South./ 6anuscript, *pril9
8une 200G
WWWWWWWWW. ,0(o Poles of Proletarian *ctivity in World Capitalis&./ 6anuscript, :ec 200O9
8anuary 200G
WWWWWWWWW. Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ in the 2poch of ,$perialist "orld "ar and 4roletarian
Revolution+ Hrgeschichte+ St. Paul, 2000
WWWWWWWWW. Civil "ar and Revolution in 7$erica+ St. Paul, 1777
Belfra%e, Cecil. Seeds of Destruction. The Truth a&out the HS 1ccupation of 8er$an%+ 3e(
-or", 17C#
BrouU, Pierre. The 8er$an Revolution, *T*S-*T'B+ Chica%o, 200C 417G15
Ca&eron, Rondo. )rance and the 2cono$ic Develop$ent of 2urope, *C((-*T*D+ Princeton
4385, 17O1
Ciriacono, Salvatore. ,6ass Consu&ption ?oods and @u'ury ?oods+ 0he :e9
Industriali=ation of the Repulic of !enice fro& the Si'teenth to the Ei%hteenth
Century/ in $er&an !an der Wee 4ed.5, The Rise and Decline of Hr&an
,ndustries in ,tal% and the 3o Countries+ @euven, 17FF
Cu&in%s, Bruce. 1rigins of the :orean "ar+ Lol+ ,: 3i&eration and the 2$ergence of Separate
Regi$es, *TDA-*TDS+ Princeton, 17F1
Chandler, 8r., *lfred. The Lisi&le Hand: The Managerial Revolution in 7$erican Business+
Ca&rid%e 46*5, 17GG
:es&ond, *drian and 8a&es 6oore. Darin: The 3ife of a Tor$ented 2volutionist+ 3e(
-or", 1771
;ord, $enry. M% 3ife and "or!+ @ondon, 1722
?oldner, @oren. ,0he Lorean Wor"in% Class+ ;ro& 6ass Stri"e to Casuali=ation and Retreat,
17FG9200G,/ 200G. *ccessed online at the authorIs (esite Brea! Their Haught%
4oer
?uilden, ?re%ory. "hat.s a 4easant To DoK Lillage Beco$ing Ton in Southern China+
Boulder 4C>5, 2001
$aerstra&, :avid. The Rec!oning+ 3e( -or", 17FO
$ead, Si&on. The Ne Ruthless 2cono$%: "or! and 4oer in the Digital 7ge+ >'ford 4En%.5,
200D
$inton, 8a&es. The )irst Shop Steards Move$ent+ @ondon, 17GD
$osa(&, Eric. The 7ge of Capital, 1F#F91FGC. 3e( -or", 177O
LosX", Larel. Diale!ti! des :on!reten+ 2ine Studie /ur 4ro&le$ati! des Menschen und der
"elt+ ;ran"furt a& 6ain, 17G1 4C=ech ori%inal, 17OD5
6ar', Larl. :apital+ 2ine :riti! der 4oliltischen 1!ono$ie+ Dritte Band, Buch ,,,: Der
8esa$$tpro/ess der !apitalistischen 4rodu!tion+ $eraus%e%een von
;riedrich En%els. $a&ur%, 1F7#
WWWWWWWW. MResultate des un&ittelaren Produ"tionspro=esses, Das :apital+ ,+ Buch+ Der
4rodu!tionspro/ess des :apitals+ L,+ :apitel+ ;ran"furt, 17O7. *ccessed online at
(((.&ar'archive.or% 4*rchiv so=ialistischer5
WWWWWWWW. E!ono$ische Manus!ripte, *CASU*CQC+ Marx-2ngels "er!e, Bd+ D'+ Berlin 4::R5,
17FD
6oore, 8r., Barrin%ton. Social 1rigins of Dictatorship and De$ocrac%+ 3ord and 4easant in
the Ma!ing of the Modern "orld. Boston, 17OO.
Searoo", 8ere&y. ,n the Cities of the South: Scenes fro$ a Developing "orld+ @ondon,
177O
Strictland, 8ohn Scott. 3o 6ore 6ud Wor"I+ 0he Stru%%le for the Control of @aor and
Production in @o( Country South Carolina, 1FOD91FF0,/ in Walter 8. ;raser, 8r.,
and Winfred B. 6oore, 8r., The South 2nig$a: 2ssa%s on Race, Class, and )ol!
Culture. Westport 4C05, 17FD
0aylor, ;rederic". The 4rinciples of Scientific Manage$ent 417115 in the collection entitled
Scientific Manage$ent+ 3e( -or", 17#G
0ho&pson, E.P. The Ma!ing of the 2nglish "or!ing Class+ 3e( -or", 17OO
Wo&ac", 8a&es, :aniel 8ones and :aniel Ross, The Machine that Changed the "orld+ 3e(
-or", 1770
World Ban", "orld Develop$ent Report *TTA: "or!ers in an ,ntegrating "orld+ 3e( -or",
177C
$ourth Study
Critique of Scientific Reason
The Theori-ation 'pogee of Science for Capital: .arl opper,
the hilosopher as $unctionary of Capital
Larl Popper.s The 3ogic of Scientific Discover% is perhaps the &a1or (or" in philosophy in the
short t(entieth century as it relates to the &odern sciences of nature.
1
It is e&raced, often
enthusiastically, y nearly all scientists (ho %ive the&selves over to e'plicit considerations of
the theoretical analysis of their specific fields and studies.
2
0his has een for %ood reason+
In the &anner of Lant (ho, ta"in% 3e(tonian physics si&ply as %iven, atte&pted to provide it
(ith philosophical foundations, Popper ta"es, delierately and fully consciously has atte&pted
to do for the ,ne( physics/ startin% fro& and pri&arily understood as relativist theory (hat
Lant did for 3e(tonian &echanics.
In so doin%, he has elaorated see&in%ly coherent episte&olo%ical and &ethodolo%ical
positions (ith re%ard to &odern science as a (hole. While this is no &ean feat, it has co&e
(ith a rather ,e'pensive price,/ that is, Popper slavishly ta"es the &ethods of the physicists
startin% (ith Einstein 4e'cludin% )uantu& &echanics (hich, li"e Einstein, %reatly troules hi&5
at his point of departure and his point of arrival< $e is entirely and consistently uncritical 4if
he is even a(are5 of the relation of science to capitalis&, of the societal pro1ect that science
as a utilitarian, instru&ental for& of "no(led%e pursues in relation to its o1ect, nature< 0his
leads hi& to an al&ost entirely &ethodolo%ical e&phasis, and it certainly has its aporias and
contradictions. 6ost i&portantly, asent a(areness, sophistication and in co&pressed fashion
he ironically recapitulates the tra1ectory startin% fro& Lant... a tra1ectory (hose cul&ination is
an i&passe, one that is un9e'plicated, suppressed and entirely hidden... that characteri=ed the
develop&ent of philosophy on the continent and (hich is su&&arily descried as the
antino&ies of our%eois thou%ht 4@u"acs5. $is co&&it&ents to critical reflection and
rationalis& not(ithstandin%, his atte&pts to e'plicitly conceptuali=e and syste&ati=e the
operative activities of physicists not only (holly uncritically suordinate the&selves to
scientists. practices, ut at a crucial point leads hi& to accept, then theori=e, e'peri&ental
&anipulation of results that confor& to the precate%orial lo%ic of science, its concealed
orientation to the telos of nature do&ination yo"ed to unendin% e'pansion of productive
forces.
D
$e affir&s this entire orientation and develop&ent in his political reflection on the
separate sphere of society 4(hose artificial separation fro& nature he (ill &ethodolo%ically, of
course, assert should e reunified5. In this re%ard, it is the class science of the our%eoisie in
its conte&porary transfor&ation, i.e., the science of capital, that is actually affir&ed and little, if
anythin% else.
1
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover% 420025.
0he first En%lish lan%ua%e edition (as pulished in 17C7. While a handful of notes have een appended 4lar%ely in
17G25 and this edition has under%one four reprints et(een this 17C7 and 2002, that portion (hich appeared as the
first En%lish lan%ua%e edition has not een edited or chan%ed. 0his te't (as ased upon the ori%inal ?er&an
lan%ua%e pulication of 17D# entitled Der 3ogi! die )orschung+ In translation, the te't of the ?er&an lan%ua%e
ori%inal itself under(ent no revisions, thou%h si%nificantly Popper added t(enty9t(o appendices 4as (ell as copious
clarificatory te'tual footnotes5, all elaorations, that, runnin% to rou%hly 1FC pa%es, a&ount to 2aD the len%th of the
ori%inal te't.
2
0his is apparent in very disparate fields of study, for e'a&ple, E.>. Wilson.s Socio&iolog%, 2G9D1 4(here, in a
&anifestly Popperian vein, he defends ,real/ theory as ,postulational9deductive/5 and 8a&es Lirchner.s criti)ue of
cli&ate chan%e science, ,0he ?aia $ypothesis+ *re 0hey 0estale2 *re 0hey Rseful2/ (hich is a strai%htfor(ard,
crude and rather adly understood re%ur%itation of Popper.
D
See this Study, Part III, ,:ecisionis&,/ elo(.
0his, of course, re&ains to e sho(n. We shall e%in (ith the philosophical conte't into
Popper consciously in1ected hi&self and (hich shaped his understandin% and %rasp of theory
and science.
Part I
0he Wei%ht of 0raditions
3ogical 4ositivis$ 0the Lienna Circle5, 3anguage 7nal%sis 0"ittgenstein5 and 4opper.s
Critique
0he lo%ical positivis& developed y the !ienna Circle, a %roup consistin% lar%ely ut not
e'clusively of philosophers 4it also included at least one theoretical physicist, a &athe&atician
and a theorist of social sciences a&on% others5, (as inau%urated in the first full decade (hich
follo(ed upon openin% of capitalIs %eneral crisis 4the first i&perialist (orld (ar5, the early
t(enties of the chronolo%ical t(entieth century. Its prehistory dates fro& the years i&&ediately
precedin% that (ar at (hich ti&e one of its central the&es, the eli&ination of &etaphysics
fro& science, (as already estalished.
1
>r%ani=ed y 6orris Schlic" 4chair of philosophy of the inductive sciences at the Rniversity of
!ienna5, a re%ular series of &eetin%s e%an ane( 4estalishin% the %roup y reputation5 in
1722. 0he Circle included such lu&inaries as Phillip ;ran" 4physicist5, >tto 3eurath 4political
econo&ist5, $ans $ahn 4&athe&atician5, Rudolf Carnap 4philosopher5 and, of course, Schlic"
a&on% its older %eneration. Be%innin% in the late t(enties the !ienna Circle held a nu&er of
con%resses 4annually et(een 17D# and 17DG5, issued an outpourin% of pulications, &ostly
&ono%raphs, and fro& 17D0 also pulished a theoretical 1ournal, 2r!enntnis 0Cognition5+ 0he
Circle (as disanded y the 3a=is (hen they ca&e to po(er 417D#5 in *ustria, ut the 1ournal
and &ono%raphs continued to e pulished in e'ile in Britain and the Rnited States.
2
0hou%h
the e'ile of &any of the Circle.s &e&ers %reatly reinforced the trans&ission of this
philosophical develop&ent to the *n%lo9*&erican (orld, lo%ical positivis& as a theoretical
tendency had already ta"en root in oth the R.S. and Britain efore 17D0, a nu&er of years
prior to the per&anent transfor&ation of e'iles into U&i%rUs. In oth nations 4(here theoretical
reflection on o1ectified products of hu&an activity, *solute Spirit in the $e%elian sense, and
the place and role of hu&an e'istence in the (orld, is unhin%ed, (ithout real center, y the
depth penetration of that e'istence y the value for&5, to this day it is, alon% (ith its close "in
ordinary lan%ua%e analysis, the do&inant &ode of philosophical reflection and has een for
three )uarters of a century. 0his should not e surprisin% since the previous ho&e%ro(n
theori=ations of science 4utilitarianis& in Britain and pra%&atis& in the Rnited States5 lac"ed
the theoretical po(er and s(eep of lo%ical positivis& 4not to &ention that even (ithin these
,native/ tendencies philosophy solely as a reflection on science had already syste&atically
appeared, e.%., in the (or" of Charles Pierce in the Rnited States5, and since these societies
are precisely those in (hich capital itself had under%one its &ost e'tensive develop&ent, in
other (ords, are societies (herein science is &ost at ho&e.
@o%ical positivis& stands at the center of several, post9$e%elian currents in science and the
philosophy of science, aove all Ernst 6ach.s positivist philosophy of science ut also the
philosophies of sciences developed in ;rance y $enri PoincarU and Pierre :uhe&, and
studies in lo%ic that appeared especially in ?er&any as (ell. In this re%ard, it should e noted
that @ud(i% Witt%enstein.s 3ogisch-4hilosophische 7&handlung, appearin% in the ?er&an
lan%ua%e ori%inal in 1721 4and in En%lish under the title Tractatus 3ogico-4hilosophicus a year
later5, (as a central docu&ent for discussions or%ani=ed (ithin the Circle.
D
In 1727, the !ienna Circle pulished a &anifesto (hich for&ulated a %eneral perspective
articulatin% the central the&es around theori=ation and reflection on the nature of science.
1
So&e of the &aterials for this discussion is ased on 6auro 6ur=i, ,!ienna Circle./
2
Schlic" re&ained in *ustria and (as &urdered in 17DO y a 3a=i student.
D
0his history is actually traced out in so&e detail in the Circle.s &anifesto 4see (hat i&&ediately follo(s in the te't5,
reprinted in Sahotra Sar"ar 4ed.5, The 2$ergence of 3ogical 2$piricis$, D219D#0, especially D2D9D2O.
Entitled ,0he Scientific Conception of the World+ 0he !ienna Circle,/ the authors of the
&anifesto conceive of the&selves as part of the ,spirit of enli%hten&ent and anti-$etaph%sical
factual research+/
1
0he &anifesto has t(o essential &o&ents, the first episte&olo%ical and the
second &ethodolo%ical. Episte&olo%ically, this conception is e&piricist and positivist,
assertin% the "no(led%e arises fro& e'perience 4thou%h, to e sure, ,e'perience/ is
conceptually laden (ith ato&is&, that is, is understood contradictoril% &ecause $etaph%sicall%
in ter&s of its ele&entary constituents, sense9data5. In this conception as for&ulated y the
!ienna Circle, "no(led%e that stands outside, and in this sense is eyond or %oes eyond,
e'perience is &etaphysical. 6ethodolo%ically, state&ents that are &ade as clai&s to valid
"no(led%e are to e clarified 4rendered intelli%ile or declared &eanin%less5 y (ay of
analysis that relies heavily on sy&olic lo%ic.
*lready hinted at, analysis of this sort 4lo%ical analysis5
2
indicates there are t(o distinct for&s
of state&ents... and it should e noted for lo%ical positivists, and Popper li"e the&, %enuine
"no(led%e is al(ays e'pressed in state&ents and thus is aout (ords and their &eanin%, and
not, for e'a&ple, so&ethin% that is intuitively %iven and understand solely in this &anner...
0he first for&, if fully clarified (ill ,reduce/ to state&ents to a asic level, to si&ple state&ents
that directly refer ac" to e'perience or, containin% lo%ical &ista"es, &ay e ale to e
refor&ulated and su1ect to scientific investi%ation. 0he second for& of state&ent cannot e
dissolved into si&ple state&ents and is thus &eanin%less. 6any, &any philosophical
prole&s are ased on lo%ical &ista"es and can e reinterpretedE &etaphysics thou%h, it %oes
(ithout say, is constituted y state&ents of the second type. It addresses ,pseudo/
prole&s
D
... a point aout (hich Popper, (hile not acceptin% &etaphysical state&ents as
scientific, (ill differ.
0he foundations of "no(led%e in e'perience &eans that lo%ical positivists do not accept
LantIs concept of synthetic a priori 1ud%&ents 4state&ents5, that is "no(led%e that is achieved
prior to all e'perienceE instead, state&ents of this for& are understood as analytic or
tautolo%ical, i.e., self9referential e'plication of conceptual content.
#
;or the lo%ical positivists,
%enuine 4that is, scientific5 "no(led%e is synthetic a posteriori. @o%ical and &athe&atics are
no e'ception, thou%h they are a priori analytic state&ents+ 0he ,notion that thin!ing can either
lead to "no(led%e out of its o(n resources (ithout usin% any e&pirical &aterial/ is si&ply
&ista"en.
C
0hus, (ithin the !ienna Circle scientific and &athe&atical 4and lo%ical5 state&ents,
one synthetic and, (hen fully ,reduced,/ related directly to e'perience, the other analytic and
developed y thou%ht or reason alone, are the only t(o for&s of authentic or valid "no(led%e.
It is in this re%ard, the Circle considers itself characteristically e&pirical and positivistic.
O
3ot the only, ut a perennial source of &etaphysics to the e'tent it rests on lo%ical error is
a&i%uity... e)uivocation, co&pression or elision of &eanin%... in the everyday use of
,ordinary/ 4i.e., socio9historically or culturally specific5 lan%ua%e.
G
In this re%ard, the scientific
1
,0he Scientific Conception of the World,/ DDD.
:edicated to 6orris Schlic", the docu&ent (as authored y $ans $ahn, >tto 3eurath and Rudolf Carnap. ,Iid,/ D22.
2
*nalysis of this sort is Nthe $ethod of logical anal%sis+> Iid,/ D2F, also DD1. E&phasis in ori%inal.
Interestin%ly, entirely unli"e Popper, (ith a vie( to the re1ection of ,&etaphysical philosophy/ the docu&ent 4the
&anifesto5 sees ,;reudian psychoanalysis/ as a pro&isin% develop&ent in the specific field of psycholo%y. ,Iid,/ D27.
4;or Popper, e.%., ,Science+ Con1ectures and Refutations/ in Con9ectures and Refutations, ##9#C.5
D
,Iid,/ D2F.
#
,Iid,/ DD0.
C
,Iid./ E&phasis in ori%inal.
O
,Iid,/ DD1.
G
K>rdinary lan%ua%e for instance uses the sa&e part of speech, the sustantive, for thin%s 4IappleI5 as (ell as for
)ualities 4IhardnessI5, relations 4IfriendshipI5, and processes 4IsleepI5E therefore it &isleads one into a thin%9li"e
conception of functional concepts./ ,Iid,/ D27. 0his reification is not, ho(ever, intrinsic to speech in all its social and
historical for&sE it is, thou%h, characteristic of die ver!ehrte "elt des :apital+
conception articulated y the !ienna Circle ai&ed at the elaoration, or &ore to the point at
construction, of a ,constitutive syste&,/ a pro1ect that (ould connect scientists, or their
achieve&ents, in different and varied fields, a syste& of state&ents ,reduced/ to concepts
presu&aly represented y (ords that ulti&ately refer ac" to contents %iven in i&&ediate
e'perience. 0he syste& (ould itself e developed on the asis of a universal, neutral
sy&olic lan%ua%e< ,a sy&olis& freed fro& the sla% of historical lan%ua%es/
1
< (hich, of
course, (ould e defined y its clarity and transparency. 0his syste& (as su&&ari=ed in a
research pro%ra& that ai&ed at develop&ent of a unified science,
2
and esche(s philosophy
as a distinctive reflective activity underpinnin% science or as a ,asic or universe science/
D
...
Such a pro%ra& is i&possile since it presupposes the asence of novelty in e'perience that
e&er%es and for&s... (hen it e&er%es... in hu&an interactions in society and upsur%es in
nature, novelty the e'perience of (hich can only e co&prehended and e'plained (ith ne(
concepts... But, accordin% to the &anifesto, lo%ical error is not the only, or even, pri&ary
source of &etaphysics.
It, &etaphysics and certainly theolo%y as (ell, is a theoretical for& of ,social and econo&ic/
stru%%le. It is ine'tricaly lin"ed (ith reactionary social strata... thou%h the &anifesto (hile
intendin% only va%uely su%%ests this... and thus the fi%ht a%ainst &etaphysics is at the sa&e
ti&e a political stru%%le a%ainst anti9&odern, and y i&plication anti9scientific, social and
econo&ic for&s and forces.
#
0he sense of the !ienna CircleIs )uest for a neutral sy&olic lan%ua%e entails a sharp rea"
et(een ,ordinary/ lan%ua%e and science, or in PopperIs ter&s, et(een co&&on sensical
and scientific for&s of "no(led%e. 0his is a position (hich Popper, in assertin% their continuity,
does not accept. $e, ho(ever, a%rees and ta"es over fro& the lo%ical positivists the ri%orous
e&phasis on episte&olo%y and &ethodolo%y, and, further&ore, critici=es the Circle... for its
lac" of ri%or. *nd, as (e shall see, it is precisely the &ethodolo%y and lo%ic that he finds...
i$pliciter< in the activity of science that he (ould ,apply/ in fra&in% his politics. But if the
lo%ical positivists affir&ed $odern science in a stru%%le a%ainst the &ost atavistic forces
ithin capitalis&, Popper defends a li&eralis$ that has defeated those forces and (hose
stru%%le, ostensily a%ainst the totalitarian pole of the sa&e %loal capitalist develop&ent,
provides cover for the anti9lieral and anti9individual despotis& of capital.
0he intellectual &ilieu estalished and cultivated y the !ienna Circle for&ed oth the
touchstone and fra&e(or" of PopperIs thou%ht... the very theoretical traditions in (hich he
(as i&&ediately %rounded... It is, in other (ords, this &ilieu that provided the conceptual
&ediations he at once e&ploys and criti)ues. But efore (e can see (here this leads, (e are
oli%ed to proceed y recountin% the position he develops.
1
,Iid,/ D2F.
2
,Iid./
D
,Iid,/ DDF.
#
,Iid,/ DD7.
Part II
Popper.s Concept of Science
4ri$ac% of 2piste$olog% and Method
7la%s (ith a vie( to its history 4ut rarely e'plicitly statin% such5, so&eti&es (ith a vie( to
physicists. practice, Popper ai&s at a conceptual deter&ination of science, one that
distin%uishes it fro& other for&s of "no(led%e 4&etaphysics, for&s of co&&on sense5 oth
&ethodolo%ically and in ter&s of its product, na&ely, %enuine "no(led%e.
1
In this re%ard, Popper holds that the tas" of philosophy is the analysis of the procedure of the
e&pirical sciences as he calls the&, in other (ords, to %ive a lo%ical analysis of their &ethod.
2
$is use of lo%ic is ri%orous or, as (e shall see, it is ri%orous in his criticis& of those to (ho&
he pri&arily distin%uishes hi&self 4the lo%ical positivists of the !ienna Circle5, ut fast and
loose in confrontin% prole&s en%endered y his analysis of the procedure of the sciences, in
particular, that of the ne( physics.
Popper conceives of this tas" as episte&olo%ical. Its outco&e is the elucidation of the specific
contours of scientific procedure, that is, the product of this episte&olo%ical laor is
deter&ination of the $ethod of e&pirical sciences. In order to clarify our criti)ue, (e shall offer
so&e preli&inary re&ar"s re%ardin% oth episte&olo%y and &ethod in Popper.
Episte&olo%y is at once traditionally and %enerally understood as the philosophical study of
the nature and the %rounds of "no(led%e, in)uiry that necessarily also involves an account of
the (ay or (ays in (hich (e "no( (hat (e 4are ale to5 "no(< In contradistinction to
PopperIs vie(, this perspective 4of episte&olo%y5 conceals unavoidale assu&ptions
concernin% the nature of hu&anity and our place in the (orld, (hich (e shall riefly e'plore in
a concludin% section to our criti)ue of his scientific episte&olo%y elo(...
Within the confines of his tas", Popper ad&iraly provides an analysis of the nature of
"no(led%e as scientific "no(led%eE and (hile (e &ay dispute his clai& that scientific, and
only scientific, "no(led%e is %enuine "no(led%e, his ar%u&ent on ehalf of this position is
forceful and co&&ands respect 4(hich, as (e shall also see, does not &ean it is coherent5. In
this re%ard, he li&its (hat can e "no(n 4(hich accordin% to hi& ta"es the for& of
state&ents5 to that (hich can (ithstand the &ost severely devised falsifyin% tests. 0he latter
provides, for hi&, the criterion 4falsification on the asis of testin%5 for distin%uishin% science
4"no(led%e5 fro& &etaphysics 4a for& of "no(in% that is not falsifiale and cannot e tested,
(hich, in e'a&inin% underlyin% assu&ptions or tacit presuppositions (ith a vie( to the %rand
prole&s of "no(led%e and philosophy< (ith a vie( to cos&olo%ical issues< so&eti&es
leads to fruitful theories or hypotheses and so&eti&es is &eanin%less5, as (ell as the criterion
for distin%uishin% science fro& co&&on sense. 0his is i&portant for, as (e shall a%ain see,
Popper, &ista"enly, elieves scientific "no(led%e is continuous (ith co&&on sense contents
4or "no(led%e5.
0he %rounds of "no(led%e, or as Popper understands it the ori%ins and for&ation of the
conceptual content of synthetic state&ents, is anished fro& his episte&olo%ical study. $e
does this (ith a slei%ht of the hand, y desi%natin% any and all &ethodolo%ical paths, )ueries,
1
In fact, Popper does reco%ni=e various for&s of "no(led%e< a&on% (hich, he specifies their sources in inspiration,
sy&pathetic understandin% and tradition< ut none of these sources, unli"e e&pirical science, can e lo%ically
validated. ;or those so specified, see Realis$ and the 7i$ of Science, 2F.
0his (or" is the first of one of three volu&es that &a"e up the 4ostscript to The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%+ 40he
other t(o are The 1pen Hniverse: 7n 7rgu$ent for ,ndeter$inis$ and Ouantu$ Theor% and the Schis$ in 4h%sics+5
>ri%inally (ritten in the period 17C1917CO as (hat retrospectively could le%iti&ately e called a draft, the 4ostscript
4all rou%hly F00 pa%es of it5 (as intended as a se)uel. *s Popper.s editor 4W.W. Bartley5 e'plains 4Realis$? 'i9'ii5,
e'tensive corrections in the %alley proofs and sur%ery to Popper.s eyes delayed pulication. ;inally, pressure
e&anatin% fro& other (or" and co&&it&ents led to a still lon%er delay in pulication 417FD5 of a (or" that (as
essentially co&pleted in 17O2.
2
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, D.
)uestions, prole&s and difficulties, or directions that are oriented to the e'periential ori%ins of
"no(led%e as ,psycholo%istic./ In particular, any account that see"s to uncover the %enesis of
concepts or entails an in)uiry into the for&ation of ideas is ,psycholo%is&,/ perhaps a fittin%
topic for the e&pirical science of psycholo%y, ut entirely unfit for episte&olo%ical analysis.
0he aandon&ent of in)uiry into the %rounds of "no(led%e per&its Popper to avoid, re&ain
olivious to, the lo%ical contradictions, aporias and other(ise insur&ountale difficulties that
philosophy as he understands it entails. We shall not, ho(ever, allo( hi& to escape<
Since, accordin% to Popper, scientific "no(in% %enerates %enuine "no(led%e 4i.e., tested
state&ents that (ithstand falsification5, it is the scientific &ethod that can in principle e
,applied/ to any prole& that e&er%es in the course of daily life 4(hether said prole& can e
&eanin%fully resolved is another )uestion5. 0his is not, in fact, ho( Popper hi&self proceeded,
e.%., (hen in 17CD re)uested to %ive a lecture on the ,develop&ent and trends in
conte&porary British philosophy,/
1
(here, instead, he recounted the %enesis, for&ation and
develop&ent of those philosophical prole&s that preoccupied hi& durin% the course of his
life. 0he develop&ent, as he readily ad&itted
2
and (hich accordin% characteri=ed the entire
te&poral span of lifelon% studies, did not unfold in a strai%ht line &anner, as a pro%ressive
elaoration of the central prole&atic in his life.s (or"< (hich (e (ould identify as the
analysis he a%ain and a%ain returns to, the t(o funda&ental prole&s of episte&olo%y, the
t(in prole&s of induction and de&arcation< ut (as uneven, (ith partial confusions that
aounded and insi%hts that developed independently of testin%, and it (as &ar"ed y
setac"s as (ell as strides for(ard, &any occurrin% early in his life as a philosopher, so&e he
had felt co&pelled to return to over and a%ain. *nd (hile, once discovered or ,decided/ upon,
,application/ of the scientific &ethod 4as he reco%ni=ed it5 &ay have characteri=ed the &anner
in (hich Popper pursued a specific prole& durin% his lifeti&e, it does not ade)uately reveal
the lo%ic or structure of the &ethod of his (or"< it ears little rese&lance to his clai&s for
&ethod< over the course of that lifeti&e. In other (ords, all theori=ation presupposes a
distinction< one operative in Popper.s (or" over his lifeti&e< et(een the &ethod of
investi%ation< (hich is neither cu&ulative nor pro%ressive, ut unfolds dialectically in the
&anner in (hich (e, in reference to hi&, have 1ust descried< and that of presentation,
(hich is syste&atic, 4ou%ht to e5 coherent, and co&plete 4in the sense resolution, even if in
principle tentative, to e prole&s set for(ard at the outset are achieved at the end5. While (e
differ %reatly fro& Popper,
D
in the for&al sense this is as true of Popper as it is of us.
Science and Metaph%sics
0entatively, (e can say that, for Popper, science is a theori=ation that has the for& of an
a'io&atic syste&E that this syste& &ust e capale of %eneratin% state&ents in the for& of
deductions that can e falsified, and that are validated only in this sense 4i.e., such state&ents
are never eyond the reach of falsification, are never validated once and for all5E and that
falsification is achieved throu%h the &ost severe testin% (hich, in turn, is ased on
oservation of carefully controlled conditions, of e'peri&ent. Counterposed to e&pirical
science, &etaphysics, it (ould e fair to say also tendin% to(ard syste&, consists in
state&ents that are not and cannot in principle e tested or falsified.
Popper critically esche(s all vul%ar concepts of the relation of science to &etaphysics,
especially that of the lo%ical positivists 4and, thou%h, he never says it that of the crudely
scientific, crude in this specific sense of a self9&isunderstandin%5 for (hich &etaphysics is
constituted y &eanin%less state&ents 4or, in so&e popular scientific versions, is si&ply
1
,Science+ Con1ectures and Refutations,/ reprinted in Con9ectures and Refutations, #D.
2
,Iid,/ passi&.
D
See this Study, the concludin% section of Part III, ,0he 6aterial :ialectic,/ elo(.
eyond science as non9falsifiale, and thou%h perhaps personally intelli%ile, &erely a &atter
of aritrary preference5, (hile science provides us (ith a reliale source of %enuine
"no(led%e.
0here are t(o reasons (hy Popper esche(s the co&&on, if crude concept of the relation of
science to &etaphysics. 4We shall e'pand on these reasons in the follo(in% section.5
0he first is e'plicit+ 6etaphysical theories can e productive in the develop&ent< not (ishin%
to have anythin% to do (ith dialectical, specifically $e%elian and 6ar'ist concepts, Popper
says ,%ro(th/< of scientific "no(led%e+
1
It ,cannot e denied that alon% (ith &etaphysical
ideas that have ostructed the advance of science there have een others N speculative
ato&is& N (hich have aided it./
2
6oreover, contrary to assertions &ade y ordinary lan%ua%e
analysts and lo%ical positivists concernin% the &eanin%lessness of &etaphysics, not only are
so&e &etaphysical doctrines intelli%ile 4i.e., &eanin%ful5 in the sense that they can e
rationally ar%ued, ut so&e are su1ect to criticis& fro& the perspective of science.
D
0he second reason is tacit. It concerns the penetration of ,fact/ y theory, or the reali=ation
that oservation and e&pirical description are never free of conceptual deter&ination as the
for&er is al(ays shaped in advance y the latter. If it is the case that, ,0here is no sharp
dividin% line et(een an Te&pirical lan%ua%e. and a Ttheoretical lan%ua%e.+ We are theori=in%
all the ti&e, even (hen (e &a"e the &ost trivial sin%ular state&ents,/
#
then in principle it is
possile that &etaphysical concepts e&edded in theoretical state&ents &ay enter into our
,e&pirical lan%ua%e./ Popper never offers this as a reason for refusin%, e.%., Witt%enstein.s
and !ienna Circle.s, assess&ents of &etaphysics in ter&s of &eanin%lessness, ut it is tacit,
as (e said, in his deter&ination of the relation of theory and ,fact./ *nd it &ust re&ain tacit+
;or Popper to ac"no(led%e the relation et(een this deter&ination 4of the relation of theory to
,fact/5 and his assess&ent of &etaphysics (ould re)uire that he pursue the deter&ination
eyond a si&ple state&ent of the relation. It (ould lead hi& do(n a path that (ould e'plode
his entire theoretical edifice fro& (ithin. We shall return to this<
C
*t this point, the )uestion that oviously arises is specifically, that is, &ethodolo%ically, (here
and ho( do (e dra( the line et(een science and &etaphysics2 0his leads to the prole& of
de&arcation y (ay of the criti)ue of induction.
To 4ro&le$s of a Theor% of :noledge: De$arcation and ,nduction
Popper refers to the )uestion of (here (e dra( the line et(een science and &etaphysics as
the prole& of de&arcation 4and, (e note, that in a purely for&al sense he correctly puts lo%ic
and &athe&atics, producin% only analytic state&ents, to the sa&e side as &etaphysics5.
O
It
has only een (ith the e&er%ence of the &odern science of nature 4at any rate, ti%htly
intert(ined (ith and really only retrospectively distin%uishale fro& Continental rationalist and
British e&piricist philosophies5 that )uestions of de&arcation eca&e a prole& and
prole&atic< Recall the ar%u&ent set forth in the Introduction aove,
G
na&ely, that the
&odern science of nature (as created in a stru%%le of the e&er%in% our%eoisie a%ainst the
old order, a%ainst sei%niorial relations in a%ricultural production, a%ainst %uild restrictions in
1
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, 1C91O, 11O 4e'a&ple of Lepler5, D1C9D1O.
2
,&id, 1O.
D
,&id, 177 n. r2.
Popper, or his pulisher, uses a peculiar convention for distin%uishin% footnotes added for the 17C7 En%lish lan%ua%e
pulication, and there are &any, fro& those that elon% to the ori%inal ?er&an edition+ *n asteris" 4r5 is placed in
front of each of the 17C7 edition footnotes.
#
,&id, ##D. E&phasis in ori%inal.
C
See this Study, Part III, ,*stract :ialectic of Concepts,/ elo(.
O
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, 11E ,0he :e&arcation et(een Science and 6etaphysics/ in Con9ectures and
Refutations, D##.
G
See the Introduction, ,Science and the Bour%eoisie,/ aove.
craft production, a%ainst controlled local &ar"ets (ith their notions of a ,fair price,/ a%ainst
usury la(s, a%ainst the dyadic he%e&ony of Church and lord, and, a&ove all, against
$edieval 7ristotelian natural philosoph% dee&ed non9scientific 4(hat later %enerations (ould
call ,&etaphysical/5 in a stru%%le that %enerated the insi%ht that the creation of a ne social
order had to &e theoreticall% $ediated in a ne a%, i+e+, scientificall%? In the &odern,
our%eois traditions of philosophy the prole& of de&arcation has een solved pri&arily y
inductive procedures. Popper.s position is different. $e states, that he re1ects inductive lo%ic
and his &ain reason for so doin% is ,that it does not provide a suita&le distinguishing $ar! of
the e&pirical, non9&etaphysical, character of a theoretical syste&E or in other (ords, it does
not provide a suita&le ccriterion of de$arcation+./
1
0here are really t(o prole&s here, for not only do inductive procedures inade)uately dra(
the line, the line 4of de&arcation5 itself cannot, accordin% to Popper, e sharply dra(n.
Consider the latter first.
Whether (e start fro& the position of Popper.s erst(hile opponents as he understands the
issue,
2
that is, fro& the sense 4&eanin%fulness5 or nonsense 4&eanin%lessness5 of asic
state&ents as the criterion of de&arcation, or (ith Popper (e start fro& testaility 4falsifiaility
or refutaility5 of theories or hypotheses, in either case (e run up a%ainst all of the follo(in%
situations that lur this line. ;irst, Popper tells us that any nu&er of &etaphysical theories
are &eanin%ful, and can, &oreover, e critically en%a%ed.
D
Second, &any scientific theories
e%an as &yths. Popper cites the case of Copernican syste& in its relation 4one of inspiration5
to a neo9Platonic (orship of the li%ht of the sun.
#
0hird, so&e theories are for&ulated at such
a hi%h de%ree of universality that they operate eyond the level of testaility of the day and
devolve into a &etaphysical syste&.
C
$ere ato&is& (ould e a case in point, as (ould the
corpuscular theory of li%ht as (ell as the fluid theory of electricity.
O
;ourth, in a related (ay
so&e theories that (ere once considered scientific as a &atter of consensus later have
eco&e increasin%ly &etaphysical. Popper cites the case of 6ach.s positivis& and
pheno&enalis&, especially in re%ard to the &olecular e'planation 4Bolt=&ann5 of the second
la( of ther&odyna&ics
G
< Even as he is alive to these situations, it escapes Popper (hy they
arise. 4It is %rounded in the &utual penetration of ,fact/ and ,theory,/ evidence and its
conceptuali=ation, e&pirical description and interpretation, of (hich Popper is co%ni=ant5<
F
So if the line of de&arcation cannot e sharply dra(n and Popper arrives at its criterion
throu%h the criticis& of the lo%ical positivists. concept of &eanin%fulness ased on inductive
inference, (e are re)uired to consider induction.
1
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, 7. E&phases in the ori%inalE also ,0he :e&arcation et(een Science and
6etaphysics/ in Con9ectures and Refutations, D#2.
2
We are co&pelled to phrase the &atter in this (ay ecause on Popper.s o(n testi&ony Carnap, in particular, thou%ht
the differences et(een he, Popper, and the !ienna Circle (ere e'a%%erated, especially those differences that
pertain to the issue at hand, the criterion of de&arcation. Popper held other(ise. ,Iid,/ D#D.
D
,Iid,/ D#1.
#
See the second part 4,0he Prole& of the Irrefutaility of Philosophical 0heories/5 of ,>n the Status of Science and
of 6etaphysic/ in Con9ectures and Refutations, 2O192G1, esp. 2OG92O7.
C
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, 2GG.
In this re%ard, Popper indicates that he later ca&e to the reali=ation that there are ,de%rees of testaility,/ theories that
are (ell tested, hardly testale and non9testale. ,0he :e&arcation et(een Science and 6etaphysics/ in
Con9ectures in Refutations, D#O.
O
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, 2GG92GF.
G
Realis$ and the 7i$ of Science, 1O0. 6ach.s pheno&enalistic e'planation discarded all efforts to e'plain so9called
Bro(nian &ove&ent in ter&s of the structure of &atter 4i.e., the lo%ical difficulties involved (ith a ,physical entity,/ a
sustance called ,&atter./5. Einstein.s 170C (or" on the sa&e a&ounted to a ,crucial e'peri&ent/ that ,refuted/ the
pheno&enalist interpretation, renderin% the latter ,osolete+/ ,&id+
F
0a"en up (ith its ra&ifications in this Study, Part III, ,*stract :ialectic of Concepts,/ elo(.
Before (e enter into Popper.s criti)ue of induction, it ehooves us to specify (hat he &eans
y induction. $e %oes ac" to $u&e (ith (ho& the criti)ue ori%inated, and in these
philosophical traditions 4(herein (e also situate $u&e5 the deter&ination 4of induction5 is
fairly strai%htfor(ard+ Induction is a for& of inference, a type of passa%e fro& one for& of
proposition or state&ent to another in (hich (hat is asserted to e the case, to e valid or
true, in the first is conse)uently assu&ed to hold for the second. With induction, or inductive
inference, this passa%e is ,fro& singular state$ents 4so&eti&es also called Tparticular.
state&ents5, such as accounts of the results of oservations or e'peri&ents, to universal
state$ents, such as hypotheses or theories./
1
>r, a%ain, an inductive inference can e
counted as ,any reasonin% fro& sin%ular and oservale cases 4and their repeated
occurrence5 to anythin% li"e re%ularities or la(s./
2
3o( it is i&portant to note here that Popper is spea"in% aout state&ents, and (ith induction
aout state&ents re%ardin% 4the results of5 oservations or e'peri&ents understood as
,e'perience./ 4We shall return to this deter&ination of e'perience.5 $e is not spea"in% aout
e'perience itself, (hich is an approach that he re1ects. 46ore on this &o&entarily.5
So the prole& of induction e%ins (ith the )uestion, ho( do (e estalish the ,truth of
universal state&ents (hich are ased on e'perience, such as the hypotheses and the
theoretical syste&s of the e&pirical sciences2/
Restatin% the &eanin% of induction as indicated aove, Popper tell us, ,people (ho say of a
universal state&ent that (e "no( its truth fro& e'perience usually &ean that the truth of this
universal state&ent can so&eho( e reduced to the truth of sin%ular ones, and that these
sin%ular ones are "no(n y e'perience to e truthE (hich a&ount to sayin% that the universal
state&ent is ased on inductive inference. 0hus to as" (hether there are natural la(s "no(n
to e true appears to e only another (ay of as"in% (hether inductive inferences are lo%ically
1ustified./
D
0his entails estalishin% a principle of induction, a state&ent that (ill aid us in settin% inductive
inferences in a ,lo%ically acceptale for&,/
#
(hich &eans, pri&arily, that ,this principle of
induction cannot e a purely lo%ical truth li"e a tautolo%y or an analytic state&ent/ in (hich
case, there (ould e no prole& (ith induction. Rather, the principle &ust e synthetic, ,a
state&ent (hose ne%ation is not self9contradictory ut lo%ically possile./
C
0his a&ounts to adoption of the fra&e(or" of Lant+ In purely lo%ical ter&s, a synthetic
state&ent adds so&ethin% novel, so&ethin% that is not &erely %iven in the 4conceptual5
e'plication of the state&ent. Popper states the situation this (ay, ecause he refuses to
derive (hat is synthetic, here novel, fro& the 4ato&istically rendered5 senses, fro& e'perience
4narro(ly as perception5, fro& sense data, etc., re1ectin% this as psycholo%is&, the ,doctrine
that state&ents can e 1ustified not only y state&ents ut also y perceptual e'perience./
Q
In the lo%ical sense 4as opposed to the ,&erely/ psycholo%ical5, then, Popper has t(o asic
o1ections to inductive inference.
0he first is that in the strict sense it is un1ustified+ 3o &atter ho( &any e'a&ples of a ein%,
o1ect, event, process or relation that is such and such I can instantiate< no &atter ho(
&any (hite s(ans I have seen or (ill see, I shall never see all s(ans that past, present and
1
,&id, D9#.
2
Realis$ and the 7i$ of Science, D1.
D
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, #.
#
,&id+
C
,&id, C.
O
,&id, GC.
0hou%h our account here is, Popper.s ar%u&ent is not circular. We shall discuss the reason4s5 (hy he re1ects the
sensual derivation, not for all for&s or "inds of "no(led%e ut, of %enuine, i.e., scientific, "no(led%e in the follo(in%
section entitled ,Psycholo%is&./
future have ein%< I cannot account for all such ein%s, events, processes or relations, and
thus I cannot validate the conclusion that all such ein%s, events, processes or relations are
such and such< I cannot le%iti&i=e the conclusion that all s(ans are (hite.
1
0he inductive
inference is, accordin%ly, illicit.
0he second o1ection is that the principle of induction leads to lo%ical incoherency+
2
0his
principle, that (hich per&its us to estalish a lo%ically satisfactory for& for inductive inference,
&ust in its turn e not 1ust a state&ent, ut a universal one. $o(ever, if (e re%ard truth as
e'perientially %rounded, then the prole& that &ade introduction of inductive inference
necessary 4passa%e fro& a particular state&ent to a universal one5 (ill return (ith a
ven%eance+ ,0o 1ustify it, (e should have to e&ploy inductive inferenceE and to 1ustify these (e
should have to assu&e an inductive principle of a hi%her orderE and so on. 0hus the atte&pt to
ase the principle of induction on e'perience rea"s do(n, since it &ust lead to an infinite
re%ress./
D
Such is the lo%ical incoherency.
0herey the lo%ical positivists. pro%ra& of foundin% "no(led%e, that is %enuine "no(led%e
4science5 on e'perience, collapses. In their fervent desire to eli&inate &etaphysics,
,annihilate/ is the ter& Popper follo(in% lo%ical positivists uses, science itself (ill e
overthro(n+ In the prole& of induction, the lo%ical positivists. pro%ra& ,co&es to %rief./ ;or,
as Popper points out, ,scientific la(s, too, cannot e lo%ically reduced to ele&entary
state&ents of e'perience./
#
3onetheless, as he has pointed out else(here,
C
one can ar%ue that it is necessary to assu&e
a principle of induction that itself is not ased upon any further induction. 0his (ould denote
the li&its of e&piricis&, the vie( that all "no(led%e derives fro& e'perience. Popper.s
position, not stated in the te't, is that this principle (ould then e &etaphysical<
;or Popper, the atte&pt to utili=e inductive lo%ic to 1ustify scientific state&ents lar%ely rests on
confusion of psycholo%ical (ith episte&olo%ical prole&s.
O
4s%chologis$
0he appellation ,psycholo%is&/ is in ordinary usa%e %enerally deployed as criticis&. It refers
to an ar%u&entative strate%y to deun", to dis&iss the relevance, validity and force of a
position, a vie( or si&ply a proposition y statin%, revealin% or even ,un&as"in%/ individual,
personal or ideal &otives that are alle%ed to have %enerated the position, vie( or proposition
in the first place. In achievin% its ai&, this strate%y does so (ithout ever havin% to &eet the
position, vie( or proposition put forth on its o(n ter&s, (ithout havin% to adduce evidence to
counter or lo%ically ascertain the structure of (hat has een put forth.
3o(, for Popper, this ordinary usa%e is itself ,psycholo%istic./
G
0hat is, it deals (ith &atters of
fact, (hich fall under the headin% of e&pirical psycholo%y, ut (hich do not concern the lo%ical
1
,&id, #.
2
,&id, C.
D
,&id+
#
,&id, 1D.
0o ce&ent the point, Popper )uotes Schlic" 4Naturissenschaften, 27, 17D1+ 1CO5+ ,0he prole& of induction consists
in as"in% for a lo%ical 1ustification of universal state$ents aout reality< We reco%ni=e, (ith $u&e, that there is no
such lo%ical 1ustification+ 0here can e none, si&ply ecause the% are not genuine state$ents./ ,&id, 1#. E&phasis as
it appears in Popper.s citation.
C
Realis$ and the 7i$ of Science, 12.
0he follo(in% position (as for&ulated y Bertrand Russell at a lecture Popper attended in @ondon shortly after his
arrival fro& !ienna in autu&n 17DC.
O
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, G.
G
In a roundaout (ay, this is further evidence that Popper.s position in recountin% the &ethod of science at the asis
of scientific "no(led%e is alto%ether distinct fro& co&&on sense and its &ethods, a position that he e'plicitly denies
ut (hich his actual account affir&s. 0his is y (ay of anticipation. See this Study, Part III, ,Co&&on Sense
4Lno(led%e5 and Scientific Lno(led%e,/ elo(.
analysis of scientific &ethod, (hatever the position, vie( or proposition that is ein% ar%ued.
1
Instead, he states, ,I <distin%uish sharply et(een the process of conceivin% a ne( idea, and
the &ethods and results of e'a&inin% it lo%ically./
2
0he ordinary usa%e cited here, on the other hand, deals (ith &atters that elon% to the non9
e&pirical, non9scientific su1ect of daily life, (hether (e are tal"in% aout %roundin% our
ar%u&ents in lo%ic, psycholo%ical &otives or perceptual e'perience.
D
0his is a little roader
than (hat Popper e'plicitly states, ut then he is settin% forth his position in contradistinction
to 4pri&arily5 philosophers (ho (ould not e so ase as to atte&pt to defeat an ar%u&ent y
(ay of i&pin%in% &otives, ut &i%ht thin" that all ar%ued positions ulti&ately &ust refer ac"
to evidence that itself ori%inates in perceptual e'perience. So, for Popper, psycholo%is& is the
,doctrine that state&ents can e 1ustified not only y state&ents ut also y perceptual
e'perience/
#
0he prole& (hich Popper sees in this position< the ar%u&ent that (ithout aritration y the
(orld of the senses, nothin% can e added to our "no(led%e of the (orld of facts< is this+ If
perceptual e'perience is the source of "no(led%e of the e&pirical sciences, then (e oviously
&ust consult that e'perience. But (hat is the criterion for the veracity of that e'perience2 0he
response 4accordin% to Popper5 is, ,By the i&&ediate feelin% of conviction (hich it conveys,
(e can distin%uish the true state&ent, the one (hose ter&s a%ree (ith e'perience, fro& the
false state&ent, (hose ter&s do not a%ree (ith it./
C
Popper, in fact, offers t(o distinct ar%u&ents a%ainst the e&piricist or sensationalist doctrine
of sense e'perience. 0he first, (hich in our vie( is the &ore i&portant to hi&, is a criticis& of
the &erely su1ective conviction central to sense certainty 4the ter& is $e%elian, and Popper
(ould ahor it5. It once a%ain entails a separation of the psycholo%ical aspect 4so9called5 of
the prole& fro& its lo%ical and &ethodolo%ical &o&ents+ ,We &ust distin%uish et(een<
our su&9ective experiences or our feelings of conviction, (hich can never 1ustify a state&ent<.
and< the o&9ective logical relations susistin% a&on% the various syste& of scientific
state&ents, and (ithin each of the&./
O
0he second ar%u&ent a%ainst sense certainty is )uite
different. Popper elieves that sensationalist doctrine ,founders< on the prole&s of
induction and of universals./ In nuce, universals, especially those that, as concepts, ideas or
sy&ols that refer to i&&ediate e'perience %o eyond the specificity that is intended y sense
e'perience. So that, for e'a&ple, (hen I point across the (ooded e'panse in front of &e and
indicate, sin%lin% out, a hundred and fifty year old (hite oa", sayin% to &y dau%hter, ,that is a
very old tree,/ the concept of tree as stated in &y e'cla&ation is not present in the sense
4Popper.s sense5 of verifiale y the ,oservational e'perience./
G
0his is the line of ar%u&ent
Popper (ill pursue.
Curiously, once the position for&ulated y Popper had (on respect fro& those he &ost
estee&ed, that is, in the scientific co&&unity, the ar%u&ents a%ainst psycholo%is&
disappeared, lar%ely superseded y his on%oin% 4decades lon%5 criti)ue of induction. 0here is,
for e'a&ple, no sustained discussion of psycholo%is& in either the collection Con9ectures and
Refutations or in that portion of his 4ostscript, Realis$ and the 7i$ of Science, (hich directly
1
0he ,lo%ical analysis of scientific "no(led%e< is concerned not (ith questions of fact 4Lant.s quid factiK5, ut only
(ith )uestions of 9ustification or validit% 4Lant.s quid 9urisK5./ ,&id, G. E&phasis in ori%inal.
2
,&id, F.
D
,0he )uestion of ho( it happens that a ne( idea occurs to a &an N (hether it is a &usical the&e, a dra&atic conflict,
or a scientific theory 9 &ay e of %reat interest to e&pirical psycholo%yE ut it is irrelevant to the lo%ical analysis of
scientific "no(led%e./ ,&id, G.
#
,&id, GC.
C
,&id, GC9GO.
O
,&id, 22. E&phases in the ori%inal.
G
,&id, GO. Popper.s e'a&ple 4,0his is a %lass of (ater/5 and his account is poor and %arled.
confronts the issues of induction, de&arcation, and science and &etaphysics. 4In neither oo"
does the ter& even &erit a sin%le entry in the respective su1ect inde'es.5 0his is ecause
Popper.s usa%e is pole&ical. $is strate%y is t(ofold, first, to separate his position fro& that of
lo%ical positivis& y placin% the entire discussion of science on a terrain that in principle
e'cludes the type of account carried for(ard y the !ienna CircleE and, second, to circu&vent
any effort to undercut his position y (ay of a non9e&pirical, non9&etaphysical criti)ue. While
pointin% this out, it is i&portant to not ,ar%ue/ psycholo%istically 4ordinary usa%e5, i.e., it is
necessary to en%a%e Popper i&&anently, to sho( ho( the deploy&ent of this concept papers
over a real %ap in his ar%u&ent. If his strate%ic orientation is to(ard the first point, ours is
to(ard the second. We shall have occasion to a%ain discuss his account of induction, ut for
here and no( (e have si&ply een re)uired to %rasp (hat he &eans and intends.
Science as Method: )alsifia&ilit% and 4ostulative Deductivis$
Popper.s criterion of de&arcation is (hat he calls falsifiaility.
What this &eans is, first, that science does not start fro& oservation, sort of a %atherin% of
,facts,/ and then proceed y (ay of induction to theori=ation as has een ar%ued in e&piricist
traditions.
1
0he prole& here can e stated si&ply enou%h+ It is that ,our ordinary lan%ua%e is
full of theories< oservation is al(ays o&servation in the light of theories+/
2
We are, then,
co&pelled to start fro& theories, and in this respect, ,0he e&pirical sciences are syste&s of
theories./
D
But in science they are theories of a very specific "ind, na&ely, a'io&ati=ed
syste&s.
So that, second, falsifiaility is ine'tricaly ound up (ith theories as a'io&ati=ed syste&s.
What is an a'io&atic syste&2 It is a %roup of assu&ptions, 1ust those that are needed, to for&
the ,foundations/ or ,asis/ 4oth our ter&s5, (hat Popper calls the ,ape',/ of the syste&, i.e.,
a lo%ically (ell9constructed series of interrelated, interconnected or inte%rated and thus a
nucleus of state&ents that are effectively hypotheses 4a ter& (hich Popper often used
interchan%ealy (ith ,theories/5. $ere Popper tells us these assu&ptions, a'io&s or
postulates, functionin% as hypotheses, are ,chosen in such a (ay that all the other state&ents
elon%in% to the theoretical syste& can e derived fro& the a'io&s y purely lo%ical or
&athe&atical transfor&ations/
#
< Presu&aly, this for hi& is the &eanin% of syste&ic
inte%ration< 0his syste& cannot e directl% ,validated,/ hence its a'io&atic, i.e.,
si&ultaneously given and &asic, character. 0hus, the state&ents that co&pose the syste& are
assu&ptions that ,are usually called the Ta'io&s. 4or Tpostulates,. or Tpri&itive propositions5</
C
3o( an a'io&atic syste& has, accordin% to Popper, its o(n re)uire&ents. 0hese are fourfold+
0he syste& of a'io&s need e free fro& contradiction, self9contradiction or &utual
contradiction, i.e., internally coherent, 4ii5 it &ust e independent, that is, none of the a'io&s
can e deducile fro& any of the others that for& the syste&, 4iii5 the a'io&s &ust e
,sufficient Hade)uateJ for the deduction of all state&ents elon%in% to the theory to e
a'io&ati=ed,/ that is, no au'iliary hypotheses are per&issile, and 4iv5 the a'io&s &ust all e
necessary, there can e no ,superfluous hypotheses./
O
1
E.%., ,Science+ Con1ectures and Refutations/ in Con9ectures and Refutations, CC, O1E Realis$ and the 7i$ of
Science, 7F977.
2
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, DG, n. r1.
D
,&id, DG.
#
,&id, C0+
C
,&id+
O
,&id, C1.
Popper had corresponded (ith Einstein on the crucial &ethodolo%ical issue of deductivis& 4for the latterIs vie(s, see
the 0hird Study, 0hird S"etch, aove5, indicatin% his a%ree&ent (ith the %reat &an in this re%ard. See ,&id, #F19#F#,
(here Popper reprints a letter fro& Einstein in (hich the latter stated his a%ree&ent. *%ree&ent here should e
(ritten do(n to a &ore funda&ental consensus on the defense of &etaphysical realis& in science or, as (e prefer,
*ll and all, this &ay appear a lon% (ay fro& falsification, ut these re)uire&ents< particularly
those of a closed and an inte%rated syste& of state&ents, (hich for Popper are universal
state&ents< are precisely (hat &a"es falsification so i&portant+ ;or all these state&ents
&ust also e testa&le, and althou%h in a purely for&al sense this is not a re)uire&ent of an
a'io&atic syste&, it is a re)uire&ent of one that is scientific in the sense Popper understands
it. ;or, predictions can e deduced fro& the universal, hypothetical state&ent 4in the for& of a
sin%ular or asic state&ent, one ,(hich can serve as a asis for an e&pirical falsificationE in
rief, a state&ent of sin%ular fact/5.
1
It is these predictions that per&it of testin%, i.e., that allo(
us to construct an e'peri&ent that ri%orously su1ects the prediction to a trial and assess&ent
of its validity< thus, our desi%nation of Popper.s science as &ethod (ith the ter&, postulative
deductivis$? If the prediction holds, (e can say that for no( the theory 4hypothesis5 and the
syste& of (hich it is an inte%ral &o&ent has een validated, i.e., the syste& itself offer an
e'planation of events, processes or relations in the (orld that holds until further notice, that is,
until a &ore ri%orous test can e %enerated in (hich case it &ay or &ay not hold. If it does
not, (e can say the hypothesis, and the syste& itself, has een falsified.
3o( Popper.s theori=ation is not in any reco%ni=ale respect as cut and dried as the last
para%raph, &erely a shorthand su&&ary, su%%ests. In the first place, to pass, as it (ere, a
falsifyin% test is to &a"e no clai&s concernin% the truth of the state&ent 4prediction5 ein%
tested, only that it has up to this point survived the &ost severe availale test.
2
In physics in
particular, the concept of truth disappears as validation is descried solely in ter&s of
statistical proaility.
D
Second, this theori=ation, further, &erely intends that a falsifiale
refutation applies only to a ,reproducile effect,/
#
i.e., an e'peri&ental outco&e that can e
repeated in principle over and a%ain y any scientist utili=in% the procedure e'peri&entally
descried. 0hird, it is i&portant to reco%ni=e that Popper (ants to rid science of (hat he
considers the a%%a%e of sensationalis&+ 0he ,e&pirical asis,/ captured as it (ere in
sin%ular or asic state&ents, does not consist in a relation that otains et(een so&ethin%
that is perceptually %iven 4as in an e'peri&ent5 and ,&anifest y inspection/ or ,feelin%s of
conviction,/ oth of (hich constitute a retreat to ,psycholo%is&,/ ut otains instead in
,o1ective lo%ical relation/ that holds a&on% ,various syste&s of scientific state&ents./
C
Scientific "no(led%e is not a )uestion, posed episte&olo%ically, of ,on (hat does our
"no(led%e rest2/E rather, it a &atter of testin% ,scientific state&ents y their deductive
conse)uences./
O
;ourth, testaility is not unifor&. 0here are de%rees of testaility<
,hypotheses &ay e distin%uished accordin% to the results of their tests/
G
< that ran%e fro&
the (ell tested, a&on% (hich there are those that have stood up to tests and those that have
not, to those that have not een tested at all.
F
$ere too 4in contradistinction to a concept of
the conte&plative character of our%eois theory.
1
,&id, 21.
2
,&id, OO.
D
* lon% chapter appearin% in The 3ogic of Scientific Discover% 4pa%es 1DD920G5, as (ell as in the lon%est section of
Realis$ and the 7i$s of Science 4pa%es 2019#015, is devoted to elaoratin% and descriin% PopperIs specific concept
of statistical proaility.
#
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, OO.
C
,&id, 20921. E&phases deleted.
O
,&id, G79F0.
G
Realis$ and the 7i$s of Science, 220.
F
,&id+ Co&pare the re&ar"s for&in% the third para%raph of the section, ,0(o Prole&s of a 0heory of Lno(led%e,/
aove.
Whether anythin% li"e (hat Popper descries here in fact %oes on in the actual practice of scientific co&&unities is
rather, (ell, duious, oth (ith a vie( to the rationality process as it is practiced, and (ith re%ard to his theori=ation of
the relations of theory, e'peri&ent and facts estalished therein. * rief, %ood antidote to Popper.s ri%id
syste&ati=ation can e found in Paul ;eyeraend, ,$as the Scientific !ie( of the World a Special Status2/, 1DO91D7.
truth5 proaility decisively shapes our understandin%, for Popper calls this ran%e or %radation
of hypotheses the de%ree of proaility or, as he later prefers, the ,de%ree of corrooration./
1
@i"e Popper (ho, as (e have noted, is not concerned (ith )uestions of fact ut only (ith
those of 1ustification, (e are not concerned (ith the precise, detailed study of the &ethod of
falsification. It is, nonetheless, incu&ent upon us to note that, ste&&in% fro& the centrality of
falsifiaility and testin% and the various for&s the latter ta"es, proaility, in fact, plays a very
i&portant role in his theori=ation of science, in particular in the for& of (hat he calls a calculus
of proaility. 0hou%h later (e shall re&ar" on certain features of this calculus, Popper
hi&self, classically reproducin% one of the li&its of our%eois philosophy 4the lo%ical analysis
of state&ents denies the relevancy of e'periential content, and cannot accordin%ly inte%rate
for& and content, the latter re&ains irrational in relation to a syste&ati=in% theori=ation5,
provides a 1ustification in this re%ard, thou%h he never rises to the level of classical our%eois
philosophy since his is &erely a reflection on the science of capital. ;urther&ore 4as if to
confir& the criticis& 1ust &ade5, he reco&&ends that (e as readers for%o the etter part of
the discussion of this calculus+
2
It appears that Popper, li"e the hi%hly rationali=ed science he defends, does not even %rasp
the &eanin% and si%nificance of (ritin% a (or" in (hich not all aspects are inte%ral or in (hich
so&e can e detached.
D
1
,&id+
2
,I su%%est that sections CC to O#< e s"ipped at first readin%. It &ay even e advisale to turn fro& here, or fro& the
end of section CC, direct to chapter 10./ The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, 1#7, n. r1.
D
3ot to &ention that one of the &ost interestin% discussions of The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, chapter 7< Popper.s
ad&ittedly failed effort to invert (hat he characteri=es as $eisener%.s &etaphysical pro%ra& for )uantu& &echanics
research< falls s)uarely (ithin the reco&&ended sections to e passed over.
Part III
0he *ntino&ies of Scientific 0hou%ht
Co$$on Sense 0:noledge5 and Scientific :noledge
*s (e have indicated, for Popper episte&olo%y is decisive in the analysis of science. $e
1ustifies this pursuit in the follo(in% (ay+ While proponents of the pri&acy of lan%ua%e analysis
in philosophy elieve there are ,no %enuine philosophical prole&s,/ he thin"s there is at least
one, one in (hich ,all thin"in% &en are interested,/ na&ely, understandin% the (orld (hich,
accordin% to Popper, includes oth ourselves and our "no(led%e as part of the (orld. $e
states this in such a &atter as to pro&le$ati/e it.
1
0his leads hi& to episte&olo%y, a reflection
on the (ays in (hich (e "no( (hat (e "no(, and specifically the ,central prole& of
episte&olo%y/ (hich, aldly assertin% it ,has al(ays een and still is/ the central prole&, is,
for hi&, the groth of !noledge. Rather startlin%ly, he then asserts further that the %ro(th of
"no(led%e ,can est e studied y studyin% the %ro(th of scientific "no(led%e./
2
0his he calls
a ,thesis/ that he (ould li"e to propound.
0hou%h he does, oviously, propose the thesis, he never sees fit to defend it. While it appears
to us hi%hly doutful that Popper (ould challen%e the state&ent that other non9our%eois and
preour%eois cultures have elaorated for&s of a(areness that can e le%iti&ately descried
as &odes of "no(in%, and therein &en and (o&en (ould also develop those &odes of
"no(in% in order to understand the (orld, reco%nition of this (ould i&ply the necessity of
defendin% a thesis that tacitly asserts the paradi%&atic, if not superior, character of the
&odern science of nature as a for& of "no(led%e. 0o do so (ould, further, appear to e a
&atter of concern for so&eone (ho has (ritten an other(ise (ell thou%ht out oo" that see"s
to episte&olo%ically %round this science, ut to do so (ould to e to run up a%ainst an
insur&ountale arrier to his episte&olo%ical study. We.ll co&e ac" to this.
$avin% also propounded the thesis that ,there is no &ethod peculiar to philosophy,/
D
he
nonetheless declares that there is ,.one &ethod of philosophy../ Popper is )uic" to add that
&ethod, ecause it e'plicitly assi&ilates a critical attitude to ,rational discussion,/
#
is not,
ho(ever, e'clusive to philosophy, ut is the &ethod of philosophy and science. 0he &ethod
involves a clear state&ent of a prole& and careful e'a&ination of the array of possile
solutions (ith a vie( to challen%in%, ,refutin%/ 4our ter&5, or overturnin% those solutions.
C
In this connection Popper tells us that lo%ical analysis and lan%ua%e analysis &ay e (ays in
(hich clarification and careful e'a&ination of a prole& and proposed solutions can e
carried out, ut he o1ects to the clai& that they are e'clusive. $e does, thou%h, %rant that the
,ne( (ay of ideas/ of @oc"e, Ber"eley and $u&e 4i.e., the psycholo%ical &ethod of analysis of
our ideas y (ay of their ori%ins in our senses5 needs to e supplanted y a ,&ore/ o1ective,
less ,%enetic/ &ethod, one centered on &eanin% and usa%e, thus entailin% the analysis of
sentences or state&ents, a ,ne( (ay of (ords./
O
Popper, ho(ever, raises a ,%rave/ o1ection
to oth ,ne( (ays,/ in particular the replace&ent of the analysis of the for&er 4,ideas/5 y the
latter 4,(ords/5 in the for& of the analysis of ordinary lan%ua%e or co&&on9sense "no(led%e.
Why2 0he prole& of the %ro(th of "no(led%e re&ains co&pletely hidden to this analysis.
G
1
,&id, 'viii.
0hat prole& in (hich ,all thin"in% &en are interested/ is ,the prole& of cos&olo%y+ The pro&le$ of understanding
the orld 6 including ourselves, and our !noledge, as part of the orld./ E&phasis in ori%inal.
2
,&id, 'i'. 0he entirety of this re&ar" is e&phasi=ed, and (e have de9e&phasi=ed everythin% ut the (ord ,scientific./
D
,&id+ E&phasis deleted.
#
,&id, 'i'.
C
,&id+ Popper uses the ter& ,overthro(in%./
O
,&id, 'i', ''i.
G
,&id, ''i9''ii.
$e su%%ests that, li"e hi&, those (ho pursuit the analysis of ordinary or co&&on sense
"no(led%e 4identified as lan%ua%e analysis5, elieve there are t(o (ays of doin%
episte&olo%y, either in this for& or y tac"lin% the ,prole& of scientific "no(led%e./ $e has
opted for the latter, ecause it is the ,easier of the t(o to analy=e./ 0his &uch said, oth he
and those (ho pursue ordinary lan%ua%e analysis a%ree that, ,scientific "no(led%e can only
e an e'tension of co&&on9sense "no(led%e./
1
>r, a%ain, he states, ,<e'perience in
science is after all no &ore than an e'tension of ordinary everyday e'perience</
2
It is this
,after all,/ i.e., the ta!en for granted and si$pl% assu$ed assi&ilation of scientific oservation
and e'peri&ent to one side and the ,ordinary/ e'perience of daily life to the other, that is at
issue< 0he assertion of the continuity of scientific "no(led%e and co&&on sense, or their
counterposition as the case &ay e, is an astract, false &anner of posin% the )uestion of
for&s or &odes of "no(in% in the first place in that cate%ories in and throu%h (hich reality is
apprehended, then e'plained, are a function of practical su1ectivity+ ;or it is in childhood that
the &ass of hu&anity y and lar%e assi&ilate and &aster a native ton%ue and (ith it those
cate%ories the&selves. *ccordin%ly, it is the conditions under (hich e'ceptions to this
paradi%&atic situation transpire that &ust e specified. But here and no( (e shall follo(
Popper<
When Popper states the lo%ical analysis of scientific "no(led%e does not deal (ith )uestions
of fact ut only (ith )uestions of 1ustification or validity in the Lantian sense,
D
(e shall
de&onstrate that, in opposition to e'plicit assertion to the contrary, this is a theoretical
state&ent of the rea" of theory (ith ,ordinary/ e'perience, of scientific "no(led%e (ith
co&&on sense.
We are first re)uired to reco%ni=e that co&&on sense is socially and historically specific. 4I.e.,
the co&&on sense Popper spea"s of is that of the our%eois individual.5 0his is the case
(hether or not Popper reco%ni=es it as such. While in other ti&es and places co&&on sense
&ay have, in fact, een %rounded in co&&unal nor&s, %uaranteed y a transcendent deity or
een ased on the force of nature, it is different for our%eois individuality+
$ere, the &ethod of co&&on sense, if that is (hat (e can call it, does deal (ith &atters of
fact. It does so (ithout re%ard to lo%ical consistency or overall coherency, (ithout &a"in%
ar%u&ents or only y &a"in% ar%u&ents and pursuin% the in)uiry or investi%ation they entail
(ith reference to an un%rounded ,foundation,/ that is, only in relation to assertions &ade y
this particular persona%e 4the spea"er, ,I,/ (hoever it happens to e5. Suestions of 1ustification
or validity are not dealt (ith as such, in a ri%orously lo%ical fashion, ut solely (ith a vie( to
that (hich is an un%rounded foundation, that (hich re)uires no 1ustification ecause it si&ply
asserts itself as such, it assert itself as ,I/ in all its particularly and specificity as self9%rounded
4and, co&pletely una(ares, entirely un%rounded5.
*s (e understand it today and as it has een in those societies (here science has 4slo(ly at
first5 &ost deeply penetrated over the last #00 years, i.e., in societies (here capitalist
develop&ent has %one the furthest, co&&on sense is a historically and socially for&ed type of
"no(led%e, lar%ely a tacit understandin% of &eans, e'cuses and self91ustifications driven y
e%ois& for the sa"e of %ratification, affir&ation or self9a%%randi=e&ent of the e%oist 4self,
person5 in )uestion.
It &ay or &ay not involve trial and error in a pri&itive sense 4rarely the e'alted sense of
con1ecturin% and, even &ore rarely if ever, of consciously settin% up tests ai&ed at refutation5,
ut trial and error is only one of sundry &ethods of co&&on sense as such, (hich Popper
1
,&id, ''i.
2
,>n the Status of Science and of 6etaphysics,/ a lecture %iven in Berlin and first pulished in 17CF, reprinted in
Con9ectures and Refutations, 2#7.
D
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, G. E&phasis in ori%inal.
hi&self later ac"no(led%es.
1
Co&&on sense is, ,&ethodolo%ically,/ far &ore li"ely< this too
is not a necessary feature, ecause it is not universal< to involve %enerali=ation 4not
induction, i.e., not universally valid state&ents, ut purely ,psycholo%ical/ state&ents that are
&erely self91ustificatory5 fro& e'periential instances, in &ore cases than not fro& sin%le
instances.
*ppearin% else(here,
2
the clai& assertin% the unity of co&&on sense and science does not
on the face of it stand up to co&&on sense. It defies the self9understandin% and co%nitive
store of "no(led%e of precisely that co&&on sense (hich he, Popper, dee&s continuous (ith
scientific "no(led%e+ We need only refer to the doctrinal contents of the &odern science of
nature, especially its recent, )ualitatively novel develop&ents 4the ,ne( physics/ as (e have
referred to these develop&ents5
D
, such as space9ti&e curvature 4as opposed to %ravitational
pull5 in %eneral relativity or the Co&pton effect. 0o assert $eisener%.s &athe&atical
for&alis& could e arrived at startin% fro& co&&on sense is ludicrous and asurd. Re)uirin%
not 1ust hi%hly speciali=ed trainin% in physics, its history and &athe&atics far eyond for&al
secondary education levels, ut the leisure fro& (or" 4in the sense of &a"in% a livin%5, or
alternatively (or" as an acade&ic theoretical physicist (ith that trainin%, these analyses and
the hypotheses put forth in their ehalf cannot in any (ay, theoretically, e'peri&entally or
practically, e arrived at startin% fro& co&&on sense notions. In point of fact, Popper inverts
the actual relation of scientific "no(led%e to co&&on sense, since conte&porary physics in
particular 4(hich is e'actly the science that Popper e'plicitly discusses and ta"es as his point
of departure5 represents a %enuinely radical rea" (ith the "no(led%e and understandin%
characteristic of daily life (hich co&&on sense constitutes a reflection on. 0o oot, una(ares
Popper hi&self ad&its as &uch, y turnin% co&&on sense so9called on its head,
#
a lo%ically
contradictory position in his ter&s, as is de&anded y his theori=ation, and he says so+ ;or if
co&&on sense elaorates &uch of its "no(led%e on the asis of sense e'perience 4and it
does5, then to say, ,>ut of uninterpreted Hi.e., (ithout e'peri&ental re(or"in%J sense
e'periences science cannot e distilled, no &atter ho( industriously (e %ather and sort
the&,/
C
is to ad&it as &uch.
< Perhaps all philosophy is driven to suspend co&&on sense in order to achieve %enuine
"no(led%e, no &atter ho( this is conceived<
O
0his eco&es una&i%uously clear as Popper is forced to defend 4i.e., lo%ically co&pelled in
the course of &a"in% his ar%u&ent5 the ,o1ective/ character of e&pirical science. $e states, ,I
readily ad&it that only oservation can %ive us T"no(led%e concernin% fact. and that (e can<
1
Realis$ and the 7i$ of Science, D79#0. See, further, the discussion elo(, this section.
2
,<scientific "no(led%e is &erely a develop&ent of ordinary "no(led%e or co&&on9sense "no(led%e/ 4The 3ogic of
Scientific Discover%, ''ii5E and ,<scientific "no(led%e can e &ore easily studied than co&&on9sense "no(led%e.
;or it is co$$on-sense !noledge rit large?/ 4,&id, ''v9''vi, e&phasis in ori%inal5, and ,0ruth, Rationality and the
?ro(th of Lno(led%e/ in Con9ectures and Refutations, 272927D.
D
See the 0hird Study, aove.
#
,Strictly e'istential state&ents, y contrast, cannot e falsified. 3o sin%ular state&ent< can contradict the e'istential
state&ent, T0here are (hite ravens.< therefore I shall have to treat strictly e'istential state&ents as non9e&pirical or
T&etaphysical./ 4,&id, #F5. *nd, Popper &ay indeed e correct in doin% so, ut to call any feature of perceptual
e'perience4especially visional e'perience5 &etaphysical< (hether or not anyone has ever seen a ,(hite raven/< is
to turn vaulted co&&on sense upside do(n, and openly elies his clai& that the scientific "no(led%e is a ,&ere
develop&ent/ or ,e'tension/ of it.
C
,&id, 2F0.
O
Classical and ancient philosophy 4Plato5 e%an (ith doxa 4opinion5 e'plicitly counterposin% it to episte$e 4true
"no(led%e5 (ith the %oal of achievin% the latter. *t the outset of &odernity a&on% the %reat our%eois philosophers,
:escartes e%an (ith 4syste&atic dout, i.e., (ith the suspension of co&&on sense and its eliefs5 and, at the end of
&odernity in the strictly philosophical sense 4i.e., in the sense that its inner tendencies have een fully (or"ed out5,
$usserl e%an (ith the daily e'perience constitutive of the life(orld and (or"ed ac" throu%h a series of epochUs to
arrive at anony&ously functionin% su1ectivity.
Teco&e a(are of facts only y oservation.. But this a(areness, this "no(led%e of ours, does
not 1ustify or estalish the truth of any state&ent. I do not elieve, therefore, that the )uestion
(hich episte&olo%y &ust as" is, T<on (hat does our !noledge rest2< or &ore e'actly, ho(
can I, havin% the experience S 1ustify &y description of it, and defend it a%ainst dout2. 0his
(ill not do, even if (e chan%e the ter& Te'perience. into Tprotocol sentence.. In &y vie(, (hat
episte&olo%y has to as" is, rather+ $o( do (e test scientific state&ents y their deductive
conse)uences2/
1
$ere (e should note the a&i%uity in the use of the ter& ,e'perience/
(here it unclear (hether $ahn.s ,e'perience/ and ,oservation/ are those of science as
for&ed on the asis of e'peri&entation 4Popper.s sense of the ter&5
2
or the e'perience of a
livin%, sentient su1ect as it unfolds in daily activity. If this a&i%uity is dissolved into
e'perience in Popper.s sense, then co&&on sense and its "no(led%e already lie, distinctively
and )ualitatively differently, ehind usE if the a&i%uity is resolved y distin%uishin% these t(o
for&s of "no(led%e 4co&&on sense and scientific5, then the (hole force of the ar%u&ent is to
assert their difference since "no(led%e as co&&on sense does not 1ustify or estalish the
veracity of any state&ent. If it did, there (ould e no need for science in Popper.s sense<
In a 17CD lecture,
D
Popper identified, respectively, the ,theory/ and ,&ethod/ of ,trial and error/
(ith that ,of con1ectures and refutations./ 0his is, presu&aly, (hat he has in &ind (hen he
asserts that co&&on sense and scientific "no(led%e are continuous. @et.s pursue this. In
Realis$ and the 7i$ of Science, he further identified three &anners in (hich (e ,learn fro&
e'perience/ 4and here ,e'perience/ is conte'tually, ut e'plicitly, the e'perience of everyday
life fro& (hich co&&on sense cate%ories rise5.
#
0hese are learnin% y trial and error, y hait
for&ation (hich he calls ,repetition proper,/ and y i&itation (hich, for hi&, constitutes
,asorin% a tradition/
C
4and (hich, clearly un"no(n to Popper or not %rasped y hi& is only
one (ay, the preco%nitive one, in (hich traditions are assi&ilated5. $e then tells us a&on%
these three (ays of learnin% that trial and error alone is %er&ane to the %ro(th of our
"no(led%e, that is, alone is the &anner in (hich (e ,ac)uire ne infor&ation< discover ne
facts and ne prole&s, practical as (ell as theoretical, and ne( solutions to our prole&s,
old as (ell as ne(./
O
*nd, at the ris" of ein% unduly repetition, trial and error is synony&ous
(ith con1ecturin% and refutin%, thus, is continuous (ith the &ethodolo%ical practice of science.
But is this really (hat is %oin% on (hen (e ,learn,/ ac)uire ,ne( "no(led%e,/ (hen (e say (e
"no( and understand2
Please consider the follo(in%.
>n readin% this te't as it appears efore you 4say, on your co&puter screen5, you read (ith
facility, %raspin% the various concepts, ,readin%,/ ,te't,/ ,appearance,/ ,co&puter,/ ,screen,/
%raspin% the& either no&inally or verally or ad1ectivally in their syntactical interconnections
as (holes, as sentences, para%raphs, as a the&atic line of thou%ht, in other (ords, you %rasp
&eanin%4s5 i&&ediately, intuitivel%+ 40hese &eanin%s are (hat are often called ,essences,/
(hich is the concept or the universal.5
*s an aside, (e (ould note that the ,ontolo%ical/ status of ,essences/ is ideal ,unities of
&eanin%./ 0hey are ,ideal,/ i.e., non9spatial 4that is, a &eanin%, concept or essence is not ,in
your or &y head,/ not ,in/ consciousness5 and o1ective, that is, they can e accessed y
anyone 4(ho shares the sa&e roader socio9historical fra&e of reference, (e shall return to
this in the discussion of ,0he 6aterial :ialectic,/ elo(5, ecause their production can e
1
,&id, G79F0. *ll e&phases in ori%in. 40he first t(o internal citation are fro& $. $ahn.s 3ogi!, Mathe$ati! und
Naturer!ennen appearin% in 2inheitsissenschaft, 2, 17DD5.
2
See the section i&&ediately follo(in%.
D
In ,Science+ Con1ectures and Refutations,/ Con9ectures and Refutations, O0, OF.
#
Realis$ and the 7i$ of Science, D79#0.
C
,&id+
O
,&id, #0. E&phasis in ori%inal.
reproduced as such ad infinitu$, (hich is (hat %uarantees their o1ectivity and their unity. But
return to our discussion.
If, ho(ever, (e say, ,In characteri=in% the noe&atic aspect of consciousness in ter&s of
hyletic &aterial, Ed&und $usserl 4the founder of the philosophical school called
pheno&enolo%y5 en%a%ed in an e&piricist construction and fell ac" into the Tnatural attitude.
and (as therey unfaithful to his &ethod,/ you, the reader, &i%ht stop readin%, pause, read
the state&ent a%ain and, so&e(hat affled, si&ply put this te't do(nE or, alternately, you
&i%ht pause, and in(ardly co&&ent, ,I "no( (hat he.s %ettin% at, I.& 1ust not fa&iliar (ith
so&e of the ter&s/ 4that is, so&e of the concepts, their &eanin%s, i.e., you %rasp &y intent ut
not their sense, the sense of the concepts5.
Puttin% aside all the &eanin%s different traditions in the philosophy of the West assi%ned to
these concepts, let.s say in the first case, you neither !ne nor understood (hat is intendedE
and, in the second alternate case, you !ne ut did not understand.
In the second case, you don.t li"e ein% affled. -ou attend to specific ter&s< then, ahah -ou,
recallin% a course in ancient philosophy, say of course ,hyle/ is 4ancient5 ?ree" (hich (e
render as ,&atter/+ -ou reali=e the ,e&piricist construction/ here &eans $usserl in his o(n
ter&s (as not attendin% to ,the thin%s the&selves/ si&ply as they presented the&selves in
perception, ut instead constructed the o1ect 4,the thin% itself/5 out of, say, ,sensations/ in the
&anner of @oc"e. 3o(, you oth !no and understand+++ this intuitive reco%nition is das
2rle&nis ,aha>... a unity that in very narroest sense (e &i%ht desi%nate as reason, (hile for
$usserl the &o&ent at (hich you understand (hat you "no( is the i&&ediate e'perience of
,essence/ 4N"esenschau>5+ Everyone &ore or less clearly sees essences, and Popper.s
scientific &ethod of con1ectures and refutations not only cannot do (ithout, ut presupposes,
this activity, necessarily presupposes the e'perience of a practical su1ect for (ho& this &ode
of "no(in% is constitutive, i.e., the orientation to the lo%ical analysis of state&ents necessarily
assu&es and al(ays operates on the asis of this &ore pri&ordial for& of understandin%.
Popper confuses one of several different (ays of learnin%, assertin% the pri&acy of a
derivative, re&oved for& over that (hich pri&ordial, pri&ary and foundin%. 0he ,&ethod/ of
trial and error, con1ecturin% and refutin%, is not even a condition of learnin%, of "no(in% and
understandin%+ >ne can learn, "no( and understand fro& a sin%le instance< *nd even in
ani&als 4&a&&als5 learnin% occurs in this &anner<
1
In insistin% on the &ethodolo%ical
separation of the lo%ical analysis of "no(led%e 4startin% fro& de&arcation5 fro& the
experience of daily life 4(hile assertin% the continuity et(een scientific "no(led%e and
co&&on sense5, Popper has reproduced the classical our%eois philosophical prole& of the
irrationality of an underlyin% sustratu&. We shall also return to this.
It is, to e sure, i&portant to %rasp that the seein%, its i&&ediacy, only achieves ,o1ectivity/ if
and (hen it is intersu1ectively acco&plishale, that is, can e repeated indefinitely y anyone
(ho underta"es to do so.
2
Rnli"e in $usserl, this i&&ediacy is al(ays transcended in e'perience+ 0he dialectic of
i&&ediacy and &ediation is constitutive of the for&al structure of consciousness, as each act
of understandin% eyond the ori%inal unreflected i&&ediacy 4itself &ediated y all one.s
"no(led%e and e'perience5 %enerates a ne( ,level/ of &ediated i&&ediacy, or to put a
different na&e on it, intuition.
D
0o oot, all i&&ediate, individual and personal a(areness is
sociall% and historicall% &ediated, there is no lo%ical analysis of "no(led%e that does not rest
1
Contrary to Scheler, Man.s 4lace in Nature, DO. See also ,;ro& 6etaphysics to Philosophical *nthropolo%y+ 6a'
Scheler.s Man.s 4lace in Nature/+ 0he author has (itnessed learnin% y (ay of ,seein% essence/ on the asis of a
sin%le instance a&on% very youn% do%s. * detailed account (ill e provided upon re)uest.
2
;or a &ore detailed elaoration, see our ,Wor" and Speech+ 0he >ri%ins of 6an * Short Revie( of 0ron :uc 0hao.s
,nvestigations into the 1rigin of 3anguage and Consciousness,/ in particular, the section entitled ,Wor" and the
Production of Ideality./
on these chan%in% ,foundations,/ there is no ,first,/ an underlyin%, unchan%in% asis on (hich
thou%ht and reflection can e constructed.
*t any rate, the first response to Popper.s clai& that the ,su1ectivist/ or intuitive asis of
"no(led%e rested on ,feelin% of conviction/ 4see the follo(in% section5 is that, ,no, to the
contrary, it is not all a )uestion of Tfeelin%. or Tconviction.. -ou need &erely perfor& the
operation, do it yourself. Confir&ation resides strictly in its intersu1ective character, in that
you, I and anyone else can reproduce the sa&e insi%ht/ 4or essential insi%ht5<
In the history of those societies (here the cate%ories of the &odern science of nature have
penetrated the deepest into daily life, science has, and can in principle, only eco&e co&&on
sense if the (orld is already scienti=ed, presupposin% real do&ination in production, i.e.,
&assive, re%ular and syste&atic inputs of science and technolo%y into production that have
transfor&ed the uilt environ&ent and i&&ediately surroundin% nature in accordance (ith
physical theory, and that are, accordin%, inte%rally part of the structure of societies of capital.
1
Even then (e are only spea"in% of ?alilean science, of the &odern science of nature+ ;or the
popular (or"in% &asses 4inclusive of the salariat5 in these societies, such theoretical
develop&ents 4i.e., conte&porary physics5 are not only counterintuitive ut (holly
unintelli%ile.
Contrary to Popper.s &ere assertion, science is in no (ay a &ere develop&ent of co&&on
senseE ut he cannot hold other(ise ecause this unevidenced and unarranted proposition
is necessaril% de$anded &% his assi$ilation of the ordinar% experience of dail% life to and his
identification of it ith the ph%sicalistic and $athe$atical construction of experi$ental science
!non as e$pirical !noledge. We should and can e &ore precise here+ This assi$ilation is
neither consistent nor is it si$ple confusion< rather, it ta!es shape as 4opper conflates to
for$s of su&9ectivit%, that of the practical su&9ect and that of logical su&9ect, the for$er
underl%ing the latter, the for$er the su&9ect of ordinar% experience as it unfolds in dail% life
and the latter the su&9ect of e$pirical !noledge constructed in thought experi$ents
08edan!enexperi$ente5 and in actual experi$ental practice &ut ala%s ith reference to
la&orator% conditions+
Conflation of 3ogical and 4ractical Su&9ectivities in the Concept of 2xperience
0he assertion that scientific "no(led%e is &erely a continuation and develop&ent of co&&on
sense de$ands an e)uivocation+ Based on oservation and the results of e'peri&ent,
scientific ,e'perience/ is conflated (ith the ordinary e'perience of daily life, (hen, as (e have
seen, their alle%ed e'istential unity is &ethodolo%ical constructed.
Popper states, ,<a su1ective e'perience, or a feelin% of conviction, can never 1ustify a
scientific state&ent< (ithin science it can play no part e'cept that of an o1ect of an e&pirical
4a psycholo%ical5 in)uiry. 3o &atter ho( intense a feelin% of conviction it &ay e, it can never
1ustify a state&ent. 0hus I &ay e utterly convinced of the truth of a state&entE certain of the
evidence of &y perceptions</ 0his, of course, includes intellectual insi%ht 4"esenshau5, not
&erely sensuous ones. Popper continues, ,over(hel&ed y the intensity of &y e'perience+
every dout &ay see& to &e asurd. But does this afford the sli%htest reason for science to
accept &y state&ent2 Can any state&ent e 1ustified y the fact that L.R.P. is utterly
convinced of its truth2 0he ans(er is, T3o.E and any other ans(er (ould e inco&patile (ith
the idea of scientific o1ectivity< fro& the episte&olo%ical point of vie(, it is )uite irrelevant
(hether &y feeling of conviction (as stron% or (ea"E (hether it ca&e fro& a stron% or even
D
I&&ediacy is an inte%ral &o&ent of e'perience and consciousness+ -es, all i$$ediac% is $ediated, &ut then there
can &e no $ediation ithout i$$ediac%.
1
$ere see the ;irst Study, Part III, ,0he Suestion of Pro1ectile 6otion and 3atural Place,/ (ith a vie( to the
i&&ediate, lar%ely unintelli%ile sense *ristotleIs concept of natural place has for us.
irresistile i&pression of induitale certainty 4or Tself9evidence.5/ or, as he adds, ,&erely fro&
a doutful sur&ise. 3one of this has any earin% on the )uestion of ho( scientific state&ents
are 1ustified./
1
3o dout, ut as (e have de&onstrated aove, a feelin% of conviction is not the
only asis on (hich an appeal to sensuous e'perience can e 1ustified. $o(ever, there is
another, a %enuine issue here.
0he co&&it&ent to scientific ,o1ectivity/ poses a prole& for Popper, one of (hich he is fully
conscious+ ,In de&andin% o1ectivity for asic state&ents as (ell as other scientific
state&ents, (e deprive ourselves of any lo%ical &eans y (hich (e &i%ht have hoped to
reduce the truth of scientific state&ents to our e'periences./
2
En%a%in% in this reduction is,
after all, his criticis& of @oc"e, Ber"eley and $u&e, and, at a re&ove 4i.e., (ith re%ard to
e'periences ,reflected in/< our ter&< or ,correspondin%/ to or descried y ,ato&ic
propositions/ or ,protocol state&ents/5, Witt%enstein and the lo%ical positivists of the !ienna
Circle.
Effectively, Popper atte&pts to &eet this stu&lin% loc" y constructin% (hat (e call a
,lo%ical su1ect./ 0his su1ect is that (hose co%nitive operations are strictly deter&ined y fir&
adherence to canons of for&al lo%ic 4and a calculus of proaility5, and (hich operates
accordin%ly to a ri%orously prescried and controlled procedure, an e'actin% &ethodolo%y, in
its efforts to validate 4i.e., tentatively affir& y testin% for falsifiaility5 conclusions in its pursuit
of "no(led%e and understandin%. Popper does not construct this lo%ical su1ect e'plicitly, for
he (ould deny that his &ethod of lo%ical analysis, and scientific "no(led%e, rely on
su1ectivity in any of its &anifold for&s at all.
0he lo%ical su1ect ,e'periences,/ i.e., it is the su1ect of e'perience ut only in the scientific
sense, i.e., it is, li"e its supposed e'perience, a construction+ ;or, ,I do not propose to spea"
of ordinary everyday e'perience. I intend, rather, to use the (ord Te'perience. in the sense in
(hich (e use it (hen (e say that science is ased on e'perience./
D
,E'perience/ here
&eans, ,an oservation or the result of an e'peri&ent./ Such is (hat is ,c!non &%
experience,./
#
i.e., y the lo%ical su1ect or, state differently, the scientist< to the e'tent she
operates in accordance (ith the &ethodolo%ical canons Popper ,lays do(n/< as the su1ect
of scientific activity.
What is crucial here is e'peri&entation (hich Popper rationali=es, i.e., rea"s do(n into
distinct operations, as hypothesis construction, testin% 4(hich is the e'peri&ent itself5 and
oservation, (hich, in turn, is a continuous ,practice/ 4thou%h perverse, even the lo%ical
su1ect has a practice &ade possile, as (e shall see, y the fact of an e'istential confusion5
1ustifyin% the lo%ically detachale, distinctive nature of the testin% (hich is so i&portant to
Popper+ ,In the field of the e&pirical sciences< he Hthe scientistJ constructs hypotheses, or
syste&s of theories, and tests the& a%ainst experience &% o&servation and experi$ent./
C
3o(, not only is the lo%ical su1ect &ethodolo%ically 0self5 constructed y su&ission to
scientifically nor&ative ehavior< (hich, it is intuitively ovious 4(ell, perhaps not to Popper,
ut then he i%nores the issue5, e%ins fro& a livin%, sentient su1ect, an o1ectively practical
ein%< ut it re)uires that nature itself have a certain specific &eanin% and ein% as a (orld
that is a priori &athe&atical in9itself, for, ,>nly (hen certain events recur in accordance (ith
rules or re%ularities, as is the case (ith repeatale e'peri&ents, can our oservations e
tested,/ and, of course, it is necessary that it e ,in principle/ testale ,y anyone./
O
,Indeed
1
Popper, ,&id, 2#92C. E&phasis added.
2
,&id, 2C.
D
,>n the Status of Science and of 6etaphysics/ in Con9ectures and Refutations, 2#7.
#
Popper, ,&id, #. E&phasis in ori%inal.
C
,&id, D. E&phasis addedE also, ,&id, 1G, G0, 10D, ##O.
O
,&id, 2D.
the scientifically si%nificant ph%sical effect &ay e defined as that (hich can e re%ularly
reproduced y anyone (ho carries out the appropriate e'peri&ent in the (ay prescried./
1
0estin% that can e carried out y anyone &eans the results can e reproduced, hence
socially or intersu1ectively verified+ ,<inter9su1ective testing is &erely a very i&portant
aspect of the &ore %eneral idea of inter9su1ective criticis$, or in other (ords, of the idea of
&utual rational control y critical discussion./
2
0o e sure, that discourse can e conducted
,rationally,/ strictly in accordance (ith the fra&e(or" of a for&ally lo%ical revie( of
e'peri&ental setups and outco&es, or can it2 :o &y %estures, the intonations and e&phases
in &y speech, the forcefulness and an%ry, ironic or sarcastic pole&ic e&odied in &y
presentation, do these provide a sensuous, envelopin% conte't that shapes, perhaps
decisively critical discussion2 4Well, (e could al(ays alto%ether eli&inate co&port&ent y
annin% speech in favor of strictly for&al, (ritten presentation.5 *nd (hile the )uestion of
ori%ins and %enesis is strictly foridden in Popper, (e can le%iti&ately as", (hat, pray tell, is
the asis of this scientific social su1ectivity 4intersu1ectivity52 *nticipatorily, (e can ans(er
y statin% that it is ound to, as e'pression, a co&&unity of non9lo%ical su1ects (hose
co&&unity is constituted in shared activity. We shall return to this also<
We &i%ht di%ress and as", a%ain )uite le%iti&ately, (hat is Popper.s position in re%ard to
su1ectivity in science.
$e calls any position that invo"es a su1ect, ,su1ectivist/ and tells that us, ,0he su1ective
theory of "no(led%e fails for various reasons./
D
0he 4first5 reason is its naivetU,
#
for it ,assu&es that all "no(led%e is su1ective/ &eanin% ,that
(e cannot spea" of "no(led%e (ithout a "no(er, a "no(in% su1ect,/
C
(hich, in the
philosophical sense, is our position. >r is it2 In Popper.s sense, e&phatically notE for he, in the
incorri%ily and the &ost e'ceedin%ly crude our%eois fashion, i.e., in a sense decidedly
shaped y e%ois& 4not philosophical reflection5, &eans, intends and e'pressly identifies
"no(in% (ith narro(ly personal "no(led%e and understandin%, so that the e'perience of the
"no(in% su1ect is ,$% on,>
Q
is the "no(led%e and understandin% of this specific, individual
and possessive e%o. $avin% set up this stra( &an< it is really %enerous to desi%nate it in this
&anner ecause Popper sincerely and idiotically elieves that in those philosophical traditions
(here one spea"s aout a "no(in% su1ect, one is spea"in% aout individuali=ed, personal
e'perience, a vie( that rests on and ,contains in/ it in a vastly co&pressed for& all the e%ois&
that is the product of the entire historical develop&ent of our%eois society< he proceeds to
de&onstrate that scientific "no(led%e< or, any "no(led%e for that &atter, ut for reasons
entirely different that those of Popper< cannot e reduced to personal "no(led%e.
G
;or Popper.s edification, (e (ould si&ply note that the ,"no(in% su1ect/ in science has
practical i&port, i.e., it refers to the co&&unity of all livin% scientists (ho are the earers of
this "no(led%e,
F
and (e conclude this di%ression y further notin% that Popper.s ,criti)ue/ of
su1ectivity in science rests on the false 4here &eanin% contrived5 opposition et(een
1
,&id, 2D92#. E&phasis in ori%inal.
2
,&id, 22, n. r1. E&phasis in ori%inal.
D
Realis$ and the 7i$ of Science, 72.
#
0he second reason concerns the assi&ilation of scientific "no(led%e on the asis of traditions. 0he criti)ue
developed in the te't that follo(s enco&passes this reason ecause Popper.s ar%u&ent has the sa&e contours, that
is, it relies on sho(in% that the scientific "no(led%e assi&ilated cannot possily e identified (ith personal
e'perience, ,(ith $% "no(led%e./ ,&id, 7297D. E&phasis in ori%inal.
C
,&id+ E&phasis in ori%inal.
O
,&id+ *%ain, e&phasis in ori%inal. ,6y o(n/ or ,&y/ as, %ra&&atically, a &odifier of "no(led%e or e'perience
appears, in italici/ed for$, ei%ht different ti&es in the less than t(o pa%e e'position of Popper.s position.
G
We (ould also note that at this point Popper.s ar%u&ent depends upon a hypostati=ation< of science+ ,ho( &any
thousand thin%s< are T"no(n to science,. ut not to &e</ ,&id, 72.
F
Consider the issue in ter&s of our o(n studies.
personal e%ois& 4su1ectivity5 and the aritrariness it entails, to one side, and its anish&ent
4o1ectivity5 to the other, and constitutes a deter&ination (hich is alto%ether at odds (ith his
notion of an o1ectivity that is intersu1ectively %rounded as in ,inter9su1ective testin%/ or
,inter9su1ective criticis&/<
0he concept of e'perience in Popper is a&i%uous, unclear ecause t(o )uite different
senses are deployed... the ,e&pirical/ reflection of the lo%ical su1ect of his science and the
e'perience of a practical su1ect+
,State&ents in (hich only universal na&es and no individual na&es occur (ill here e called
Tstrict. or Tpure.. 6ost i&portant a&on% the& are the strictl% universal state$ents< In addition
to these, I a& especially interested in state&ents of the for& Tthere are lac" ravens,. (hich
&ay e ta"en to &ean the sa&e as Tthere e'ists at least one lac" raven.. Such state&ents
(ill e called strictl% or purel% existential state$ents 4or cthere-is. state$ents5+/ -et, e'pressed
in a for& of a proposition or state&ent, a ,lac" raven/ cannot e referred to (ithout seein%
4and perhaps indicatin% y pointin%5, that is, ithout rel%ing exclusivel% on the veracit% of the
senses, on a practical su&9ect#s experience of seeing the ,lac" raven./
,0he ne%ation of a strictly universal state&ent is al(ays e)uivalent to a strictly e'istential
state&ent and vice versa+ ;or e'a&ple, Tnot all ravens are lac". says the sa&e thin% as
Tthere e'ists a raven (hich is not lac",. or there are non9lac" ravens..
1
Note here that the
deter$ination, the test of the Nvalidit%> of the universal state$ent 0i+e+, the strictl% existential
state$ent5 is intuitive, not discursive, and its negation, hich is intuitive, is the &asis of the
test, i+e+, the logical su&9ect of science presupposes and operates in all its activit% on the &asis
of the practical su&9ect+ Prosaically stated, the scientist is a livin%, reathin% hu&an, a sentient
ein%.
,0he theories of nature science, and especially (hat (e call natural la(s, have the lo%ical
for& of strictly universal state&entsE thus they can e e'pressed in the for& of ne%ations of
strictly e'istential state&ents</ and thus assu&e the sense e'perience of a practical su1ect,
as in the case of the seein%, a for& of perceptual and practical i&&ediacy, that in state&ent
for& affir&s 4counterintuitively5 ,there does not e'ist at least one lac" raven/ and, in so
affir&in% (ould e sensuously tested, and in testin%, in seein% and thus (itnessin% the reality
of a lac" raven, (ould affir& 4until in principle at least a further, &ore severe test could e
underta"en5 the universal state&ent, ,there are lac" ravens./ ,We see that natural la(s &i%ht
e co&pared to Tproscriptions. or Tprohiitions.. 0hey do not assert that so&ethin% e'ists or is
the caseE they deny it<. *nd it is precisely ecause they do this that they are falsifia&le+/
2
*nd, in this instanced ne%ation of a universal state&ent y (ay of affir&ation of the ne%ation
of a strictly e'istential state&ent, the act of denial rests on, and e'plicitly stated, refers us
ac" to, the seein%, to the activity of a practical su1ect.
0hus, it is clear that the lo%ical su1ect entails the practical 4concrete, i.e., livin%, sentient and
active5 one, that Popper cannot do (ithout an appeal to e'perience in the non9lo%ical, non9
scientific sense+ Because there are t(o distinct &eanin%s of e'perience operative in Popper,
his overall use is a&i%uousE ecause he uses one for the other, this usa%e is e)uivocal,
thou%h they are not &utually e'clusive.
$ad 6endel.s &anuscript (or" descriin% his %enetic e'peri&entation never een rediscovered, as it (as circa 1700,
(ould, assu&in% other early t(entieth century lines of in)uiries arrived at si&ilar conclusions, the &odern synthesis
rar his i&print, (ould neo9:ar(inian e a synthesis of :ar(inian evolutionary theory and specifically 6endelian
%enetics2 -es and no. ,-es/ in the sense that conver%in% lines of the chronolo%ically early t(entieth century
investi%ation &ay have produced a )ualitatively si&ilar %enetics, ut ,no/ in the sense that the (or" of 6endel (ould
have een lost to iolo%ical science, for there (ould have een no co&&unity of iolo%ists and %eneticists for (ho& it
e'isted, i.e., it (ould have een asence a ,"no(in% su1ect./
1
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, #G. *ll e&phases in the ori%inal.
2
,&id, #F. E&phasis in ori%inal.
0he a&i%uous, e)uivocal concepts of e'perience arise fro& the asence of the concrete
su1ect, (hich nonetheless is appealed to as the foundations on (hich hi%her order scientific
state&ents are %enerated.
While, rather curiously, Popper appears to have no prole& in spea"in% of ,intuitively
acceptale/ ,strictly universal state&ents,/
1
i.e., ,la(s of nature,/ he re)uires the real
su1ect< (e (hose ordinary e'perience for&s the content of daily life< thus, the
e)uivocation< ecause he cannot spea" (ithout &a"in% reference to it< as a constantly
rene(ed point of departure, as foundations< to intuitive understandin%, to perception 4as
inte%ral and (hole, not as a lo%ical construct called ,sense data/5, as in ,I see,/ ,(e see that,/
etc.
2
<While the lo%ical su1ect, and the e)uivocation that &a"es it possile, &ay e
unprole&atic in Popper, for hi& it presupposes as its hidden foundation the desiraility,
triu&ph and the unendin% reality of the scientific edifice 4and its pre&ises, e&pirical research
funded y the capitalist state, the necessity that calls that research forth, na&ely, syste&atic
scientific and technolo%ical inputs into production, in other (ords, the civili=ation of capital5...
0he lo%ical su1ect is a fiction, it e'periences nothin%E it is another construct, this one ased
on the practical su1ectivity of the scientist as he< &ystifyin% hi&self< en%a%es in a schi=oid
e'peri&ental ,practice/ under laoratory conditions.
D
The 4ro&le$ of )oundations 0,rrationalit% of the Su&stratu$5
Popper.s Sisyphean effort to construct a lo%ical su1ect is deter&ined y his refusal of
practical su1ectivity, an o1ectively practical ein%, in an account of scientific "no(led%e at its
ori%ins. While for%oin% all reference to sensuous e'perience is a central aspect of the pro%ra&
of our%eois science to sharply differentiate and ,de&arcate/ itself fro& &etaphysics 4and
1
,&id, ##G9##7.
2
In this conte't, co&pare the re&ar"s aout &a"in% the identification of the concept of si&plicity (ith that of
falsifiaility ,intuitively &ore acceptale./ ,&id, 12O, n. r1, and those concernin% his failure to ,carry out fully/ his
,intuitive pro%ra&,/ ,&id, 1CC, n. r1.
Popper e'plicitly introduces ,universal state&ents/ (ithout any discussion of their %enesis 4,&id, #09#G5. 0his is taoo,
strictly veroten, since he a%rees (ith the lo%ical positivists. efforts to as far as possile to rid science of
,&etaphysics,/ that it is necessary to ,replace/ the ,pseudo9psycholo%ical &ethod of analy=in% our idea and their
ori%ins in our senses/ (ith ,a &ore To1ective. and a less genetic &ethod/ 4,&id, ''i. E&phasis added5.
While (e o1ect, a%ainst say $usserl and pheno&enolo%y, to raisin% intellectual intuition, that is, the clear seein% of
essences 4"esenschau5, to the status of reason itself, (e su&it in this re%ard that Popper.s intent to (rite off their
%enesis as &etaphysics 4and the philosophical concept of intellectual intuition as, perhaps, &ystical nonsense5 is
&isplaced, contradictory and ulti&ately incoherent. See our re&ar"s on intuition in the discussion, ,Co&&on Sense
4Lno(led%e5 and Scientific Lno(led%e,/ aove.
D
>f course, Popper illicitly assi&ilates e&pirical oservation and e'peri&entation to e'perience+ E'peri&ents and
their outco&es, e&pirical results, are &ethodically set up accordin% to strict procedures and %uidelines. 0heir
outco&es, those results, are estalished on the asis of conditions that e'ist no(here in nature< (here, for e'a&ple,
in nature does one find a decererate cat, su1ect of e'peri&ents on the refle' arc so9called or, if you prefer, on the
relation of ,e'ternal sti&uli/ to nervous physiolo%y2 0hese e'peri&ents, &oreover, dra( conclusions fro& such
e&pirical results, outco&es and conse)uences that are valid only under laoratory conditions, in an artificially
constructed, fully deter&inistic (orld. Such conditions do not e'ist in nature or society.
E&pirical oservation, the activity of the lo%ical su1ect that is (edded to the practical one, is entirely a function of this
laoratory situation, or laoratory9li"e situations. It is a part, a historically and socially specific and e'traordinarily
li&ited aspect of hu&an e'perience to the extent that su1ectivity is &ethodolo%ically canali=ed, that one functions as
a scientist. But it is not identical (ith e'perience itself, its scope, ran%e. 0o oot, scienti=in% su1ectivity produces a
Teil$ensch, a fra%&entary hu&an ein% lar%ely (ithout identifialy hu&an characteristics< in particular, a
conscience< in the na&e of certain un"no(in%ly nor&ative co&&it&ents 4value freedo&, o1ectivity, detach&ent5
that render it, the scientist, a fit functionary of capital.
0he overall conte't for this construction has een provided in the Introduction, aove. See ,Ele&ents of the
Conceptual Structure of Science./
(hile Popper, of course, full (ell "no(s that such is i&possile5, this effort leads strai%hta(ay
to the prole& of foundations.
6ore roadly, in his assi&ilation of co&&on sense to scientific "no(led%e Popper &as"s the
su&9ectivit% that generates this co&&on stoc" of &eanin% or sense in the first place, the
practical su&9ect hose i$$ediate experience in the ever%da% sense underlines all predicative
efforts at validation 4falsification5. In effectively constructin% a lo%ical su1ect of scientific
e'peri&entation Popper conceals the practical su&9ect on (hich it relies. In refusin% the
contents 4&eanin%5 of e'perience as the foundation of hi%her order astractions, Popper
refuses to confront the underlyin% irrationality of his construction, his lo%ical and
&ethodolo%ical analysis of scientific "no(led%e.
-et, de&arcation, a'io&atic syste&ati=ation con1oined to testin%, and psycholo%is& are all
effectively and o1ectively ele&ents of a strate%y to circle the (a%ons, olt close the hatches
and hun"er do(n+ 0a"en to%ether, they constitute a for&ally inte%rated series of steps that
insulate science fro& the for&9content prole& 4insulation that produces, and thus reappears
in a hei%htened, &ystified and rarefied for& in, an arcane, convoluted discussion of a
propensity theori=ation of proaility5 and rin% do(n an iron veil over the prole& of the
irrationality of sustratu& (hich is syste&atically precluded fro& discussion+ >n the core
issues, his discussion re&ains prole&atic ecause his entire theori=ation is constructed in
such a &anner as to render it unreco%ni=ale, as, deployin% a perceptual &etaphor, a
construction ostructin% a vie( of the prole& in the first place.
?iven his e'plicit co&&it&ent to ,the prole& of cos&olo%y/ 4i.e., to the prole& of the (orld
and our place and role in it5, PopperIs cavalier disre%ard for those specifically philosophical
prole&s 4e.%., the inaccessiility or uninte%rataility of the underlyin% sustratu&, the
irrationality of contents, the contradiction et(een syste& and history
1
all (hich appear in his
(or" and all of (hich are suppressed5 and the syste&atic effort to ury, occlude and
ofuscate the&< prole&s ?er&an philosophy fro& Lant on(ard &ade titanic, uns(ervin%
and do%%ed speculative atte&pts to resolve< is revealed in his unsha"ale co&&it&ent to
our%eois science, actually the science of capital 4since The 3ogic of Discover% in no (ay
rises to the philosophical level of classical ?er&an idealis& and since it is the culture and
civili=ation of capital that he upholds5.
In Popper, lo%ical analysis as such re&oves all that is philosophically si%nificant and
co&pellin%, per&ittin% science to function (ithout direction or &eanin%, for capital, i.e., to e
%uided in all its constructions 4and predictions5 y the hidden telos of nature do&ination.
Science, of course, could &e no other a%+ ,n this is a% 4opper is the $odel of a philosopher
as a functionar% of capital+
While it (ill e our tas" to restore the practical su1ect 4as the pre&ise and foundation of any
ne( science and ense&le of technics throu%h (hich (e ne%otiate our relation to the nature
in (hich (e are e&edded5, Popper si&ply declares the prole& of the underlyin% irrationality
of the sustratu&, the practical su1ect, off li&its, irrelevant and of no concern, anishin% it y
sheer fiat+ Indeed, in an era in (hich the our%eoisie is no lon%er capale of class creativity, it
is only ,reasonale/ that a &an (ho is (holly co&&itted to its science (ould reduce the
funda&ental )uestions of that science to arational ,decision,/ (hich in his ter$s is uncritical
and anti9critical+ ;iat decisions are the onl% &anner in (hich capital.s science can e
defended. In point of fact, ,decision/ is the $ethodological devise, the specific a% in (hich
the prole& is posed and ,resolved,/ i.e., ofuscated, thus uried and therey aandoned.
1
See ?eor%y @u"acs, Histor% and Class Consciousness, the 1ustly fa&ous essay, ,Reification and the Consciousness
of the Proletariat,/ in particular ,0he *ntino&ies of Bour%eois 0hou%ht/ 4section 15.
Decisionis$
Co&pelled y the ,lo%ic/ of his theori=ation to confront its asence of foundations, yet unale
to coherently resolve this aporia, Popper ,overco&es/ 4i.e., conceals, thus occludes and
aandons5 the rational syste&s9driven re)uire&ent for rational self9co&pletion.
*sence the rational co&pletion of the syste&, a'io&atic syste&s are %enerated y sheer fiat
ased on a decision,
1
that, fro& the perspective of the rational speech as Popper pretends to,
is aritrary+
,6y criterion of de&arcation (ill< have to e re%arded as a proposal for an agree$ent or
convention+ *s to the suitaility of any such convention opinions &ay different and a
reasonale discussion of these )uestions is only possile et(een parties havin% so&e
purpose in co&&on./
2
*leit hidden, that purpose is the incontestaility of our%eois
accu&ulative practices and, intert(ined, the nature do&ination and class e'ploitation on
(hich it is ased and (hich found capitalist civili=ation tout court, i.e., ,decision/ is a refle', a
visceral affir&ation of the %iven, and it, for capital, is eyond reason+ ,0he choice of that
purpose &ust, of course, e ulti&ately a &atter of decision, %oin% eyond rational ar%u&ent./
D
We &i%ht add that in this for&ulation there is no difference in principle et(een the purported
rationality of Popper.s position, inductive inferences that fail, pheno&enolo%ical positions that
found science in the self9evidence of intellectually intuited essences, and &ysticis&. 3o2
0hen, ,I freely ad&it that in arrivin% at &y proposals I have een %uided, in the last analysis,
y value91ud%&ents and predilections,/
#
i.e., y &ere preference for science, our%eois culture
and the order of capital.
:ecisionis& is aritrariness raised to the level of a 4false5 principle+ ;or decisional thou%ht,
(hether 1uridical and political in (hich case it is not the content of the decision, ut &erely the
fact that the decision is &ade y the proper authority, (hether e'istential in (hich case it is
&ade in the resoluteness of authentic ein% 4:a9sein5 or scientific, as in the te't at hand, in
(hich case it is produced y use of the correct &ethod, it is fiat that deter&ines validity, use,
si%nificance, fruitfulness, etc. But in any case, there is no necessity that inheres in the
,decision/< But there is so&ethin% else at the deepest societal level that underpins the
personal reality that ,decides/<
:ecisionis&+
!ast, suterranean undercurrents of a (hole culture and society hurdlin% to(ard disaster and
collapse are su&&ed up in this concept.
In the ostensile hi%her culture of the our%eoisie, it surfaced perhaps first in Carl Sch&itt in
the early t(enties of the last century
C
< a%ainst the ac"%round of enor&ous tur&oil, &a1or
class confrontations one after other 4the Lapp Putsch, the 6arch *ction5, the unfoldin% ?reat
Inflation, the unstale Wei&ar Repulic< as 1urisprudential 4and political5 doctrine statin% the
le%al 4or tacitly &oral5 principles are the outco&e of decisions &ade (ithin the institutional
for&s of class authority, y political odies aove all y the E'ecutive. Before the end of the
decade it has found its (ay into philosophy as funda&ental ontolo%y, in the e'istential analytic
of the resoluteness of authentic :a9sein in the pri&ordial disclosure of the truth of e'istence, a
resolution 4decision5 that pro1ectively discloses deter&ination of actual factual possiility
O
4i.e.,
reveals for itself the o1ective &eanin%lessness, essential %ivenness and irrationality of its
1
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, 1C.
,0he interpretation of an a'io&atic syste& as a syste& of 4conventions or5 i&plicit definitions can also e e'pressed
sayin% that it a&ounts to a decision./ ,&id, CD.
2
,&id, 1C. E&phasis in ori%inal.
D
,&id+
#
,&id+
C
4olitische Theologie 417225.
e'istence for&in% the asence of a asis for decision5. *nd, (ith the crisis of capital
deepenin% as accu&ulation (as at an i&passe, rulin% class social %roups screa&in% for a
decision resolvin% the crisis,
1
Wei&ar %ave (ay descendin% into early horrors of the 3a=i
pur%e of undesirale social ele&ents as the President appointed a first (orld (ar trench
runner, a &essen%er, to the chancellorship and Larl Popper (rote the 3ogic of Scientific
Discover% <
>nce decisional thou%ht ,estalishes/ itself on the asis of a'io&atic syste&i=ation,
aritrariness and irrationality penetrate, aleit for the &ost part hidden, into the structure of the
theori=ation+
,6ethodolo%ical rules are here re%arded as conventions+/
2
>f course, no( this irrationality has the loo" of rationality as it appears in the %uise of lo%ically
consistent de&ands+
,0he theory of &ethod, in so far as it %oes eyond the purely lo%ical analysis of the relations
et(een scientific state&ents, is concerned (ith the choice of $ethods? 0he decision here
proposed for layin% do(n suitale rules for (hat I call the Te&pirical &ethod. is closely
connected (ith &y criterion of de&arcation+ I propose to adopt such rules as (ill ensure the
testaility of scientific state&entsE (hich to say, their falsifiaility./
D
*nd that aritrariness and irrationality seep ever deeper into the theoretical construction+
,*lso the vie( that the e'clusion of &etaphysics is li"e(ise a &atter for decision./
#
*nd deeper+
,I propose the follo(in% definition HofJ< a theory< called Te&pirical. or Tfalsifiale.</
C
and,
,We &ay no( lay do(n the follo(in% rule concernin% asic state&ents</
O
*nd still deeper yet+
,*s re%ard auxiliar% h%potheses/? What au'iliary hypotheses, pray tell2 :o not a'io&atic
syste&s refuse all such state&ents2
G
< We ,propose to lay do(n the rule that only those are
acceptale (hose introduction does not di&inish the de%ree of falsifiaility or testaility of the
syste& in )uestion./
F
In a circuitous (ay, (e co&e ac" to our point of departure+ ,<(hat is to e called a Tscience.
and (ho is to e called a Tscientist. &ust al(ays re&ain a &atter of convention or decision./
7
But no(, not only has aritrariness and irrationality penetrated the depth structure of the
theori=ation in the %uise of a 4pseudo5 rationality, so&e of the very for&s of thou%ht< here
intuition< that (ere re1ected in favor of a critical, discursive approach no( reappear+ ,It is only
fro& the conse)uences of &y definitions of e&pirical science, and fro& the &ethodolo%ical
decisions (hich depend upon this definition, that the scientist (ill e ale to see ho( far its
confor&s to his intuitive idea of the %oal of his endeavors./
10
But at a certain point the insur&ountale prole& of the irrationality of the sustratu& returns
(ith a ven%eance+ ,Every test of a theory< &ust stop at so&e asic state&ent or other (hich
(e decide to accept+/
11
Perhaps this is not clear enou%h2 0hen, ,the asic state&ents at
O
$eide%%er, Sein und Feit 4172G5. ,:er Entschlub ist %erade erst das erschliebende Ent(erfen und Besti&&en der
1e(eili%en fa"tische 6c%lich"eit,/ 27F 4]O05.
1
See The 8er$an Road to Reneed ,$perialist "orld "ar, ,0he Slu&p and the 3a=i *scent to Po(er./
2
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, D2. E&phasis in ori%inal.
D
,&id, 2G. E&phasis in ori%inal.
#
,&id, D1, n. O.
C
,&id, OC.
O
,&id, F#.
G
,&id, C1, and Part II, ,Science as 6ethod+ ;alsification and Postulative :eductivis&,/ aove.
F
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, O2.
7
,&id, D1.
10
,&id, D#.
11
,&id, FO.
(hich (e stop, (hich (e decide to accept as satisfactory, and as sufficiently tested, have
ad&ittedly the character of do%&as</
1
With its fiat features, aritrariness and irrationality, decision reaches into the very heart of
Popper.s construction, the deter&ination of testin% as the nuts and olts of falsifiaility in his
calculus of proaility.
$ere Popper.s suordination of thou%ht, theori=in% and philosophical reflection to really
e'istin% science, i.e., to the science as capital.s theori=ation, appears craven. ;or it is here, in
the intricate and finely (or"ed out details of ,testin%/ that he arrives at a point at (hich he
thro(s the entire theoretically elaorate and elaorated scaffoldin% of e'peri&ent and testin%
aside.
,>nly an infinite se)uence of events< could contradict a proaility esti&ate. But this &eans,
in vie( of the considerations set forth HaoveJ< that proaility hypotheses are unfalsifiale
ecause their di&ension is infinite. We should therefore really descrie the& as e&pirically
uninfor&ative, as void of e&pirical content</
2
0his is entirely prole&atic, in fact rational analysis (ith its outco&e is ,unacceptale/+
,-et any such vie( is clearly unacceptale in face of the success (hich physics have
achieved (ith predictions otained fro& hypothetical esti&ates of proailities./ ;ro& the
standpoint of the internal coherency of an ar%u&ent, the prole& is ,solved/ y fiat, y &a"in%
a ,&ethodolo%ical decision/ to ,rule out,/ ,prohiit/ hi%hly i&proale events/ in the
deploy&ent of proaility
D
< *s (e shall see, this prole& reappears assertin% itself still &ore
forcily+ In an account of the concept of appro'i&ation in his discussion of a calculus of
proaility, Popper sets his entire (ell9developed criticis& of the concept aside in favor of<
on his o(n account incoherent? the physicist.s deter&ination, and then proceeds< y fiat<
to ,propose a &ethodolo%ical rule,/ to ar&itrar% decide, to anish the prole&atic character of
the physicist.s deter&ination
#
<
0he &ethodolo%ical ,decision/ is not, ho(ever, purely aritrary to the e'tent there is a veiled
lo%ic at (or" here that (e uncovered in our introductory re&ar"s to these studies+ ,0he
peculiar and (idely reco%ni=ed validity science as theory has achieved does not refer us ac"
to its cate%orial acco&plish&ents,/ and here not even ,to e'peri&ental verification at the level
of scientific activity,/ ut, ased on physics. Nsuccess,/ ,to practical verification in the order of
society. It is here, then, in the proof, i.e., in the socially %enerali=ed seein%, approval, and
acclai& for the technolo%ical achieve&ents ased on and e'hiited as nature do&ination./
C
0his ,solution/< an aritrary decision< occurred (ith the prole& of decidaility at the
$ethodological level 4i.e., proaility considered solely fro& the vie(point of its internal lo%ical
develop&ent5. But, as (e have already indicated, the sa&e prole& reappears in physics as
practiced y the scientist )ua physicist herself.
In the case of so&e e'peri&ents, those that are chance li"e 4such as, for e'a&ple, the toss of
a coin5, fre)uent repetition produces outco&es (ith relative fre)uencies that, repeated over
and over, &ore and &ore approach a fi'ed value that can e called the proaility of the event
in )uestion. 0he entire e'peri&ent entails, then, estalishin% a ,value/ that is ,.e&pirically
deter&inale throu%h lon% series of e'peri&ents../
O
0his does not, ho(ever, a%ree (ith the
calculus of proaility 4referred to aove as &ethodolo%ically developed5+ ;or only al$ost all
very lon% ,se%&ents,/ in this case of the physicist.s e'peri&entally len%thy repetitions, are
statistically stale, that is, ,ehave/ conver%ently. ,*l&ost all/ has the sense, then, of ,very
1
,&id, FG.
2
,&id, 1F2.
D
,&id, 1F2. E&phasis in ori%inal.
#
,&id, 1709172.
C
Citin% fro& the Introduction, ,Ele&ents of the Conceptual Structure of Science,/ aove.
O
,&id, 171. Popper cites 6. Born98ordan, 2le$entare Ouanten$echani! 417D05.
proale./ But proaility cannot e defined y this staility< the ar%u&ent is circular< and
the physicist.s deter&ination is not acceptale.
1
$o( does Popper resolve this prole&2 ;irst,
he returns to the physicist.s ,practice/+ In his e'peri&ent, the physicist &ust have a sense of
(hat constitutes a len%thy repetition< an intuitive sense that is a function of his reality as a
practical su1ect< that is, a sense of ,(hat is long2/ Without this sense, (e cannot estalish
the de%ree of appro'i&ation. But this too, tacitly, is unacceptale 4i.e., Popper does not say
this e'pressly5. So, second, Popper clai&s the physicist (ould never in the event %o aout an
e'peri&ent in this &anner, pursue an ,unli&ited application, for he ,(ould never use the&
HapplicationsJ in this (ay./ So, third, he put for(ard the follo(in%, ,I shall,/ decreein% the
follo(in%, ,disallo( the unli&ited application of proaility hypotheses. I propose that (e ta"e
the $ethodological decision to explain ph%sical effects, i+e+, reproduci&le regularities, as
accu$ulation of accidents./
2
3o(, in the first place the appeal to physicists. ,practice/ is disin%enuous+ Popper len%thy
ar%u&ent is contravened y such an appeal, since it is a theoretical argu$ent aout the
nature and 4presu&ed5 practice of science. 4In a truly dishonest and perverse &anner, he
further rationali=es his ar%u&ent y statin% (hat he has illicitly con1oined is de 9ure separate+
0his ,o1ection< does not affect &y position, for I do not assert the identity of the physical
and the &athe&atical concepts of proaility at allE on the contrary, I deny it./5
D
What he is
doin% is proposin% an ad hoc and de facto solution, an auxiliar% $ethodological la 4and not
even a hypothesis5, in an appeal to physicists. use. In the second place, Popper has conflated
the &eanin% of ,len%thy/ and ,unli&ited/+ 0hey are not the sa&e, and in lo%ic the difference
et(een the& cannot e rid%ed, for len%thy, no ho( ,lon%,/ is not unli&ited, i.e., infinite. In
the third place, lar%ely hidden the real %uidin% intent riefly surfaces+ 0he ,&ethodolo%ical
decision/ concerns ,physical effects/ or reproducile re%ularities/ that serve scientific
prediction, i.e., that decision is %overned y the precate%orial telos of nature do&ination+
Popper.s &anipulation of his o(n theori=ation to rin% it into line (ith physicists. practice 4i.e.,
(ith her calculations and e'peri&ental &anipulation to otain predictale results5, the latter.s
&anipulation of her e'peri&ents< in Popper.s case the precise analo% to the person (ho
&anipulates her o(n e&otions to pursue her e%oistic a&itions< is not &erely craven and
unscrupulous< all these &ehaviors are class reflexes, internali/ed and assi$ilated, of
&ourgeois practices of the $anipulation of la&or in production and ha!ing in distri&ution, a
state$ent of the essentiall% egoistic for$ation and the nihilis$ of accu$ulative practices that
characteri/es this class in histor%< not $erel% a holesale a&andon$ent of critical rationalit%
04opper thin!s the% are s%non%$ous5
#
9 the guise under hich he operates and that (hich he
other(ise proclai&s essentially characteristic of philosophy as philosophy and science 4in li%ht
of the for%oin%, a patently ideolo%ical and delusionary conviction and provin% scientific
rationality is not critical, ut instru&ental5, ut this logical, $athe$atical, pro&a&ilistic
$anipulation occurs &ecause nature is not easil% a$enda&le and resists such treat$ent
0itness cli$ate change5, and instead has to &e de-structured, dis$e$&ered, dis$antled,
destro%ed? $a!ing science the theoretical anticipation of this reduction and destruction 4an
anticipation ased on the very processes of astraction descried in &ore detailed in our
analyses aove5<
C
in order to render it &alleale, to reconstruct nature in its autono&y,
1
,&id+
2
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, 172. E&phasis added.
D
,&id+
#
$e thin"s that scientific practice e&odies a paradi%&atic critical rationality.
C
Introduction, ,Ele&ents of the Conceptual Structure of Science,/ aove.
internal coherency and otherness as a ra( &aterials asin for capitalist production of
co&&odities.
1
<
7&stract Dialectic of Concepts
Popper reco%ni=es the role of theory in the for&ation of even the &ost ele&entary concepts in
science+ ,.6atter,. or Tato&. after Rutherford, and T&atter,. or Tener%y,. after Einstein, &eant
so&ethin% different fro& (hat they &eant efore+ the &eanin% of these concepts is a function
of the N constantly chan%in% N theory./
2
0heory is, accordin% to Popper, ui)uitously present in all are activities and e'perience. $e
too reco%ni=es, as (e (ould then e'pect, its presence in ordinary e'perience of daily life
4thou%h he does not understand its %enesis, role or function5+ ,<there is no such thin% as
Tpure e'perience,. ut only e'perience interpreted in the li%ht of e'pectations or theories (hich
are Ttranscendent./
D
<
$ere, thou%h Popper is &ista"en+ E'perience is for the &ost part the constant interplay of the
precate%orial and cate%orial, and this is (hy there is no hard and fast dividin% line et(een
e'perience and theory. -et there is ,pure e'perience./ *s such, it is ineffale, ut reflectively
identifiale in characteri=ations such as ,the shoc" of the ne(/ or ,ein% left speechless,/ i.e.,
there is astonish&ent, a&a=e&ent, one is stunned ut unale to i&&ediately say (hat ,this
is,/ i.e., there is i&&ediate confusion for the concept is either asence in the upsur%e of the
ne( or in the in%ression of novelty into daily life in all its predictaility and anality, or itself is
inade)uate to the novel e'perience. 0he ,shoc" of reco%nition/ and ,das Erlenis Taha./ are
precisely the discovery, recovery< as (e &i%ht say, (e search our &e&ory< or the
production of a concept that co&prehends and e'plains the e'perience, renders it &eanin%ful
y &a"in% it intelli%ile<
In science, then, facts, %ivenness or facticity, are inescapaly theory laden. Popper &a"es this
un&ista"aly clear, for, ,0heory do&inates the e'peri&ental (or" fro& its initial plannin% up to
the finishin% touches in the laoratory/
#
and ,< oservations and even &ore so oservation
state&ents and state&ents of e'peri&ental results< are al(ays interpretations of the facts
oservedE <they are interpretations in the light of theories+>
A
>ne of the &ost i&portant i&plications of this< the asence of a sharp de&arcation et(een
science and &etaphysics< has already een discussed.
O
So if, as Popper recounts, any
nu&er of &etaphysical theories are &eanin%ful, &any scientific theories e%an as &yths,
so&e rarefied theories operate eyond the level of testaility of the day and devolve into
&etaphysical syste&s, and so&e once considered scientific as a &atter of consensus later
have eco&e increasin%ly &etaphysical, even, as (e noted earlier, he is alive to these
situations, and if they are %rounded, as he ar%ues in other conte'ts, in the &utual penetration
of ,fact/ and ,theory,/ evidence and its conceptuali=ation, e&pirical description and
interpretation, if he is co%ni=ant that an ,e&pirical lan%ua%e/ is also a theoretical one, that
1
;or earthly nature in its coherency and otherness, see the Postscript, passi&, elo(, and the Prolo%ue to "h% the
Stud% of Hu$an 1rigins is Necessar% to a Revolutionar% and 2$ancipator% Pro1ect appearin% in 1rigins and Endin%s.
HEditorIs note.J
2
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, 11D n. rD.
D
,&id, ##O.
#
,&id, 70.
C
,&id, 70, n. rD. E&phases in the ori%inal.
,>ur oservational e'periences are< i&pre%nated (ith theories< TBasic state&ents. are Ttest state&ents.E they are,
li"e all lan%ua%e, i&pre%nated (ith theories/ 4,&id, 7#. *ddendu&, 17G25.
O
See this Study, Part II, ,0(o Prole&s of a 0heory of Lno(led%e+ Induction and :e&arcation,/ aove.
*nd, to e sure, for Popper this e'tends all the (ay ac" into ordinary lan%ua%e+ KIn fact, the &ost co&&on universal
ter&s of ordinary lan%ua%e incorporate a %reat nu&er of e&pirical as (ell as &etaphysical or reli%ious theories/
4Realis$ and the 7i$ of Science, 1105. We a%ree.
theory not only for&ulates the results of an artificially constructed situation ut enters into and
shapes that the laoratory e'peri&ent itself prior to its construction, then (hy, ho( is it that he
fails to %rasp that the e'peri&ent itself utili=es instru&ents and instru&ental co&ple'es (hich
are desi%ned in ter&s of and thus can only e e'pressed in a conceptual lan%ua%e ade)uate
to science to hand 4that, in turn, presupposes the specific discipline, the level of develop&ent
it has achieved and the entire history that is this develop&ent5, then (hy is unale to see the
si%nificance of the situation Bohr refers us ac" to,
1
that the analysis of )uantu& pheno&ena
cannot e detached fro& the conditions of their application, (hich constitute the conditions of
its, the e&pirical content.s, %enesis and for&ation2
...0o cite Bohr re&ar"s a%ain, this ,crucial point< i&plies the i&possiility of any sharp
separation et(een the ehavior of ato&ic o1ects and the interactions (ith the &easurin%
instru&ent (hich serve to define the conditions under (hich the pheno&ena appear/
2
...
Why is he unale to %rasp that, %enerally, there is no sharp separation et(een the e&pirical
content, the test 4the e)uation is Popper.s5, and its interaction (ith the instru&ents of its
&easure&ent includin%, in Bohr.s radical for&ulation, the scientist hi&self as part of the
instru&ental apparatus and not as so&e e'ternal oserver, consciousness or su1ectivity2
Why, ecause acceptin% a %enerali=ation of Bohr.s position 4(hich in Bohr.s for&ulation is
strictly confined to the peculiar indeter&inate conditions of the suato&ic situation ut in its
%enerali=ed for& insists on the indissolule lin"a%e of "no(led%e to the instru&ents (ithin
deter&inant laoratory conditions under (hich it, this "no(led%e, is produced5, &eanin% that
the outco&es, e'peri&ental results, have no reality, no ontolo%ical status apart fro& the
overall conditions of e'peri&entation, that astrono&y, relativity physics, etc., are theoretical
constructs (hose supportin% evidence is of course not only not sensuous, ut ased still
further on hi%hly theoretically, &ostly &athe&atically, &ediated constructs allo(in%
interpretation of that ,evidence/ %athered y instru&ents that e&ody the sa&e theoretical
assu&ptions.. Popper cannot accept this< on the face of it he (ould find it asurd< ecause
his entire understandin% of this situation is thorou%hly &ediated y his &etaphysically realistic
perspective.
So (hat does Popper accept, and (hat is he doin%2
In the first place, 4opper.s $etaph%sical realis$, his rarefied logical su&9ect, a conte$plative
attitude expressed as experi$entation and a correspondence theor% of truth, all of hich
presuppose, na% explicitl% assu$e, the orld is pregiven, thingl% and si$pl% there confronting
us, are ele$ents of a theori/ation shaped in its funda$ental contours &% the overhel$ing
realit%, societies of capital, in hich the activit% and products of a productive su&9ect do not
1
0hird Study, ;irst S"etch, ,BornIs :iscussion of the ;oundation of Suantu& 6echanics./
2
3iels Bohr, 7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an :noledge, D79#0 E&phasis in ori%inal.
Popper.s elief 4Ouantu$ Mechanics and the Schis$ in 4h%sics, 7f, esp. 10, 1F9225 that Einstein, Podols"y and
Rosen put this issue to ed &% a% of a false transcendence of the ave particle dualit% in )uantu& interpretations of
ato&ic pheno&ena is &ista"en on &oth counts. $ere, see ;eyeraend, Realis$, Rationalis$ and Scientific Method,
D119D12, n. DF.
*t any rate, Popper not only ad&its the prole& has not een put to rest< and that the episte&olo%ical conundru&
re&ains, i.e., the )uestion of a full ade)uate interpretation of &icrophysical pheno&ena that avoids the re)uire&ent of
t(o inco&&ensurate and &utually e'clusive fra&e(or"s 4those of particles and (aves5 to achieve a satisfactory
interpretation 4Popper, ,&id, 2C, anticipatin% an e'peri&ental refutation of )uantu& &echanics, ,&y e'pectation
appears to have een &ista"en/5< ut, in order to save his theori=ation 4and that of Einstein.s principle of locality5, he
pursues a course that e'pressly involves resurrectin% the 3e(tonian concept of an ,asolute space./ See ,&id, 2C, 2G9
2F 4the e'peri&ent desi%ned to once again, in Popper.s do%%edly persistent fashion, challen%e $eisener%.s thou%ht
e'peri&ent and the conclusions he sou%ht to verify5, and 27 4(here the concept of ,asolute space/ is tentatively put
forth5.
We &i%ht le%iti&ately as" ho( this course can e 1ustified in ter&s of his o(n deter&ination that e&pirical science
start fro& a'io&atic syste&s that de&ands as one of their internal re)uire&ents the eli&ination of ,superfluous
hypotheses/ 4The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, C1 and this Study, Part II, ,Science as 6ethod,/ aove5.
i$$ediatel% appear as social relations &ut are transposed, &eginning fro$ the la&or
processes, into an interconnected, external netor! of a&stract things< co&&odities, price,
profit, their institutionally social and le%al settin%s, as (ell as the hi%her order astractions,
such as the ,econo&y/ and ,society,/ that rise fro& the&< a du$& thingl% realit% that starting
in dail% life i$$ediatel% infor$s and shapes our sense of the orld++++ nature, co$$unit% and
the universe+++ its constitution and ho it appears, a sense hich 4opper has $erel% $ediated
in and through ela&oration of a reified $ethodolog%, episte$olog% and 0pro&a&ilistic5 logic+
43ote, please, that (e e$phaticall% did not sa% the previous enu&erated features of PopperIs
theori=ation are the e'pression of the class of capitalists as passive eneficiaries of the
surpluses %enerated throu%h the astraction of livin%, practical su1ects, proletarians, in
production.5
In the second, an episte&olo%ical sense, (hat, in a &anner that vastly reduced the scope of
classical theories of "no(led%e, Popper is doin%, in ,validatin%/ y (ay of falsif%ing testing and
for&ulatin% e'peri&ental results in state&ents, is &erely $atching concept to concept, those
concepts e'pressin% in state&ent for& onl% those results that are con%ruent (ith those
e&edded in the instru&ental apparatus4es5 (ith (hich results are ascertained, i.e.,
)uantitatively &easured. ;alsification tells us nothin% other than that (hich is already present
i&plicitly in the e'peri&ent itself, i.e., it tells us only that (hich is ade)uate 4hence validated
for no(5, or inade)uate 4hence falsified5, to the %oals posited in settin% up and estalishin% the
e'peri&ent in the first place.
0his is the "ey+ *ll %enuine "no(led%e e%ins y reco%ni=in% that &atchin% concepts to
concepts is &erely e'plication of conceptual content, (here that content is e&odied in an
instru&ental conte't or e'pressed in state&ents. 0hus, it is e'pressly for this reason 4(ith
re%ard to the latter5 that Popper is co&pelled to aritrarily ,decide to la% don< ruleHsJ,/
since, other(ise, ,it is i&possile to Hdeter&ineJ< y analy=in% its lo%ical for&, (hether a
syste& of state&ents is a conventional syste& of irrefutale i&plicit definitions, or (hether it is
a syste& (hich is e&pirical in &y sense/
1
<
@et us pause and e'plicitly note that Popper is fully a(are that 4(ithin the fra&e(or" of his
vaunted &etaphysical realis&5 he is &atchin% concepts to concepts, for e'a&ple in his
characteri=ation of falsification+ ,We shall atte&pt to characteri=e the falsifiaility of a theory y
the lo%ical relations holdin% et(een the theory and the class of asic state&ents/
2
and,
a%ain, in this discussion of (hat he calls the ,prole& of the e&pirical asis,/ that is, the
foundation, as it (ere, on (hich state&ents in science can e falsified+ ,We &ust distin%uish
et(een< our su1ective e'periences or our feelin%s of certainty< and< the o1ective lo%ical
relations susistin% a&on% the various syste&s of scientific state&ents, and (ithin each of
the&./
D
>r &ore si%nificantly in his criti)ue of Carnap+ ,0he lo%ic of science has to investi%ate Tthe
for&s of scientific lan%ua%e.. It does not spea" of 4physical5 To1ects. ut of (ordsE not of fact,
ut of sentences. With this, the correct Tfor$al $ode of speech,. Carnap contrasts the ordinary
or, as he calls it, the T&aterial &ode of speech.. If confusion is to e avoided, then the &aterial
&ode of speech should only e used (here it is possile to translate it into the correct for&al
&ode of speech.
1
The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%, O1. E&phases added.
Popper calls ,conventional/ a syste& of thou%ht for (hich the la(s of nature are its ,o(n free creations/ 4as the
&odern science of nature, in particular the ne( physics5, are ,not a picture of nature ut &erely a lo%ical
construction./ ,&id, CF. Rnli"e Bachelard (ho (e cited e'tensively aove, Popper is unale to reco%ni=e ho( this
situation otains, that the asis of (hich this science develops as an artificial, laoratory9ased construct decisively
shapes it.
2
,&id, O#.
D
,&id, 22.
,3o( this vie( N (ith (hich I can a%ree N leads Carnap< to assert that (e &ust not say, in
the lo%ic of science, that sentences are tested y co&parin% the& (ith states of affairs or (ith
e'perience+ (e &ay only say that they can e tested y co&parin% the& (ith other
sentences/
1
<
0he &atchin% of concept to concept, ho(ever, is not synthetic. It adds nothin% ne( to our
"no(led%e< It &ay e nothin% &ore than a convoluted, hi%hly elaoration e'plication of
thou%ht e'peri&ents< ;or "no(led%e is first and fore&ost a )uestion of the adequac% of
concept to goal 0telos5. We shall ta"e this up shortly+
2
But for Popper, science is
episte&olo%ically constructed on the asis of a lo%ical su1ect. 0hus, reco%nition of the
&otivational teleolo%y at the ori%ins of conceptual "no(led%e is inad&issile, for the telos is
precate%orial and therey falls outside of the previe( and the activity of the lo%ical su1ect...
0hus, at its &ost funda&ental level 4as a doctrinal ody of "no(led%e5, science does not
effectively proceed y (ay of falsificationE it is not at all the latter that decides the successful
synthesis 4synthetic "no(led%e for Popper, e'peri&ental ,validity/ for the scientist5. ;or this
event does not occur ithin the order of science itself 4as in e'peri&ent, as in scientific
co%nition in state&ent for&5. Instead, synthesis is constituted y the reali/ation of prediction
that occurs in the order of societ% as the seein%, approval and acclai& for the technolo%ical
achieve&ents of science, i.e., in nature con)uest 4do&ination5, i.e., in advancin% the
,pro%ra&/ of capital...
3o( (e call this situation< that of the conceptual apparatus of falsifiaility as it rests on a
procedure of &atchin% concept to concept< an a&stract dialectic of concepts. It is astract
ecause it is suspended (ithout foundations< in the &ilitary lan%ua%e of tactical for&ation, it
is ,in the air/< or, $ore precisel%, it is deter$ined &% the hole hidden nature of science, &%
the experi$ental $anipulation of inert su&stances and destruction of vital &eings the purpose
of hich is testing a prediction ai$ed at directing and controlling those su&stances and &eings
as so $uch o&9ectivel% contentless $atter, &% the hidden telos of nature do$ination in the
service of endless expansion of the productive forces, i+e+, &% &ourgeois ai$s in histor%, i+e+,
&% the logic of capital, accu$ulation for accu$ulation.s sa!e+
Popper is unco&fortaly, va%uely and confusedly a(are of this. By 17O0, he had co&e around
to the vie( that, indeed, a theory of truth< in the &etaphysically realist for& of the
,correspondence to the facts/< (as re)uired in order to the distance hi&self fro& &ore
aneful scientific productions, e.%., ato&ic (eaponry 4recall a &ass &ove&ent in Britain
a%ainst nuclear testin% had e&er%ed in this year5, or in his cryptic for&ulation, ,if (e (ish to
elucidate the difference et(een pure and applied science, et(een the search for
"no(led%e, and the search for po(er or for po(erful instru&ents, then (e cannot do (ithout
it/ Hi.e., (ithout an ,o1ective theory of truth/J.
D
1
,&id, GG.
Popper %oes on to critici=e Carnap for a psycholo%istic ac"trac"in%, statin% that he s&u%%les ac" in ,e'periences/
4throu%h the use of ,protocol sentences/ that correspond to ordinary e'perience and that are to e deployed to ali%n
the e'perience, ,the T%iven,. sense9data/ accordin% to Popper, (ith the for&al &ode of speech. ,&id+5 Popper is citin%
fro& an essay entitled ,0hese der 6etalo%i"/ appearin% in the 1ournal 2r!enntnis, ', 17D2.
2
0his Study, Part III, ,0heory of 0ruth,/ elo(.
D
,0ruth, Rationality and the ?ro(th of Lno(led%e/ in Con9ectures and Refutations, D0O. Contrast this to Popper.s
attitude in 17DC917DO 4the ti&e at (hich the te't in )uestion, to e &entioned shortly, (as drafted and a private
presentation &ade5 in The 4overt% of Historicis$ 4(hich, as late as 17CG N the date of pulication, Popper sa( no
reason to aandon5+ ,Whether the true &otive of scientific in)uiry is< a purely theoretical in)uiry or Tidle. curiosity, or
(hether (e should rather understand science as an instru&ent for solvin% the practical prole&s that rise in the
stru%%le for life, this is )uestion that need not decided here Hi.e., it is an open, unresolved )uestion, even thou%hJ, ,the
so&e(hat e'tre&e vie( 4to (hich I personally inclined5 that science is &ost si%nificant as one of the %reatest spiritual
achieve&ents that &an has yet "no(n &ay e co&ined (ith a reco%nition of the i&portance of practical prole&s
and practical tests Hli"e the ,tests/ conducted over 3a%asa"i and $iroshi&aJ for the pro%ress of science, (hether
applied or pure/ 4,&id, CC9CO5. $ere ,practice/ is not &erely e'peri&ent, ut technolo%ical achieve&ent as a &easure
So (hat aout Popper.s correspondence theory of truth2
;or over three decades Popper ad&its to ein% confounded y a correspondence theory of
truth, for he "ne(, as (e pointed in the criti)ue of Carnap, that it &erely a &atter of &atchin%
conceptual arrays one to another, a theory laden state&ent to another theory laden state&ent
that clai&s to e &ore ele&entary 4as in an ,ato&ic/ proposition or a ,protocol state&ent/5.
0hus, he (rites, ,it appeared hopeless to try and understand clearly this stran%ely elusive idea
of a correspondence et(een a state&ent 4or proposition5 and a fact./
1
But then alon% ca&e *lfred 0ars"i.
2
We shall follo( Popper.s readin% of 0ars"i closely here, citin% at len%th in recountin% this
account of a correspondence of state&ents to facts as the asis of a theory of truth.
Popper presents us (ith t(o for&ulations, ,(hich state... very si&ply 4in a &etalan%ua%e5
under (hat conditions a certain assertion 4of an o1ect lan%ua%e5 correspond to the facts.
,415 0he state&ent, or the assertion, cSno is hite. corresponds to the facts if, and only if,
sno( is, indeed, (hite.
,425 0he state&ent, or the assertion, c8rass is red. corresponds to the facts, if and only if,
%rass is, indeed, red./
3o( the ,decisive point,/ accordin% to Popper, is that ,in order to spea" of correspondence to
the facts, and do 415 and 425, (e &ust use a &etalan%ua%e/< presu&aly everythin% that,
distinct fro&, reflects on the assertions concernin% ,sno(/ and ,%rass/< ,in (hich (e can
spea! a&out to things: state$ents< and the facts to hich these state$ents refer+>
B
In Popper.s account, no &ore is said aout the relation et(een the &etalan%ua%e and the
o1ect, as if it ere all so o&vious+ 4;or hi&, it is. $e refers, for e'a&ple, to ,the hi%hly intuitive
character of 0ars"i.s ideas./5
#
So, then, (hat does Popper &ean and intend here2 0ruth is
constituted in the &eta9lin%uistic relation of (hat he calls the &etalan%ua%e to an o1ect
lan%ua%e, the latter ein% that assertion in (hich a synthetic 1ud%&ent is &ade, as in, ,Sno(
is (hite./ 0herein lies the correspondence. But that correspondence is validated, on Popper.s
o(n account, if and only if the o1ect lan%ua%e assertion ,corresponds to the facts,/ in the
e'a&ple cited, if and only if sno( is (hite, (hile the o1ect lan%ua%e assertion that ,?rass is
red/ is, (e assu&e, an instance of a falsifiale state&ent. But the point to note here is
validation depends on the intuitive seeing, the perception, of sno( that is (hite and %rass that
is not red, that, (hile validation proceeds in the sa&e &anner of testin% y (ay of falsification
4and thus Popper (ill spea" only of an ,appro'i&ation to truth/5, the falsif%ing testing itself,
and hence the correspondence to facts, rests on intuitive certaint%, precisel% hat in all other
cases 4opper re9ects+ 0he o1ect lan%ua%e so9called is the precise e)uivalent of and analo% to
,ato&ic propositions/ and ,protocol state&ents./ What Popper re1ects in Carnap, he affir&s in
0ars"i.
C
of pro%ress 41ustifyin% our rac"eted re&ar"5. $o( could it e other(ise2 In this re%ard, co&pare the re&ar"s cited
fro& von Wei=sQc"er in the penulti&ate note, 0hird Study, Second S"etch, ,Continuity et(een Suantu& 6echanics
and Classical Physics,/ aove.
1
,Iid,/ D02.
2
"ahrheits&egriff 417DC5, literally the ,concept of truth,/ ut translated into En%lish under the title 3ogic, Se$antics,
Meta$athe$atics 417CO5.
D
,0ruth, Rationality and the ?ro(th of Lno(led%e/ in Con9ectures and Refutations, D0D9D0#.
#
,Iid,/ D0D.
C
,-et Carnap is nevertheless really retainin% the funda&ental ideas of the psycholo%istic approach to the prole&E all
that he is doin% is to translate the& into the Tfor&al &odel of speech.. $e says that the sentences of science are
tested T(ith the help of protocol sentences.< ut since these are e'plained as state&ents or sentences T(hich are not
in need of confir&ation ut serve as a asis for all other sentences of science,. this a&ounts to say N in the ordinary
T&aterial. &ode of speech 9 that the protocol sentences refers to the T%iven./+ to the Tsense9data./ The 3ogical of
Scientific Discover%, GG. Perhaps the only difference is that in 0ars"i.s case in the instances (hich Popper provides,
there is a further e' plicit appeal, na&ely to ,the T%iven.+ to the sense9data.,/ i.e., in 4opper.s on ter$s this is a
ps%chologistic appeal to perceptual intuition+
So the assertion of the continuity et(een co&&on sense and scientific "no(led%e 4is
contradicted, as (e have descried, on several occasions y Popper.s o(n account and5
rests on the conflation of the constructed, lo%ical su1ect (ith the concrete, practical one
(hich, in its turn, opens on the prole& of the irrationality of the sustratu&, the denial of (hat
is al(ays other(ise presupposed, na&ely that practical su1ect, a contradiction that, in turn, is
papered over y a resort to the irrational and aritrary &ethodolo%ical devise of decision,
(hich, finally, de&onstrates the science proceeds y (ay of an astract dialectic of concepts
that &as"s its real, hidden intentionality 4telos5 that %uides its construction as 4a5 theory 4of the
do&ination of nature5, an astract dialectic that in the end, in its atte&pt to flee ,applied
science/ 4(here it openly re1oins the our%eois pro1ect of nature do&ination in its e)ually open
lin"a%e to capital accu&ulation5 throu%h a correspondence theory of truth, rin%s us ac" to
the practical su1ect, to an o1ectively practical ein%.
The Materialist Dialectic
2piste$olog% as Revolutionar% Social Theor%, and Transcendence of the 7prioras of 3ogical
Su&9ectivit% in the 7ctivit% of an 1&9ectivel% 4ractical Being
0he antino&ies of scientific thou%ht arise necessarily fro& the societal pro1ect it e&odies, the
endless e'pansion of productive forces throu%h nature do&ination, the interests of a particular
class in society dressed out in service to hu&anity.
Co&&on sense is lar%ely at odds (ith scientific "no(led%e, the lo%ical su1ect al(ays tacitly
refers ac" to the practical one in (hich it is %rounded, these aprioras devolve on the irrational
lac" of foundations in science and the o1ectively necessary failure to accordin%ly reconstruct
the asis of science drives the theorist to articulate an aritrary, irrational decisionis&, (hich
in turn issues in an effort to found science in an o1ective, asolute theory of truth as a
correspondence (ith the ,facts/ that, contradictorily, rests on the sa&e %round as the criti)ue
of induction atte&pted to undercut and fro& (hich the entire theori=ation started.
Science as Popper de&ands and as he understands it strives to oliterate its foundations in
o1ectively practical su1ectivity, to reaffir& o1ectivis& 4i.e., a theori=ation of the (orld asent
the su1ectivity on the asis of (hich our "no(led%e and understandin% arises5 and
ph%sicalis$: It is &etaphysical, for $etaph%sics is precisel% an% theori/ation that is
independent of an% and all possi&le o&9ectivel% practical su&9ectivities and dependent on none
for its validation.
?Constituted in and through the theori/ation of the $odern science of nature 0in particular,
the ne ph%sics5, the Naxio$atic s%ste$ati/ation> and those funda$ental concepts 0N$atter,>
Nenerg%,> Nsu&ato$ic particles,> Nlight,> etc+5 hich for$ its core 0are its foundation and
$ainsta%5 are reductionist assu$ptions, ato$istic postulates of a theoretical anal%sis
pro9ected as real, as underl%ing Nrealities+> 0his is physicalis&
1
<
1
*&on% other thin%s, (hat Popper really affir&s (ith his reco%nition that ,facts/ are theory laden is a co&&it&ent to
this &etaphysical theory (e call physicalis&.
,*ll universal concepts incorporate theories. *nd althou%h so&e of these can e tested, they can ever e e'haustively
tested 4and can never e verified5. 0he state&ent T$ere is a %lass of (ater. is open to an indefinite nu&er and
ine'haustile nu&er of tests N che&ical tests, for e'a&ple N ecause (ater, li"e anythin% else, is reco%ni=ale y its
la-li!e &ehavior 4cf+ the end of section 2C of 3+Sc+D.5. 0hus T(ater. is dispositional Hi.e., structural or relationalJ, li"e
every other universal concept. Even Tred. is dispositional, for T0his surface is red. asserts that this surface has a
disposition to reflect red li%ht/ 4Realis$ and the 7i$ of Science, 1075.
Perhaps this state&ent, ,$ere is a %lass of (ater,/ is open to an indefinite nu&er of tests, ut only at a %reat re&ove
and only under conditions of e'peri&entation. *s I survey the roo& loo"in% for a %lass or reach for a drin", the %lass
itself, ho(ever, appears inseparale fro& its &eanin%, and that &eanin% is i&&ediately present to &e in its very
intuitive seein%< that &eanin% is incarnate in the %lass itself as a use9o1ect for drin"in% &ecause e produced it for
that purpose, and in &a"in% it e&edded that &eanin% in it. 0his is the funda&ental situation, the state&ent to e
,tested/ is secondary 4or tertiary5, hi%hly re&oved and does not even arise in daily activity.
If the prole&s of the relation of theory and practice, and truth and falsity, are to have
&eanin%, if the role and function of the &odern science of nature and capitalist technolo%y
4to%ether (ith technolo%ies of capital on (hich it, circuitously, rests5 are to e critically
assessed, (e &ust not only for%o reductionist and physicalist realis&, (e &ust return to that
point at (hich all the aporias, dead9ends and contradictions in Popper.s account have een
e'posed+ Whose activity %enerates co&&on sense and scientific "no(led%e2 0he lo%ical
su1ect is conflated (ith (hat in Popper.s concept of e'perience2 What is the source of the
prole& of foundations 4and (hy is the sustratu& irrational52 What is there only recourse to
decision2 >n (hat asis (ould the &ove&ent 4of concepts5 in thou%ht achieve concretion2
We &ust return to su1ectivity of an o1ectively practical ein%+ We &ust start fro& that (hich
(e are &ost fa&iliar 4ourselves5, (hich, as self9foundin%, constitutes a foundation ithout
ein% a %round in the classical sense of per&anent, unchan%in%, self9sufficient and (ithout
cause<
1ur pri$ordial attitude toard realit% is not that of a passive su&9ect confronting an external
realit%+
We are not o1ects a&on% other o1ects, passively for&ed odies in a (orld of &athe&atically
and )uantitatively deter&ined ready9&ade o1ects, Popper.s physicalist (orld. Reflectively
(e, conte&porary &en and (o&en as historical individuals, find ourselves al(ays, already
actively en%a%ed in a pre%iven (orld of others, of nature, and a (orld of interrelated and
&utually i&plicative, &eanin% e&odyin% use o1ects and cultural o1ects. It is precisely in
reflection 9 itself a secondary operation and for& of hu&an activity in and throu%h (hich (e
disen%a%ed ourselves on the asis of a preco%nitive telos 9 that (e uncover this, our initial
situation...
Who are (e2
What is an o1ectively practical ein% and ho( is that o1ectivity deter&ined2
Pri&ordially, o1ectivity is incarnate intersu&9ectivit%: We have an inside, interiority, &ecause as
e$&odied su&9ects (e have an outside, &ecause (e are visily, tan%ily and audile present
to others< not ,the >ther/< (ho confir& us in our identities, and not ecause (e are ,e%os,/
,I/s, not ecause I a& su1ectively certain ,I a&/ an e%o that I discover in reflection a la
:escartes or $usserl. *n ,o1ectively practical ein%/ has the sense, philosophically, of a
co&&unity of livin%, sentient ein%s 4ein%s that live, reathe, eat, sleep, feel and suffer, and
(hich are &ortal, (hich die5, conscious ein%s, &en and (o&en, (ho, in nature, as nature,
act in concert, that is, for& and shape a (orld, ein%s that &a"e and re&a"e the&selves on
the asis of pre9e'istin% natural, social and historical conditions and circu&stances.
>1ectively practical su1ectivities are conscious ein%s.
Consciousness here is not pri&arily e%oic consciousness, e&odied su1ectivity is not
pri&arily a theoretical a(areness that %enerates the concepts of philosophy and science.
0hese are the&atic possiilities for an a(areness that e'ists as a field in (hich the ody as
lived is already tacitly present and (hich opens onto the surroundin% (orld in (hich it is
i&&ersed. Both fi%ures 4the&es5 and %round 4field of a(areness5 are co9present. Invested
(ith &eanin%, perceptual 4sense5 e'perience is the tissue in (hich e, fro& (hich ,I/s at any
rate arise, and the (orld are intert(ined and interconnected<
1
@i"e(ise for the red surface+ ,Red/ does not, e&phatically does not, assert it reflects red li%ht, a state&ent that
presupposes the entire physics of spectral analysis. Instead, it asserts that perceptually, intuitively, that the surface
has color (hich is &eanin%fully identified throu%h preco%nitively assi&ilated lan%ua%e ac)uisition, and refers ac" to
visile )ualities that appear in the (orld, nature, hu&ani=ed nature and the uilt environ&ent.
1
,Sense e'perience< invests the )uality Hof a sensuous o1ectJ (ith vital value, %raspin% it first in its &eanin% for us,
for< our ody, (hen it co&es aout that it al(ays involves a reference to the ody. 0he prole& is to understand
these stran%e relationships (hich are (oven et(een the parts of the landscape, or et(een it and &e as incarnate
su1ect, and throu%h (hich an o1ect perceived can concentrate in itself a (hole scene or eco&e the i&a%o of a
*s o1ectively practical su1ects, our initial situation as it is for&ed is actively and co&&unally
constituted.
0his initial situation of ein% al(ays, already en%a%ed in a pre%iven, ut not ready &ade (orld
ta"es the for& of practico9sensile activity carried on (ithin the conte't of a social and
historical life(orld, the un)uestioned, fa&iliar (orld of daily activity that includes, of course,
others, our fra%&entary co&&unities, the uilt environ&ent, and sensile nature often
hu&ani=ed natural landscapes, all of (hich (e are i&&ersed in. It is in and throu%h our daily
activity in 4and for&ative for5 this social and historical life(orld that (e, so to spea", over our
heads and ehind our ac"s produce and reproduce ourselves, this (orld, and our relation to
nature. It is, further, on the %round of our daily activities that (e pursue deter&inate %oals, and
at the sa&e ti&e that our i&&ediate intuitions of reality arise. Both as a &eans to reali=e
those %oals and as e'planations of reality, it is here the cate%ories of co&&on sense are, in
concrete social conte'ts, %enerated<
,t is ulti$atel% ith reference to this orld, the orld of dail% practice, that other theoretical
constructs, such as science, are produced.
0he physicalist (orld is a &erely one such construct, an ideolo%ically potent one that
i&&ediately captures and fi'es the fetishi=ed structure and or%ani=ation of societies of capital
for&ed throu%h scientific and technolo%ical inputs into production and si&ilar construction of
uilt environ&ent. But that physicalist (orld is itself ased on a realistically &etaphysical
interpretation, such as in Popper, that in the end is, on its on ter$s, so utterly incoherent that
not only does it see" to resurrect concepts that fly in the face of its e&race of the ne(
physics ut that violate its syste&ic re)uire&ents 4i.e., its o(n proscription on superfluous
hypotheses5. 0his is, &ind you, all in the interests of preservin% that ,realis&,/ that is, the
,pro%ra&/ of conte&plative e'teriority vis9P9vis the ,o1ects of our "no(led%e,/ and the
,o1ectivity/ (hose first re)uire&ent is anishin% a su1ect that can and does act in the (orld.
Reality, then, is not, even funda&entally K&atter./ If in science, for e'a&ple, one spea"s of the
Kpri&acy of &atter,K this is &eant not &erely episte&olo%ically ut also ontolo%ically. 0hat, of
course, is nonsense. Rnderstood at once as the sustratu& of nature, the asic ele&ent of
(hich nature includin% &an as natural is for&ed, and as the principle of intelli%iility of nature,
K&atterK is a theoretical construct (hose production 4y early, scientific our%eois intellectuals5
(as ori%inally necessitated y the very class teleolo%y &otivatin% the construction of natural
science itself, na&ely, nature9do&ination. K6atterK is a socio9historically specific theoretical
construction of the &eanin% and si%nificance of nature for hu&an e'istence.
1
0his, the (orld of daily e'perience practicall% stripped of the veil of reifications enshroudin% it,
an act identical (ith its revolutionary transfor&ation, is the real (orld<
(hole se%&ent of life. Sense e'perience is that vital co&&unication (ith the (orld (hich &a"es it present as a
fa&iliar settin% of our life./ 6erleau9Ponty, The 4heno$enolog% of 4erception, C29CD.
It should e ovious that the individual ,I/ at its ori%ins starts fro& the assi&ilation 4,ac)uisition/5 of lan%ua%e, an
active and a laorious effort 4even if not recollected as such5 underta"en in childhood, and rests on a co&&unity of
spea"ers, a ,(e,/ even if that co&&unity has socio9historically narro(ed to the confines of a our%eois fa&ily of only
&other and father. But (e can also paleoanthropolo%ically reconstruct the ori%ins of hu&an lan%ua%e as such. $ere
too the ,I/ rests on co&&on activity, on ,(e/s. See our ,Wor" and Speech,/ in particular the discussion entitled ,0he
>ri%ins of Consciousness./
1
0he only reality that nature as K&atterK has is the aesthetically u%ly stuff capitalis& &a"es of nature. But nature, i.e.,
perceptually %iven, sensile nature, is part of the real (orld+ It appears in the life(orld as the hu$anl% for$ed natural
landscapes (hose reality and e'istence (e can reconstruct e'tend ac" to the ori%ins of life on Earth, to the very
ori%ins of the Earth, and in this sense is the ground of our historical life(orld. 0hus this nature, that on the asis of
(hich theories of KnatureK 4includin% nature as K&atterK5 are constructed and that to (hich they ulti&ately refer ac",
is throu%h and throu%h socially and historically &ediated oth in its sensile for& and inseparaly in its &eanin% and
si%nificance.
3o &atter ho( elaorate, cate%ories of any analysis (hatsoever that fail to penetrate the
i&&ediacy of the life(orld si&ultaneously fail to achieve an account of its intelli%iility.
3either the cate%ories of co&&on sense founded i&&ediately on our life(orld activities, nor
scientific concepts elaorated in a specific, &ethodolo%ically deter&ined theoretical activity,
%ive an ade)uate account of the structure of reality, its intelli%iility. 0hey astract fro& the
concreteness of the real, and never proceed in thou%ht to %o eyond catchin% and fi'in% its
for&s that are already anticipated in the pro1ection of a precate%orial class teleolo%y. 0hus, the
see&in%ly self9evident e'planations of our (orld pose the prole& of false consciousness. In
%eneral, false consciousness is precisely the failure to understand that the pheno&ena (hich
present the&selves to us in daily practice are $ediatel% i&&ediate, that these socially and
historically constituted pheno&enal for&s of reality not only reveal ut also conceal its
structure. Reality in its intelli%iility is not i&&ediately present to us<
0he (orld is here, i&&ediately present to us, ut it is not "no(n and understood in this &ode.
;or each and every one of us, the (orld is al(ays, already there, pre%iven or in-itself, (hich is
not say it is ,in9itself/ in the classical sense of self9sufficient and (ithout cause, causi sui. 40he
pre%iven (orld of daily life that is ala%s, alread% there is, once de&ystified, a product of the
daily activity of previous %enerations of &en and (o&en.5 If the (orld is to eco&e Kfor us,/
eco&e our (orld 4i.e., the (orld of our fa&iliar dealin%s and activities (e si&ply ta"e for
%ranted5, (e &ust actively co&e into contact (ith it+ We &ust appropriate it. In the ele&ent of
thou%ht in (hich the theoretical appropriation of the (orld is acco&plished, to "no( the real
(e &ust also first co&e into contact (ith it. But co&in%9into9contact is here very peculiar+ 0o
"no( the (orld re)uires a &ediatin% 4o1ectivatin%5 operation, i.e., (e &ust conceptually
apprehend it<
It is in this &ediatin% activity that (e produce concepts.
We produce concepts in and throu%h (hich (e ideally reproduce reality in order to act on it,
that is, transfor& it y renderin% it practically rational.
While thin"in%, as the production of concepts, is itself a for& of hu&an creative activity, &ost
concepts are assi&ilated in the ac)uisition of lan%ua%e, in childhood practice, ut these
concepts ori%inate so&eho( 4they are not Platonic eide5. 0hey arise fro& ne%ativity, need,
(hich co&prehends not onl% our anthropolo%ical9evolutionary and socially &ediated and
for&ed physiolo%ical constitution ut affective cravin%, desire, etc. and co%nitive need 4e.%.,
the de&and for consistency in thin"in%, (ritin% or presentation5 as (ell.
1
We "no( and understand ecause (e produce the concepts in and throu%h (hich reality is
apprehended, and in producin%, %eneratin%, the& (e rin% forth so&ethin% novel, the concept
itself in and throu%h (e e'plain and co&prehend the (orld in order to act on it and in it. But
those concepts never exhaust that reality<
We do not co%nitively, not even e'istentially, choose to interpret the (orld, that is, to
co&prehend and e'plain it in order to act in it.
:ecisionis& is not %er&ane to the reality and discussion of a practical su1ect. 0he effort to
"no( and understand the (orld is a necessit% rooted in our ein%, in the anthropolo%ical9
evolutionary for&ed, sensory9odily constitution of a ein% called ,&an./
1
In another 4pole&ic5 conte't, Popper does reco%ni=e this ut the insi%ht has never een inte%rated into his thin"in%.
,Before (e can collect data, our interest in data of a certain !ind &ust e aroused+ the pro&le$ al(ays co&es first.
0he prole& in its turn &ay e su%%ested y practical needs, or y scientific or pre9scientific eliefs (hich, for so&e
reason or other, appear to e in need of revision./ The 4overt% of Historicis$, 121. E&phases in the ori%inal.
;or us, i.e., for our reconstruction of the paleoanthropolo%ical conditions of our for&ation as
such,
1
this necessity is at once an evolutionary and ,&ade/ product of upri%ht posture,
%enetically fi'ed and a feature in the develop&ent of ho&inids...
The Nlogical> conditions of the production of theories, perspectives and orld visions
i$$anent to concepts, language and speech are intertined ith and insepara&le fro$ the
experiential, anthropologico-sociall% for$ed self-ela&oration of the conditions of
individuali/ation+
Because ho&inids and Ho$o sapiens, havin% &ade the&selves,
2
stand upri%ht, they have
s&all pelvic openin%s. 0his &eans that infants &ust e orn (hile still i&&ature, not 1ust
physiolo%ically. *&on% ,hi%her,/ and the &ost co&ple' for&s of earthly life, hu&an children
alone 4since all ho&inids and other Ho$o species and individuals are no( e'tinct5 re)uired
prolon%ed &aterial care to co&pensate for this relatively short %estation period in the (o&.
0his evolutionary fact itself &a%nified the co&ple'ity of social interaction, insurin% it (ould
reach ac" and shape hu&an iolo%y as it evolved+ 0he essential steps in distinctivel% and
specificall% hu$an develop&ent, a develop&ent si&ilar to that occurs in the fetal period of
other &a&&als, ta"e place after irth in the case of hu&an ein%s, especially durin% the first
t(o years 4ut far eyond this period5. 7n a&sence of speciali/ed drives or instincts is the
consequence. 4Indeter&inate, unfocused and chaotic, drives do e'ist in hu&an ein%s at irth,
ut they are e'istentially ound up (ith, ,suli&ated/ and ,liidinally/ ,cathected/ as, socially
for&ed and canali=ed physiolo%ical, affective and co%nitive needs and interests throu%h
sociali=ation, i.e., in hu&ani=ation.5 0his socially constituted, and actively &ade physiolo%ical
,fact/ is (hat &a"es &en and (o&en ,instinctually deprived/ (orld open ein%s+ >ur
inco&plete for&ation at the &o&ent of our ori%ins 4irth (ith the len%thy postnatal period of
initial hu&ani=ation that follo(s5 recreates us, as hu&an, as deficient ein%s (ho in this
i&&ediate natally %iven for& are e'istentially helpless, creatin% a asic ,condition/+ We do not
have a ready9&ade ,nature,/ lac" an innate &oral purpose or co&pass, are not at irth
uni)uely fitted to a specific (orld, are asent speciali=ed drives or instincts and a
correspondin% environ&ent or &ilieu...
0his funda&ental, i.e., anthropo9ontolo%ical, situation is at the asis of activity in and throu%h
(hich a (orld and our identities are for&ed, co&pellin% us to %enerate a self9interpretation,
one that e'tends fro& ourselves to our place in reality in its totality.
1
We spea" of evidentially ased reconstructions (hen referrin% to our critical assess&ents of scientific accounts of
astrophysical, %eolo%ical and paleoanthropolo%ical ori%ins+ >ur standpoint is that of a social and historical reflection
on the a&assed e'perience of the (or"in% classes of the (orld, that an o1ectively for&ed (orld class, the
8esa$tar&eiter, and the necessary conditions and presuppositions, here the &ost re&ote and &ediated ones, of that
reflection. H;or a reassess&ent of the position ta"en here, see The Converging Crises in Nature and Societ% and their
Denounce$ent, :ivision II, Part IIE and for a theoretical 1ustification of an alternative perspective fro& (hich Will has
%one eyond the position set forth here, see the Introduction, ,What is at Issue in the E'a&ination of $u&an >ri%ins,/
to "h% the Stud% of Hu$an 1rigins is Necessar% to a Revolutionar% and 2$ancipator% 4ro9ect+ Both appear in
1rigins and 2ndings+ HEditorIs note.J
2
$u&an characteristics< an upri%ht posture, speech, the production of instru&ents for specific tas"s involved in
social reproduction, hierarchical social or%ani=ation as they all e'isted prior to hu&an develop&ent< (ere the
conse)uent of specific practices, particularly huntin%, su%%estin% that ,&an/ 4in oth "no(n lines of ,his/
develop&ent5 (as self9&ade, ,his/ appearance a product of ,his/ o(n activity of eco&in%< 0his should e )ualified+
0he co&ple' interpenetration and &ultiple deter&ination of activity, iolo%y, techni)ue, nature 4cli&ate5 and social
relations does not 1ust characteri=e anato&ically &odern &an ut is the central feature of ho&inid develop&ent
4includin% archaic Ho$o sapiens5 as such. In this sense, earthly nature and hu&anity have co-evolved since the first
appearance of the ho&inid %enus Ho$o< 8ust as anato&ical evolution did not precede social 4cultural5 and technical
develop&ent, and 1ust as it did not drive species develop&ent, the transition fro& ani&ality to hu&anity (as not a
linear process. HSee The 7ppearance of NSpirit> in 1rigins and Endin%s (hich is cited al&ost verati& here. EditorIs
note.J
We are ein%s (hose e'istence is a )uestion and riddle (ithout i&&ediate ans(er or a
pre%iven solution, conde&ned instead to &a"e our e'istence and capale of doin% so only
throu%h ideal &ediation 4for&ed throu%h speech and lan%ua%e5 that is present and %iven (ith
4yet constituted in and throu%h5 our activities. *ll our efforts in the (orld 4(hether in relation to
others, o1ects, institutions, nature, etc.5 are and can e carried out in no other (ay than y
for&in% a preco%nitive ,vie(/ of the (orld that orients us practically in this (orld+ We are
co&pelled to illu&ine our activity y producin% a self9interpretation that, arisin% on the %round
of daily practice, contains tacitly or e'plicitly a sense of the totality, that is, e'tends fro&
ourselves to our place in reality in its totality 4ourselves, the (orld (e have for&ed in nature as
hu&ani=ed nature, and nature in its unendin%, ate&poral eco&in%5, activity in (hich and on
the asis of (hich reality and totality, reality as the totality, is itself understood and e'plained
fro& co&&on sense to philosophy+ We as hu&an al(ays already, and necessarily, act on the
&asis of a deter$inate conception of realit% and, inextrica&l% &ound up ith it, a vision of the
orld e ish and need to create.
1
We "no( and understand concepts ecause (e produce the&.
It is not , ut e that for& the %round on (hich concepts are %enerated. It is under socio9
historically and culturally specific conditions (hich e share that conceptual production rises
fro& the co&&on foundations of a collective sense of propriety and &oral i&peratives, of
loyalties, sanctions and taoos, and of e'pectations and ideas aout the (orld, all of (hich
develop out of social shared for&s of activity and (or" 4precisely those socio9historically and
culturally specific conditions5, all of (hich are estalished in the ac)uisition of lan%ua%e and
throu%h the len%thy practice of the socially infor&ed for&ation of individuality and
personality<
0he production of concepts is the sa&e ti&e their intuition, and in this 4not $usserl.s5 sense is
intellectual intuition 4"esenshau5. 0he production of concepts is the creation of a su&9ective
sense that esta&lishes the $eaning of this or that aspect of realit% itself. 0hese senses (e
produce are social 4historical5 products<
Theor% of Truth
* correspondence theory of truth 40ars"i, Popper5 is a variant of one for (hich consciousness
,reflects/ ,reality,/ and truth is a )uestion of conceptually ,appro'i&atin%/ the structure of the
real so reflected. >ur perspective is different+
In %eneral, the a(areness of social su1ects is e&odied either tacitly, ,unconsciously,/ in
co&&on sense, its pre1udices, &oral senti&ents, and its unreflected vie(s and theories, or
e'plicitly and self9consciously in syste&atic "no(led%e, ,ideolo%ies/ and (orld visions. 0he
concepts, conceptual constructs and theories that &a"e up the for&er are %enerated (ithout
e'plicitly attendin% to their production 4(hich is (hy their production is &ista"enly assu&ed to
e ,passive/5E those of the latter are actively produced. 0he unity of oth for&s of synthesis
can in a narro( (ay e desi%nated as ,consciousness./ 3either is essentially passive in
relation to the (orld. 3either ,reflects/ 4,refracts/ or ,distorts/5 that (orld and neither results in
conceptual understandin% that &ore or less ,appro'i&ates/ its structure. /Consciousness/
does not ,reflect/ the (orld, first, ecause the structure of each is essentially dissi&ilar, and
second, ecause oth consciousness and theory are active &o&ents in the construction of
reality 4(orld5 itself...
We have no( produced the pre&ises on the asis of (hich (e can preli&inarily as" aout the
&eanin% of truth, initially for&ulate the contours of a theory of truth.
2
1
See Co$$unis$, the concludin% section entitled ,0otality,/ appearin% in 1rigins and 2ndings+
2
;or elaoration of this and the previous section, see ,>n 0ruth./ H*lso see Dialectic of the Concrete+ Theoretical
Hnit% of Method, 2piste$olog% and 1ntolog% in the Reconstruction of the 1rigins and 2volution of Man in 1rigins and
0he attain&ent of truth, for&in% the critical activity of reason, is the decisive aspect of the
theoretical appropriation of the (orld, an activity that each and all of us as practical su1ects
continuously underta"e. But truth is not achieved in each and every act of theori=ation, it is not
i&&ediately accessile and reachin% it re)uires %enuine, arduous effort, $e%el.s laor of the
concept.
0ruth itself is constituted in the ele&ent of thou%ht as a product of a critical operation of
disocclusion, as the unveiling of the structure of realit%.
In not strai%hta(ay %raspin% the structure of reality thou%ht ta"es a detour. It is precisely
ecause it &a"es a detour in see"in% to constitute truth that thou%ht, i.e., as practical ein%s
(e (ho thin", can %et lost 4say, in a &a=e of concepts5. If syste&atic coherency is to have
&eanin% at all, it does so in that it is our only %uarantee a%ainst %ettin% lost. 0hat is,
syste&atic coherency in the order of thou%ht &eans the e%innin% of any in)uiry 4into an
aspect of or reality itself5 &ust e for&ally identical (ith its conclusion. 0he for&al identity of
the points of departure and arrival is our sole %uarantor a%ainst losin% our (ay. Stated
differently, the &ethod of thou%ht is &ove&ent in thou%ht, a &ove&ent fro& the i&&ediately
%iven and sensile 4say, co&&on sense, opinions5 to the &ediate and conceptual and ac" to
the %iven+ 3o lon%er %iven, ut differentiated, conte'tuali=ed, conceptually deter&ined and
intelli%ile. 0his &ove&ent is the $aterialist dialectic of concrete concepts, a process of
concretion, is &ove&ent in (hich reality is ideationally reproduced, co&prehended and
e'plained, and throu%h (hich (e %ain practical direction in actin% in the (orld.
0he autono&y of thou%ht, the lo%ic %overnin% its &ove&ent, does not pure and si&ple for& a
totality of for&al rules applicale to o1ects, to the K&atterK of thou%ht. Because ideality is
situated neither apart fro& nor prior to reality, ut is itself an 4ideal5 aspect of reality, ecause
thin"in% is a for& of hu&an activity, the activity of a practical su1ect, conse)uently (orldly
and te&poral, any for&al syste& of a priori, independent rules, as such a fetishistic lo%ic, is
ori%inally %rounded in and uilt up out of the relation of thou%ht to the daily (orld of real
o1ects, co&&on sense intuitions, opinionated chatter, etc. @o%ic, then, is dialectical, a
&ove&ent in and of opinion, its invalidation, and transcendence. 3one of this is y (ay of
su%%estin% thin"in% is a psycholo%ical facultyE it is co%nitive activity. But, %enetically, the
constitution of thou%ht is &ediated y the sensuous, practical production of reality, the activity
of the real, hu&an co&&unity in daily life. In this sense, the relation of thou%ht to its o1ect4s5
is &utually i&plicative, co9penetratin%, and reciprocally enrichin%.
Syste&atic coherency and lo%ical consistency, ho(ever, are for&al, and not the sole, criteria
of truth. In other (ords, reality cannot e conceptually e'hausted, concept and its o1ect are
not co&&ensurate. 4It they (ere, $e%el (ould have een ri%ht, history (ould have ended,
reality (ould have een co&prehensively captured and co&e to itself in *solute Spirit
identical (ith self9conscious asolute "no(in%5. If reality is not reducile to cate%ories, then
4as (e have already sho(n (ith Popper and 0ars"i5 neither is truth a )uestion of &atchin%
concept to concept. Instead, )uestions of truth have a further di&ension, na&ely, as )uestions
of ade)uacy. 0his is not, thou%h, a &atter of the ade)uacy of concept 4theory5 to reality, (hich
once a%ain in the end (ould &erely &ean &atchin% of concept to concept. *t any rate,
different and &utually inco&&ensurate for&s of "no(led%e can refer ac" to the sa&e reality
4co&&unity5. Rather, inas&uch as all conceptual production is nor$ativel% governed y an
intersu1ective telos %rounded ori%inally in the life(orld, that is, in the activity of a co&&unity
of o1ectively practical su1ects... &eanin% theory has a K&aterialK aspect that concerns social
1ustice... concepts or theories &ust e referred ac" to that telos that necessitated their
production.
2ndings+ EditorIs note.J
-et, the very activity of conceptual production 4and its products5, throu%h (hich (e
co&prehend reality and in (hich truth as the unveilin% of the structure of reality is constituted,
is a historically %rounded activity. Is truth therey relativi=ed2 *re there only the various truths,
oftenti&es contradictory, of historically deter&ined intersu1ective %roups, social classes, and
co&&unities2 -es and no. -es, for the ovious reason stated in the last interro%ative
state&ent. 3o ecause truth is at once possile and necessary for a su1ect (hose very ein%
re)uires it, us, to co&prehend and e'plain reality in order to act on and in it.
While a correspondence theory of truth rin%s to%ether t(o ri%idly and falsely opposed poles,
that of an astract lo%ical su1ect and that of a &assive du& o1ect, reality as the a%%re%ate
totality of its ato&istic ele&ents, the ,facts,/ the critical, theoretical operation of disocclusion
ai&in% at the constitution of truth rises on the %round of daily activity and doin%s. It attains
truth (hen+
it ta"es up all other rival theories and perfor&s an i&&anent analysis of their content, in other
(ords, it evaluates the& in ter&s of syste&atic coherency, consistency, and stated o1ectivesE
it de&onstrates all other such theories, and itself as (ell, ear reference (ithin the&selves
4itself5 ac" to a socio9historical co&&unity and specifies that reference, i.e., intersu1ective
telos, class, or co&&unity teleolo%yE
it retrospectively ta"es up the events and develop&ents of a future that had at the &o&ent of
its ori%inal for&ulation yet to unfold and &easures itself a%ainst these events and
develop&ents in order to deter&ine ho( (ell it has accounted for the&, (hether it is in need
of revision, a&end&entE (hether so&e other theory could have etter &ade that account, and
hence it is in need of overthro(E
It reflectively underta"es to 1ustify its co&prehensive &eanin% and purpose, its telos? an
operation &odern science has never en%a%ed in and cannot in principle carry out< that is, it
see"s to 9ustif% co$$unit%-grounded nor$s of the good life &% de$onstrating the% could
practicall% $ediate construction of a orld infor$ed, pervaded, and shaped &% principles of
social 9usticeE
1
it states the conditions of the supersession of all co&petin% theories, i.e., the conditions of the
practical sulation of the contradictory social e'istence that %ave rise to these theories, as (ell
as the conditions of its practical transcendence, that is, the condition of the reali=ation of
social 1usticeE and,
its telos rendered e'plicit at the level of theory is practically reali=ed and eco&e fact<
0heory deals (ith the real (orld, the (orld of our co&&unity9ased daily practice. In so doin%,
it ta"es a detour, that is, y (ay of articulatin% the intelli%iility of reality, it returns us to
ourselves as self9consciously practical su1ects, to our initial situation no( conceptually
deter&ined and fully &ediated, co&prehended, e'plained, and %iven practical direction.
1
0he theory of truth and %roundin% the )uest for social 1ustice has een tied to%ether in the seventh the&e, ,6ar'9
$e%el+ 0he *i&s of 0heory is Co&&unis& as the ?ood @ife,/ of Hegel-Marx, Marx-Hegel+ HEditorIs note.J
Part I!
Critical Rationality and @ieralis&
The Class 4olitics of Science
6ired in astract individualis&, the principles of a philosophical lieralis& as articulated y
Popper are entirely inade)uate to co&prehend develop&ents (ithin society, not to &ention
the develop&ent of society itself, and cannot 1ust as si&ply e astractly, i.e.,
&ethodolo%ically, reunified (ith the scientific effort to understand nature.
$is politics are the rarefied criticis&s of astractions, e%innin% (ith totalitarianis&,
proceedin% to the ,&ethodolo%ical/ asis of utopianis&, (hich devolves lar%ely in 4and
presupposes5 a defense of the our%eois individual, today a (hisper and product of the
spectacle (ithin the order of capital. *t est the ai& of reali=in% personal freedo& is only
for&ally achievale 4for lieralis& philosophical or other(ise, freedo& is concretely li&ert%,
i.e., first and fore&ost the unha&pered aility to dispose of private property in production, and
then, all (itticis&s and puns aside, &erely the freedo& to uy and sell. In today.s (orld it has
the sin%ular, popular sense of consu&in% profli%ately, oscenely and entropically in capitalist
&ar"ets5. *nd, it is for&ally achievale only for a very tiny &inority of persona%es and only
(ithin the conte't of a lieral pulic sphere, (hich as lieral has tended in history to transcend
4and as such aolish5 itself, (hile its institutional e'pressions have een sha&s institutions, a
pheno&enon (ell noted even efore Popper hi&self has reached intellectual &aturity. *ll in
all, it is patent that he at &est operates (ith a vastly restricted concept of freedo&.
0he practice in and throu%h (hich this slender threat of freedo& is achieved finds its defense
in the principles of philosophical lieralis&, (hich are for&ulated in opposition to the &assive
reality of the state 4a for&ulation (hich is co&pletely ho&olo%ous (ith the episte&olo%ical
situation of a lo%ical su1ect confrontin% a &assively inert reality opposite it5. In the actual
course of historical develop&ent even as that develop&ent unfolds conte&porarily, here and
no(, this defense is a &as)uerade, a dense veil thro(n over the actual, relentlessly on%oin%
annihilation of individuality that this du& &ove&ent, that of capital, ai&s at.
Popper.s criti)ue of utopianis& si&ilarly rests on the sa&e astract individualis&, the sa&e
defense of the narro(est concept of freedo&, and the sa&e inade)uate or, etter, alto%ether
asent social analysis. $e cannot really e situated in the conservative philosophical
historio%raphy of the rival totalitarians such as that of $annah *rendt,
1
funda&entally ecause
he (or"s (ithout an understandin% of history, and then ecause he does not rise to the level
of an analysis. In this respect, too, not only &i%ht (e add that his criti)ue of Plato is si&ply
irrelevant,
2
ut the &ethod and lo%ic of scientific discovery loc"s insi%ht into the functionall%
totalitarian character of the order of capital that he defends.
We shall start (ith one of those i% ,is&s,/ and proceed y (ay of a lon% detour< dealin%
(ith the state< to the individuality 4philosophically co&prehended y hi& in ter&s of
&ini&alist lieral doctrine5 that he defends, and end (ith that other i% ,is&,/ historicis&,
&ethodolo%ically the asis of the totalitarianis& that he counterposes to ,free/ individuality.
We shall e critical throu%hout, and (e shall apolo%i=e in advance for a discussion (hich is
urdened (ith len%thy footnotes.
The Critique of NHtopianis$>: 7n 1pen Societ%K ,ts 2ne$iesK
;or Popper, utopianis& is inti&ately tied to totalitarianis&, for the utopian $entalitI carried
into practice (ill under specific conditions 4not for&ulated y Popper5 leads to a totalitarian
reality.
1
The 1rigins of Totalitarianis$+
2
The 1pen Societ% and its 2ne$ies 4!ol. 15.
0he criti)ue of (hat Popper calls totalitarianis& see"s to un&as" intellectual perfidy, the
,etrayal/ of ,so &any of the intellectual leaders HsicJ of &an"ind,/ a&on% (hich, to na&e
na&es, are Plato, $e%el and 6ar'.
1
0heir treachery threatens ,our/ civili=ation, i.e., our%eois
culture and the order of capital erroneously identified (ith the ,West/ 4(hich in the non9West,
if you (ill, is often synony&ous (ith European capitalis&5 and its alle%ed roots in ancient
?reece, thou%h the nature of the relation of these intellectual ,leaders/ to the threat, ,those
reactionary &ove&ents (hich have tried, and still try, to overthro( civili=ation HsicJ and return
to trialis& HsicJ,/
2
presu&aly the social &ove&ents %enerally desi%nated y the ter&s
3a=is& and Stalinis&, is not entirely clear, unless it is threat to the ,critical po(ers of
$an!ind/
D
4i.e., capital.s scientific intelli%entsias5. Popper.s pro1ect constitutes a vastly
reductionist, the narro(est of for&s of intellectual history.
It is not our intent here to (or" throu%h, discuss and criti)ue the factious and facile
assu&ptions, assertions and assess&ent put forth in this aceric pole&ic. We have already
confronted the decisive theoretical issues in the for%oin%, those ontolo%ical, episte&olo%ical,
historical and &ethodolo%ical pre&ises that, un)uestioned and lar%ely un1ustified, characteri=e
Popper.s (or". $ere (e shall &erely present su&&ary re&ar"s concernin% t(o of those three
previously &entioned traitors 4one (ho &ust e rele%ated to a te'tual note5
#
and, additionally,
Popper hi&self, re&ar"s that &ay serve as the asis for further, future discussion.
;irst, then, there is Popper. 0here is a sin%le aspect to this.
C
1
,&id, D.
;or Plato, ,&id, 2191O#E for 6ar', ,&id, 2G#9DF#E and for $e%el, ,&id, 17792GD.
2
,&id+
D
,&id+ E&phasis added.
#
See the 3ote on Plato concludin% this section.
C
*ctually there is a second aspect also.
@i"e the other ri%ht (in% critics of the fascist and state capitalist develop&ents of the thirties, those (ho actually lived
throu%h the period, Popper did not pulish his rant until after the last i&perialist (orld (ar (as over. Whatever the
&otivation, in all cases this has the appearance of an utter lac" of scruple, of hed%in% ones ets, of (aitin% to see
(ho (ould e&er%e victorious in the stru%%le et(een the de&ocratic our%eoisie and its totalitarian counterparts.
Popper pulished his 1pen Societ% in 17C0, a hi%hpoint, an early one and one of &any, of the Cold War so9called.
;ifteen years transpired et(een the &o&ent he left !ienna in 17DC 4fascists, 3a=is, had %raed state po(er in
*ustria over the odies of the red Schut/&und in 17D#5 and the date of the pulication of this (or". $e (as silent for
this entire period. Well, not e'actly. $e has a len%thy list of pulications datin% fro& this period, ut none that deal
directly (ith the ,totalitarians/ and ,totalitarianis&./ *&on% the for&er (e can nu&er countless revolutionary
co&&unists (ho did spea" out and very, very early 4(hile Popper (as 1ust e%innin% to ,thin" throu%h/ the prole&s
of induction and de&arcation in 17175, such as $er&ann ?orter and $einriette Roland $olst (ho opposed @enin as
left co&&unists 4seePhillipe Bourrinet, The Dutch and 8er$an Co$$unist 3eft, especially chapters #, C5E the anti9
Bolshevi" co&&unists Larl Lorsch and >tto RAhl 4for RAhle, see his ,Report fro& 6osco(/ 417205, ,0he Revolution
is not a Party *ffair/ 417205 and ,0he Stru%%le *%ainst ;ascis& Be%ins (ith the Stru%%le *%ainst Bolshevis&,/ 17D75.
0hen there (ere &en li"e 8ehan van den $oven, a Bel%ian co&&unist and theorist in ;rench and Italian left
co&&unist circles, (ho died in a 3a=i concentration ca&p in early 17#CE &en li"e *nte Cili%a incarcerated in
isolators, Stalinist political prisoner holdin% facilities 4see his The Russian 2nig$a, Boo" III, chapter !5, and in
particular the tendency he, a&on% others, e&odiedE there (ere the revolutionary Spanish 6ar'ists as a %roup (ho
fou%ht ;ranco fascists and Stalinists in Spain 4see !ictor *la, Spanish Marxis$ versus Soviet Co&&unis&5E and
even &en li"e $en" Sneevliet, a :utch co&&unist (ho had played a cri&inally reprehensile role in the Co&intern
for e'a&ple in China in 172O9172G 4the na&e ,Borodin/ co&es to &ind5, yet (ho led the stru%%le a%ainst the 3a=i in
occupied $olland and (ho, alon% (ith his co&rades &a"in% up the centre of the 6ar'9@enin9@u'e&ur% ;ront (ere
e'ecuted y the ?estapo in sprin% 17#2 4see Wi& Bot, Tegen fascis$e, !apialis$e en oorlog+ Het Marx-3enin-
3uxe$&urgfront 9uli *TD( 6 april *TD'+ *&sterda&, 17FD5. *nd, of course, there (as also that arch9totalitarian (ho
fled ?er&any a couple years prior to Popper.s departure fro& !ienna. We spea"in% of $erert 6arcuse, (ho lost no
opportunity 4e%innin% fro& the early thirties5 to e'hiit ho( 3a=i totalitarianis& (as inti&ately connected to
our%eois society at its ori%ins so&e three hundred years earlier 4see his ,0he Stru%%le a%ainst @ieralis& in the
0otalitarian !ie( of the State/ 417D#5 reprinted in Negations: 2ssa%s in Critical Theor%+ Boston, 17OF5.
0he list %oes on and on, ut the reader %et a sense of (hat (e are drivin% at. 0he )uestion re&ains, thou%h, (here
(as Popper in all this, that is, efore the Cold War &ade his type of criti)ue fashionale2
It concerns the understandin% of 1ust (hat 3a=i ?er&any and the Soviet Rnion si%nified in
socio9historical ter&s, and 1ust (hat is ein% defended in astract opposition to these
societies. ;or, it isn.t lieralis&, freedo& or ,civili=ation./
In the unresolved crisis of capital in the after&ath of the first i&perialist (orld (ar the
statification of that institution of institutions that develops out of and specifically enco&passes
productive activity, the econo&y, proceeded in t(o distinct (ays. 0he first (as the sei=ure of
the state y private capital, a feature of the developed capitalist econo&y (hich (e shall refer
to as the ?er&an ,&odel/ under the 3a=is+ and second, as a consequence of &ac!ardness
the asorption of private capital y the state, (hich can e characteri=ed as the Russian
,&odel/ under Stalin.
In asorin% private capital, in transposin% capitalist &ethods of the or%ani=ation of laor
40ayloris&, continuous flo( production5, in aandonin% councilar control of (or" for one9&an
&ana%e&ent of nationali=ed and trustified 4carteli=ed5 property 4su1ectin% (or"ers to a (or"
re%i&e that rivaled any private capitalis& for aritrariness and rutality5, in startin% fro& a
lo(er level of productive develop&ent e'portin% a%ricultural surpluses for the forei%n
e'chan%e to i&port &achinery &anufactured in the capitalist &etropolises, thus su1ectin%
society to the relentless pressures of the (orld &ar"et and therey &ediately i&posin% the
,la(/ of value, the Soviet state ,%uided/ y 3enin had started do(n the road of state
capitalis&, stoppin% here at a (ay station called a ,&i'ed econo&y./
In earlier theori=ations of state capitalis&, the ureaucracy, ecause it (as i&&ediately
related to the disposition of industrial property, consisted first in the heads of trusts, directors
and deputy directors of and &ana%ers (ithin enterprises, and then those (ho headed or%ans
and a%encies (ithin the state that controlled those institutions in (hich productive activity in its
entirety (as carried out. 0his is an ade)uate characteri=ation as far as it %oes, ut state
capitalis& cannot e deter&ined solely fro& the difference et(een private and state capitals.
State capitalis& is possile only in the a&sence of those &ediatory institutions 4parlia&ents,
trade unions, interest %roup associations and or%ani=ations, etc.5 that have characteri=ed
private and de&ocratic capitalis&. It is (ith re%ard to this sin%le, aleit essential feature, one
of several, that the discourse on ,totalitarianis&/ arises.
State asorption of private capital derives, as (e have already noted, fro& ac"(ardness.
0he difference is &ore precisely that et(een those countries (here a successful our%eois
de&ocratic revolution (as carried out 4(hich did not in every case coincide (ith those
countries (here capitalis& ori%inated5, and those lateco&ers (here our%eois de&ocratic
revolutions (ere either unsuccessful or (ere si&ply not carried out at all. State capitalis$ is a
develop$ent starting fro$ the latter+ 0he first dra&atic hurdle the pre9our%eois classes of
these societies, as lateco&ers to capitalis&, had to clear (as the capitali=ation of a%riculture
in order to revolutioni=e productivity in a%riculture to si&ultaneously create a surplus and
proletariani=e the peasantry.
1
Even (here this prole& (as ,solved,/
2
these arriviste rulin%
classes faced another %reat arrier, na&ely, overco&in% the si&ilar disadvanta%es do&estic
industrial capitals faced in the stru%%le for resources and &ar"ets in the arena of the (orld.
*&on% so&e of these for&erly ac"(ard countries, these rulin% classes %ave (ay, either y a
revolutionary overthro( 4Russia, China, !ietna& after 17##, Lorea in the north5 or y
con)uest 4the Soviets in eastern Europe5 to the state as the ,&otor/ of capitalist develop&ent.
$ere, the ascendancy of finance over industry 4as in ?er&any fro& the 1FG0s on(ard5 (as
1
@oren ?oldner, ,Co&&unis& is the 6aterial $u&an Co&&unity./
2
!ia a ,hyrid/ that entailed capitalist a%riculture, sei%niorial yet capitalist landed classes and a rural proletariat
su1ect to ferocious e'ploitation y (ay of ,residue/ laor services urdenin% its laor, as in ?er&any east of the Ele
4i.e., a&on% the 8un"ers5.
itself superseded y asorption of the latter y the state. 0his (as the socially and historically
si%nificant response to a crisis that, in Russia, reached ac" to 1FCO and the Cri&ean War.
:riven y the contradictions of (orld capitalis&, this crisis e'ploded in i&perialist (orld (ar in
171#. It found inade)uate resolution in the revolutionary, (or"in% class overthro( of 0saris&.
4Inade)uate ecause in the end the revolution in Russia (as unale to lin" up to those
aorted ones in Europe5.
0he Bolshevi" stru%%le a%ainst &assive i&perialist intervention that follo(ed on the revolution
%enerated a ,(ar co&&unis&/ response that alienated, relatively spea"in%, an enor&ous
peasant population. In rela'in% the strictures, restrictions and terror a%ainst peasants the
re%i&e institutionali=ed features of the statification that had e&er%ed in the civil (ar.
Statification (as of a &ild sort, (hat after Leynes has een called a &i'ed econo&y, presided
over y a state ureaucracy. But in 172F, the anta%onis&s et(een this ureaucracy and its
desi%ns on uni&peded control and its fears of the %ro(th of a private econo&ic sphere
do&inated y another class of lar%e peasants inau%urated a radical transfor&ation, rutally
&urderous, in (hich the ureaucracy, spurred on y a %rain crisis in a%riculture and its
conse)uent inaility to %enerate triutary surpluses to carry on its industriali=ation pro%ra&,
1
pri&itive accu&ulation as it is other(ise "no(n, not only e'propriated this class 4the ,"ula"s/5
and socially interpenetrated (ith the& other rural strata ut en%a%ed in collectivi=ation9ased
&ass &urder. *lon% (ith Stalin.s coterie, those self9professed 6ar'ists (ho defended the
Soviet Rnion (ere &inions, scientists, theorists, ad&inistrators, etc., in the service of a
despotic ureaucracy, &inions (hose ostensily e&ancipatory politics (ere ideolo%ical veils
cast over the develop&ent (ithin capitalis& of one &ore for& of viciously oppressive and
e'ploitative, divided social order. 0hey (ere thieves, thu%s and &urderers, one and all<
0he point here is that state capitalis$, and ith the polit% that characteri/ed it in its earl%
for$ative period, hich for political reasons 0o&fuscator%, ideological 9ustifications for
capitalis$ as it had developed in the "est5 is dee$ed totalitarianis$, is a develop$ent ith
the glo&al s%ste$ of social relations that for$ capitalis$, the order of capital (hich is (hat
lieralis& in its &ost open, honest professions defends. *nd to lieralis& (e shall return.
Second, there is 6ar'. 0here is a sin%le aspect here.
It concerns 6ar'Is theori=ation, and its funda&ental &o&ents. It is (hat is called the theory of
value. Popper thin"s it is relatively insi%nificant (ithin 6ar'.s (or" as a (hole+ ,Rsually
considered y 6ar'ists as (ell as y anti96ar'ists as a cornerstone of the 6ar'ist creed, Hthe
theory of valueJ, is in &y opinion one of its rather uni&portant parts./
2

1
Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ 0Hrgeschichte5, Second Study, Part I, ,172F, the Re%i&e at the Crossroads./
2
The 1pen Societ% and its 2ne$ies, DCF.
0he clai&s &ade y 6ar' 4and En%els5, father to ,utopian/ and ,totalitarian/ pro%eny as Popper (ould have hi&
4the&5, have een contradictory+ *t different ti&es, i.e., relative to the level of revolutionary activity in En%land, the
Rnited States and on the Continent, 6ar' and En%els &ade assertions that (hen, deconte'tuali=ed and de9
te&porali=ed, are patently contradictory. ;or e'a&ple, in 1F#F at the hei%ht of the revolutionary &ove&ent, their
account stated they (ere &erely recountin% an on%oin% develop&ent<,:ie theoretischen SQt=e der Lo&&unisten
eruhen "eines(e%s auf Ideen, auf Prin=ipien, die von diese& oder 1ene& Weltveresserer erfunden oder entdec"t
sind. Sie sind nur all%e&eine *usdrAc"e tatsQchlicher !erhQltnisse eines e'istierenden Llassen"a&pfes, einer unter
unseren *u%en vor sich %ehenden %eschichtlichen Be(e%un%./ 4,0he theoretical conclusions of the Co&&unists are
in no (ay ased on ideas or principles that have een invented, or discovered, y this or that (orld refor&er. 0hey
are only %eneral e'pressions of actual relations of an e'istin% class stru%%le, an historical &ove&ent %oin% on under
our very eyes./5 6ar' and En%els, 6anifest der "o&&unistische Partei, II Lapitel 4,Proletarier und Lo&&unisten/5<
$o(ever, nearly t(enty years later as the revolutionary &ove&ent hit a nadir, 6ar' stated that Capital descried the
,la(s of &otion/ of capitalist society< ,*n und fAr sich handelt es sich nicht u& den hcheren oder niedri%eren
Ent(ic"lun%s%rad der %esellschaftlichen *nta%onis&en, (elche aus den 3atur%eset=en der "apitalistischen
Produ"tion entsprin%en. Es handelt sich u& diese ?eset=e selst, u& diese &it eherner 3ot(endi%"eit (ir"enden
und sich durchset=enden 0enden=en. :as industriell ent(ic"eltere @and =ei%t de& &inder ent(ic"elten nur das Bild
der ei%nen Bu"unft./ 4,Considered i&&anently, it is not a )uestion of the hi%her or lo(er de%ree of develop&ent of the
0his is an interestin% state&ent ut not sustainale, for the entirety of the criti)ue of political
econo&y and the necessity that it discovers in the proletariat rests on it.
1
6ar'.s criti)ue ta"es
its departure fro& the astraction of the o1ectively practical su1ect understood under the
aspect of concrete laor, ut as astraction carried out in production, as laor reduced
te&porality, ho&o%eni=ed, then o1ectified and &ateriali=ed in co&&odities as value. But let
us not elaor this point. 0here is so&ethin% else here, na&ely, it is in a strictly lo%ical sense
a &atter of so&eone (ho, &ecause she operates (ithin a theoretical fra&e(or" for (hich
another is anathe&a, cannot see or reco%ni=e funda&ental si&ilarities et(een hers and that
other fra&e(or", as is the case here (ith 6ar' and 6ar'is&+ ;or it is )uite possile to read
6ar', say in the openin% sections of Capital, ,, and find in the theory of value the central
postulates of an a'io&atic syste& and the ody of the volu&e, the ,descriptive analysis,
social anta%onis&s that rise fro& the natural la(s of capitalist production. It is a )uestion of these la(s the&selves, of
these effective tendencies unfoldin% (ith iron necessity. 0he industrially &ore developed country only sho(s the less
developed the i&a%e of its o(n future./5 6ar', ,!orrede/ to the first ?er&an edition of :apital 41FOG5... But then even
6ar' asserted he (as at (or" on a ,refine&ent/ of his initial description 4!olu&e 15, (ith the &eanin% that the overall
develop&ent he descried is tendential, (ithin (hich countervailin% tendencies are a (or" 4!olu&e D5 ...:apital. :ritte
Band, Buch III. VI! Lapitel 4,Ent%e%en(ir"ende Rrsachen,5< ;inally, assu&in% international support fro& advanced,
revolutionary proletarian forces aroad, the perspective of ta"in% the villa%e co&&unity as a startin% point for socialist
construction in Russia, entailin% a leap over the capitalist ,&ode of production/ that e'plicitly si%nified aandon&ent of
any of those ostensile ,la(s/ of historical develop&ent, (as that of 6ar' hi&self to(ard the end of his life as his
drafts of letters to !era Basulich de&onstrate< See the 1FF1 drafts of a letter of response to !era Basulich, reprinted
in 0eodor Shanin, 3ate Marx and the Russian Road 43e( -or", 17FD5, and also Ca&atteIs re&ar"s on 6ar' in his
Co$$unit% and Co$$unis$, 2092#<
3o(, to relate these state&ents to their specific historical conte'ts, and to say that oth are illicit %enerali=ations of
assess&ents &ade (ithin and of these conte'ts, not a very sutle tas" for a historian, is so&ethin% that not only
alto%ether escapes Popper, it is also a tas" (hich is to hi& anathe&a+
$e does not thin" any assertion aout the societal develop&ent is le%iti&ate, ecause he does not thin"
,scientifically/ one can e spea" of society as a (hole, the cate%ory of ,totality/ itself in his vie( ein% ,&etaphysical./
Such a vie( neatly dovetails (ith his philosophical lieralis&, and his ideas of piece&eal refor&. In this conte't, it
(ould e infor&ative to %et his perspective on the crisis of capital, e%innin% openly in Septe&er 200F as it has
unfolded to the present, 8une 2010, a crisis (hich has een clearly %loal, in (hich synchroni=ed ,national/
econo&ies, societies, have felt si&ilar effects and (hich rulin% class responses have een si&ilar and in &any cases
identical. 3o social totality2 If certain nodal aspects of the syste& of social relations, ,decisive aspects,/ for e'a&ple
those such as a specific type of &ort%a%e lendin% in the housin% &ar"et and a type of an"in% a&on% invest&ent
houses, those en%a%ed in derivative trades, did not structure that totality and, dialectically, at any &o&ent any lar%e9
scale feature or si%nificant event had not een conte&porarily deter&ined fro& the total situation of %loal capitalis&
at that specific &o&ent, i.e., fro& the totality, then ho(, pray tell, (ould Popper account for the ,collapse/ of
capitalis& in the five &onths follo(in% upon @eh&an Brothers. an"ruptcy, i.e, an i&&ense devalori=ation that
ruptured the %loal se)uence of e'chan%es at countless sites and locales, and led to interruptions of trade and the
lar%e9scale shutdo(ns of production, all of (hich e'isted as fact2 3o pressure e'erted y the (hole2 $o( (ould
Popper reconstruct these events2 :eployin% nineteen thirties. our%eois econo&ists. ,=ero &ethod/ that he advocates
in social analysis2 <,By this I &ean the &ethod of construction a &odel on the assu&ption of co&plete rationality<.
>n the part of all the individuals concerned, and of esti&atin% the deviation of the actual ehavior of people fro& the
&odel ehavior, usin% the latter as a "ind of =ero co9ordinate/ 4The 4overt% of Historicis$, 1#15. I.e., the individuals
so9called have assi&ilated the &eans9ends rationality of production and e'chan%e, and ehavior is, accordin%ly,
ased strictly on the co&pulsion e'ercised y socially &ediated need to &aintain and sustain ourselves throu%h
e%oistic rational calculation.
It should also e said that such a vie(< entirely out of step (ith a historical develop&ent in (hich the unified nature
of society has eco&e a &assive ,fact/ that forces itself on a(areness, Popper cannot respond, he died in 2002<
constitutes an ideolo%ical defense of capitalist de&ocracy a%ainst the ,dan%ers/ of (or"in% classes that have e%un
to &ove in response to, a%ain, consciously synchroni=ed rulin% class, draconian austerity pro%ra&s<
*t any rate, (hile forcefully su%%estin% the intert(inin% of fau' scientific clai&s and e&ancipatory intent and insi%ht
that suffuses the (or" of 6ar', the for%oin% recountin% of his vie(s in re%ard to necessity and contin%ency in history
e'hiits 1ust ho( difficult it is to accept Popper.s clai&s of 6ar'.s totalitarianis& appetites and intellectual etrayal.
1
See, for e'a&ple, ,0he Wor"in% Class, World Capitalis& and Crisis/ specifically the rief discussion of astract laor
in the penulti&ate section.
supported y statistics/ as Popper depicts it,
2
as a series of tested hypotheses that confir&,
validate, this syste&.
0hus, it is ar%ued that 6ar' arrived at the syste& astractly, that is, y (ay of the deduction of
all the conse)uences of &odern develop&ent, (hich include su1ectively %rounded actions as
&ere personifications of econo&ic cate%ories, fro& a syste& analysis predicated on an
axio$atic value-concept.
1
It is su%%ested this pro1ect (as conceived as a scientifically
KprovaleK instance of the theory of historical &aterialis&, i.e., of the o1ectivistic dialectic of
productive forces and relations+ 0he syste& is closed, self9contained and the value concepts
represent the least nu&er of coherent state&ents fro& (hich the &odern develop&ent can
e deduced. ;or, thou%h, such a conception rests on the operative assu&ption of, itself really
pro1ectin% 4or referrin% ac" to5, a total reification of intersu1ectively ased action, of &en and
(o&en as historical actors. I.e., it fails to return to the source and %round of the interaction of
a co&&unity of practical su1ects en%a%ed in laor in production, i.e., to the practical
su1ectivity (hich anony&ously, i.e., non9"no(in%ly, produces and reproduces, and
dialectically is produced and reproduced in, the con%ealed social relations that for& capitalis&
as a syste&.
0his is a possile interpretation, one that (e thin" fran"ly &isses the (hole point, ut (ithout
re%ard to our 1ud%&ent here, it si&ply (ill not do for Popper+ It not only unacceptale, he, as
(e have su%%ested, never reco%ni=ed it and for the reason (e indicated. If Popper did
reco%ni=e and seriously consider this si&ilarity, i.e., lo%ical and for&al identity, he (ould e
co&pelled to reconsider at least and perhaps for%o that criticis& (hich he elieves &a"es his
ar%u&ent %enuinely co&pellin%, na&ely, the ,prophetic,/
2
i.e., non9scientific, e'tra9rational and
at est drea&y at (orst pernicious, nature of 6ar'is&.
0he criticis&, here, then is not the assertion of ,la( li"e/ ehavior of social develop&ent 4in
the defense of individual freedo&5 as Popper elieves, ut of conceivin% this develop&ent
o1ectivistically, i.e., (ithout a su1ect of activity that %enerates it in the first place, a criticis&
(hich holds for Popper far &ore than 6ar' 4or even En%els5, since this is consistently his vie(
4and it only sporadically theirs5.
So (hat aout individuality and the individual.s freedo&2
4rinciples of 4hilosophical 3i&eralis$
Popper.s lieralis& upholds a &ini&alistic core of principles.
D
$e starts (ith the state.
#
$e considers the state a transhistorical necessity. Why2 for%oin% a
$oesian 1ustification, (ith %reat confidence Popper tells us state is 1ustified and necessary
2
The 1pen Societ% and its 2ne$ies, DC#.
1
,Intervie( (ith Cornelius Castoriadis,/ 1#Df.
2
,&id, passi&E The 4overt% of Historicis$+ #29#C.
D
Larl Popper, ,Pulic >pinion and @ieral Principles/ 417C#5 in Refutations and Confrontations, #G19#GD.
#
We shall for%o e'a&ination and analysis of the re&ainder of these principles. 40here are seven &ore5. 0he ne't four
are &erely specifications of the first 4te't aove5, and assu&e its validity 4i.e., the state.s transhistorical necessity and
its standin% aove social conflict (hich is the asis for its i&partial capacity to resolve conflict, in Popper.s case that
et(een ,stron%er and (ea"er &en/5. ;or e'a&ple, Popper says a de&ocracy can rid itself of its %overn&ent (ithout
violence, a tyranny cannot. 6aye, &aye not. But the point is (hether these for&s 4particularly that of ,de&ocracy/5
have in the history of the state ever e'isted as political for&s, they are for&s of the e'istence of the state+ 0hose four
principles in )uestion stand or fall (ith the first.
0he si'th principle, or thesis as Popper calls it, states that ,a lieral Rtopia/ is i&possile. Indeed, (e a%ree 4ut for a
different reason, na&ely5, any ,utopia/ is i&possile if it rests on develop&ents (ithin the state 4see the te't, elo(5.
We also a%ree (ith the seventh thesis, statin% that lieralis& is an ,evolutionary creed/ 4as opposed to a revolutionary
one5. 0he last, the ei%hth principle, concerns social traditions, a&on% the& a custo&ary &oral fra&e(or", (hich is
the asis for a ,fair and e)uitale co&pro&ise et(een conflictin% interests/ 4,&id, #GD5. It is not acceptale, since it
assu&es 4as the first five principles5 that the state is a neutral aritrator standin% aove society, and, a%ain, it also
stands or falls (ith the first principle.
in any (orld, for there are al(ays ,(ea"er and stron%er &en, and the (ea"er ones (ould
have no legal right to e tolerated y the stron%er ones, ut (ould o(e the& %ratitude for their
ein% so "ind as to tolerate the&< every person should have a legal clai$ to e protected
a%ainst the po(er of the stron%,/ &eanin% that ,(e need a state that protects the ri%hts of all./
1
In this conte't, he considers the state is ,a constant dan%er,/ that is, ,an evil, thou%h a
necessary one./
2
0his leads to a second, this ti&e tacit, assu&ption+ In classically lieral
fashion,
D
Popper elieves that state stands aove all conflict in society, and ecause of this
standin% it can under certain conditions fairly and e)uitaly resolve conflicts in society.
0he state, ho(ever, is a historical reality... its logical status in relation to individuals is a (holly
peripheral &atter that is not pertinent to its analysis... and it e&odies specific social %roup
interests.
Its reality cannot e lo%ically deduced 4if so, it is neither co&prehended nor e'plained5.
;urther&ore, the pre&ises fro& (hich its necessity is lo%ically inferred, e%oistic individuality
as a historically specifically for& of hu&an e'istence that has co&e into ein% under
conditions of capitalist production 4i.e., the individuals as Popper understands the&5 and is
relative to that for& of societal activity, does not have the e'istential status Popper attriutes
to it 4and here actually this status is to all intents and purposes synony&ous (ith effective
presence in history5 and that (ould 1ustify the state.s necessity. ;inally, Popper.s assertion is
really a &oral de&and &as)ueradin% as a lo%ical inference, a re)uire&ent that the state $ust
&e such and such 4and, in li%ht of the role, function and reality of the state as it has e'isted in
all ti&es and places in history (here it has e'isted, this inference is little, if anythin%, &ore
than a (ea" plea5.
So (hat can (e say aout the historical reality of the state2
#
0he state appears as soon as a unitary co&&unity is torn y social divisionE that is, as social
division 4into estates, classes, etc., ased on stratified positions (ithin a fi'ed division of social
laor5 is institutionali=ed, the state ta"es shape as a con%ealed, hierarchical social relation of
co&&and and oedience. This institution is the state. 0he for&ation of a state, its
institutionali=ation, re)uires coercion+ * vast underlyin% population, relatively spea"in%, &ust
e suordinated to a tiny &inority that has for&ed a state to he%e&oni=e this population.
Certain co&&unities &ay have een divided, hence, pri&itively statified, at their ori%ins, i.e.,
as no lon%er specifiale %roups of hu&ans e&er%ed fro& ani&ality.
Where, thou%h, appearin% (ith a fracture in ori%inally undivided co&&unities, states have
their foundations in the introduction of innovation (ithin those co&&unities, for statist
co&&unities are those (hich ear (ithin the&selves chan%e, innovation, historicit% as an
i&&anent principle of social intelli%iility. States, then, are co9e'tensive (ith the histories of
the co&&unities on the ac"s of (hich they rise. Chan%e or innovation at its ori%ins cannot e
introduced (ithout upsettin% an ori%inal stasis, and sustained do&ination over the rest of the
co&&unity re)uires the &aintenance of the very &eans of the destruction of the ori%inal ond,
ar&ed force that can ran%e in its &ost rudi&entary for&s fro& a s&all soldiery and to its
&ost developed, &odern for&s that co&prise a standin% ar&y, a e(ilderin% variety of police
and policin% a%encies, &aterial ad1uncts such as prisons, detention centers and ca&ps, and
coercive institutions of all sorts especially that of a 1udiciary (ith its array of 1ud%es,
prosecutors and courts. In all states and, to e sure, especially (ith re%ard to the &odern,
our%eois state, this force is arrayed a%ainst the rest of the co&&unity to secure control over
1
,Iid,/ #G1.
2
,Iid./
D
See here ?uido de Ru%%iero.s The Histor% of 2uropean 3i&eralis$+ 3e( -or", 17OG 4172G5.
#
See Co$$unit% and Capital, the fourth criti)ue entitled si&ply ,0he State./
and dispossession of &aterial surpluses. 0hus, those (ho constitute the state or &an its
institutions hold a &onopoly on practical violence.
0he state, territorially ased 4(hether oundaries are indeter&inate frontiers or fi'ed orders5
and territorially self9a%%randi=in%, %enocidal, and &ar"ed y the appearance of a stratu& of
functionaries or officials attached to the ruler, rulin% stratu&, or rulin% class, essentially
concentrates ar&ed force. 3o &atter ho( sophisticated its for&s of coercion, the &onopoly of
practical violence re&ains unchan%ed. 0his concentration of force is the essential, historical
condition ensurin% the continuity of rule.
State for&ation is genocidal. In contrast to ands, %roups, or co&&unities that are no&adic,
pastoral, or early a%riculturists (ho resided in no fi'ed locale, states pursue territorial
au%&entation or enlar%e&ent of resource ases over ti&e. 0hese practices rest on the
assi&ilation or incorporation of peoples and the destruction of autono&ous cultures in their
autono&y throu%h creation of a sin%le lan%ua%e, ho&o%eni=ation of space and culture, etc.
*ccordin%ly, these practices see" to produce a ho&o%eni=ed population, and are pre&ised on
the destruction, re&oval, or assi&ilation of indi%enous peoples and on for&ation of classes,
estates, or fi'ed social %roups out of distinct peoples, ethnic %roups or settler populations
contradictorily unified throu%h creation of a unifor& and, in the &odern era, a national culture.
>viously, the concept of %enocide operative here is understood in ter&s of the destruction of
the identit% of a people as a people.
We &entioned a social reality desi%nated as the unitary co&&unity.
Relations of co&&and and oedience, Po(er in its &ost pri&itive for&, predated the
appearance of &aterial surpluses, ut once the latter appeared Po(er and those surpluses
(ere 4and have re&ained5 ine'tricaly tied to%ether.
1
It (as on the asis of the activity of
far&in%< of its develop&ent 4neither lineal nor dialectical5 over centuries, a develop&ent
(hich e%innin% (ith a set of different activities 4huntin%, fishin%, %atherin% and plant
cultivation5 devolved into a sustained productive and susistence strate%y (here hu&an
populations eca&e e'istentially dependent upon a%riculture to reproduce the&selves and
ai&ed at such in order to create relia&le $aterial surpluses? that those surpluses first
appeared. >ne type of susistence far&in% in particular has al(ays een conducive not 1ust to
production ut to the accu&ulation of surpluses, in fact to lar%e surpluses relative to, in a
really crude and astract &anner, the sophistication of technical develop&ent. It is %rain
4(heat, rice, &ai=e5 far&in%, i.e., a%riculture.
>nce these surpluses (ere produced and stored, then accu&ulated, social relations of
co&&and and oedience harden into societal stratification. 0he %roup that controls, later
appropriatin% these surpluses, eco&es separate, settin% itself over and a%ainst the rest of
the co&&unity. >nce it has force at its disposal to ensure that control, rudi&entarily a and of
ar&ed &en, it has fully separated itself fro& the co&&unity+ We can say that it constitutes a
separate po(er, a state.
What this &eans is t(ofold+ ;irst, the state appears in history and is not co9e'tensive (ith
hu&an sociation in all its various for&s that have appeared throu%hout the course of hu&an
history 4since &an, in the ta'ono&ic sense, Ho$o sapiens sapiens first appeared so&e
110,000 years a%o. 0he state, in fact, first appeared in its &ost rudi&entary or pri&itive for&
rou%hly 10,000 years a%o.5. Second, there are no instances that Popper can elicit, since there
are none in history, in (hich the state did not arise fro& a &ore pri&ordial social division and
1
What is really i&portant here is the appearance of hierarchy predates the appearance of hu&anity. >nce it
reappears this side of hu&an ori%ins, it did so slo(ly, leadin% to fi'ed social functions, then to con%ealed social
relations of co&&and and oedience that characteri=ed the activity of different social %roups in all decisive social
conte'ts, all production, rituals and cere&onies, consu&ption and leisure, for&s of e'chan%e ine'tricaly tied to one
another. ;or this entire discussion. H;or this, see Hierarch% and Social Division, Natural Deter$inis$ and Modern
Man, ,Po(er and *%riculture,/ appearin% in 1rigins and 2ndings, fro& (hich these re&ar"s are ta"en. EditorIs note.J
e'acerate, reinforce and a&plify that division. 0he state e&odies the &aterial and ideal
interests, and secures the (ealth, status and po(er of those (ho rule, a tiny &inority (ithin
society 4today in the Rnited States, for e'a&ple, perhaps as fe( as five thousand in a
population of D00 &illion5, a%ainst the clai&s, le%al and other(ise, of the vast underlyin%
populace. In a &ediated (ay 4i.e., as lon% as the clai&s of those to e protected are
suordinate to those (ho rule5, the state further protects those strata (ho are attached to it in
the various for&s in (hich state and society have e'isted 4e.%., strata of state priests,
ureaucrats, and &ilitary chiefs, s&all capitalists and layers of the usiness classes, etc.5<
Popper concept of individuality etrays his hypostati=ation of a historically specific for& of
society and the individuals, for&ed into social %roups, (hich co&pose it. 0here are three
points here, the latter t(o of (hich are, as it (ere, t(o sides of the sa&e coin.
Within any society or%ani=ed around co&petition in production and e'chan%e 4i.e., (ithin
capitalist social for&ations (hich over the four hundred years of their e'istence e'hiit an
array of different polities ran%in% fro& constitutional, throu%h de&ocratic to e'tre&e tyranny,
that is, to totalitarian political for&s5, hu&anity (ill e defined in ter&s of individuality. ;irst and
fore&ost, this deter&ination (ill prevail ecause individuality is actually, practically a
,yproduct,/ if you (ill, of all the character for&ative lessons learned, assi&ilated and
sedi&ented in consciousness in the ,stru%%le to &a"e a livin%,/ to accu&ulate (ealth in
&oney9for&, and to affir& oneself y possessin% and sho(in% once the value9for& co&es to
or%ani=e social life in its entirety. It is an o1ectively su1ective for& of preco%nitive a(areness
4ehavior in the strict sense5 that arises in the fi%ht of all a%ainst all under conditions of
capitalist production. 0he &oral depravity Popper fears develops as a conse)uence of the
fierce co&petitively situation in (or" that produces the socially ui)uitous personal
a%%ressivity and elli%erence that, prior to the appearance of capitalis&, is uni)ue in the
history of hu&anity. Popper says he can dispense (ith $oes,
1
ut in point of fact his
presentation has $oes (ritten all over it+ The N&ellu$ o$niu$ in o$nes> is the funda$ental
possi&ilit% of all capitalist social life+ $is purely individualistic solution, na&ely, a state that
secures the ,freedo& of the individual.s ehavior,/
2
reproduces in thou%ht this funda&ental
situation revealed &ost star"ly in capitalis& at its ori%ins, articulates the sense of social life of
the &iddlin% %roups 4s&all artisans, shop"eepers, retailers, the tiny freeholder or copyri%ht in
the countryside5 &ore than any other uffeted and threatened y novel social relations in
production, ases itself on a (orld of isolated ecause privati=ed and e%oistic individuals
confrontin% an inco&prehensile other 4society5 that has co&e to e unconsciously or%ani=ed
around e'chan%e, transfor&in% social relations into that ar of all against all, and, in this asic
respect is not si%nificantly different fro& its theori=ation at the ori%ins of capitalis&.
D
0hus, the individuality that Popper defends is itself a historical develop&ent, a uni)ue one, a
,product/ lar%ely of the social relations of production that these individuals enter into in
reproducin% the&selves, at first individually, as social individuals. Popper astracts fro& this
1
,Iid,/ #G1.
2
,Iid./
D
Well, there (as one difference. * ,covenant of the people/ issues fro& social action 4unli"e Popper (ho pleas (ith
the state for protection5, and indicates that in production the for&ation of individuality (as contradictory, since it (as
fro& there that collective action issued.
0hus, for theorists of the En%lish Civil War era, the &ellu$ o$niu$ in o$nes (as the essence of the Kstate of nature.K
0he @evellers shared this vie( and held that the state of nature (as %overned y one principle, to (it, Kevery &an...
H&ustJ preserve and defend hi&self the est he can.K In @eveller thou%ht, it is clear the state of nature could e
transcended and civil %overn&ent re9instituted y a Kcovenant,K y an a%ree&ent in (hich all parties involved
consciously co&&itted the&selves to a set of principles and to a pro%ra&&atic practice for their reali=ation. ;or the
citation, K*%ree&ent of the PeopleK 410a1O#G5, in Wolfe, ,&id, 22Of. ;or the @evellers to%ether (ith this theori=ation of
social life at the ori%ins of capitalis&, see The 2nglish Civil and the Birth of )reedo$, Part III, ,0he @eveller
Synthesis./
entire societal conte't in (hich daily life is or%ani=ed, specifically fro& those social relations
and the hidden, social character of (or" 4production5 fro& (hich and on the asis of (hich
individuality rises, fro& the ense&le of social relations that constitute the individual as such.
1
0his is the first point.
0he second point is that Popper defends the astract individual in her astractness, as a
citi=en or political ein%.
2
0his is, of course, at a re&ove entirely consistent (ith the socially
pervasive self9assess&ent for (hich self9for&ation is a ,personal,/ ,su1ective/ or ,individual/
achieve&ent. *nd, (hile this is o1ectively necessary illusion and false consciousness,
ecause individuality %rounded socially is founded in (or", fa&ily life as it is decidedly shaped
y (or", and those other conte&porary institutions, education, &ilitary, etc., as they too are
structured y (or", this assess&ent poses a &o&ent of truth in that it reco%ni=es that
individuality is for&ed y and lar%e entirel% outside the political sphere. 4Popper is, after all,
spea"in% aout a conte&porary situation, and this too points to the narro( asis of his
hypostati=ation of individuality5.
0he third point 4the flip side of the second5 is that, in invertin% the real structure of social life in
assertin% the pri&acy of political reality in individual life 4and disre%ardin% (or" and
production5, in defendin% an astraction, 4opper ignores the social relations that render
individuals reall% defenseless 0against capitalist exploitation and oppression5: He not onl%
leaves the$ defenseless, &ut in so doing he $%stif%ingl% and ideologicall% reinforces the
poer of the capital.s state over the$ as individuals. 0hus, in &ost forcily reaffir&in% the
po(er of the state over individuals or, as it appears, the po(er of a rulin% class over the
various social %roups and classes in society 4especially those for (ho& the (or" peculiar to
1
E%oistic individuality, and its hi%hly differentiatin% 4yet o1ectively ho&o%eni=in%5 needs proliferate, yet constituted in
production and e'chan%e a co$plete s%ste$ of interdependence is presupposed as the livelihood and happiness of
all are dependent upon that of each, on each fulfillin% her role in production or e'chan%e. ,:ie "on"rete Person,
(elche sich als esondere B(ec" ist, von 3aturnot(endi%"eit and Will"Ar, ist das eine Prin=ip der Ar%erlichen
?esellschaft, 9 aer die esondere Person als (esentlich in Be=iehun% auf andere solche Besonderhiet, so dab 1ede
durch die andere und =u%leich schlechthin nur als durch die ;or& der *ll%e&einheit, das andere Prin=ip, ver&ittelt
sich %eltend &acht und %efriedi%t./ 4K0he concrete person, hi&self the o1ect of his particular ai&s, is, as a totality of
desires and a &i' of caprice and natural necessity, one principle of civil society. But the particular person is
essentially related to other such particular persons, in such a (ay that each estalishes hi&self and finds satisfaction
only throu%h the &ediation of others and as such si&ultaneously y &eans of the for& of universality, the second
principle here.K $e%el, 8runlinien der 4hilosophie des Rechts, ]1F2. >ur translation5. KSocietyK restin% on astract
laor is a netor! of interdependent egoistic individualities each pursuin% its o(n selfish ends.
2
Si&ilarly, 6ar' in his youthful essay, ,Bur 8udenfra%e/+
,:ie droits de l#ho$$e, die 6enschenrechte (erden als solche unterschieden von den droits du cito%en, von den
StaatsAr%errechten. Wer ist der vo& cito%en unterschiedene ho$$e2 3ie&and anders als das Mitglied der
&Prgerlichen 8esellschaft. Waru& (ird das 6it%lied der Ar%erlichen ?esellschaft s6enscht, 6ensch schlechthin,
(aru& (erden seine Rechte Menschenrechte %enannt2 Woraus er"lQren (ir dies ;a"tu&2 *us de& !erhQltnis des
politischen Staats =ur Ar%erlichen ?esellschaft, aus de& Wesen der politischen E&an=ipation.
!or alle& "onstatieren (ir die 0atsache, dab die so%enannten Menschenrechte, die droits de l#ho$$e i& Rnterschied
von den droits du cito%en, nichts anderes sind als die Rechte des Mitglieds der &Prgerlichen 8esellschaft, d.h. des
e%oistischen 6enschen, des vo& 6enschen und vo& ?e&ein(esen %etrennten 6enschen<
,:ie ;reiheit ist also das Recht, alles =u tun und =u treien, (as "eine& andern schadet. :ie ?ren=e, in (elcher sich
1eder de& andern unsch@dlich e(e%en "ann, ist durch das ?eset= esti&&t, (ie die ?ren=e =(eier ;elder durch
den Baunpfahl esti&&t ist. Es handelt sich u& die ;reiheit des 6enschen als isolierter auf sich =urAc"%e=o%ener
6onade<
,*er das 6enschenrecht der ;reiheit asiert nicht auf der !erindun% des 6enschen &it de& 6enschen, sondern
viel&ehr auf der *sonderun% des 6enschen von de& 6enschen. Es ist das Recht dieser *sonderun%, das Recht
des &eschr@n!ten, auf sich eschrQn"ten Individuu&s<
,:as 6enschenrecht des Privatei%entu&s ist also das Recht, (ill"Arlich 4P son %rU5, ohne Be=iehun% auf andre
6enschen, unahQn%i% von der ?esellschaft, sein !er&c%en =u %enieben und Aer dassele =u disponieren, das
Recht des Ei%ennut=es. 8ene individuelle ;reiheit, (ie diese 3ut=an(endun% derselen, ilden die ?rundla%e der
Ar%erlichen ?esellschaft. Sie lQbt 1eden 6enschen i& andern 6enschen nicht die !er(ir"lichun%, sondern viel&ehr
die Schran"e seiner ;reiheit finden./ Larl 6ar'a;riedrich En%els, "er!e, Band I+ DOD9DO#.
capitalis&, (a%ed laor, is deter&inate, the &ass of individuals as they are styled5, effectively,
Popper.s philosophical lieralis& is, contradictorily, a veiled rationali=ation of this po(er of the
state, and Popper hi&self is a functionary of that state, (hich, as the arena in (hich unity
a&on%st other(ise co&petin% capitals is for%ed, &a"es hi& as a philosopher a functionar% of
capital+
The 3i&eral 4u&lic Sphere
Popper spea"s aout pulic opinion. $e considers it a 4social5 dan%er ecause it is y
definition anony&ous< or so he su%%ests< and as such is an ,irresponsi&le for$ of poer/
especially (hen e'ercised throu%h the a%ency of the state.
1
In conte&porary societies of
capital stretchin% ac" in historical ti&e efore the last i&perialist (orld (ar, pulic opinion is
an astraction fro& real a%ency and an ideolo%i=ation to oot+ It does not 1ust e'ist in the for&
of 4(hile ein% pro&oted y5 oo"s, pa&phlets and letters to the editors of the %reat
ne(spapers, in parlia&entary speeches and &otions, and thus it is not 1ust or even pri&arily
,a "ind of pulic response to the thou%hts and efforts of those aristocrats of the &ind (ho
produce ne( thou%hts, ne( ideas ne( ar%u&ents,/
2
ut constitutes the &anipulative creation
of ,opinion/ y various factions or social %roups (ithin the rulin% class (ith a vie( to &oili=in%
support for chan%e or to le%iti&i=e a societal policy a%enda on the patently ideolo%ical
assu&ption that the ,voice of the people HisJ a "ind of final authority and unli&ited (isdo&/
4vox populi vox dei5, (hich Popper correctly characteri=es as a classical &yth.
D
0hese (ritten
docu&ents 4oo"s, pa&phlets, letters5 are the earliest for& of its &ore developed,
conte&porary e'istence. It is a for& that reaches ac" to a for&er realit%, the lieral pulic
sphere, (hose ai&s (ere predicated on and enco&passed free discussion that Popper finds
so i&portant 9 an e'istence (hich is today pri&arily audio9visual, ut also include print and
audio for&s in isolation 4e.%., &a%a=ines, radio5. Startin% (ith very youn% children, pulic
opinion is created today in an i&&ediate, pri&ordial and depth psycholo%ical &anner, lar%ely
y advertisin%, in the for&ation of needs to co&pulsively and profli%ately consu&e (hat
appears on the capitalist &ar"et. Pulic opinion is, then, a function of the &ove&ent of capital.
0his (as not the case (ith the lieral pulic sphere at its ori%ins.
* pulic sphere is a social conte't, institutionali=ed or other(ise, in (hich ,open and infor&ed/
free discussion, ar%u&ent and persuasion create the possiility of ,rational/ decision &a"in%
ai&ed at the ,enli%hten&ent of political (ill./
#
It is ostensily a classless conte't, open to all,
universal.
Really e'istin% lieral or our%eois pulic spheres have run up a%ainst the order of capital and
have een either shut do(n y repressive a%ents of the state, or have tended to transcend
the&selves, shorn the&selves of their ostensile universality, i.e., e&er%ed as an or%an of a
particular class &a"in% universalist clai&s 4i.e., concernin% a %eneral e&ancipation5, and
started do(n a course of confrontation (ith the state.
0he outstandin% historical e'a&ples of such social conte't all occur in periods of social
upheaval, especially in revolutionary situations. 0hey include the @eveller a%itators in the
streets of @ondon and in the lar%ely non9officered %atherin%s of Cro&(ell.s horse re%i&ents,
the Ironclads 41O#G91O#F5, in the 8acoin Clus of the ;rench Revolution, in the soapo'
orations and discussions y Wolies in the Rnited States in the early t(entieth century.
0hese (ere all &ore or less non9institutional settin%s. In each case, these pulic spheres (ere
forci&l% shut do(n y the state. *&on% the @evellers, street a%itators (ere constantly
1
,Pulic >pinion and @ieral Principles/ in Con9ectures and Refutations, #G09#G1. E&phasis in ori%inal.
2
,Iid,/ #G0.
D
,Iid,/ #OG.
#
8Ar%en $aer&as, K0he Pulic Sphere+ *n Encyclopedia *rticle 417O#5,K Ne 8er$an Critique, esp. #F9#7.
i&prisoned for &a"in% i&passioned pleas for the lierality and tolerance that Popper, for one,
thin"s essential to the functionin% of a non9tyrannical social order. 8ohn @ilurne spent &ore
than half a lifeti&e in prison fi%htin% for a free pulic sphere.
1
0he Co&&ittee of Pulic Safety
anned the 8acoin Clus as a threat to pulic order, i.e., out of fear they (ould roust the
sans-culottes to street action ai&ed at the Co&&ittee. Cops, sheriffs and their deputies
re%ularly arrested Woly a%itators, (hose actions (ere still individual and did not 4fully and
yet5 e&ody a class thrust, for violation of city and to(n ordinances on the asis of (hich their
free speech ca&pai%ns (ere considered a nuisance and i&pedi&ent to ,pulic order./ *ove
all, there has een the historical appearance of revolutionary (or"ers. councils, the first and
perhaps prototypical ,instance/ developed in the after&ath of Bloody Sunday in Russia
4Petro%rad5, 7 4215 8anuary 170C as the St. Petersur% ?aponist *ssociations.
2
With a
revolutionary proletariat as its creator and ani&ator, councils have concreti=ed (hat
philosophical lieralis& only drea&s aout+ ;ree discussion, ar%u&ent, articulation of needs,
consultation, for&ulation of pro1ects, de&ands, etc., ased on free asse&ly and full
representation. In the conte't of, and &otivated y, the dual confrontation (ith capital and the
state, councils have functioned as a &ediu& in (hich (or"ers could have e%un to raise
the&selves to an understandin% of society in its totality. 0his is not ,enli%hten&ent of political
(ill/ in the astract universalist sense, ut in the historically concrete sense in (hich a
particular social %roup is co&pelled y the very &ove&ent of capital, i.e., in a confrontation
that forces it to act and in actin% to eco&e conscious, e&odies tendentially universally
hu&an re)uire&ents and de&ands. 4But then a%ain in history, i.e., in the history of societies
rooted in and ased on social division, there has een no pre%iven, already for&ed
universality, (hich is &erely another side of classical &yth of the ,people/5.
If, in runnin% up a%ainst the li&its of capitalist social or%ani=ation, proletarian pulics lead to
the &ost outstandin% institutional incarnation of a pulic sphere any(here in history, it is
ecause the councils are the actuali=ation of an institutionally non9separate for& of proletarian
po(er.
D
0he council only appears in revolutionary situations. It stands in na"ed contrast to the
&odern state of capital, (hich is uni)ue in its institutional and separate character, its
appearance as a KpulicK force clothed in this sha& o1ectivity that sets it apart fro& and over
and a%ainst individuals, the underlyin% social classes, and society at lar%e. While any &odern,
centrali=ed state &ay co&e in the short run to e identified (ith a specific historical
persona%e, (hat distin%uishes it fro& states that appear in other past epochs is a see&in%
efficacy, per&anence and reality that render it at once o1ectively independent in relation to
1
3ote (e do not say a ,lieral/ one.
In a society and culture suffused (ith notions of deference and openly structured y class and status stratification,
@ilurne ar%ued for, de&onstrated for and de&anded in the En%lish courts ri%hts (here they did not e'ist. >ne of the
personal conse)uences (as the i&prison&ent referred to in the te't. @ilurne defended convictions concernin% a
le%al and institutional e&odi&ent for the ri%hts of every person to free speech, asse&ly and to petition for a redress
of %rievances a%ainst the %reat &en (ho hold po(erE for a prohiition a%ainst )uarterin% troops on the ho&es of
honest (or"in% &en and their fa&iliesE for an end to unreasonale searches and sei=ures ar%uin% for the necessity of
(arrants ased on proale causeE for the ri%ht to a speedy and pulic trail y a 1ury of one.s peers to%ether (ith
infor&ation of the nature and cause of accusation and the ri%ht to confront an accuserE and for the very ri%ht to a 1ury
trial and a%ainst e'cessive ails and fines<
In the R.S. today, (e can reco%ni=e these de&ands in codified for& in the Bill of Ri%hts. 0hey for& the historically
transcendent &o&ents of the really si%nificant ele&ents of an% rearguard defense y proletarian %roups a%ainst the
state on the terrain of capital in any stru%%le to aolish it...
@ilurneIs and the @evellersI fi%ht (as a stru%%le for freedo& 9 aleit narro(ly understood 9 on the terrain of the state.
0o%ether (ith their radical allies inside Cro&(ell.s Ironsides, they unsuccessfully fou%ht to institute the le%al
conditions for provisions of a livelihood fro& (or" as artisans 4and for all s&all property holders5. See The 2nglish
Civil "ars and the Birth of )reedo$, Part III in its entirety.
2
;or this, see Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ 0Hrgeschichte5, ;irst Study, $istorical 3ote 1.
D
See the discussion of councilar po(er in ,So&e Re&ar"s on the Role of the Wor"in% Class in $istory./
society and independent of any specific ruler. In opposition to the state, in particular, the
totalitarian state, councils for& an interconnected syste& of transparent social relations, are a
historically novel po(er, a sole po(er that i&&ediately and directly holds s(ay over society
(ithout institutional separation, that is, a po(er that can only develop y (ay of the
destruction and on the ruins of the state. 0hey are the conte't in (hich a consciousness of the
&a%nitude of historical tas"s of reor%ani=in% society develops, in (hich the pro%ra&&atic
features of this reor%ani=ation, conducted alon% universalist lines for the first ti&e in history,
are for&ulated. Carried out revolutionarily, it is the councilar for& of the or%ani=ation of society
that offers the only chances of reali=in% hu&an freedo&, a %enuinely free society in (hich
individuality &i%ht flourish.
1
Popper (ould call this ,utopian/ and, no dout, ,dan%erous,/ and it is, indeed, a lon% (ay fro&
hi&, ut then Popper is a )ualitatively lon%er (ay, a distance that cannot e rid%ed, fro& real
historical develop&ent...
Where they have appeared historically, lieral institutions are sha&, illusory ones as (as
already reco%ni=ed y a conte&porary of a youthful Popper, Carl Sch&itt.
&
0he &ost co&&on
lieral institution that pretends to e an arena in (hich ,political (ill/ is enli%htened and
,rational/ ,decisions/ are &ade is the parlia&ent or our%eois le%islature 4Con%ress,
Parlia&ent, :iet, :u&a, Reichsta%, etc.5. 0hese have een dero%atorily ut correctly identified
as ,tal" shops,/ as &edia circles (here posturin% is the order of the day or, alternately as
settin%s fro& (hich &ystifications arise as ideolo%ically an i&a%e of society is %iven ac" to
itself. 0hey are at one ti&e or another, and so&eti&es at the sa&e ti&e, all of these, (hile
further &as"in% the conduct of ,real ne%otiations/ over issues and ,real deals/ that are &ade
ehind ,closed doors/ y &en 4invarialy &en, or so it see&s5 (ho can lay clai& to e
,representatives,/ duly dele%ated or &andated 4e.%., y election5 of that &ythical entity, the
,people./ Instead the ,real/ function of these sha& institutions, as state institutions, is
achieve&ent of unity a&on% other(ise co&petin% capitals 4y a our%eois stratu& itself
product of the capitalist rationali=ation of society5 y for&ulatin% 4le%islatin%5 a co&&on
pro%ra& for capitalE constructin% 4to%ether (ith the E'ecutive5 the le%al and or%ani=ational
1
In the final chapter of The 1rigins of the Totalitarianis$, $annah *rendt pursued the )uestion of (hat essentially
distin%uishes totalitarian polities fro& others as they have appeared in history.
Restin% on evidentially indefensile vie( that polities fully deter&ine societies and that, &oreover, their structure and
or%ani=ation are autono&ous and can e e'a&ined as such, she arrived at the conclusion that the essence of
totalitarianis& is terror 4,&id, #O#, #OO, #GC5. Still, unli"e Popper, her investi%ation (as not devoid of the analysis of
social for&s, and it (as not ahistorical.
She further understood that intellectual develop&ents, perhaps decidedly, ut rarely decisively shape the life of a
society, so that she oth "ne( and understood that Plato.s ,totalitarian/ predilections, as Popper (ould have it, (ere
in this specific case y and lar%e not %er&ane to develop&ents in $ellas, and (holly irrelevant in relation to the
classical ?ree" polis. $er o(n analysis, laid out in The Hu$an Condition, de&onstrates real insi%ht into, affir&in%, the
ancient ?ree" concept of freedo&, (hile e'hiitin% a %enuine appreciation for the pa%anis& 4in the narro( Christian
sense5 and the centrality of politics 4not ,statecraft/5 for the totality of one, rather uni)ue for& of hu&an social
e'istence. 0his sensitivity to socio9historically specific pheno&ena, alto%ether asent in Popper, allo(ed her to arrive
at rather nuanced assess&ent of conte&porary develop&ents, even if that understandin% (as %reatly li&ited y her
concept of totalitarianis&. 0hus, she (rote, ,What is so easily overloo"ed y the &odern historian (ho faces the rise
of totalitarian syste&s, especially (hen he deals (ith develop&ents in the Soviet Rnion, is that 1ust as the &odern
&asses Hased in the &iddlin% %roups in society, s&all o(ners, the salariat attached to the capitalist fir&, etc.J and
their leaders succeeded, at least te&porarily, in rin%in% forth in totalitarianis& an authentic, aleit all9destructive, ne(
for& of %overn&ent, thus the people.s Hi.e., (or"in% classJ revolutions, for &ore than a hundred years no(, have
co&e forth, aleit never successfully (ith another ne( for& of %overn&ent+ the syste& of people.s Hi.e., (or"ers.J
councils to ta"e the place of the Continental party syste&.../ 4,&id, 21O5 (hich did not &erely ai& at replacin% a for&
of %overn&ent, ut at overturnin% society as a (hole startin% fro& the destruction of the state. Insi%ht of this order is
not particularly profound, ut is far, far eyond Popper and for all the &ethodolo%ical reasons he elieved are central
to analysis of any pheno&ena (hatsoever. See the 3ote on Plato, elo(.
2
Die geistesgeschichtliche 3age des heutigen 4arla$entaris$us+ Berlin, 172D.
principles of capitalIs &ove&ent 4that the E'ecutive defends5E and %uardin% and pro&otin%
&ass loyalty to the capitalist syste& and our%eois society as a (hole. 4I&portant here are
the various &edias, spectacular ad1uncts to the state propa%anda &achine (hich create &uch
of (hat passes today as ,pulic opinion./5
0he institutionali=ation of lieral or our%eois pulic spheres invarialy &as"s the po(er of
rulin% classes in creatin% their o(n unity a%ainst the underlyin% 4i.e., e'ploited and oppressed5
classes and social %roups in society, for the very activity carried on in these institutions
i&&ediately and &ystifyin%ly e'hiits, li"e ,pulic opinion,/ precisely the opposite 4of (hat is
ceaselessly e'clai&ed, the ,people.s/ interests are represented, le%islation advancin% those
interests are ein% enacted, policies on ehalf of the ,people/ (ill e put in place5. In the
pri&ordial sense, these institutions, a%ain li"e ,pulic opinion,/ invert the real state of affairs,
that is operate ideolo%ically+ Institutionali=ed, the lieral or our%eois pulic sphere &as"s the
activity of those (ho rule, and also their intend 4to not only preserve ut to e'pand and
deepen that rule5 y proclai&in%, declai&in% and declarin% that it is the ,people.s/ interests
that are ein% served and pro&oted, all the (hile the very possiility of the for&ation of
so&ethin% li"e a universal interest is constantly suverted. In defendin% and advocatin% a
lieral vision of free discussion, here too, perhaps un(ittin%ly 4perhaps not5, Popper as
philosopher is a functionar% of capital.
3i&eral Scruples and Social 7nal%sis
In its authentic incarnations, institutions of free discussion do not start fro&, do not advance
y (ay of and do not end (ith scientific rationality, (ith the instru&ental reason that insists
that all truth is constituted y the &ethod of con1ectures and refutations.
Instead, as recounted and hinted at aove, actually e'istin% pulic spheres, i.e., proletarian
pulics or councils, (hile a safe haven, as it (ere, fro& the occlusion and &ystification that
e&anates fro& the state.s propa%anda &achine and its spectacular ad1uncts, and fro& the
deleterious i&pacts of suordination and passivity in daily life 4production5 itself, and (hile its
(or"< the (or" of the councils< proceeds on the asis of free discussion, the state&ent of
positions and perspectives, ar%u&ent and persuasion, it is also riotous, a social and
institutional conte't in (hich needs are articulated, de&ands are set forth, e'pectations
proclai&ed and even drea&y anticipations of the future are voiced. 0his is not only not
irrational, ut aids clarity y revealin% the underlyin% precate%orial ases of positions that are
enunciated and pro1ects that are pursued. It is the practical su1ect of daily life that co&es to
consciousness, achieves clarity here throu%h self9clarification, &utual criticis& and
consultation, and that elaorates, e'pands and deepens that consciousnessE it is e&phatically
not a lo%ical su1ect (ith a ready9&ade &ethod, already to hand 4for&5 and &ade to i&pose
itself on, to repress, the upsur%e of the precate%orial di&ension 4content5 of social life.
1
<
But this is &erely one side of the paucity of or, rather the very inaility to carry out social
analysis in philosophical lieralis&, in Popper hi&self.
0his inaility is a strai%htfor(ard 4(e daresay ,lo%ical/5 conse)uence of a tacitly &etaphysical
assu&ption that the su1ect of free discussion is the ,individual/ in her individuality 4&otivated
y her desire for an alto%ether astract freedo&5+ But the cate%ories of the astract analysis of
individuals en%a%ed interpersonally cannot e transposed to society, to the analysis of social
%roups and classes.
;irst, it cannot ecause ,individual/ 4the precise e)uivalent of the &ore openly philosophical
,&an/5 is itself an astraction fro& deter&inate social relations, that ense&le, (hich
1
,0he Western rationalist tradition< is the tradition of critical discussion N of e'a&inin% and testin% propositions or
theories y atte&ptin% to refute the&./ ,Pulic >pinion and @ieral Principles/ in Con9ectures and Refutations, #G#.
constitutes &en and (o&en in flesh and lood, as, first and fore&ost social individuals (hose
individuality rests on historically specific for&s of sociality.
Second, this transposition fails ecause the institutional settin% for resolvin% social conflict is
not the sa&e as those for personal conflicts 4our%eois courts5. Resolution of social conflict
develops violentl% in the specific sense that it overturns e'istin% social institutions 4and not
pri&arily in the sense of entailin% personal violence. 0he &ore ,popular/ the overthro(, the
&ore thorou%h%oin% it is, the less personal violence it (ill involve.5
1
$ere, it should e noted
that Popper ahors violence 4personal violence is lar%ely (hat he envisions5 and, (hile there
is certainly nothin% i%nole in this senti&ent, it is another li&itation 4not 1ust PopperIs since it is
conceptually inte%rated5 on the aility to en%a%e social analysis, analysis of individuals in the
sociality, in their elon%in%9to%ether as inte%ral to, as earers of everythin% in conscious life
that infor&s social %roups.
2
In fact, Popper.s entirely astract concept of free discussion e'ists onl% as ideality+ *s an
asocial settin% for rational discussion, it is a construction that derives fro& and is entirely
con%ruent (ith 4in the conceptual sense5, &ecause it is $odeled on, the laoratory in (hich
results are e'peri&entally arrived in science.
In all this, it is then not 1ust Popper.s lieral scruples 4principles5 that prevent hi& fro&
en%a%in% in social analysis, ut scientific deter&ination of the& that render hi& and the& unfit
for 4i.e., conceptually i&pede, loc" such5 analysis.
D
The Critique of Historicis$
3ot so oviously Popper is, li"e $aye" 4(ho he is fond of citin%5, a see&in%ly reasonale yet
fanatical defender of our%eois society and, underlyin% it, the order of capital. 0his is clear
fro& his first (or" devoted to a narro( scientific understandin% of the study of society.
:rafted in late 17DC and read to a private %atherin% in early 17DO ut unpulished until 17CG,
the asic thesis of Popper.s criti)ue of the social sciences is, ,the elief in historical destiny is
sheer superstition and< there can e no prediction of the course of hu&an history y
scientific or any other rather &ethods./
#
0o e sure, such elief is ,superstition/ fro& the
perspective of any nu&er of rationalities 4thou%h the e'plication of such elief can e
e&inently rational, and such elief itself (ill have its o(n lo%ic5E and, indeed, the prediction of
the course of hu&an history is not possile if y ,course/ (e &ean so&e lo%ic of an overall
develop&ent or a teleolo%ical &ove&ent.
With certain reservations, (e can a%ree (ith Popper that there is no ,la(/ of evolution of the
develop&ent of vital life in nature or social life in historyE
C
that the direction of a specific
historical develop&ent cannot e co&prehend as a la(, ut &ust e done as tendency 4and
not as ,trend/5E
O
the &ethod of the study of nature and society is unitaryE
G
situational lo%ics are
operative in specific historical conte'ts and history is (ritten interpretatively and as such is in
1
0he councilar fra&e(or" of a ne( social order< one that does not en%a%e lieral principles as Popper understand
the&< is neither an e'istin% feature of society, a settin% at allE and nor is it an institution in the traditional our%eois
sense, that is, it is not characteri=ed y separation: It does not appear as a KpulicK force clothed in this sha$
o&9ectivit% that sets it apart fro$ and over and against individuals, the underlyin% social classes, and society at lar%e.
2
,Rtopia and !iolence/ in Con9ectures and Refutations, #GG.
D
I&portant here are the centrality of ,facts/ as opposed to tendential develop&ents in society, the very concept of a
society totality. See the ,0he Criti)ue of $istoricis&,/ i&&ediately follo(in%.
#
The 4overt% of Historicis$, iv.
C
,&id, 10G910F, 11G.
O
,&id,120.
Popper plays fast and loose here, for his initial criticis& e)uates ,la(s/ (ith ,trends/ and the latter (ith ,tendency./
See, ,&id, DO, (here he asserts the underlyin% unity of ,anti9naturalistic/ and ,pro9naturalistic/ ,historicis&/ 4descried
in the te't, elo(5 in ter&s of ,the doctrine of historical las or trends+> E&phasis in ori%inal.
G
,&id, 1D0f.
part a function of a perspectiveE
1
and, that specific conditions, often institutional, underpin any
tendential develop&ent.
2
Is there, then, a prole& here2 Well, yes.
0he ,criti)ue/ of historicis& is incoherent, and (e shall identify (hy y (ay of syste&atically
counterposin% the theori=ation of concrete totality in historical and social analysis to it. We can
start (ith Popper and his deter&ination of historicis&, indicatin% li&ited points of a%ree&ent
and, of course, developin% our counterposition.
$istoricis&, accordin% to hi&, co&es into t(o varieties. 0he first he calls ,anti9naturalistic/ and
is characteri=ed y the ,&ethodolo%ically essentialist/ analysis of events, relations, processes
in society, and society itself, y (hich he &eans that this analysis clai&s to penetrate to
certain ,intrinsic properties/ that characteri=e the pheno&enon in )uestion. 0his for& of
historicis&, once a%ain on PopperIs vie(, entails the position that historical %enerali=ation is
not ,la( li"e/ in the sense of physicsE social pheno&ena e'hiit an irreducile novelty and
co&ple'ity in their constitutionE all prediction in the analysis of society 4Popper reduces this
,study/ to ,social science/5 is ,ine'act/E social %roups are &ore than the su& of the individuals
that co&pose the& or the social relations that e'ist a&on% the&E that "no(led%e in the study
of society is historical and ased on a sy&pathetic 4Popper says ,intuitive/5 understandin% that
has three for&s 4each of (hich constitutes an increasin%ly stron%er clai&5, na&ely,
understandin% arrived at on the asis of analysis of %enesis and effectsE of situational value
and of underlyin% historical tendencies of societal develop&entE and, a certain reluctance to
e&ploy )uantitative &ethods.
D
Popper opposes analysis of this sort to ,&ethodolo%ical no&inalis&/ (hich see"s only to
descrie ,ho( thin%s ehave,/
#
and to (hich the other for& of historicis& is closer. Called
,pro9naturalistic,/ and of course &ore attuned (ith his predilections, it ai&s to e theoretical
and e&pirical 4of course, in Popper.s sense5,
C
(here ,theoretical/ &eans that it is re)uired to
e'plain and predict events as (ell y (ay of theories or ,universal la(s,/ and ,e&pirical/
&eans it rests on ,e'perience/ 4the ,e'perience/ here, Popper ad&its, is not laoratory
constructed5E its e'planations and predictions concern oserved facts, (here oservation is
the asis for validation of any theory that has een put forthE and it, as ,sociolo%y,/ has certain
&ethods in co&&on (ith physics,
O
e.%., a stron% ent to(ard )uantitative &easure&ent.
G
Still Popper is unco&fortale (ith ,pro9naturalistic/ historicis&. So, a%ain, if (e also re1ect the
possiility of assertin% a ,la(/ that %overns historical develop&ent 4as a (hole or at any level
of that develop&ent5,
F
(here do (e and on (hat asis do (e part co&pany (ith Popper2
0he differences that are at the core of this dispute is the reality and concept of totality N and
inti&ately connected to it, the si%nificance of the relation of a &o&ent to totality, the role of
decisive &o&ents in the totality, the concept of tendential develop&ent as opposed to a
,trend,/ and the practice, underlyin% these concepts, that ai&s to transfor& the historical (orld
1
,&id, 1C091C1.
2
,&id, 1C#91CC, 1CC91CO.
D
,&id, 1092C.
#
,&id, 2G927. 0he citation appears on 27.
C
See this Study, Part II, ,Science as 6ethod+ ;alsifiaility and Postulative :eductivis&,/ aove.
O
The 4overt% of Historicis$, DC9DO.
G
Sociolo%y as an e&pirical science, of course, rests on the very develop&ent of capitalis&, specifically, the process of
institutional rationali=ation on the asis of (hich ,society/ itself as a &assive presence confrontin% individuals, as a
syste& of hardened social relations, of institutions, first appears, appears distinct fro& other institutions such as the
,econo&y/ and ,polity,/ and can e descried physicalistically (ith &ethods ta"en over fro& the &odern science of
nature. See the Second Interlude, ,0he Real Susu&ption of @aor under Capital 4Real :o&ination5,/ aove.
F
In point of fact, it is only (ith the e&er%ence of capitalis& into history 4i.e., (ith the constitution of a for& of sociation
that is capitalist5 that the &ultitude of histories of different and varyin% co&&unities and societies are overta"en y the
e'pansion and deepenin% of the deter&inants of capital, and that a universal history e%ins to unfold in the f irst place.
It is only on this condition that (e can spea" of a sin%ular historical develop&ent at all.
of hu&anity and our relations to earthly nature on (hich the for&er rests. $ere (e oppose
ourselves to practices of ,social en%ineerin% and ,piece&eal technolo%y,/
1
(hich underpin a
scientific sociolo%y and (hich stand or falls, as does the alle%ed contradiction et(een ,la(s/
of social develop&ent and the co&&it&ent to chan%e,
2
(ith the ade)uacy, coherency and
validity of PopperIs criticis& of totality. Bound up (ith these are a variety of specific
differences that at once illu&ine the core of the disa%ree&ent and devolve fro& it.
Be%in (ith the really crucial concept, that of totality.
In Popper.s for&ulation, ,theories are prior to oservations as (ell as to e'peri&ents, in the
sense that the latter are si%nificant only in relation to theoretical prole&s./
D
But this is hardly
radical enou%h, i.e., it does not %o to the root of the issue. Whether co&&onsensical,
scientific, philosophical, ideolo%ical, and so on, theories< all vie(s, standpoints or positions...
tacitly assu&e no &atter ho( va%ue and confused or e'pressly articulate a deter&inate
conception of reality and, inseparaly in practice, vision of the (orld (e (ish to &a"e.
4*nalytically and reflectively, they can e considered separately.5 0hus, the &ethod of the
study of society and nature cannot, as Popper does, e divorced fro& a perspective on (hat
reality is and ho( it is for&ed (ithout i&poverishin% its content and &isapprehendin% any
tendential develop&ents (ithin in society or in natureE that &ethod and that reality is not
scientific ut dialectical, and this perspective can e rationally 1ustified, as (e undertoo"
aove.
#
...0his situation is %rounded in the constitution of hu&an ein%s as hu&an ein%s+ *s
e'istentially ,deficient/ ein%s, hu&ans produce concepts, vie(s and theories in and on the
asis of the (orld of daily practice to illu&ine that activity and act in this (orld. 0heories, then,
are relative to first and ori%inally the life(orlds in (hich they are produced, and here to the
for&s of (or" or activity throu%h (hich they developE and, second to the cultures as total
social facts that they develop out of and (hich they interpret...
0he prole& of totality %oes deeper in Popper, for he fails to %rasp the very possily that the
concept of essence has 4real and conceptual5 &eanin% as part of the historical evolvin%
concrete totality of society, history and nature. 0his is our perspective. $is concept of
essence, thou%h, is &etaphysical ecause it attriutes the sense of per&anency and
unchan%in% to it+ ;or hi&, it, essence, is independent of any and all real and possile
su1ectivities and refers ac" to none+ $e e'plicitly holds that processes, relations, events,
institutions, etc., deter&ined essentially have an unchan%in%,
C
and per&anent
O
characterE and,
that accordin%ly, historical develop&ent cannot e constituted as chan%e in the very faric of
society if its sustratu&, presu&aly so&e aspect of society 4he does not say5, is unchan%in%.
In this re%ard, he cites 4rather e'tensively5 $usserl
G
4and the $usserl of the 3ogical
,nvestigations no less5.
1
,&id, CF9G0.
2
,&id, C19C2.
D
,&id, 7F.
#
0his Study, Part II, ,0he 6aterialist :ialectic,/ aove.
;or us, PopperIs co&&ent that, ,it see&s not i&proale that the historicist &ethod &i%ht have ori%inated as part of a
%eneral philosophical interpretation of the (orld/ 4The 4overt% of Historicis$, C#5 is either unduly repetitive or utterly
thou%htless.
C
,&id, D19D2, DD.
O
,&id, 1DO, (here he refers to ,&ethodolo%ical essentialis&/ e'plainin% ,facts/ y reference to ,a "ind of per$anent
%host or essence./ 3ote the e&phases 4added5 aove and elo(.
G
It ,.&i%ht e, so far as its essence is concerned, present at any other place and in any other for&, and &i%ht li"e(ise
chan%e (hilst re&ainin% in fact unchan%ed, or chan%e other(ise than in the (ay in (hich it actually does../ ,&id, D2+
40he source of this citation fro& $usserl is not specifically identified.5 ;ro& this very early $usserlian understandin%
of essence, Popper further inference that essence e'ists as potentiality, not d%na$icall%, asurdly su%%estin% that
*ristotle stands ehind, as it (ere, the thin"in% 4in its lo%ical structure5 of all ,historicis&s/ 4,&id, DD5. 3ot at any rate a
historicis&, the revolutionary concept of reality as a concrete totality cannot e understood in this &anner. See elo(.
0he concept of an essence, accordin% to Popper, refers us ac" to a deter&inant that cannot
e resolved into history, real &ove&ent. 40hus his concept is an asolute, a residue of pre9
Lantian &etaphysics.5 0o one side< thou%h he does not e'plicitly deploy theses ter&s, they
are the sense of his re&ar"s< (hether underlyin% sustrate, sustance, ulti&ate reality or
really real, it, the alle%ed real referent 4the essence5, is characteri=ed y its per&anence 4a
ter& (hich, (e have pointed out, he does use5. 0o the other side, the concept 4of an essence5
and its &o&ents 4reflectively, the cate%ories of analysis5 are the theoretically revealed
ele&ents of this sustantial reality 4say, real deter&inants &ar"in% off societies situated alon%
a line or aout a course of historical develop&ent5. With a vie( to the s(eep of history 4the
(hole of socio9hu&an, historical develop&ent5, of novelty and chan%e, for&s 4concept and
cate%ories (hich (e %enerate5 do not e&er%e fro& real social &ove&ent 4content5, endin%
ac" on 4conceptually catchin% and fi'in%5 the aidin% re%ularities that recur yet disappear in
that ceaselessly chan%in% &ove&ent. Instead, a per&anent structure is said to underlay
history, novelty, chan%e+ ;or&, as essence, is al(ays present< ut this is &erely an ideal
reconstruction &as)ueradin% as a real deter&inant, i&posed rather %od9li"e, i.e., fro& a
perspective9less or ,o1ective/ position, on content 4history, real &ove&ent5.
But in history essence has the sense of &erely aidin% re%ularities in e'perience, that
the&selves too can chan%e, (hich for& those structures that stand out a&on% other internal
relations that for& the (hole 4totality5 and (hich are decisive for its constitutionE and, as they
chan%e the (hole itself is transfor&ed. 0he historical totality, capitalis&, has its decisive
&o&ents in astract laor, value 4capital5, use and e'chan%e value, production, relations of
production, productive forces that sensily e&ody capital, etc., concepts that have real
referents (hich the&selves have for&ed historically, that all refer ac" to the activity of
practical su1ectivity in production, that can e transfor&ed, aolished even, throu%h that
activity, and that accordin%ly in this su1ect.s activity as it and to the e'tent it issues in
)ualitative chan%e can rin% aout the aolition of capitalis& as a historical totality.
1
1
Popper asserts that totality cannot e concrete, (hile he &eans it cannot e the o1ect of scientific, i.e., our%eois,
theory and investi%ation, for he affir&s the irrationality of the historical present, na&ely, capitalis&, and our inaility to
transfor& it as a (hole. Such practice leads to ,totalitarianis&,/ the effort to transfor& ,&an,/ the political prole& of
,or%ani=Hin%J< hu&an i&pulses. /It is ,i&possile,/ self9contradictory, ,utopian,/ ,&id, O2, OF9O7, GD9G#.
In this re%ard, Popper states, ,there e'ists no physical analo%y of holistic en%ineerin% or of the correspondin%
Tscience.. ,&id, F2. 0o the contrary, Popper lived lon% enou%h ut did not reco%ni=e, ecause he could not understand,
there is this on%oin% ,planetary e'peri&ent/ called cli&ate chan%e 4and reco%ni=ed in the scientific co&&unity as
such5, and its ,correspondin% Tscience./ is the &odern science of nature 4(ith all its attendant and au'iliary disciplines5
itself.
0here are t(o ironies here, first, Popper returns to nihilist decisionis&, to the assertion that all funda&ental ends, and
ai&s, are ,a &atter of choice/ 4,&id, G#5 and cannot, accordin%ly, e rationally 1ustified 4and here, (e &ean rationally
in the revolutionary and dialectical sense5E and, second, he does not reco%ni=e< and this is a theoretically &ediated,
personal failure< that it is precisel% capital ho is the totalitarian and &ar&arian, ho has underta!en the pro9ect of
Nre$a!ing $an>: $e does not understand the real totalitarian dyna&is& can e found in the develop&ent of
capitalis&, and &ust e located in the total societal situation, startin% fro& the )ualitatively deeper penetration of
science and technolo%y, not as ,inputs/ that shape and reor%ani=e production ut as techno9scientific production that
is sea&lessly a piece (ith a culture of daily life underlyin% (hich are the individuals (hose souls and odies are
ceaselessly ein% techno9scientifically re&ade. ;or it is capitalIs insinuation of itself into the culturally and historically
constituted need structure of &en and (o&en, e%innin% (ith the for&ation and structuri=ation of hu&an need in
children. 0hat is, intert(ined (ith and as sustitutes for the depth9psycholo%ical asences 4love, elon%in%5 (hich are
relational products of the our%eois 4nuclear5 fa&ily, an asolutely insatiale need to consu&e co&&odities is
i&planted 4constitutin% a character9for&ative, repressive desuli&ation of those asences5. Its Tintro1ection. re)uires
oscenely &assive production of hu&anly (orthless co&&odities that is inseparale fro&, and i&possile (ithout the
plunder of nature, its reduction to infinitely plastic ra( &aterial in the &atri' of production, and i&possile (ithout the
sciences of nature (hich constitute the theoretical fra&e(or" in (hich this reduction is carried out<0his voracious
need itself is for novelty, to have and possess (hatever ne(ly appears on the &ar"et, ut (ith the proviso that in a
really crude pheno&enal sense, a ui)uitous &ar"et is constitutive of society itself in its specific historical for&.
3eatly dovetailin% 4ecause it is entirely consistent5 (ith the second feature of the concept of
totality that Popper does not understand is the relation of (hole to part, &o&ent to totality.
Popper says the constitution of totality 4say, a social %roup5 as a (hole is &ore than the parts.
4,0he %roup is $ore than the &ere su& total of its &e&ers, and it is also $ore than the &ere
su& total of the &erely personal relationships e'istin% at any &o&ent et(een any of its
&e&ers./5
1
Well, yes, if ,essence,/ (hat he &eans (hen he says ,(hole,/ is unchan%in% and
per&anent, then necessarily the (hole (ould e &ore than the parts. But this concept
constitutes a hypostati=ation of the (hole over the parts, (hich, a&on% other thin%s, is the
si%nificance of our discussion 41ust concluded5 of essence in Popper< It is to e understood
that reference to Popper is for the &ost part a reference to scientific thin"in%, not to hi&
personally, the person Larl Popper, ut only to hi& to the e'tent and ecause he ri%orously
thin"s in this &anner, in the &anner of scientific thin"in%< *nd, hypostati=e is (hat he does,
ecause it is ho( the (hole is understood in science. 0hus he illicitly co&pares the concept of
the (hole 4operative in a revolutionary, dialectic theori=ation of society5 to the iolo%ical
concept of an or%anis&. $e spea"s of the derivation of historical structure of society fro& a
society as a pheno&enon that ,e'periences/+ ,0he or%anis& learns y e'perience. 0he
sa&e< holds true of society, since society too e'periences./
2
0his is the hypostati=ation+
0here are t(o points here. ;irst, ,society/ is nonetheless an astraction+ It is socially 4class5
divided. It is therey a false totality+ ,Society/ ,e'periences/ nothin%. Second, the (hole is not
prior to, a&ove, N$ore than> or apart fro$ the parts, ut is si&ultaneously dialectically for&ed,
i.e., constituted y and constitutive of those parts. -et, for Popper, the attriution of an
independent reality to the (hole in the vie( he (ishes to critici=e is the only lo%ically
consistent &anner in (hich to spea" aout it, for fro& the standpoint of the &odern science of
nature the (hole either is an a%%re%ated totality of parts, the su& of the ,facts,/ or it is a
&etaphysically autono&ous reality.
@etIs consider the relation of (hole to part, or &o&ent to totality, in Popper &ore carefully.
In this criticis& it is the very character of the parts 4e.%., ,facts/5 as parts, as partial, to e
nu&erically endless or as he says 4and this is crucial for the ar%u&ent5 ,all./ 0hus, he refers to
?estalt psycholo%y in ter&s of ,the totality of all the properties or aspects of a thin%,/
D
and
,social (holes/ that e&race the ,.structure of all social and historical events of an epoch../
*ccordin%ly, a part or aspect is &erely ,one/ a&on% others, one ,(hich &ay e clearly
distin%uished fro& other aspects,/ in (hich case, (e study only an aspect.
#
0his conception
4of Popper and science5 rests on, ecause it presupposes the totality is an a%%re%ated (hole,
a su$ of all these aspects+ 4>nly an idiot (ould other(ise ar%ue %raspin% the totality (ould
entail apprehension of each and every part, all of the&E (ould fail to understand that so&e
parts are decisive in shapin% the (hole, others secondary and so&e only of li&ited
conse)uenceE and (ould utterly fail to reco%ni=e the totality need not, accordin%ly, e
co&prehended fro& all the parts.5 But here (e have Popper+ ,It (e (ish to study a thin%, (e
are ound to select certain aspects of it. It is not possile for to oserve or to descrie a (hole
0his insatiale de&and, lived as need, is the &asis for re$a!ing the hole Ninner life of c$an.,>, a re$a!ing that calls
forth capital to provide all social individuals so9for&ed 4not 1ust alienated and (a%ed laor5 (ith their 4inco&plete5
fulfill&ent, an inco&pletion that is only e'perienced as ineffale lon%in% and dissatisfaction (hich, in turn, is yo"ed to
the consu&ption of co&&odities and, on that asis, to laor and production as provision of the &onetary &eans of
fulfill&ent... Such is the contours of the real, historically actual totalitarian reality.
1
,&id, 1G, also GO. E&phasis in ori%inal.
2
,&id, 10.
D
,&id, GO. E&phasis added.
#
,&id, GG, GF. E&phases added. Si&ilarly, F7970, (here sa&e concept of ,all/ reappears this ti&e to 1ustify the
opposition to ,plannin%,/ (hich in its ureaucratic centralist, i.e., state capitalist, for& a la the Soviet Rnion
e&phatically re)uires (itherin% criticis&, ut not for the reasons Popper offers.
In the second, internal citation Popper is citin% Larl 6annhei&.s Man and Societ%+
piece of the (orld, or a (hole piece of nature./
1
So in the case of ?estalt theori=ation, Popper
reduces the (hole to an aspect, collapsin% the &eanin% of the one into the other, ad&ittin%
there are (holes 4i.e., aspects5 and denyin% the (holes have &eanin%, reality and e'istence
in any other sense 4in the case in point in the ?estaltist sense, ut also as concrete totality5...
*tte&ptin% to con1ure a(ay the i&port of ?estalt theory, it is a species ar%u&ent, sheer
sophistry, for, accordin% to Loff"a, Loehler, Lat=, ?oldstein, ?el, etc., and their analyses
4and theori=ations as (ell5 de&onstrate it,
2
it is in, throu%h and on the asis of its i&&ediate,
intuitive or perceptual apprehension of the aspect itself that the (hole, the ?estalt, is
si&ultaneously %iven and present to a(areness. 4$usserl (ould say it, the (hole, is
,apperceived./5 0hey are distinct, ut inseparale. 0heir relations are internal. 0he aspect
descried y these theorists is precisely that decisive &o&ent (e descried aove, (hich
e&phatically can e ,oserved/ or descried, the structurally definin% &o&ent4s5 of the totality
that %raspin%, and e'plicatin% the&, per&its insi%ht into it, the totality, its shape, or%ani=ation
and structure, its constitution, its for&ation.
In Popper, totality, then, is the (hole apart fro&, other and &ore than the parts, ut this is
either a &ystical or a &etaphysical (hole 4(hich intuitively he reco%ni=es, and accordin%ly
re1ects5. But not only is the totality as real not detachale fro& its &o&ents 4(hile, ideally and
analytically it &ay e astractly and &ista"enly spo"en of in this &anner5, structurally
si%nificant &o&ents or parts provide insi%ht into the totality or (hole, and the points of
levera%e fro& (hich it under%oes transfor&ation 4or can e transfor&ed5. In this respect
4thou%h this is not ho( he understands it ut it (hat he does, (hat he (rites yet does not
reco%ni=e as (hat he has said5, Popper is co$pelled to deploy the concept of a decisive
$o$ent, a structural feature 4or, as the case &i%ht e ut not here, an interrelated nu&er of
the&5, fro& (hich the totality can e %rasped, and (hich essentially characteri=es it, and
(hich (ould therey per&it us to act on it 4in society as part of it5, to transfor& it. In a len%thy
footnote in (hich he distin%uishes his position fro& that of the reno(ned ;rench physicist and
theorist, Pierre :uhe&, he states, ,*d&ittedly, :uhe& is ri%ht (hen he says that (e can test
only hu%e and co&ple' theoretical syste&s rather than isolated hypothesesE ut if (e test t(o
such syste&s (hich differ in one hypothesis only, and if (e can desi%n e'peri&ents (hich
refute the first syste& (hile leavin% the second very (ell corroorated, then (e &ay e on
reasonaly safe %round if (e attriute the failure of the first syste& to that hypothesis in (hich
it differs fro& the other./
D
0he theoretical syste&s are ideal 4not real5 totalities, the decisive
&o&ent or structural aspect is that hypothesis (hich differs in one syste& to another+ It is
decisive ecause it per&its Popper to re1ect one syste& as uncorroorated, and this re1ection
constitutes in thou%ht 4in a &ethodolo%ically perverse, i.e., scientific, for&5 action that
transfor&s our entire situation, here our understandin% of the reality the t(o co&ple' theories
refer ac" to<
It should e noted that Popper elieves that concepts deployed, first consistently y $e%el,
then 6ar' 4and other lesser lu&inaries for (ho& his criticis& &ay e appropriate5 for the
specific analysis of society, concepts such as ,direction,/ ,&ove&ent/ and ,force,/ are derived
fro& scientific use.
#
In point of fact these concepts derive fro& a specifically philosophical
thin"in% aout society that in $e%el 4and, ecause he ta"es over the $e%elian &ediatory
conceptual fra&e(or", in 6ar'5 is consciously non9scientific and &ovies (ithin and arises
1
,&id, and also F09F1.
2
;or analysis and discussion, see, for e'a&ple, Loff"a.s So$e 4ro&le$s of Space 4erception in Carl 6urchison 4ed.5,
4s%chologies of *TB( 4Worcester 46*5, 17D05. ;or e'plicit theori=ation, see Lurt Loff"a, 4rinciples of 8estalt
4s%cholog%, O1#9OF1, (here of special interest so&e of these the&es appear (ith reference to the attac" &ounted y
the critics 4li"e Popper5 of ,psycholo%is&./
D
Popper, ,&id, 1D191D2, n. 2.
#
The 4overt% of Historicis$, 11D911#.
fro& the confrontation (ith (hat is ne( in society itself 4i.e., (ith the novelty of ,society/
itself5.
1
0his inversion is typical of Popper, and it &isses the historically si%nificant point,
na&ely, that the asic cate%ories of the &odern science of nature, its ,force,/ ,irreducile
ele&ents/ 4identified latter as ,ato&s/5, ,&otion,/ etc., ere concepts that ere first encounter
in the pre-scientific experience of &ourgeois societ% as it originall% e$erged, specifically in the
e'perience of the self9sunderin%, e'plosive and contradictory social unity, the &ellu$ o$niu$
in o$nes arisin% out of production and e'chan%e. Popper.s ar%u&ent is one len%thy,
pole&ical attac" on a concept, and the reality that concept refers ac" to, oth of (hich he
never understands. 0his is no &ore apparent in the tacit assu&ptions he &a"es aout, and
the e'a&ples he provides that derive fro&, a society and usiness culture that is presu&ed
universal and eternally %iven<
2
0he (hole is a dialectical totality, a real, evolvin% (hole, that is constituted y the parts in their
interaction+
D
It is not a different order of reality, and it is not independent of its &o&ents 4e.%.,
,facts/5+ It is not suspended aove it, as it (ere, or hidin% ehind it.
#
0he counterposition of
&o&ent and totality, part and (hole, does not consist in their presu&ed e'ternal relation. 0his
is the conte$plative viepoint of science and the our%eoisie, for here the o&9ect onl%
appears ithin an artificiall% constructed context 0the la&orator% is exe$plar%5 in order to vie
it in its externalit%, anal%/e it in its unpertur&ed for$< o&serve, undistur&ed and ithout
interference fro$ an underl%ing irrational su&stratu$ 0hich is Neradicated,> i+e+, cannot
appear as such in this artificial context5, herein the Nexperi$ent> validates 0or Nfalsifies>5 its
las, las that per$it the o&9ect, societ% and nature, to &e deco$posed, the living social
Nco$ponents> of the for$er to &e exploited in the accu$ulation of capital and nature to &e
transfor$ed into a sin! of uglified, unprocessed $atter for further used as ra $aterials in
capitalist production< Rather, in the dialectical concept of realit% as a concrete totalit%, the
relation of all &o&ents to the totality are relations of interiorityE the o1ectively practical su1ect
is itself a &o&ent of the totality, it is that ,underlyin% sustratu&,/ that is, its relation is
,privile%ed,/ i.e., it is the standpoint (ithin the totality fro& (hich all of reality can e
levera%edE and, the opposition of &o&ents and totality is to e found in the dyna&ic of the
develop&ent of the totality and in its contradictory character...
Because he does not %rasp totality, and accordin% its dialectical relation of &o&ent to it in its
constitution, Popper also is incapale of understandin% actual tendencies of social and
historical develop&ent. $e is incapale of reco%ni=in% that various %roups of social ,facts,/
&o&ents, or parts 4(hether activities, social relations, institutions or even the various layers
for&in% social %roups and classes5 are interconnected, internally related, that those in their
connectedness and relatedness stand out as structurally si%nificant e'hiit a ,(ei%htI in the
)ualitative, socio9hu&an sense that i&parts a direction to historical develop&ent. Popper, on
the other hand, assu&es that in all theori=ations that are not scientific, tendential develop&ent
&ust &ean ,trend,/ and he e)uals the latter (ith ,historical la(s./
C
In either case the concept
in his hands has a lar%e statistical and ,factual/ co&ponent, (hich, althou%h it &ay e present
in 4one sense of5 the concept of a tendency, never do&inates that concept.
0he &eanin% and sense of ,historical tendency/ is a&i%uous, irreducily t(ofold and
situationally deter&ined+ In either sense, it is i&&anent to a %iven socio9historical con1uncture.
1
See 6anfred Riedel, Beteen Tradition and Revolution, G#9GC, 112911D, 1179121, 12D, 1D791#0, 1#F91C0E and
Co$$unit% and Capital, ]7097G.
2
0hese reifications are scattered throu%hout The 4overt% of Historicis$, e.%., C7, O0 n.1, O2, OC, FO.
D
;or elaoration, in a &anner that in its nuances is )uite distinct fro& us, see Larel LosX", Diale!ti! des :on!reten,
D#f.
#
,&id, 1DO, (here Popper states that ,&ethodolo%ical essentialis&/ rests on an unchan%in% sustratu& that is ,either
(ithin or &ehind the chan%in% oservale events./
C
,&id, DO, 11C.
In one sense, it is a the&atic unity of a series of social ,facts/ that su%%est a direction of social
develop&ent and presupposes that (e, in an on%oin% sense, &erely produce and reproduce
this reality over our heads and ehind our ac"s 4i.e., (ithout a(areness of the &eanin% of
our activity5. In the other sense, this reality itself 4its structure for&ed y the &ove&ent of
capital5 has eco&e so e'plosively contradictory that it co&pels specifiale social %roups,
(or"ers, as the o1ect and su1ect of capitalist production, to act and in actin% to %enerate a
%ro(in% a(areness of this entire develop&ent, in (hich case tendential direction is the
i&&anent potential incarnate in a social class for historically effective action, that is, for
challen%in% and aolishin% capital.
In either sense, any future su%%ested y the tendential direction of historical develop&ent
re&ains indeter&inate, even as this direction su%%ests a reall% possi&le outco&e that is &ay
even e li"ely. 0hat outco&e is never ,proale/ or statistically calculale. 0o oot, the
concept 4of tendency, li"e that of totality5 is only a function of the analysis of societies of
capital and it is in its prosaic usa%e a function of capital only to the e'tent that its e'istence
has een auto&ati=ed.
0he deter&inate conception of reality operative and, in Popper.s case e'plicit, in science,
&etaphysical realis&, reduces investi%ative activity to con1ectures and refutations, to trial and
error, and then, atop this, identifies this ,&ethod/ (ith specifically hu&an co%nitive capacities
and achieve&ents.
1
By the &ethod of thou%ht is so&ethin% &ore and entirely other+ 0he lo%ic
operative in 4the &ethod of5 investi%atory activity, (hether socio9historical or natural 4inclusive
of hu&ani=ed natural landscapes that appear (ithin and (ithout the uilt environ&ent5 is not
that found in science, and it is not Popper.s. It is dialectical, that is, ad&its of no asolutely
valid startin% points, does not &ove for(ard in a strai%ht line, reco%ni=es each particular
&o&ent, detail, fact, idea or cate%ory, receives its si%nificance only as it assu&es its places in
the totality, a totality that si&ultaneously can only e %rasped as its partial, inco&plete
&o&ents, the ,facts/ (hich for& it, coalesce. 0he lo%ic of presentation has, &oreover, a (ell9
defined, &ethodolo%ically necessary structure+ @i"e $e%el and 6ar', (e al(ays e%in (ith an
o1ect that is si&ply %iven or i&&ediately present, (hat is isolated and astract.
2
4;or 6ar'.s
co&prehensive analysis, it is the pervasively present co&&odity.5 0his startin% point is not
and cannot e aritrary+ :ialectical circularity, i.e., the for&al identity of the points of departure
and arrival 4the endpoint or conclusion to the entire presentation5, is an episte&olo%ical
re)uire&ent of theori=in%+ It is our only %uarantee a%ainst %ettin% lost 4literally in a &a=e of
concepts5. 0his circularity secures for us a return to the ori%inal, i&&ediately %iven o1ect
(hich upon return is no lon%er i&&ediate, i.e., is no lon%er once (e have (or"ed throu%h the
for&s of its &ove&ent and returned to the ori%inal o1ect of our investi%ation no( presented
as articulated, &ediated and concreti=ed 4i.e., it is co&prehended and e'plained as a &o&ent
1
0his is positivist, and e&piricist vul%ar nonsense. Co%nitively (e are, hu&anity is, as a distinctive, novel for$ of
&eing that is nonetheless part of nature, in nature, is nature and as such is hu$anl% natural, characteri=ed, a&on%
other features, &ost i&portantly y t(o ne( principles of self9or%ani=ation in nature, first, y (hat (e call reason or
,spirit,/ not &erely y conceptual thou%ht 4discursive, lo%ical analysis5, ut also the production of concepts, the
intuition of essences 4(here they are not identical5 in (hich the o1ectivity of o1ects is constituted and %iven a second
ti&e as &eanin%, and the capacity to ne%ate (hat is %iven and pro1ect (hat is not 4y i&a%inin%5E second, y an
e'istential lieration fro& life, fro& nature understood vitally or fro& the or%anic (orld, y a freedo& fro& the
i&&ediacy of life, and the aility to disen%a%e ourselves fro& its pressures, per&ittin% us as hu&ans to o1ectify all
di&ensions, (hether co%nitive, e&otional or physiolo%ical, of our e'istenceE and, third, on these ases y the active
construction of a socio9historical (orld (hose various aspects 4useful o1ects, idealities, social relations and
institutions, uilt environ&ent5, the&selves products of hu&an activity, are interconnected, intert(ined and &ore or
less inte%rated. HSee The 7ppearance of NSpirit> in 1rigins and 2ndings+ EditorIs note.J
2
;or 6ar', see the M3ach(ort/ to the second ?er&an edition 41FGD5 of :apital, cited at len%th in the ;irst Interlude,
,Bet(een 0riutary ;or&ation and Capitalist 6odernity,/ aove. Ele&ents of this approach can also e, thou%h
understood in a narro(ly &ethodolo%ical sense and thou%h articulated as ,science,/ in @ucien ?old&ann, The Hidden
8od, 17920, F7970, 7#97C, 7G97F, 100.
in the evolvin% totality, say, capitalis& at the level of the (orld5+ What is present yet &erely
tacit, undeveloped and astractly in the e%innin% &ust also e there, fully &ediated hence
concrete and actual, in the end.
1
Popper.s &ethod, on the other hand, is one that reathes the rarefied air of an astract
dialectic of concepts+ $e starts fro& and proceeds y (ay of %eneral consideration of social
and historical events, relations and structure stripped of their specificity, i.e., contentless, and
arrives at a theoretically &ore elaorate, evidentially un&ediated theori=ation of this
i&&ediacy.
PopperIs entire concept of science is deter&ined y this concept of an astract totality, that is,
y an understandin% that reverts to science at its ori%ins, y his opposition to &etaphysics in a
pre9critical, pre9Lantian sense. Popper &ay ,"no(/ totality, i.e., he can lo%ically &anipulate
concepts, ut he does not understand it, i.e., he does not %rasp its sense, the reality the
concepts refer ac" to ecause, for hi& 4that is, (ithin science5, preco%nitively that reality has
no sense unless it has een ,selected,/ astracted and pro1ectively elaorated (ith a vie( to
nature do&ination, a nature that is thus artificially reconstructed. In this crucial respect 4for
that &atter, in all respects5, PopperIs ar%u&ent transpires (ithin the order of capital, assu&in%
it, affir&in% it, and reinforcin% its stran%lehold.
1
,<1ener Rn&ittelar"eit und Einfachheit des *n%an%s ist es daru& %leich< Es ist das Werden seiner selst, der
Lreis, der sein Ende als seinen B(ec" vorausset=t und =u& *nfan%e hat, und nur durch die *usfAhrun% und sein
Ende (ir"lich ist., 4,I&&ediacy and si&plicity are characteristic of the e%innin%< It is the process of its o(n
eco&in%, the circle (hich presupposes its end as its purpose, and has its end for its e%innin%E it eco&es concrete
and actual only e ein% carried out, and y the end it involves/5. $e%el, M!orrede,, 4h@no$enologie des 8eistes 4our
translation5.
7 Note on 4lato
En%a%ed in an ahistorical intellectual history, Popper, of course, "no(s nothin% of the ancient
(orld and, it appears, understands less than nothin% of it, i.e., pursues an ofuscatory
construction that e%innin% fro& Plato only &ystifies this historical develop&ent. Plato2
Popper does not, it appears, understand that Plato.s The Repu&lic ut also 4ar$enides
4(ritten to(ard the end of his &iddle period5, and especially later (ritin%s, The 3a and The
States$an, are a historically specific account in philosophical ter&s, and these are 4lato.s
ter$s, of the political conditions in the ancient ?ree" sense of the good life.
Even if ancient ?ree" society 4(hich had a developed petty co&&odity producin% sector5
peripherally suffered reification, the )uestions posed and solutions offered y ancient
philosophy are, only in the &ost li&ited &anner, co&&ensurate (ith ours. Effectively, those
)uestions and solutions are for&ed (ithin a (holly different society, and %ive little clue to the
aporias, i&passes and contradictions that en%a%e philosophy in the our%eois era. In Plato.s
case, his (ritin%s are desi%ned to resolve a specific prole&, e&er%in% in an entirely different
socio9cultural conte't, of his o(n place and ti&e, to (it, *thens. final defeat in the
Peloponnesian War 4#D19#0# BC5, the Spartan i&position on *thens of the 0hirty 0yrants and
their ouster 4#0#9#0D BC5, Socrates death at the hands, so to spea", of the restored *thenian
de&ocracy, and Plato.s fli%ht and self9i&posed e'ile fro& *thens. Plato can e considered
utopian and totalitarian only in the &ost astract, i.e., ahistorical and socially indeter&inate,
&anner.
Plato desired to indicate ho( society is %overned, i.e., ruled, asin% his analysis on (ho rules
4the philosopher9"in%5 precisely in order to, at least in principle, prevent a recurrence of (hat
he sa( as the de&ocratic asse&ly9inspired tra%edy of *thens 4not to &ention Socrates5. It is
only (hen (e see" the theoretical 1ustification for (ho rules that the notion of the Ideas 4eide5
e&er%es, since it is the philosopher9"in% that lays clai& to the ri%ht to rule on the asis of
insi%ht, a seein% of the Ideas and the practical conse)uences this entails<
1
1
0his is not to voice approval for Plato. But our criti)ue starts fro& and ai&s at so&ethin% entirely different.
;ro& the earliest priests e&ployed y ancient "in%s to &odern intellectuals in the service of capitalist rulin% classes,
philosophi=in% is the ofuscatory &as)uerade that those (ho have created and hold po(er have utili=ed to &ystified
and enthrall, to oppress, to e'ploit+
Plato stands in the &etaphysically founded, philosophical traditions of Kpolitical theori=in%K 4i.e., of reflections on
statecraft5, the &odel for (hich is the philosopher or theorist 4e.%., *ristotle and $oes, or 6achiavelli5 consulting
the t%rant. $ere the concern is (ith conditions of the possiility of Statehood, theori=in% the %round of the tyrantIs
e'istence 4e.%., $oes5, or condition for the reali=ation of K1usticeK as the &easure of class do&ination 4*ristotle5, or
a%ain pro1ectin% the KestK state 4Plato, the philosopher )ua "in%, a&on% statist for&s, "in%ship as rule of the K>neK
ein% one of the &ost hostile to the freely constituted polity5, i.e., pro1ectin% enli%htened despotis&. 6etaphysically
%rounded philosophers have left their &ar" on history ecause they have concerned the&selves al&ost e'clusively
(ith the institutionali=ation of violence in hu&an affairs, that is, (ith a%%randi=e&ent of the state. Plato is not only no
e'ception, ut a &odel in this re%ard, and Popper, far fro& havin% dra&atically 4as he thin"s5 distanced hi&self fro&
hi&, share the funda&ental, underlyin% assu&ption, na&ely, the unalterale reality and overridin% necessity of the
state. In this, the last re%ard, see this Study, Part I!, ,Principles of Philosophical @ieralis&,/ aove.
Fourth Study
Criti,ue o Scientiic Reason
Biblio#raphical Sources
*la, !ictor 4and Stephen Sch(ar=5. Spanish Marxis$ versus Soviet Co$$unis$+ The
Histor% of the 41HM. 3e( Bruns(ic" 4385, 17FF
*rendt, $annah. The 1rigins of Totalitarianis$+ 3e( -or", 17C1
WWWWWWWWWWWW. The Hu$an Condition+ Chica%o, 17C7
Barnes, Will. Hegel-Marx, Marx-Hegel: Brief Re$ar!s 0Seven The$es5 on the Materialist
Reading of Hegel+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWWW. 1rigins and 2ndings: 8enerali/ed Hu$an 2$ancipation in the 4erspective of a
Ne 2arth+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWWW. The 2nglish Civil "ars and the Birth of )reedo$, Boo" III of Revolutionar%
1rigins of )reedo$ in the 2poch of Capital#s )or$al Do$ination of 3a&or in
4roduction+ St. Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5
WWWWWWWWW. ,So&e Re&ar"s on the Role of the Wor"in% Class in $istory/ in The Crisis in
Nature and Societ% and the "or!ing Class in Histor%+ St. Paul, 200792010
WWWWWWWWW. ,ICould *ntarctica 6elt2 Revolution I&a%ined+ 0hree ScenariosI and
TConsciousness of ClassI/ in The Crisis in Nature and Societ% and the "or!ing
Class in Histor%+ St. Paul, 200792010
WWWWWWWWW. ,Wor" and Speech+ 0he >ri%ins of 6an * Short Revie( of 0ron :uc 0hao.s
,nvestigations into the 1rigin of 3anguage and Consciousness+/ Rnpulished, 200F
WWWWWWWWW. ;ro& 6etaphysics to Philosophical *nthropolo%y+ 6a' Scheler.s Man.s 4lace in
Nature+/ Rnpulished, 200F
WWWWWWWWW. The 8er$an "orld to Reneed ,$perialist "orld "ar, *CS(-*TBC+ St. Paul, 200F
WWWWWWWWW. Co$$unit% and Capital+ St. Paul, 2001
WWWWWWWWW. Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ in the 2ra of ,$perialist "orld "ar and 4roletarian
Revolution+ Hrgeschichte 0*TST-'(((5+ St. Paul, 2000
WWWWWWWW. ,Instinctual :eprivation, ;ascis& and the ;ictitious Co&&unity of Capital./
Rnpulished, 177F
WWWWWWWWW. ,>n 0ruth./ Rnpulished, 17F0
Bohr, 3iels. 7to$ic 4h%sics and Hu$an :noledge+ 3e( -or", 2002 417C75
Bourrinet, Phillipe. The Dutch and 8er$an Co$$unist 3eft. @ondon, 1770
Ca&atte, 8ac)ues. Co$$unit% and Co$$unis$ in Russia+ @ondon, 17GF
Cili%a, *nte. The Russian 2nig$a 47u pa%s du grande $ensonge5. @ondon, 17GG 417DF5
;eyeraend, Paul. Realis$, Rationalis$ and Scientific Method+ 4hilosophical 4apers, L+ ,+
Ca&rid%e 4En%.5, 17F1
WWWWWWWWWWWWWW. ,$as the Scientific !ie( of the World a Special Status2/ in 8an $il%evoord
4ed.5, 4h%sics and 1ur Lie of the "orld+ Ca&rid%e 4En%.5, 177#+ 1CC91OF
?old&ann, @ucien. The Hidden 8od: 7 Stud% of Tragic Lision in The 4ensIes of 4ascal and
the Tragedies of Racine+ 3e( -or", 17O#
?oldner, @oren. ,Co&&unis& is the 6aterial $u&an Co&&unity/ 417725, accessile at the
(esite, Brea! their Haught% 4oer
$aer&as, 8Ar%en. ,K0he Pulic Sphere+ *n Encyclopedia *rticle 417O#5,K Ne 8er$an
Critique,/ D, ;all, 17G#
$e%el, ?.W.;. 8runlinien der 4hilosophie des Rechts+ Philosophische Biliothe", Band 12#.
@eip=in% 1711 41F215
WWWWWWWWWW. 4h@no$enologie des 8eistes. $a&ur% 17FF 41F0O5. Based on the te't of the
critical edition of $e%elIs 8esa$$elte "er!e, Band. 7, edited y W. Bonsiepen and
R. $eede
$eide%%er, 6artin. Sein und Feit+ $alle, 17DC 4172G5
KIntervie( (ith Cornelius Castoriadis.K Telos, 'B, Sprin% 17GC
Lirchner, 8a&es W. ,0he ?aia $ypothesis+ *re 0hey 0estale2 *re 0hey Rseful2/ Steven
Schneider and Penelope Boston, Scientists on 8aia+ Ca&rid%e 46*5+ 1771
Loff"a, Lurt. 4rinciples of 8estalt 4s%cholog%+ 3e( -or", 17DC
LosX", Larel. Diale!ti! des :on!reten+ 2ine Studie /ur 4ro&le$ati! des Menschen und der
"elt+ ;ran"furt a& 6ain, 17G1 4C=ech ori%inal, 17OD5
@u"acs, ?eor%y. Histor% and Class Consciousness: Studies in Marxist Dialectic+ @ondon, 17G1
4172D5
6ar', Larl. Das :apital+ 2ine :riti! der 4oliltischen E!ono$ie+ Dritte Band, Buch ,,,: Der
8esa$$tpro/ess der !apitalistischen 4rodu!tion+ $eraus%e%een von ;riedrich
En%els. $a&ur%, 1F7#
WWWWWWWW. M3ach(ort =ur =(eiten *ufla%e, auf+ Larl 6ar'a ;riedrich En%els, "er!e, Band 2D
4Das :apital, Bd. I5, Berlin 4::R5 17OF 41FGD5
WWWWWWWW. Das :apital+ 2ine :riti! der 4oliltischen E!ono$ie+ Erste Band auf+ Larl
6ar'a;riedrich En%els, "er!e, Band 2D. Berlin 4::R5, 17OF 41FOG5
WWWWWWWW. ,Bur 8udenfra%e/ auf+ Larl 6ar'a ;riedrich En%els, "er!e, Band I. Berlin 4::R5,
17GO 41F#D5
6ar', Larl and ;riedrich En%els. Manifest des !o$$unistiche 4artei+ "er!e, Band #. Berlin
4::R5, 17G# 41F#F5
6erleau9Ponty, 6aurice. The 4heno$enolog% of 4erception+ @ondon 17O2 4;rench ori%inal,
17#C5
6ur=i, 6auro. ,!ienna Circle/ 4200C5. Pdf docu&ent accessed at (((.&ur = i&.net
Popper, Larl. Realis$ and the 7i$ of Science+ ;ro& the 4ostscript to The 3ogic of Scientific
Discover%. Edited y W.W. Bartley, III. 0oto(a 4385, 17FD
WWWWWWWWWW. Ouantu$ Mechanics and the Schis$ in 4h%sics+ ;ro& the 4ostscript to The
3ogic of Scientific Discover%. Edited y W.W. Bartley, III. 0oto(a 4385, 17F2
WWWWWWWWWW. Con9ectures and Refutations+ 3e( -or", 2002 417OD5
WWWWWWWWWW. The 3ogic of Scientific Discover%+ 3e( -or", 17C7
WWWWWWWWWW. The 4overt% of Historicis$+ @ondon, 17CG
WWWWWWWWWW. The 1pen Societ% and its 2ne$ies+ Princeton 4385 17C0
Riedel, 6anfred. Beteen Tradition and Revolution: The Hegelian Transfor$ation of 4olitical
4hilosoph%+ Ca&rid%e 4En%.5, 17F# 4?er&an ori%inal, 17O75
Scheler, 6a'. Man.s 4lace in Nature 4Die Stellung des Menschen i$ :os$os5. Boston, 17O1
4172F5
Sch&itt, Carl. 4olitische Theologie: Lier :apitel /ur 3ehre von der Souver@nt@t+ 6Anchen,
1722
,0he Scientific Conception of the World+ 0he !ienna Circle/ in Sahotra Sar"ar 4ed.5, The
2$ergence of 3ogical 2$piricis$: fro$ *T(( to the Lienna Circle. 3e( -or", 177O
Wilson, Ed(ard >. Socio&iolog%: The Ne S%nthesis+ Ca&rid%e 46*5, 17GC
Wolfe, :on 6. 3eveller Manifestos of the 4uritan Revolution. 3.-., 17##
Conclusion
Science and Capital
0he ne'us et(een capital and science is no lon%er for&ed y the class (ho activities
created capitalis& and (hose e'istence has historically een co%nitively &ediated y science.
0he deeper the value for& has penetrated into society, the &ore real do&ination has
unfolded, the less the our%eoisie has acted in history, the less its capacity to cohere itself
(hether throu%h the do&ination it e'ercises in production, its unchallen%ed he%e&ony in the
state or in and throu%h the on%oin% develop&ent of 4its5 science. 0oday under conditions of
the totali=in% do&ination of capital over society, the our%eoisie is no lon%er a class in the
sense that it acts+ ;or, cohered y the &ove&ent of capital, it e'istential deter&inations are
theoretically e'pressed in cate%ories that capture and fi'... it is a slavish captive to... capital.s
&ove&ent+ 0he our%eoisie as such has ceased to e'ist, and the capitalist is a &ere
personification of those econo&ic cate%ories.
0hus, havin% ori%inated as a class theory in a stru%%le a%ainst old order "in%ship, its
funda&ental assu&ptions arisin% fro& our%eois accu&ulative practices, its conceptual
structure ho&o%eneous (ith that structure e'hiited in the constitution of value, science is
today &ore and &ore directly and i&&ediately ound to capital+ It is the e'peri&ent< creatin%
artificial conditions that e'ist no(here in nature and testin% predictions that &a"e possile
techni)ues and processes throu%h (hich nature do&ination is reali=ed.... that inds science
ever closer to capital, and it is production in (hich capital recreates science as a central
&o&ent in its reproduction.
1
Start riefly (ith production, the relation of science to capital fro& the side of capital.
In an i&&ediate sense, science is (holly dependent for its theoretical develop&ent on its
earers, scientists< ho( else could it e2 <and thus &ediately dependent upon that (hich
its earers the&selves i&&ediately depend, research and schools 4universities5 funded y
capitalIs state, %rants provided y the sa&e, and inco&es derived fro& revenues e'tracted
fro& underlyin% populations... y the state.
In respect to the function, role and co&prehensive aleit lar%ely hidden purpose of science as
nature do&ination, it is tas"ed (ith provision of the conceptual &ediations that e'pand
productive forces+ ;or it is onl% in the incessant develop&ent of ne( and refine&ent of old
technolo%ies of capital as they shape production that scientists, and thus science, can insure
the continuity of those funds, %rants and inco&es...
3o( ta"e the e'peri&ent, the relation of science to capital fro& the side of science.
0he e'peri&ent itself is artificial producin%< constructing< conditions that e'ist no(here in
nature. Instead, in dealin% (ith odies and processes, the e'peri&ent proceeds y settin%
aside the decisive interconnected relations and conditions (hich penetrate and shape these
odies and processes, on (hich they rest and (hich ta"en to%ether for& the conte't 4totality5
that is effectively deter&inate for their reality and ein%. What is distilled in the e'peri&ent is
precisely a %rand astraction, a ,practical/ construct that is asent real, concrete
deter&inationE rather, in fetishistically fi'in% and &ali%nantly &a%nifyin% partial aspects,
dee&ed ,essential,/ of the various orders of reality, (hether ,inor%anic,/ vital or hu&anly
natural 4not to &ention the various %radations that shade off and into each other or those
points at (hich they intersect5, this e'peri&ental distillation per&its these natures 4odies5 to
e &anipulated so that they &ay e torn apart, %round up, destroyed and refor&ed as ra(
&aterials for the capitalist production of a (orld of co&&odities+ If the &odern science of
1
It is in this, the scientific sense that e'peri&entation is at issue, and not in the sense of the practical effort to
reproduce e'istin% conditions in nature or in the sense of %ivin% free rei%n to potentials that inhere in nature 4natura
naturans5.
nature 4and those sciences for (hich it is a &odel5 is ale to e'hiit the ele&entary
constitution of odies, no &atter ho( fetishi=ed the analysis, it in principle e'hiits ho( odies
can e &ade up, and ho the% can &e ta!en apart, de-structured or destro%ed+ 0he e&phasis
is not on for&s or relations 4e'ceptin% the purely )uantitative5 a&on% various sensuous
odies, ut on a type of understandin% that is narro(ly practical as such, i.e., pra%&atic and
utilitarian, prior to any ,application./ 0he rationality here is, as (e say, a priori instru&ental.
3o( this character 4as instru&ental5 is confir&ed y the very internal conceptual structure of
science, i.e., the very %oal of theori=in% points to the sa&e conclusion+ *s a ody of theoretical
"no(led%e science ai&s at prediction, i.e., the doctrinal contents of science de&and e'tra9
theoretical confir&ation (hich, in part and in turn, secure scientific validation 4or, if you prefer,
those contents re&ain unfalsified5. But the peculiar and (idely reco%ni=ed validity, &eanin%
and si%nificance that science has achieved as theory does not refer us ac" to its cate%orial
achieve&ents. Instead, the validation is sou%ht in e'peri&entation and in technological
achieve$ent, the real process of verification, in the order of societ%+ ;or it is here, in this proof,
i.e., in the sociall% generali/ed seeing, approval and acclai$ for technological achieve$ent
revealed in and exhi&ited as nature do$ination, that science e'hiits its a priori technolo%ical
character, its instru&ental rationality and the peculiar for& of "no(led%e of ein%s as ra(
&aterial that it produces.
0his leads ac" to our earlier analysis of the relation of capital.s science to technolo%y+ 3ot
only is this science dependent upon &odern technolo%y for its theoretical develop&ent, and
not only is the latter, capitalist technolo%y 4ecause it incarnates e'plicit theori=ation5, in turn,
dependent on the for&er for its advances. Crucial for the sense of this &utual dependency is
the e'peri&ent or, &ore precisely, the instru&ent, instru&ental apparatus or co&ple' of
instru&ents e&ployed in carryin% out e'peri&ents+ Scientific "no(led%e of nature is at once a
product of our 4instru&ental5 interaction (ith it and relative to the sophistication of the
instru&ents e&ployed. *s technolo%ically developed scientific instru&ents eco&e &ore
elaorate, refined and co&ple', scientific "no(led%e of nature 4the universe5 e'pands and is
not infre)uently transfor&ed. 0his should e ovious+ We only need refer to the role of
conte&porary accelerators 4&icrophysically5 and telescopically e)uipped satellites
4&acrophysically5 in particle physicsI and cos&olo%ical understandin%, respectively, of
funda&ental ,&atter/ and the physical structures so9called 4e.%., %ala'ies5 of the universe.
0hus, (e can affir&, on one side, the e'peri&ent e&ploys ,practice/ for the sa"e of theory.
But this heterono&y, as (e indicated, is &utual+ 0he "ind of theory therey achieved lends
itself to, and thus encoura%es, the lar%e9scale natural 4and social5 transfor&ations re)uisite to
the e'panded reproduction of capital up to and includin% planetary %eoen%ineerin%,
transfor&ations that once occurred only on %eolo%ical ti&escales ut today characteri=e the
te&poral fra&e(or" in (hich conte&porary technolo%ies of capital operate 4&onths and
years5. 0herey, on the other side, this )ualitatively enlar%ed e'peri&ent e&ploys this
&utilated theory for the sa"e of its ,practice./ But that is not all. 0hat ,practice,/ in turn,
eco&es a fount of theoretical insi%hts that cannot e ac)uired &erely in the laoratory, or
&ore precisely, the Earth as a (hole has eco&e a laoratory+ 0he entire cycle recurs
continuously as science and &odern technolo%y, &utually dependent, co9penetrate each other
and enlar%e each otherIs do&ains throu%h a societal process that re&a"es surroundin%
earthly nature as a holdin% area of unprocessed resources for capitalist production.
ostscript
rologue
*t the end of the &illenniu&, startin% fro& plate tectonics a veritale revolution in the
our%eoisieIs theory, science, has ta"en up ane( the prole& of the life sciencesE not,
ho(ever, as a )ualitatively elaoration or refine&ent of %enetics (ith its vast reductionistic
deter&ination of life in ter&s of a &athe&atical code 4thou%h as a "ey di&ension of an even
vaster pro%ra& of capitalist social control this is on%oin%5. Rather, a%ainst it o(n ato&istic
predilections, a nu&er of once separate do&ains of study 4oro%eny and volcanis&,
oceano%raphy and %lacialo%y, at&ospheric che&istry, and far &ore5, havin% co&e to%ether in
the study of cli&ate chan%e, have arrived at a unitary vie( of the %eophysiolo%ical history 4our
ter&5 of the Earth. 0his &ay all appear odd, since startin% fro& a see&in%ly inert, inor%anic,
,physicalI or %eophysical o1ect, the Earth, (e arrive at the prole& of the life sciences, at
issues that deal (ith the or%anic or iotic.
0his perspective for (hich the Earth is a (hole si&ultaneously one (ith and other than its
co&ponent partial syste&s, so&e apparently livin%, has &een forced on scientists, first, y the
alar&in%ly apparent dan%ers posed y the rava%es of capital itself 4the effort to &odify inner
nature and transfor& hu&an ehavior %enetically, increasin%ly reali=ed, is the precise
counterpart to the on%oin% transfor&ation of nature, reali=ed throu%h the relentless and
acceleratin% destruction of haitat for purposes of constructin% uild environ&ent, throu%h
fossil fuels9ased caron e&issions, to'ification of %round(ater, ocean acidification, etc.5,
rava%es that (ould e i&possile (ithout technolo%ies of capital and, underlyin% the&, the
&odern science of natureE and, second, y their o1ect 4i.e., the Earth5, and the transfor&ation
that it as a (hole, &anifested in a radically alterin% cli&ate, is under%oin%. 0his transfor&ation
is %ivin% rise to %enuine crises in nature and society 4crises (hich are conver%in%5, and it is
the reco%nition, &uch of its tacit ut nonetheless increasin%ly e'plicit, that our%eois
civili=ation, the fate of hu&anity and, (ith oth, the &odern science of nature in its entirety is
at issue and its very e'istence at sta"e in the alteration.
If (e set aside the disclai&ers aoundin% in the &edia spectacle, (ithin the scientific cli&ate
chan%e co&&unity there is virtual unani&ity, first, on the reality of cli&ate chan%e and,
second, as to its a%ency and causation. It is ,anthropo%enic/ 4a desi%nation the %enuine
&eanin% and si%nificance of (hich (e shall in due course correctively specify5.
1
Within this
co&&unity there have also een efforts, far fe(er in nu&er, to understand on%oin% and
unfoldin% cli&ate chan%e (ithin a road, %eolo%ical9develop&ental and underlyin% fra&e(or",
that of Earth history itself. Proaly the only, a (ell9"no(n, relatively coherent paradi%& to
develop in the course of this research is called Earth syste& science. Pro%ra&&atically, this is
an orientation ithin the order of capital<
3o( ovious, reco%nition of the role of hu&ans as an undisputed, decisive force shapin% the
landscape and topo%raphy of the Earth< &anifest in uran &e%a9&etropolises N cities of
slu&s, &assive diversions of (ater(ays, pollution of oceans, %round(ater and terrains, &ore
&ediately in at&ospheric pollution transfor&in% the caron cycle and heatin% the Earth< has
%iven rise in the past three decades to syste&atic research and a series of reflections, oth
often scientific in character, that co&e to%ether around the prole&atic of cli&ate chan%e.
*c"no(led%in% the unavoidaility of &assive, %loal cli&ate chan%e, the politics of a %ro(in%
section of capitalIs scientific cli&ate chan%e co&&unity are predicated on a reactionary
6althusian perspective of overpopulation 4(ith its clai& of necessary, insatiale de&ands on
inelastic, finite resources5 and entail planetary %eoen%ineerin% as a stop%ap to salva%e
1
See Part !, ,*nthropo%enic Cli&ate Chan%e2/, elo(.
capitalist civili=ation. 0hese politics outline a van%uard position (ithin the order of capital.
1
It a
position that reaffir&s the science and technolo%ies of capital, and it tacitly accepts the
totalitarian re%i&entation of social life to preserve this order. 0his, then, provides us (ith our
reason to pursue this study in a criti)ue of science+ It is precisely the &odern science of
natureitself that has under conditions of real do&ination 4i.e., under conditions of its inti&ate,
internal and necessary lin"a%e to capitalist production5 played a lar%e and fateful role in the
inau%uration of cli&ate chan%e...
Return, if you (ill, to the )uestion of life.
0he physicist Paul :avies
2
offers a iolo%ical definition of life that includes the follo(in%
essential features+ 6etaolis&, co&ple'ity and or%ani=ation, self9reproduction, develop&ent,
autono&y 4self9deter&ination5 and evolution. While develop&ent and evolution &ay at first
appear to overlap, they are distinct+ :evelop&ent has a strictly iolo%ical sense referrin% to
%ro(th, chan%e in shape 4and si=e5 and (ith that chan%e possile chan%es in function, (hile
evolution is narro(ly ,:ar(inian,/ that is enco&passes %enetic replication and species
alteration 4or ,chan%e/5 on the asis of adaptation throu%h natural selection.
Even in iolo%ical ter&s this deter&ination 4of life5 is not ade)uate, not to &ention
contradictory. 40hat inade)uacy is &ost visile in the evolutionary deter&inistic aspect of the
definition,
D
the contradiction is constituted in the unresolved relation of autono&y to evolution5.
0here are, &oreover, deter&inations arisin% fro& other perspectives that su%%est other
essential features+ Physicists are apt to define life as ounded, un&ediatedly li&itin% its o(n
entropy y e'pellin% it to its surroundin% environ&entE che&ists &i%ht descrie life as
&acro&olecular and specify the &ost i&portant and co&&on ele&ents 4hydro%en, o'y%en,
nitro%en, caron5 on (hich it is asedE ioche&ists and physiolo%ists are li"ely to su%%est life
transpires (ithin cellular orders that retain an a)ueous settin%. ;or a philosopher, on the
other hand, life can e %rasped ehaviorally as the unity and asic identity of its psychic and
physiolo%ical aspects, (ith an orientation to(ard its outside 4environ&ent5 of (hich it is
functionally and operatively part and (hich in this relation is pheno&enolo%ically characteri=ed
in a funda&ental (ay y e'pressiveness.
#
0he point is that (ithin and (ithout the our%eois
scientific co&&unity there is no consensus deter&ination of the &eanin% of life+ It is analy=ed,
euphe&istically ,dissected,/ i.e., &urdered, in the na&e of that science and, of course,
oservedE ut definitions, thou%h occasionally overlappin% and thou%h rational, are %iven and
presented in relation to different levels of the real itself, and are variations on the possile
(ays in (hich life presents itself. 0his si%nificance of all this lies in the fact that, (hile a
%enuine co&prehension of life eludes science in a &anner entirely consistent (ith our%eois
practices in relation to the earthly nature in (hich hu&anity has evolved, it is lar%ely the role of
life that is at issue in the understandin% and e'planation of cli&ate chan%e.
1
$ere for e'a&ple, see Peter Ward, The Medea H%pothesis: ,t 3ife on 2arth Hlti$atel% DestructiveK Princeton 4385,
2007.
2
The )ifth Miracle+ @ondon, 177F.
D
See the Second Study, Part ! as a (hole, aove.
#
6a' Scheler, Man#s 4lace in Nature+ Boston, 17O1 4172F5+ 12.
Su""ary and rospects
)est our Hopes and Drea"s Beco"e an ,ndless Night"are
The Do"ination of Nature:
Capitalist Technology, the Modern Science of Nature and the
Mo/e"ent of Capital
With its relations of production, of e'chan%e and of property, &odern our%eois society, a
society that has su&&oned up such colossal &eans of production and of e'chan%e, is li"e the
sorcerer (ho is no lon%er ale to control the po(ers of the under(orld (ho& he has con1ured
up y his spells.
6ar' and En%els, The Co$$unist Manifesto
1
If technolo%ical &an had conscience of his dependent position in the (hole of nature, he (ould
e etter e)uipped to do a %ood 1o for hi&self ecause in the lon% run, a cos&olo%ical
pheno&enon &i%ht put an end to the adventure of &an. 0his pheno&enon is proaly in the
&a"in%, and it is )uite possile that &an is one of the a%ents of this &a"in%. :isre%ard for
nature is, in any case, the (orst pre&ise for survival, let alone develop&ent.
Paolo Soleri, The Bridge Beteen Matter and Spirit is
Matter Beco$ing Spirit 417O75
,ntroduction
*t this &o&ent, today, an unfoldin% cli&ate chan%e catastrophe is enco&passed y the
&ove&ent of capital. *s it deepens, its e'panse %ro(s, the (eather events and once
e'traordinary natural events throu%h (hich it &anifests itself and (hich for& its out(ard
for&s, fren=ied, convulsive and uni&a%inaly over(hel&in% this &ove&ent of natural
chan%e (ill unfold &ore and &ore autono&ously, &ore and &ore &enacin%ly, e'istentially
threatenin% not 1ust to hu&an life ut to life across the planet. 0his &uch is li"ely to transpire
(ithin the ne't t(o decades.
Capitalist Cri$inalit%
Destruction of the )oundations of Hu$anit% and 3ife in 2arth% Nature
What is i&portant to reco%ni=e is that the cri&inality of capital %oes eyond the vast and
potentially catastrophic prole&s that cli&ate chan%e has introduced. Even if societies of
capital (ere to co&e to %rips (ith on%oin% cli&ate chan%e in a &anner that (ould allo( the&
to &aintain densely populated reserve industrial ar&ies of laor, the industrial and financial
uilt environ&ent of &e%alopolitan landscapes, the vast and %i%antic fossil fuels infrastructure
4under(ater plu&in% lin"in% thousands of oil (ells in the ?ulfs of ?uinea and 6e'ico to
na&e 1ust t(o re%ions, thousands "ilo&eter lon% pipelines, fleets of ocean%oin% tan"ers, coal9
fired po(er plants5, not to &ention the enor&ous &ass of circulatin% co&&odities... retention
of these features is a hi%hly duious proposition... planetary ecolo%ical collapse that starts
fro& the iolo%ical diversity as the foundations of life on Earth (ill not cease. 0his collapse
ori%inates, is developed and sustained y the &ove&ent of capital, its causation e%ins (ith
the practical reduction of surroundin% nature to ra( &aterials for capitalist production, and its
cessation can only start fro& the aandon&ent of the activity throu%h (hich this reduction
occurs.
1
,:ie Ar%erlichen Produ"tions9 und !er"ehrsverhQltnisse, die Ar%erlichen Ei%entu&sverhQltnisse, die &oderne
Ar%erliche ?esellschaft, die so %e(alti%e Produ"tions9 und !er"ehrs&ittel hervor%e=auert hat, %leicht de&
$e'en&eister, der die unterirdischen ?e(alten nicht &ehr =u eherrschen ver&a%, die er heraufesch(or/ 4our
translation5.
Cli&ate chan%e is on%oin% occurrin% (ithin the fra&e(or" of %loal ecolo%ical transfor&ations
that too are on%oin%, and that are ein% accelerated y it. If (e consider several do&inant
for&s of transfor&ation, it eco&es patent that this fra&e(or" itself is fully deter&ined y
capitalist develop&ent+ In our lan%ua%e, (e see" to assess capitalIs cri&inality and to indict it.
0hese are not positive, factual and le%al concepts. Rather, (hat (e ai& at is the i&&anent
asis of capitalist production, the funda&ental %rounds on (hich it and all earthly e'istence
rests, (ith respect to the transcendent &eanin% of its lo%ic and &ove&ent...
0he consu&ption of hydrocaron9ased fossil fuels, oil, natural %as and coal, is producin% a
(ar&in% of the Earth that is &eltin% the ice caps and raisin% sea levels, thus threatenin% the
vast seaoard populations of the (orld, producin% a shift in the re%i&e of cli&ate as it has
e'isted for the past t(o &illion years on Earth, leadin% to %eolo%ically rare, if not
unprecedented, &ass species e'tinction.
!ast tracts of forest, land for lu&er 4for e'a&ple, the hard(oods of the tropical rainforests5,
are clear cut and then the ,residues/ are urned, oliterated, in order to satisfy the aesthetic
and profli%ate needs for consu&ption y the (ell9to9do &iddlin% %roups of the old capitalist
&etropolises and those e&er%in% in the ne( centers of accu&ulation and consu&ption on a
(orld9scale. E)ually vast tracts of &onocultural a%riculture created to capture food &ar"ets
%loally destroy intricate ecolo%ical alances a&on% plant life, &icroor%anis&s, soils, and
hu&ans and their cultures dependent upon those forests for their for& of life, further destroys
plant life 4here, forests (ith their lu'uriant folia%e and under%ro(th5 itself, creates nutrient poor
soils and top soils incapale of holdin% (ater, produces aridity, eventually desertification and
destroys, &a"in% e'tinct, entire &icroor%anic, plant, insect, ird and &a&&alian species
dependent on forests and their canopies for their haitat and food (hich all, in turn, deprives
hu&anity of incalculale &edicinal (ealth.
Si&ilarly, forests cleared for far&in% 4as (ell as for %ra=in%, ti&er and fuel5 is underta"en and
&ana%ed y a%riusiness capitals+ 6assed far&lands producin% e'otic fruits and ve%etale
for &ar"ets in the capitalist &etropolises, plantation estates 4toacco and su%ar, also indi%o,
dyestuffs, cotton5, and &onocultural %rain a%riculture 4corn, (heat, rice, soyeans5 and tree
forestries 4pine, eucalyptus, etc.5 are entropic and utterly unsustainale+ 0hey destroy
acteria, plant life, the ani&als and ird dependent upon that plant life, and (ith thei loss soil
productivity and the hu&an far&in% practices that (ithout re%ard to accu&ulation and
profitaility have een, outside that i&&ediate &etropolitan capitalist countryside, inte%ral to
this hu&ani=ed nature 9 the e'istin% plethora of hu&anly natural ecosyste&s created y
hundreds of %enerations of previous a%riculturalists, peasants, petty producers and forest
d(ellers that have sustained rural, villa%e9ased for&s of life for nearly t(elve thousand
years. 0hese &onocultures are %enerally (ater intensive dra(in% off (ater resources fro&
else(here since they, asent diversity 4&uch less creatin% it5, lac" the capacity to hold (ater
throu%h top soils that &erely (ash a(ay in heavy, seasonal rainsE lac"in% varie%ated plant life,
&icroor%anis&s that attac" pests disappear, and pests no( eco&e a prole&< to e &et
(ith pesticides and hericides, (hich in turn poison a)uifers, strea&s, rivers and oceans and
(hich creates the necessity of iotechnolo%ical %enetic splicin% that, in turn, introduces
trans%enes trans&itted throu%h natural interspecies crosses (hich, in turn, have allo(ed
e&er%ence of resistance super(eeds and superpests, (hich, in their turn, de&and the
application of further che&ical poisons, i.e., hericides and pesticides, and further poison
%round(ater and (ater(ays.
*s sea levels rise, invarialy these &onocultural sites, situated in lo( lyin% areas, (ill e
a&on% the first to e inundated, rendered useless, and aandoned y capitalist practice<
6onocultural a%riculture and forestry destroy the asis of life for a%ricultural populations (ho
are not en%a%ed in (a%ed laor and not fully dependent on capitalist &ar"et in order to serve
%reat a%riusiness capitals and plantation a%ricultural capitals in efforts to achieve pro%ress in
feedin% hu&anity, or so capitalist ideolo%ues ar%ue. In fact, (hat they achieve is a %enerali=ed
lo(erin% of nutritional inta"e, )ualitative increase in che&ically poisonous sustances
4synthetic carcino%ens, pesticide and hericide residues5
1
as a feature of that inta"e, to%ether
(ith a restructurin% of food production at the level of the (orld that on avera%e has drastically
lo(ered avera%e caloric consu&ption for the &asses of hu&anity, has dra&atically increased
the prospects for re%ularly recurrin% crop failure and fa&ine 4(hich has never een a
iolo%ical )uestion of ,e'cessive/ population pressure on the i&&ediately availale resources
in nature, and (hich under conditions of capitalist develop&ent is socially &ediated y
co&&odity &ar"ets5, and has vastly e'acerated the concentration of capitalist (ealth (ith a
correspondin% casuali=in% proletariani=ation of hundreds of &illions of petty producers. In
point of fact, non9capitalist, s&all9scale io9diversely %rounded a%ricultures are &ore
productive.
2
6onocultural crop a%riculture and forestry are &o&ents of the ho$ogeni/ation of
nature and society %enerated y the &ove&ent of capital+ In destroyin% %enetic diversity,
&onocultural life has no asis, it is a decisive aspect of the cannialistic activity that is capital,
is not sustainale, i&plies death, i.e., if pursued (ill contriute i&&ensely to the recreation of
the Earth as a dead planet... 6ust (e point out that life $uch less a general e$ancipation is
not possi&le on a dead planet2 ...
0he vast syste& of ocean transportation of petroleu& fro& oil (ells to locales around the
(orld produces industrial accidents, &assive oil spills foulin% sea(ater ecolo%y, destroyin%
&arine life and conta&inatin% coastal land. 0he discarded, ro"en, pulveri=ed plastic
(rappers and containers of all sorts, the trin"ets, aules and assorted 1un" N %ara%e
intended for e'port to landfills cri&inally du&ped y ships at sea 4its a )uestion of lo(erin% the
costs of transportation5, (ashed out fro& land durin% stor&s, accidentally lost overoard fro&
container ships < all lar%ely petroleu& ased products %enerated y a for& of productive
activity that "no(s only the canniali=ation of concrete hu&anity throu%h its astraction as
(a%ed laor N has created a 109&illion9s)uare9&ile oval 4t(ice the si=e of 0e'as5 "no(n as
the 3orth Pacific %yre full of plastic, a &illion pieces per s)uare &ile floatin% on the ocean
surface 4and on the ocean floor a &ass y (ei%ht si' ti&es as %reat as plan"ton5, that is
enterin% the food chain, "illin% &ore than a &illion seairds, 100,000 &arine &a&&als, and
countless fish in the 3orth Pacific each year, either fro& &ista"enly eatin% this 1un" or fro&
ein% ensnared in it and dro(nin%. *&on% those further countless fish that survive this
encounter, that are cau%ht y industriali=ed tra(lers and that are served in restaurants and
ho&es, the reside to'ins product of the &anufacture of these plastics, so consu&ed, are
&a"in% their (ay into our lood, urine, saliva, se&inal fluid, reast &il" and a&niotic fluid
contriutin% to oesity, causin% infertility and disruptin% hor&onal activity.
D
0he increasin%ly density of lo( level at&ospheric pollutants 9 product of t(o and a half
centuries of capitalist industry and specifically decades of the oil9coal9auto econo&y
e&issions 9 to%ether (ith the acceleratin% &ove&ent of capitalist co&&erce have enhanced
the virulent character of the &ost ui)uitous of hu&an disorders, the co&&on cold, its
1
8a&es @oveloc" noted as far ac" as 17GF that, e&pirically de&onstrated, there (as no lon%er a livin% ein% on
Earth (hose tissues do not ear pesticides. 8aia: 7 Ne 3oo! at 3ife+ @ondon, 17G7+ vii.
2
:ifferent syste&s of a%riculture 4capitalist &onoculture and traditional rotational, &i'ed &ulti9crop a%riculture, e.%., in
India5 do not %enerate shared ter&s allo(in% overall co&parison of syste&s of a%riculture+ :eter&ination of the
vaunted productivity of crop &onocultures 4e.%., (heat and rice5 is lar%ely a conceptual astraction, a theoretically
constructed cate%ory that rests on a de9conte'tuali=ation, one ased on a li&itation of (hat counts as productive to a
sin%le aspect of a%ricultural practices. I.e., the co&parison, (hen favorin% crop &onoculture, does so only (hen
constructed on the asis of profitailityE and (hen the outputs of hyrid seeds are set alon%side hi%h perfor&ance
indi%enous cultivators, the latter &ore often than not fare etter than the for&er.
D
0hen there is the %reatest dan%er, trophic cascade, to (hich all these activities contriute.
occurrence today %enerally developin% (ith ronchitis or ronchial asth&a. 0his, in turn,
creates an entire series of respiratory disorders as a ne( feature characteri=in% daily life, ut
an affliction (hich i&&unolo%ically co&pro&ises hu&ans, especially the &ass of hu&anity
that does not have proper access to &edical care.
In the pursuit of capital accu&ulation y (ay of a %reatly enlar%ed (orld(ide &ar"ets for &eat
consu&ption 4chic"en, eef, por"5, the scientific &ana%e&ent of poultry and livestoc" ased
on principles of industrial production is %eneratin% y &assin% literally thousands or &illions of
ani&als or irds, respectively, in ti%htly enclosed )uarters 4irds on the 0yson &odel5 (here
naturally occurrin% disease can run, uninhiited, throu%h these populations at fri%htenin%ly
rapid speeds creatin% virally &utatin% hi%hly patho%enic, potentially pande&ic viruses 4havin%
in irds already produced (ild (aterfo(l as a natural reservoir for *a$C315. *t the sa&e ti&e,
industriali=ed &ethods of slau%hter, in particular the or%ani=ed &assed ani&al &urder on hi%h
speed, hi%hly rationali=ed asse&ly line operations, %uarantee the unsanitary nature of the
,product/ throu%h trans&ission of lood and feces in %uttin%, utcherin% and carvin%. It
therey %ives rise to life threatenin% strains of antiiotic resistant acteria 4E. coli,
Ca&pyloacter, sal&onella, etc.5. Ende&ic to hi%hly stratified societies (here ani&al
do&estication proceeded on the asis of e'tre&es of poverty and (ealth, viral 4and acterial5
disease has e&er%ed ane, i.e., in )ualitatively &ore resistant, &edically afflin% and
epide&ic and pande&ic for&s, at the end of the chronolo%ical t(entieth century.
Statistically insi%nificant, fe( cancers are hereditary. ;or the rest, at their ori%ins they are
products of capitalist induced ecolo%ical i&alances in hu&ani=ed nature 4includin% &an as
hu&anly natural5, irre%ularities and aerrations introduced into ani&al and hu&an or%anis&s.
Introduction occurs, &ost co&&only, throu%h lon% periods of contact (ith conta&inated (ater
and polluted air, throu%h life lon% in%estion of or%anically inassi&ilale fatty, pesticide covered
or che&ical9preservative ridden foods, and e'tre&e e'posures to sunli%ht (hich today (ith
thinner o=one layers in the hi%her latitudes have &ar"edly increased the incident of
&elano&a. 0he sa&e can e said aout coronary heart disease+ Its dra&atic ups(in% is
directly and i&&ediately a product of oesity in con1unction (ith sedentary livin%, oth
outco&es of capitalist develop&ent, the for&er traceale ac" lar%ely to the consu&ption of
processed ,cuisine,/ ,food/ created y conte&porary capitalist production.
Disease in the specific for$s that devolve fro$ capitalist develop$ent is co$pro$ising, in
large strata under$ining, hu$anit%.s on evolutionaril% $ade health, its culturall% for$ed
&iological foundations+
0he &ove&ent of capital is leadin% to a &assive and cri&inal ter&ination of plant and ani&al
species and &icroiotic life for&s, effectively synony&ous (ith the destruction of iolo%ical
diversity, an e'traordinary contraction in the ver% &asis of life itself+ 6ore precisely, the pursuit
of e'ploitale Knatural resourcesK for capitalist production on a (orld9scale has created a
%eolo%ical and iolo%ical re%ression reversin% tens of &illions of years of %eophysiolo%ical
evolution. 0he pri&ary cause of species e'tinction as currentl% occurrin% is haitat destruction,
the ruin of co&ple', intricate, interdependent and often intensively hu&anly 4a%riculturally5
shaped ecosyste&s. It is a conse)uence of the capitalist develop&ent deter&ined fro& the
penetration in depth of the value for& into surroundin% nature. 0he sa&e socially necessary
laor ti&e re)uired for the reproduction of capital that tendentially shapes and re%i&ents
social life y decidin% capital flo(s or arenas for the &ost profitale e'ploitation of resources
and utili=ation of &oney capital is also responsile for species e'tinction, ta"in% shape in
industrial develop&ent, suuran ho&e and official construction, in &inin%, industrial lo%%in%
and the clearin% of forests for and in road and hi%h(ay construction.
In the history of the evolution of earthly nature, species, ne( ones, co&es into ein% and they
disappear+ $u&an ein%s, arupt cli&atic chan%es, and even the occasional 4y %eolo%ical
standards5 natural cala&ity ori%inatin% fro& eyond the Earth in the solar syste& rin% aout
e'tinctions, even the rare &ass e'tinction. -et this state&ent of %eolo%ical reconstruction
&isses the point+ If the *rctic polar ear dies out 4as conse)uence of its inaility to %ain
access to food sources as %loal (ar&in% &elts the ice fields it uses to traverse distances and
as a result of the early death of its youn% as PCBs, product of industrial e&issions that fall in
their %reatest concentration to Earth in the *rctic, lod%e in &il" of lactatin% &others ears5, it is
an unnecessary loss of a &a1estic creature, one that is final. 2xtinct species do not $a!e
evolutionar% reappearances. 3onetheless this loss, unintended and undesired, is not of the
sa$e order or $agnitude as that at hich &ourgeois civili/ation un!noingl% ta!es ai$+ 0hat
ai& transcends the life and ti&es of any individual, social %roup, or plant and ani&al species
individuals. The logic and $ove$ent of capital o&9ectivel% and necessaril% under$ine
existence and &eing as such in the a%s that the% are given and appear in and on earthl%
nature: The pro&le$ is that specificall% capitalist social transfor$ations are &orne along &% an
o&9ective logic hose outco$e is necessaril% the ver% destruction of the natural orld in its
autono$%, cohesion, diversit% and otherness, that is, in its a&iotic coherence, as living, and as
a presupposition of specificall% hu$an life: ,t is the natural orld as the totalit% of earthl%
nature 0earthl% nature as a totalit% and in its totalit%5 that capitalist social transfor$ation ta!es
as its o&9ect+
0he %rand s(eep of capitalIs &ove&ent at the e%innin% of the t(entieth9first century can only
portend a future in (hich nature, ecause for capital nature is ra $aterial for co$$odit%
production, at the very least under%oes continuous and ever %reater ho$ogeni/ation, a
ho$ogeni/ation that as product of the $ove$ent of capital is ho$ologous ith the for$all%
identical ho$ogeni/ations of agriculture 0disappearance of vast variet% of species of seed and
plants5 and do$esticated ani$als, languages and cultures in the order of societ%, a
ho$ogeni/ation that in the end together, overlapping and dovetailing, ith rapid cli$ate
change $a% ver% ell &e finall% consu$$ated in a runaa% ar$ing that recreates 2arth as
a dead planet li!e Lenus+ Ho$ogeni/ation of the 2arth has for so$e ti$e no tended toard
the creation of nature existing at to poles, uglified ra $aterial &asins at the start of a c%cle
of co$$odit% production and noxious astelands and gar&age cesspools at the end of that
c%cle, i+e+, ith co$$odit% consu$ption.
1
What in a %eneral (ay is the outco&e of ho&o%eni=ation2 It is the destruction of diversity
(ithin earthly nature+ 0his diversity includes, a&on% other thin%s and relations, a variety of
different cli&atic re%i&es and =ones, a &ultitude of re%ional landscapes, and, centrally, a
hu%e assort&ent of different life for&s. 0hus, it is precisely this internal diversity (hich
hu&anity has co9produced and of (hich hu&anity is part that the &ove&ent of capital is
destroyin% and 4as this &ove&ent produces rapid cli&ate chan%e that co&es to%ether (ith,
accelerates and intensifies the on%oin% ho&o%eni=ation of nature5 is irreversi&l% destroyin%. ,t
is a hu$anl% for$ed nature ithout hich hu$anit% cannot exist+
1
In the &ost ,advanced/ sites of capitalist develop&ent, hu&an ein%s, actin% and interactin% on this nature (e are
re&a"in% in its totality, have already e%un to &orpholo%ical, anato&ically and physiolo%ically e'hiit characteristics
of a de%eneratin% species N (itness the ,epide&ic/ of oesity, the alar&in% %ro(th of asth&a a&on% d(ellers of lar%e
&etropolitan centers, and the s"yroc"etin% instances of cancers of all sorts the&selves products of the leechin%,
seepin% and e&issions of countless to'ins into the air (e reathe, the (ater (e drin" and the food (e eat<
Part I
Capital and the Crisis in "ature
0he follo(in% discussion is de rigueur if (e are to &a"e sense out of a (hole series of
recently natural events (hose causation, lar%ely une'plained, see$s to transcend social
deter&ination, i.e., capital.
0he &ove&ent of capital, and the social and natural transfor&ations it %enerates, are orne
alon% y the lo%ic of accu&ulation (hose conse)uence< in the era of totali=in% do&ination it
can e no other (ay< is the on%oin% ruin of earthly nature, the destruction of its self9
or%ani=in% cohesiveness and its otherness that is the very pre&ise of vital and hu&an life.
Without the &odern sciences of nature and capitalist technolo%y these transfor&ations are
neither psycholo%ically conceivale nor lo%ically possile. Capital is perpetrating a cri$e for
hich there is no na$e, an enor$ous cri$e that 4(ith the e'ception of the fe( details
s"etched in literature and fil&s of anti9utopian science fiction5 largel% re$ains uni$agined: ,t
is the totalit% of earthl% nature 0earthl% nature as a totalit% and in its totalit%5 that the $ove$ent
of capital is unraveling+ 0his collapse in earthly nature is te&porary, ut &easured %eolo%ically
on a &illennial ti&escale ,te&porary/ has no &eanin% for the livin% %enerations of hu&anity
and countless &ore to co&e<
;ro& that &o&ent at (hich (hat 6ar' called real do&ination in production 4deter&ined y the
syste&atic incorporation of science and technolo%y into that production5 e%an to effectively
hold s(ay over the (orld, capitalis& has developed and can only develop throu%h
destructurin% nature in its o1ectivity, reconstitutin% it as a sin" of unprocessed supplies, a
standin% reserve of &atter (hose &eanin% and e'istence is e'hausted in ein% re(or"ed in
capitalist production. Capitalist develop&ent proceeds y (ay of the disruption, dislocation
and in all cases destruction of the autono&y, coherence and otherness that is earthly nature
4increased inputs to the caron, &ethane, sulfur cycles raisin% at&ospheric C>2 and C$#
levels, increasin% acidification of the oceans, shutdo(n and then shiftin% of the ther&ohaline
circulation (hich is in part already under(ay5 that, creatin% rapid cli&ate chan%e, is already
renderin% access to resources &ore difficult, (ill interrupt and &a"e production of a%ricultural
foodstuffs and industrial ra( &aterials less dependale, place &ore de&ands on the
infrastructural foundations of capitalis& (hich capital.s &ove&ent at once produces and
re)uires to reproduce itself on an e'panded asis< and vastly restricts the asis in earthly
nature for hu&an activity in its socio9historically specific, capitalist for&< ,t is height of foll% to
thin! that cli$ate change is not alread% undera%, that the increasingl% elasticit% of eather
and seasons, the disruption of geologicall% for$ed patterns of eather, of eather and
cli$atic regi$es, $ost visi&le in hat the $edia spectacle calls Nextre$e eather,> is not the
initial phase of cli$ate change
1
< Capital.s representatives have proven unale to even
ade)uately pose, &uch less ta"e up, cli&ate chan%e issues, (hile it is increasin%ly &anifest
that technical innovations (ithin capitalis& (ill not "eep pace (ith that chan%e, and are not
capale of addressin% it in its scale and co&ple'ity< Without the revolutionary overthro( of
capital, and the estalish&ent of a practically efficacious %loal political fra&e(or", cli&ate
1
Will (ould later identify ,phases/ in (eather at increasin%ly ferocious and destructive e'tre&es, the initial one ein%
periodic. $e noted that (inter 201092012 &ar"ed the inau%uration of a second, no lon%er initial ,phase/ characteri=ed
y the re%ular, fre)uent appearance of %ro(in% e'tre&es. In e'traordinarily co&pressed %eolo%ical ti&e, (e are no(
e'periencin% a third ,phase/ (hich e%an in Septe&er 2012. Its distin%uishin% feature is the patent de%radation of
the te&perature %radient et(een the tropics and the *rctic (hich has produced and is &anifested in a 1et strea& that
&eanders. 0his &eanderin%, represented visually in &aps of the 3orthern $e&isphere, ta"es the for& of rid%es and
trou%hs in (hich, respectively, (ar& (eather fro& the lo( latitudes pushes far north and cool (eather fro& the hi%h
latitudes pushes south. In the conver%ence =ones, vast re%ions of prolon%ed, unstale e'tre&e (eather events
transpire 4such as drou%htsE heavy rains producin% floodin%, landslides and &udslidesE tornadic superstor&sE e'tre&e
heatE e'tre&e coldE etc.5. ?ro(in% in intensity, ne( ,phases/ (ill surely appear. HEditorIs note.J
chan%e and the prole&s it presents, those it creates and those it e'acerates cannot even
e addressed<
0he &ove&ent of capital necessarily produces despoliation of earthly nature 0recreation of the
2arth as a ra $aterial &asin for co$$odit% production5, $ass species extinction and cli$ate
change (ith the possiility of runa(ay (ar&in%+
Scientific inputs into production raise the productivity of aged laor< (hich, for the
capitalist, is &erely a capacity that is &easured and calculated, hence )uantified, in ter&s of
the ti&e of its e'penditure. We call it astract laor< 0his si&ply astoundin% productivity of
astract laor reduces turnover ti&es< the ti&e re)uired to produce and &ar"et a
co&&odity< and the period of a develop&ental cycle< the period e%innin% fro& capitalist
e'pansion throu%h devalori=ation to the outset of rene(ed e'pansion< so that (ithin each
cycle resources are voraciously consu&ed at a pace that is rapidly outstrippin% the rate of
technical innovation (ithin capitalis& (hich (ould &a"e it possile to shift the earthly
resource ase a(ay fro& hydrocaron fossil fuels and create a ne( type of ra( &aterials on
(hich the entirety of capitalist develop&ent could rest. It is the syste& of social relations
(hich en%enders the voracious consu&ption of resources, the production of ra( &aterials and
(hat it entails, the so9called ,e'ternalities/ 4i.e., the plunderin%, (aste and destruction
%enerated y capitalist production5, (hich is at issue.
@et.s pause.
Start ane( (ith a couple deter&inations, e%innin%, not (ith so&e %ross astraction, ut (hat
is i&&ediate, ready to hand and un&ediatedly present to us as livin%, reathin% and feelin%
ein%s.
;irst, y ,nature/ it is the surroundin% (orld in (hich a%riculture, industry and the uilt
environ&ent are all situated, the nature that (e e'perience in daily life, that (e see, hear and
s&ell 4that (e can taste and touch5 that is i&&ediately present and thus that (hich (e
understand. In a totali=in% sense, (e call this earthly nature. Rnless (e are so co&pletely
haituali=ed to and ato&i=ed y capitalis& and, conse)uently, inured and olivious to &isery
and sufferin% natural as (ell as hu&an, (e i&&ediately reco%ni=e and understand that in
so&e (ays that perhaps (e cannot ade)uate put a fin%er on capitalist production de%rades
and plunders nature. Call this de%radation and plunderin% despoliation.
So, second, y nature do&ination, (e understand so&ethin% a it &ore &ediate+ :espoliation
at once as a relation to nature e&edded in societal practices. 0hese are capitalist practices.
0hey recreate earthly nature as a holdin% arena consistin% solely in unprocessed resources,
for (hich all of reality has the &eanin% of a ra( &aterials asin for capitalist co&&odity
production. 0his is nature as oth a necessar% product of capitalist develop&ent and a
presupposition of that develop&ent.
3o( this &ay not appear i&&ediately ovious, ut it is not co%nitively difficult to %rasp and it
is undenialy present to us in daily e'perience. We see it all around us. 0hat is, (e find
surroundin% nature reduced to a ra( &aterial asin< (hich presupposes that fro& the
standpoint of capitalist activity nature is i&&ediately apprehended as ,&atter/< all around us,
in denuded forests, open surface &ines, desertified %rasslands, &ountains stripped of trees
and %round cover (ith their pea"s literally lopped off or their descendin% sides carved out,
(ater(ays suffused (ith oil &anifest in their discoloration, sea otto&s poc"ed (ith countless
(ells plu&ed to%ether and in &yriad other (ays< and (e find the inevitale result of this in
(etlands turned into landfills, decayin% uran centers and the to'ic %round of aandoned
industrial sites, cru&lin% infrastructure, and vast stretches of road(ays (ith trash and 1un"
scattered to each side, endless e'panses of ocean densely littered (ith plastic refuse (hile
rivers, la"es and strea&s are filled (ith the deris 4plastic a%s and ottles, food containers,
%lass ottles, &etal soda and alcohol cans5 of capitalist civili=ation.
Recall the cycle of co&&odity production and consu&ption alluded to aove+ :eter&ined fro&
re%ular introduction of science and technolo%y into production, fro& the &o&ent that the real
do&ination of capital over laor had eco&e irreversile capitalist develop&ent has created a
situation (ithin earthly nature in (hich the latter is ho&o%eni=ed, reduced to u%lified ra(
&aterial asins 4those denuded forests, open surface &ines, etc.5 at the start of a c%cle of
co$$odit% production, (ith their inevitale result in to'ic (astelands and %ara%e cesspools
4those (etlands turned into landfills, decayin% uran centers, etc.5 at the end of that c%cle,
i+e+, ith co$$odit% consu$ption. 0his is a product of the $ove$ent of capital, this is
despoliation+
-et the despoliation of nature is 1ust the one of three inseparaly interrelated aspects in (hich
the capitalist do&ination of nature occurs. Briefly consider the second, &ass species
e'tinction.
Mass Species 2xtinction
*t this &o&ent, the pri&ary cause of species e'tinction is haitat destruction, the ruin of
co&ple', intricate, interdependent and often intensively hu&anly shaped ecosyste&s. 4>n a
daily asis, this ruin is, to e sure, the central feature of the despoliation of nature.5 It is a
conse)uence of the capitalist develop&ent deter&ined fro& the penetration in depth of the
value for& into surroundin% nature. 0he sa&e socially necessary laor ti&e re)uired for the
reproduction of capital that tendentially shapes and re%i&ents social life y decidin% capital
flo(s or arenas for the &ost profitale e'ploitation of resources and utili=ation of &oney
capital is also responsile for species e'tinction. Capitalist develop&ent forces species into
e'tinction throu%h haitat destruction, first, in the for&s of industrial develop&ent 4plant
construction5E second, in real estate develop&ent issuin% in suuran spra(l 4ho&e and office
construction, and venues of consu&ption such as strip &alls5E then, especially in industrial
lo%%in%, the clearin% of forests for &onocultural crop a%riculture, and &inin%E in road and
hi%h(ay construction 4as in infrastructural presupposition of all of these for&s of
develop&ent5E in heavily &echani=ed ocean tra(lin% of fisheries 4here %illnettin% and
lon%linin% have led to the near e'tinction, soon to e fact, of nu&erous, once e'traordinarily
lar%e fish populations, species of sal&on, tuna, cod, haliut, s(ordfish, &arlin, shar" and
s"ates5E and, eyond haitat destruction and on a relatively s&all scale, in trophy huntin% and
poachin% carried out syste&atically y hi%hly or%ani=ed, capitalist and cri&inal syndicates,
%an%s and &afias and y proletariani=ed &en driven to this activity y the loss of forests and
far&in% land to (hich they previously o(ed their life and activity. Before &id9century, all (ell9
"no( lar%e &a&&als, ani&als that re)uire lar%e terrains they traverse to hunt and feed, lions,
all species of ti%ers, elephants, hippopota&uses and rhinoceroses, and %reat apes,
oran%utans and several chi&pan=ees species as (ell (ill e e'tinct as species 4(hether or
not a fe( species-individuals survive in the =oos of the capitalist (orld5.
3o( (hether all this is ovious &ay e open to )uestion, ut that it is on%oin%, that is it
internally and necessary a product of capitalist develop&ent even if only superfluously
understood in ter&s of econo&ic %ro(th, these features are co&&only understood+ 0here is
nothin% esoteric or arcane in thisE it does not ta"e, as is often re&ar"ed, a roc"et scientist to
%rasp it. *ny nu&er of individuals, (or"ers in the R.S. for e'a&ple, en1oy fishin% or ca&pin%
in national par"s, and fro& this e'perience one &i%ht thin" they can understand (hat is at
sta"e in the develop&ent that destroys natural haitat.
Rnfortunately, species e'tinction has another causal di&ension, rapidly eco&in% its central
one, that %oes eyond the &undane features of capitalist develop&ent+
0he sa&e &ove&ent of capital descried in the aove for&s of production and develop&ent
is inducin% a cli&ate chan%e (ar&in% that is vastly acceleratin% and e'tendin% species
e'tinction, &a"in% it (hat is characteri=ed as a $ass one.
Pursuin% this further, the really dire conse)uences of a failure to effect a revolutionary
transfor&ation, aolition, of capitalis& &i%ht e noted+ In the very near future, cli&ate chan%e
irreversily threatens the vast ul" of a)uatic life on Earth. *s caron dio'ide e&issions
continue to increase 4even if they (ere to level off at current rates5, as C>2 rises up into the
at&osphere caron9ased pollutants are rained out and enter sea(aters+ 0he concentration of
free hydro%en ions 4product of che&ical reactions of those pollutants (ith an a)ueous
environ&ent5 in those sea(aters increases, sli%htly al"aline oceans are eco&in% increasin%ly
acidified. *cidification of oceans eventually destroys a)uatic species. In fact, %ro(in% oceanic
acidification has already "illed t(o9thirds of coral reefs in the oceans of the Earth, and is "illin%
=ooplan"ton. 0here is %reat dan%er here. It is called trophic cascade+ Re&ove one species,
say phytoplan"ton at the otto& of the oceans. food (e, and e'tinction follo(s upon
e'tinction as a asic life for&, a critical food source for a host of other life for&s and still &ore
life for&s tiered atop these, disappears<0hese e'tinctions 4(hich on the present course are
inevitale5, to%ether (ith cli&ate (ar&in%, (ill destroy nearly all ocean fish, and &a&&alian
species 4seals, (alrus, (halesE polar ears, arctic &oose, reindeerE as (ell as &ost species of
turtles and pen%uins5 that depend on ice, the *rctic or these &icroor%anis&s for their
e'istence and ein%s.
Brou%ht on and propelled capitalist develop&ent, the current rate of species e'tinction is
aout one hundred ti&es the natural rate, an avera%e calculated over %eolo%ical ti&e. What
this portends is an e'tinction not 1ust &assive, ut one that is not occurrin% in deep %eolo%ical
ti&e ut in historical ti&e, and ecause the te&poral hori=on is so e'traordinarily co&pressed,
plant and ani&al species that &i%ht other(ise survive over %eolo%ical ti&e (ill not in historical
ti&e. 40he &ost &oile species, and they are fe(, are capale of &i%ratin% a(ay fro& re%ions
&ost effected y cli&ate chan%e at rate of aout 20 "ilo&eters a year5.
So, in reconstructin% the %eolo%ical past, (hat (e have co&e to reco%ni=e is that (e are
confrontin% a $ass species e'tinction on the order of those that have occurred on five
previous occasions in the past C00 &illion years, each of (hich has occurred fro& over
several thousands to rou%hly C9O &illion years, and each of (hich has destroyed et(een
2CZ and 70Z of life on Earth. Each of these e'tinctions transpired in the %eolo%ical conte't
of, and (ere %enerated y, &assive cli&ate chan%e (hich in each case (as precipitated
centrally y an enor&ous rise in at&osphere caron dio'ide relative to e'istin% levels. 0oday,
product of the $ove$ent of capital, an ecolo%ical catastrophe is ongoing, not in %eolo%ical ut
in vastly co&pressed historical ti&eE these alterations are so co&pressed that are even
&anifest in individual lifeti&es+ *nd should &ountin% at&ospheric C>2 levels %o unchec"ed,
this e'tinction (ill occur as the si'th "no(n or %eolo%ically reconstructed $ass species
extinction in the nearly four illion year old %eolo%ical history of life on Earth. It constitutes,
&oreover, a iolo%ical re%ression that is reversin% tens of &illions of years of natural
evolution< rou%hly CC &illion< and under&inin% the asis of life, includin% hu&an life itself.
If you (ill, please "eep in &ind< (hen (e discuss elo( the transcendent si%nificance of
iolo%ical diversity for all life on Earth< that &ass species e'tinction is effectively
synony&ous (ith the destruction of iolo%ical diversity. While (e shall start (ith the peculiar
nature of life on earth, (e are re)uired to say so&ethin% at len%th aout cli&ate chan%e< the
third for& of the capitalist do&ination of nature< and, havin% said, ho( it and these other t(o
for&s of nature do&ination 4despoliation and &ass species e'tinction5 are %rounded in the
dyna&ics of capitalist develop&ent. But first a fe( (ords aout the si&ply e'traordinary
nature of life as it has appeared on Earth.
The 8eoph%siolog% of the 2arth, ,:
Three Reasons "h% "e Might Suspect
3ife 1ccupies a Special 4lace in the S%ste$ of Natural Relations "e Call the 2arth
Within societies of capital, the culturally he%e&onic for& of "no(led%e, understandin% and
practice vis9P9vis surroundin% earthly nature is %uided y the &odern our%eois science of
nature 4lar%ely ta"in% its point of departure in ?alilean physics over four centuries a%o5, for
(hich nature is essentially dead, inert &atter, shapeless e'tension and, in our ter&s, for&s a
ra( &aterial asin for the production of a (orld of co&&odities.
Is it possile (ithin the fra&e(or" of science to consider the Earth other(ise, as an evolvin%
totality of physical, che&ical and iolo%ical relations, events and processes, a self9re%ulatin%
syste& of relations in (hich life itself plays a central role, and, &ore radically 4and less
acceptaly5, (hich ai&s at haitaility2
;irst, startin% fro& a scientific reconstruction of Earth.s e'istence over eons 4illions of years5,
(e can note that the avera%e te&perature of Earth.s surface has re&ained &ore or less stale
over four illion years, (hile, in fact, %iven the sun.s increasin% lu&inosity over the sa&e
period, aout DCZ, that te&perature should have risen a li"e a&ount. It has, thou%h, re&ained
(ithin a ran%e of 10_C to 20_C (ithout ever reachin% a oilin% or a free=in% point. Whether
the Earth has under%one %laciation or tropical e'tre&es, it has never eco&e an unfit place
for life.
1
If the Earth (ere a dead planet li"e 6ars or !enus, (ithout oceans, at&osphere and
(ithout life, this (ould not e possile. Rnans(erale (ithin the fra&e(or" of physics 4for
such, it is not possile5, (e &i%ht e led to the vie( that life, the iota as a (hole as it e'ists
1
*s one &i%ht e'pect, conte&porary astrophysicists pay a lot of attention to stars. *&on% other thin%s, these
scientists have constructed a sort of pheno&enolo%y of the ,life/ of various stars, an account of the pri&ary types of
stars, the dyna&ics devolvin% in different phases or sta%es of typical stars life cycles arran%ed accordin% to lu&inosity
and te&perature 4entailin% different ato&ic co&positions, &asses, and lon%evities5. It centers on ,&ain se)uence,
stars and, (ith so&e e'ceptions 4super%iants, red %iants and (hite d(arfs5, it constitutes a classification that
enco&passes the %reatest do(n to the s&allest stars. >ur, the Earth.s, sun is a class ? star, (hich &a"es it a
&oderate si=ed star or, &ore precisely, puts it on the lo(er end of the &iddle of this classificatory sche&e.

4It is a ?2
(here a su9classification of each cate%ory 9 >, B, *, ;, ?, L and 6 9 ran%es fro& 7 do(n to 0, fro& hotter to cooler.5
0he surface te&perature of our sun is rou%hly CF00_ Lelvin 4its internal te&perature &ay e as hi%h as 10
G
_ L5, and,
as the &easure of all other stars, has a solar lu&inosity of 1. 43o( outside the &ain se)uence the %iants, for
e'a&ple, have the sa&e te&perature as our sun ut far %reater lu&inosity, y a factor of one hundred, 10
2
, (hich
&a"es the& far lar%er.5 0he overall life of our sun is rou%hly ten illion years. Currently it is aout half that a%e.
Stars do not, on this vie(, urn evenly throu%hout the course of their life cycle. 0his includes our sun. 0he sun urns
hydro%en and, in urnin% it, it fuses hydro%en ato&s into heliu& ones 4fusin% t(o sin%le proton ato&s into a sin%le
ato& (ith t(o protons5. ?radually, that is, over illions of years, the hydro%en at the star.s core %ets converted to
heliu&, to the point at (hich the star.s heliu& core is rou%hly 10Z of its &ass. But at this point the te&perature (ithin
star is not hot enou%h to fuse heliu& ato&s. 4It ta"es far &ore ener%y to force four identically char%ed protons
to%ether than 1ust t(o.5 Because there are no nuclear reactions at the heliu& core, and since the surroundin%
hydro%en envelope is nonetheless not as hot as that core, the core lea"s radiation 4protons5 into its envelope. 0he
core contracts as a result of this lea"a%e, and suse)uently the pressure of the contraction causes it to heat up.
$eliu& ato&s e%in to fuse< 0he hydro%en i&&ediately surroundin% the core for&s a shell around it and, in fusin%,
increases the &ass of the heliu& core (hich continues to fuse ut not enou%h to prevent continued contraction+ *s a
result of the increased interactions in the central re%ion of the star, the core no( e&its &ore radiation+ It has eco&e
&ore po(erful, &ore lu&inous. ,:eposited,/ as it (ere, in the outer envelope, the e'tra radiation e&itted fro& the
core pushes this envelope out(ard. 0hus, the star e'pands 4to a red %iant5. 0he core continues to contract, heatin%
up &ore, perhaps fusin% heliu& ato&s into unstale erylliu& 4heatin% up eventually to as &uch as 10
F
_ L5. 0o(ard
the end of this cycle, perhaps aout # illion years fro& no(, the sun.s dia&eter (ill e'pand to enco&pass the orits
traced out y 6ercury and !enus, and then Earth, (hich (ill e incinerated. If you accept this, then lon% efore
current esti&ates su%%est aout t(o illion years fro& no(, the %ro(in% intensity of the sun as it urns (ill evaporate
the oceans.
But for no(, the syste& of relations (e call earthly nature is already under tre&endous stress fro& increasin% solar
insolation, for it has risen aout DD9DGZ since the ori%ins of the Earth.
at the surface 4land, lo(er at&osphere and oceans5 plays a decisive role in the re%ulation of
planetary te&perature 4i.e., the avera%e %loal surface te&perature5.
Second, a che&ical analysis of the co&position of the %ases &a"in% up the EarthIs
at&osphere de&onstrates that it is entirely ano&alous (ith re%ard to (hat e)uiliriu&
che&istry (ould other(ise de&and. In an e)uiliriu& (orld 4essentially a dead one5, the
at&osphere (ould consist in 77Z caron dio'ide, 0Z nitro%en, 0Z o'y%en and 1Z ar%on.
0hus, the at&osphere of !enus is &ade of 7FZ caron dio'ide, 1.7Z nitro%en, trace a&ounts
of o'y%en and .1Z ar%onE 6ars, 7CZ caron dio'ide, 2.GZ nitro%en, .1DZ o'y%en and 2Z
ar%on. 0he surface te&perature of !enus is #GGu C, that of 6ars 9CDu C. 0he Earth, on the
other hand, has the follo(in% at&ospheric content+ .DZ caron dio'ide, G7Z nitro%en, 21Z
o'y%en and 1Z ar%on. 4Without life, that at&osphere (ould consist in 7FZ caron dio'ide,
1.7Z nitro%en, trace a&ounts of o'y%en and .1Z ar%on.5 Its surface te&perature is 1Du C 4CCu
;5, (hile (ithout life it (ould 270u ea9 C0u C.
1
0he ,ano&aly/ is enor&ous, for the e'tent to
(hich nitro%en is dyna&ically &aintained in dise)uiliriu& is ten orders of &a%nitude 410
10
5,
that of a&&onia and &ethane eyond the li&its of co&putation, effectively infinite.
0he Earth has for an indeter&inate period so&ethin% less than the past t(o illion years had a
rou%hly 21Z o'y%en at&osphere. *n at&osphere at %reater than a 21Z o'y%en co&position
(ould result in spontaneously co&ustin% (ildfires at EarthIs surface 4at 2CZ at&ospheric
o'y%en content even the da&p leaves of the rainforests (ould urst into fla&es5E
2
elo( that
level, the diversity of life as (e "no( it, and have "no(n if for at least the past C#0 &illion
years, could not e'ist. *t the sa&e ti&e, e)uiliriu& che&istry tells us an at&osphere (ith a
21Z o'y%en content should not e ale to co9e'ist (ith the other &a1or, a hi%hly reactive %as,
nitro%en, and &inor ones as (ell, &ethane, a&&onia and caron dio'ide. 0his is not a
)uestion of de%ree, for these other %ases 4%ases other than o'y%en5 e'ist in Earth.s
at&osphere at several order of &a%nitude of (hat they &i%ht e other(ise e'pected. ;or
e'a&ple, &ethane and nitro%en are e'plosively reactiveE o'y%en and nitro%en at these levels
could e e'pected to react and for& lar%e a&ounts of nitro%en o'ides that are poisonous.
0hey don.t.
3o( che&ical dise)uiliriu& of this enor&ity is not &erely ,ano&alous/+ It has e'isted in this
for& for at least 1.C illion years, and it could have e'isted in this for& only if it has een
activel% $aintained< &% life, y acteria alone 4for the first illion of those years5, and y
acteria, plants and ani&als 4for last half illion of those years5< on the asis of the constant
circulation of those %ases throu%h, for e'a&ple, respiration 4e.%., caron dio'ide inta"e5 and
the e&ission of %aseous yproducts of that (aste 4e.%., o'y%en5. EarthIs at&osphere is not
physically %iven, ut is constructed, i.e., its co&position is %enerated and sustained, y life as
a (hole.
0hird, plant life plays a &a1or role in acceleratin% the other(ise strictly che&ical process of
(eatherin%, and therey enters into and shapes the caron cycle over %eolo%ical ti&e.
@i&estone is for&ed y &i'in% calciu& 4Ca25 (ith icaronate ions 4&ini&ally t(o, 2$C>D5,
(hich che&ically %ives us li&estone, CaC>D, and caronic acid, $2C>D. Silicate (eatherin%,
on the other hand, occurs as roc" silicates, CaSi>D, co&ine (ith caronic acid 4here, a%ain,
&ini&ally t(o &olecules5, 2$2C>D and, in so doin%, produce t(o icaronate ions 42$C>D5,
silicate dio'ide 4Si>25 and (ater 4$2>5. *s the relation et(een surface Earth roc" silicates
e'posed to air and (ater 4precipitation5 and the end product of the process, li&estone, the
(eatherin% is %iven in the e)uation, CaSi>D e C>2 v CaC>D e Si>2 4(here the arro(, v,
indicates (hat is for&ed follo(in% che&ical reaction5.
1
8a&es @oveloc", 8aia: 7 Ne 3oo! at 3ife on 2arth+ >'ford 4En%.5, 17G7+ D7.
2
,&id, G1.
0hus, roc" (eatherin% as descried here che&ically releases inor%anic caron fro& silicate
and caronate roc"s 4e.%., )uart=, %ranite5, the rea"do(n products of (hich run off, are
carried y (ater(ays out to sea, and eventually accu&ulate in the for& of li&estone (hich is
se)uestered at the ocean otto&s 4and (hich suducted, as one lithosphere ocean plate
&oves under another or under a continental plate, (ill eventually pass to the asthenosphere
fro& (hich it can reenter the caron cycle as caron dio'ide y (ay of volcanic eruption5.
>f special i&port here is the i&pin%e&ent of, inte%ration (ith and %ro(in% deter&ination y
plant life on (eatherin%, transfor&in% ,physical reactions/ into a distinctively and inseparaly
iolo%ically for&ed che&ical processes+ 0he ,<invasion of the land y plants over the past
C00 &illion years< HhasJ drastically chan%ed (eatherin% rates N hence the cycle of C>2
a&on% land, air, and sea./
1
$o( so2 Plants rea" up roc" as they root in the soil see"in% out
nutrition+ Rootlets, includin% sy&iotic acteria and fun%i they hold, e'ude different or%anic
acids across their surface area that effectively detach sustrata &inerals, nitrates, phosphates
and other ele&ents re)uisite for %ro(th. *dditionally, plant root syste&s vastly increase the
(ater retention of soils, settin% up a arrier a%ainst erosion, therey estalishin% a &inerals
enco&passin% li)uid environ&ent that increases the rate of &ineral and &ineral &aterial
dissolution. 0hese iolo%ically %enerated processes accelerate roc" (eatherin%.
If life shapes the ,asic/ physical9che&ical processes that shape it, then their relation, the
causation so9called, is dialectically circular, not linear and not a&endale to reductionist
treat&ent. In the case of (eatherin%, plant life as part of earthly nature functionally has for
thousands of &illennia en%a%ed in &aintainin% haitaility in the face of increasin% solar
insolation y enterin% further into the caron cycle 4eyond &erely %ivin% off o'y%en y
&etaoli=in% caron dio'ide (hich itself dra(s do(n a %reenhouse %as that (ould other(ise
increase at&ospheric heatin%5, detachin% caron fro& its &ineral sustrate and per&ittin% it to
e se)uestered. In this respect, plant life has een en%a%ed in (hat appears as a rear%uard
action of the iota as a (hole, (hich in its entirety re%ulates cli&ate 4te&perature5 to sustain
that haitaility.
We call this inti&ate, internal and deter&inate relation of life the %eophysical structure of the
Earth its geoph%siological construction.
The 8eoph%siolog% of the 2arth, ,,
Cli$ate and Cli$ate Change
Capitalist develop&ent proceeds y (ay of the disruption, dislocation and in all cases
destruction of the autono&y, coherence and otherness that is earthly nature, that is as (e
have indicated, y increased fossil fuel inputs to the caron, &ethane, sulfur cycles raisin%
at&ospheric C>2 and C$# levels. -et nature, earthly nature, is not a ra( &aterials asin,
purely and si&ply &atter that is re(or"ed in capitalist co&&odity production. 0hat earthly
nature is possessed of autono&y, cohesion and otherness in relation to hu&anity, to us as
(o&en and &en, even as (e are in this nature, a part of nature, hu&anly natural ein%s, is
stri"in%ly &anifest in these disruptions and dislocations 9 increasin% acidification of the
oceans, unprecedentedly rapid &eltin% of %lacier and polar icepac"s, shutdo(n and then
shiftin% of the ther&ohaline circulation (hich is in part already under(ay N as e'pression of an
on%oin% transfor&ation of cli&ate+
0he Earth as (e i&&ediately apprehend it, inclusive (hat (e call the iosphere 4life at Earth.s
surface and the oceans, land&asses and at&osphere that support it, that shape it and are
shaped y it5, is a unitary pheno&enon, its various partial &o&ents 4(eather, oceans,
at&osphere, aio%enic sustances, or%anic life includin% ,&an/5 are fully inte%rated and
&utually dependent. It is self9re%ulatin% (hole, a totality (hose internal diversity 4precisely
1
Peter Ward, The Medea H%pothesis: ,t 3ife on 2arth Hlti$atel% DestructiveK Princeton 4385, 2007+ OD.
that (hich capital ithout re%ard to cli&ate chan%e is destroyin%5 provides it (ith its o(n
coherence and %uarantees the preservation of life on Earth< (e shall return to this elo(<
*s the ,e'ternal envelope/ of Earth, the iosphere in particular orders the constant ener%y
inflo( fro& space 4solar ener%y5 on (hich it is dependent. 0he constitution of Earth.s
&o&ents, its partial ,syste&s,/ especially the iosphere, have )ualitatively chan%ed over
%eolo%ical ti&e, &eanin% that life 4the iota in its entirety5 and the Earth astractly understood
as a %eophysical reality have co9evolved, each inseparaly fro& the other, hence in their co9
evolution each transfor&in% the other. While cos&olo%ically the Earth is situated in a nature
that can e understood ,physically,/ (hat is asic for the Earth itself as self9re%ulatory cannot
e co&prehended as a physical syste&+ )ull% $ediated &% life, especially pro"aryotic life
4acteria5, those &o&ents or ,partial syste&s/ dyna&ically reorder and restructure
the&selves to &aintain earthly nature.s e)uiliriu& 4e'pressed ,physically,/ inflo( of solar
heat e)uals its outflo( over ti&e5. Cli&ate chan%e is a ,syste&.s/ ,effort/ to re9e)uilirate a
hu%e and %ro(in% i&alance that 4thou%h the process is far &ore co&plicated5 occurs as
certain ,%reenhouse/ %ases 4caron dio'ide, &ethane, (ater vapor5 accu&ulate and trap heat
(ithin the at&osphere 4loc"in% it fro& re9radiatin% ac" into space5 (hile at the sa&e ti&e
they asor solar insulation 4inco&in% radiation5. 0his i&alance, a%ain (e stress the
outco&e of capitalist develop&ent, is ri%hted 4re9e)uilirated5 y a planetary (ar&in% that
starts, i&perceptily, (ith the (ar&in% of the oceans.
Su&&arily, over %eolo%ical ti&e an e)uiliriu& is achieved in a chan%e of 4raisin% or lo(erin%5
te&perature at Earth.s surface. Su1ect to disruption and i&alances y (ay of cos&olo%ical
perturation, to deter&ination y the EarthIs o(n solar syste& situatedness and to capitalist
develop&ent, cli&ate chan%e is the %rand &ediation that re9e)uilirates, a e)uiliratin% that
appear to us as disruptive chan%e, and cli&ate is the i&&ediate e'pression of this constitution
of earthly nature as the dialectical totality of inte%rated, endlessly interactin% &o&ents 4for
e'a&ple, oceans9at&osphere ,syste&/ that is &ost clearly lin"ed y evaporation and
precipitation5 a&on% (hich over %eolo%ical ti&e &iospheric life is, as indicated, &ost
i&portant.
0o %et a etter handle on cli&ate, and cli&ate chan%e, consider reconstructions of the Earth.s
%eophysiolo%y on a %eolo%ical ti&escale.
While the Earth, at so&e D.F illion years of a%e 4the period of its for&ation %oin% ac"
another G00 &illion years5, is esti&ated to e nearly as old as the solar syste&, %eolo%ical
datin% e%ins in evidentially ased detail C#0 &illion years a%o (ith the e&er%ence of truly
co&ple', hi%hly developed life for&s 4fish, insects, reptiles5 in a phyletic eruption of ne( for&s
of eu"aryotic 4cellularly nucleated5 life "no(n as the Ca&rian e'plosion. Within the entirety of
this vast s(eep of %eolo%ical ti&e do(n to present 4in fact, %oin% ac" another 1O0 &illion
years into the pre9Ca&rian5, (e can desi%nate t(o road types or &odes cli&ate on Earth.
0hese types are ,cool/ and ,(ar&,/ so&eti&es referred to as ,cold and dry/ and ,hot and (et,/
respectively. * si&ple deter&ination of a type of cli&ate can e offered, na&ely, the presence
or asence of ice+ * (ar& type or &ode of cli&ate is deter&ined y the asence of ice, and a
cool one y its presence. 0he latter can ran%e to seasonale cold at hi%h altitudes (here ice
covers the hi%hlands associated (ith %reat &ountain ran%es as (ell as the hi%her reaches of
&ountains the&selves, to the presence of an intense %laciation (hich, %eo%raphically,
e&anates fro& the poles covered (ith per&anent ice caps. ;or, it is of the ut&ost i&portance
to note, the latter, intense glaciation, has over the last illion years only occurred hen there
are land$asses ver% near or over the poles. It should e ovious that in recountin% the
%eophysiolo%ical history of the Earth over the si&ply enor&ous stretch of %eolo%ical ti&e of
our reconstructions, there have een periods (hen land&asses (ere near or at the poles and
periods (hen they (ere not. Since the late Preca&rian, the te&poral e'panses of cool and
%laciated cli&ate have een hi%hly li&ited in nu&er and co&paraly short in duration 4a
duration &easured in &illions of years5.
0ectonic activity, ecause it is capale of shiftin% continental9si=ed land&asses, has played
the lar%est role in &a"in% possile intense cold, especially %laciation+
*ntarctica split off fro& the ancient, %i%antic continent "no(n as ?ond(ana 4enco&passin%
present day *ustralia, *ntarctica, South *&erica, *frica and *sia 6inor and *raia5 and
arrived at it current locale over thirty &illion years a%o. Before it reached (hat (e identify as
the southern pole it had already e%un to %laciate in response to tectonic chan%es, to plate
upliftin% and volcanis&. 4It should e noted that the rate of upliftin% is dependent on the
a&ounts of the prior deposition of sedi&ent that, havin% een suducted, has over %eolo%ical
ti&e een vastly accelerated y the action of vascular plants< since as (e have seen roc"
(eatherin% is a iolo%ically controlled che&ical process as plants rea" up roc" as they root in
the soil see"in% out nutrition5. 0he for&ation of the Southern >cean, as an open (ater(ay
4(ith acco&panyin% (inds5 s(eepin% round the Earth, isolated *ntarctica y creatin% a partial
at&ospheric arrier a%ainst (eather syste&s eyond this continent. Rntil recently, *ntarctica
has lar%ely &ade its o(n cli&ate, one very cold and dry, (hich, in turn, has helped cool an
Earth that hitherto 4prior to its separation and drift5 (as hot and (et, ?ond(ana lar%ely a
te&perate rainforest. So&e t(enty &illion years a%o, tectonic activity entered a period, still
on%oin%, of considerale di&inution 4after the continents as (e "no( the& today for&ed5,
lessenin%, for the %eolo%ical ti&e ein%, its deter&ination in the for&ation of cli&ate. 0hese
cooler, drier conditions (ere particularly noticeale in *frica. *nd, under these ne(ly for&in%
cli&atic conditions, species died off and ne( ones appeared. *&on% the latter %roup are
ho&inid lines, includin% the lar%er rained ho&inids (ho appear to e our ancestors.
Be%innin% aout t(o and half &illion years a%o, the dyna&ic cli&atic structure characteri=in%
the &ost recent %eolo%ical epoch staili=ed, slo(ly ta"in% on its present for& e%innin% (ith
the Pleistocene. So (hat does our %eolo%ically ,conte&porary/ cli&atic structure loo" li"e2
;or an ans(er to this )uestion (e &ust consider astrophysical theory ai&ed at understandin%
the causation of recurrent ice a%es 4%laciation5.
0oday, that understandin% of %laciation in the %eolo%ical ti&e fra&e (e live in 4it &ore or less
slo(ly e%an fifteen &illion years a%o ut did not start ta"in% its present for& until 1.F &illion
years a%o, (hich in %eolo%ical ti&e is that &o&ent (hich desi%nates the advent of the
Pleistocene5 has lar%ely een resolved into three %reat cycles that drive the Earth.s cli&atic
variaility. 40hese three %reat cycles are so&eti&es called 6ilan"ovitch cycles.5... 0he
%eolo%ical condition that has enaled the& is continental drift+ It has rou%ht lar%e
land&asses near to the poles thus allo(in% the Earth.s orital eccentricity to cyclically create
ice a%es... 0he Earth.s orit around the sun is elliptical co&pletin% a cycle rou%hly every
100,000 years. *t its %reatest as opposed to its s&allest distance fro& the sun, a
deter&ination of the Earth.s eccentricity, there is a 20Z9D0Z reduction in the a&ount of
radiation 4heat5 that reaches the Earth. *t that eccentricity, it is this relation 4of sun to Earth5
that has produced ice a%es at &ore or less re%ular intervals over the last seven hundred
&illennia, perhaps the last &illion years. 0he second cycle concerns the tilt of the Earth on its
a'is, its oli)uity. 0ilt deter&ines (here the &ost radiation fro& the sun (ill fall on the Earth. *
full cycle occurs every #2,000 years. *s the Earth revolves around the sun, tilt produces
seasons. 0he last, shortest cyclin%, periods of 17,000 and 2D,000 years, turns, so to spea", on
the Earth.s (ole 4called precession5. Created y the &a%netic &ass distriuted unevenly
and off9center et(een the Earth.s inner core and &esosphere, (ole creates a shift on
avera%e every 21,G00 years in its, the Earth.s, ,true 4celestial5 north/ 4north deter&ined alon%
its a'is in contradistinction fro& the %eo%raphical north pole5 fro& Polaris to !e%a. 0his shift
affects seasonal intensity 4e.%., hot su&&ers, fri%idly cold (inters5, and a half cycle is said to
deter&ine the avera%e len%th of the (ar& periods et(een %laciations. In the case of all
orital cycles, the chan%es in radiation that reach the Earth are dra&atically increased,
Na$plified> in the sa&e cyernetic lan%ua%e of capital, y the a$ount present 4&ore or less5
of those gases, especially caron dio'ide, &ethane and (ater vapor 4the first t(o are
produced y plant and acterial life5, that trap solar radiation in the at&osphere. Involvin% the
caron cycle 4(hich, in turn, revolves on the living presence of lar%e tropic forests as caron
sin"s and their relation to dyna&ically interactin% at&osphere and oceans5, a rapid and
dra$atic increase, Na$plification,> is hat &rings a&out a geologicall% characteristic a&rupt
transition fro$ cold to ar$ cli$ates on 2arth.
Rntil no(, (e have lived in a cold, dry type of earthly cli&ate, one characteri=ed y %laciation.
4Within a hu&an lifeti&e it (ill e part of the %eolo%ical past5+ Within the cycle of this %laciation
as it has unfolded e%innin% so&e 1.F &illion years a%o, each period of intense cold (ith
e'tensive ice covera%e especially in the 3orthern $e&isphere 4and the hi%her latitudes of the
South $e&isphere5 has een follo(ed y a period of (ar&in%, one of &uch shorter duration 9
on avera%e rou%hly 10,00091C,000 years called an inter%lacial. 40his te&poral deter&ination
e'cludes the arupt (ar&in% period, say a couple thousand years, of transition fro& %lacial to
inter%lacial, and the far slo(er coolin% period, say, as &uch as nine to ten thousand years, of
transition fro& inter%lacial to %lacial.5 $u&anity, as it e'its and lar%ely as (e understand it
today, e%innin% (ith sedentary a%riculture, and the rise of the state and civili=ation, has
appeared and developed in the current inter%lacial. In this re%ard and in ter&s of ti&escales,
the historically conte&porary (ar&in% &oves in a direction opposite cyclical coolin% 4si%ns of
(hich should e aundant5 (hich is, asent capitalistically %enerated (ar&in%, (hat, in a
%eolo%ical ti&escale, (ould e e'pected. 0his current inter%lacial, transitions aside, stands
out ecause it has already continued for a lon% period and, (ith the on%oin% (ar&in%, sho(s
no si%ns of aatin%+ Instead of %ro(in% ice sheets, (e are (itness their retreat.
>ccurrin% over %eolo%ical ti&e, a ti&e fra&e (hich has no &eanin% fro& the standpoint of an
individual hu&an life, these cos&ic deter&inations 4eccentricity, oli)uity, precession5 of
Earth.s cli&ate are called forcin%s. 0oday, their relevance palls and have eco&e virtually
insi%nificant in co&parison (ith the &ove&ent of capital (hich, (ithout dout, has eco&e the
decisive %eolo%ical force on Earth. If 8a&es $ansen 4direct of the ?oddard Institute and
perhaps the (orld.s leadin% cli&ate scientist5 is to e elieved, as lon% as there are hu&ans,
i.e., as lon% as capitalist develop&ent persists, a sin%le chlorofluorocaron factory can
annually produce enou%h C>2 to prevent the Earth fro& ever returnin% to %laciated conditions.
N2xtre$e "eather>
,E'tre&e (eather/ is a &ystification that e&anates fro& capital.s spectacle+ Weather e'ists at
the e'tre&es precisely ecause (e are livin% in historical ti&e in an early or onset period of a
transition et(een the t(o &odes of cli&ate that have %eolo%ically characteri=ed the last G00
&illion to a illion years of Earth history. 46a"e no &ista"e aout it, it is foolish to thin"
other(ise.5
0he last 12,000 years, that is, over the e'tent of the last inter%lacial in (hich (e live, (e have
(itnessed perhaps the &ost stale cli&ate period in any in Earth.s history that (e have
reconstructed. 0his staility has &ost visily and noticealy characteri=ed y (ell9defined
re%ional cli&atic re%i&es 4e.%., hot, dry arid re%ions (hose (eather &oves (ith narro( ran%es
and does so repeatedly, i.e., seasonally, over ti&e5, seasonal te&perature ran%es (ithin
narro( li&its, (ell defined periods of seasonal chan%e, predictale ecause constantly
recurrin% (eather patterns and &odalities of (eather that itself occurs (ithin narro( li&its.
0oday, thou%h, patterns of (eather for&ed over and do&inatin% the inter%lacial (e live in,
such as the re%ularity of seasons each (ith its o(n predictale structure, are disappearin%.
Instead, (eather patterns that have e'isted over &illennia are vanishin%, and ased on these
vanishin% patterns ,the (eather/ itself is losin% its predictaility. Si&ilarly, cli&atic ,re%i&es/
characteristic of specific %eo%raphical re%ions 4e.%., a te&perate re%ion (ith &ild su&&ers
and cold (inters5 are losin% their definin% features as these re%i&es eco&e &uch &ore
,elastic./ :estaili=ed, under conditions of capitalistically deter&ined, %loal (ar&in% induced
cli&ate chan%e, the occurrence of (eather at its extre$es is eco&in% &ore and &ore
fre)uent 4increased intensity of torrential do(npours, increased fre)uency of drou%ht, (ildfires
and ,hundred year/ floods (orld(ide, etc.5< those e'tre&es are not fi'ed ut their li&its or
oundaries are eco&in% &ore and &ore stretched, the e'tre&es the&selves &ore and &ore
severe< ecause (ar&in% radically increases oth the dryness of e'istin% arid re%ions
4(hich actually tend to e'pand5 and &oisture content in the different at&ospheric circulations
and thus produces e'tre&e (eather.
1
...
Constant references to the past in ter&s of a ,reconstruction/ &i%ht e the occasion for
curiosity. In fact, there is no direct or i&&ediate evidence for (hat (e "no( in this re%ard+
0here is the ovious point that there are no (ritten records or hu&anly produced records of
any other sort that descrie the cli&ate chan%e that e%an circa 1O,000 years a%o (ith the
transition fro& the last %laciation to the present inter%lacial. But it is further&ore the case that
the record of len%thy, rou%hly hundred thousand year %laciations periodically interspersed (ith
far shorter, say 10,000 N 1C,000 year inter%lacials, dates ac" no( aout a &illion years. So a
second point is that the record predates the e&er%ence of hu&anity in the anthropolo%ical9
anato&ical sense, Ho$o sapiens sapiens. 40his is not a redundancy, it &eans that ,&an/ is
uni)ue, she is her o(n %enus and species.5 Recall, if you (ill, a discussion y 6ar' in his
youthful Manuscripts: $e, correctly, stated that the hu&an senses the&selves, for&ed in
interaction (ith nature, in (or" and laor, are the product of entire history of their
develop&ent. So that, (e note, if all "no(led%e starts fro& e'perience, e'perience shaped y
(or" and laor and the chan%in% conditions they produce, a&on% the varieties of (hich
sensuous e'perience 4e'perience %rounded in the senses, in seein%, hearin%, etc.5 has a
particular pri&acy, then le%iti&ately there is a )uestion as to ho( it is possile to "no(
anythin% (hich predates us, since that (hich predates us in nature has disappeared, since the
nature (e e'perience is itself the product of our interaction throu%h (or" and laor (ith it over
thousands of %enerations. In other (ords, ho( is to possile to spea" of a ,nature prior to
&an/2 $o( can (e "no( anythin% that entirely transcends that e'perience2 While this is not a
,purely philosophical,/ i.e., irrelevant if not &eanin%less )uestion, (e (ould &erely point out
that an astract dialectic of concepts, a discourse or discussion that &erely elaorate
conceptual content (ithout reference to e'perience is (hat (e call &etaphysics 4i.e., a
conceptual fra&e of reference (hich has no relation to any actual or possile su1ect, in the
lan%ua%e of our%eois theory, of science, is independent of any actual and all possile
oservers5. In the social for&ations of the West prior to the e&er%ence of capitalis&, the
1
$eat is a for& of ener%y.
*dd enou%h heat to ice and you %et a phase chan%e fro& solid 4ice5 to li)uid 4(ater5E add enou%h heat to (ater and
you %et another phase chan%e fro& solid 4(ater5 to %as 4(ater vapor5. Re&ove the heat and the phase chan%es can
e reversed. In addin% heat, the ener%y it contains re&ains in the ne( phase ut latently. Water vapor, (hat (e have
een callin% at&ospheric &oisture, contains &ore heat 4hence &ore latent ener%y5 than li)uid (ater. 0he oceans are
the lar%est reservoir of heat on Earth. 0he &ore the at&osphere (ar&s, the &ore (ater is evaporated fro& the
oceans, the &ore latent ener%y is present and availale for stor&s so that, for e'a&ple, (hen a hurricane for&in% in
the central *tlantic reaches the ?ulf, already perhaps the (ar&est lar%e ody of (ater on Earth, additional (ater
vapor in the at&osphere is additional fuel that enhances the si=e and intensity of the stor&. fuel, 1ust as in the
opposite case e'tre&ely dry conditions in the underrush of a forest provides fuel for a (ildfireE or, a%ain, as a lar%e
(ar& air &ass containin% copious a&ounts of (ater vapor pushes north and collides (ith a far cooler air &ass fro&
Canada pushed south y the 1et strea&, the stor&s produced alon% the line of their collision (ill e very po(erful.
Every .F de%ree celsius te&perature rise add GZ &ore &oisture to the air <
School&en as the or%anic intelli%entsia of a rural rulin% class deated the nature of the
i&&ateriality or &ateriality of a ein% that is situated so&e(here et(een divinity and
hu&anity. 0his deate, (hich today (e dis&iss as so &uch nonsense aout ho( &any an%els
can e fitted on the head of a pin, e'e&plifies the si%nificance of a discussion that proceeds
(ithout any reference to e'perience, for a strai%htfor(ard discussion of the %eolo%ical past
4ter&ed ,realist/5 is &etaphysical in precisely the sense indicated here. We, unli"e the
scientist, spea" of reconstructions ecause the evidence, (hile involvin% specifiale
theoretical assu&ptions and interpretations, is not &erely lo%ical and conceptual 4as, e.%., an
inference fro& a set of pre&ises5E and (hile that evidence of the past is not direct and
una&i%uous, it is ased on (hat are called pro'ies 4ice cores, co&pressed and stratified
layers of roc", tree rin%s, sedi&ents found at the otto& ancient la"es and o%s, etc.5 that,
conceptually interpreted in analyses in principle accessile to anyone, provide us (ith
evidence that su%%ests the prior e'istence of a lon%, %eophysiolo%ically len%thy, history of the
develop&ent of the Earth that (ent throu%h various sta%es and phases to arrive at that
&o&ent (here a &an9nature interaction and relation first for&ed. It is this perspective on
nature that is for&ed and estalished or is reconstructed, i.e., that has the lo%ical status of an
ideal or theoretical reconstruction, a conceptual effort to reach ac" to those conditions that
asent a real referent nonetheless appear, in and to thou%ht, as necessary pre&ises of a
ein%, ,&an,/ (hose e'ists in nature and depends on that relation for its e'istence<
1
The 8eoph%siolog% of the 2arth, ,,,:
Transitions, 7&rupt Change and Tipping 4oints in the 8lo&al Cli$ate Regi$e
0he transition fro& intense %laciation to an inter%lacial can occur aruptly, not over thousands
of years 4as coolin%, the transition fro& an inter%lacial ac" to a %lacial, al(ays does5, ut in
the te&poral fra&e(or" of actual historical ti&e, in hundreds of years and, once all the
preconditions have eco&e real, actually set in place so to spea", perhaps even in as little as
a decade. 0his &ay (ell e true of the far ,%rander/ transition fro& a cold and dry cli&ate
&ode to a hot and (et one, (hich is the %reat dan%er (e confront.
0here are several nodal points (ithin the total syste& of interrelated relations and processes
that characteri=e earthly nature that, su1ect to severe strain 4to disruption5, (ill under
conditions of planetary (ar&in% rapidly accelerate the chan%e that is ta"in% place, and that
are li"ely to render it irreversile in the %eolo%ical short9ter& 4i.e., for at least several tens, if
not hundreds, of thousand or even &illions of years5. 0hese are called tippin% points.
0he &ost i&portant of these relations and processes are the ther&ohaline circulation, the
%reat rainforests, and ocean floor clathrates to%ether (ith the &ethane fro=en in *rctic
per&afrost.
0he ther$ohaline circulation is the %loal, deep ocean &ove&ent of sea(ater. In opposition to
surface (ater currents driven y at&ospheric (inds, its &otion is %enerated y %eo%raphic
differences in the density of ocean (ater, density differences %overned y te&perature
4ther&al5 and salinity 4haline5. In the 3orth *tlantic this circulation transports (ar&, salty (ater
fro& the tropics to the north+ It acts as a vast conveyor of hot (ater fro& the ?ulf, (hich,
ecause it is heavier 4a conse)uence of its %reater salinity5, drops to(ard the deep ocean
floor in the area of Iceland, and in droppin% thus pulls &ore (ater in ehind it. 0here, durin%
the (inter, the (ater cools and releases heat to the at&osphere, (ar&in% the 3orth *tlantic
re%ion 4especially Britain and Scandinavia5 y (ay of the prevailin% (inds. Because it is so
1
Si&ilarly, see the further e'plication in "h% the Stud% of Hu$an 1rigins is Necessar% and "h% it is ,ndispensa&le to
a Revolutionar% and 2$ancipator% 4ro9ect, the Introduction, ,What is at Issue in the E'a&ination and *nalysis of
$u&an >ri%ins,/ appearin% in 1rigins and 2ndings: 8enerali/ed Hu$an 2$ancipation in 4erspective of a Ne 2arth+
St Paul, 201# 4posthu&ous5. HEditorIs note.J
saline, hence dense 4as is all deep (ater5, the ne(ly for&ed deep (ater then flo(s ver%
slol% south and rises to &id9depths around *ntarctica, (here it 1oins the *ntarctic
circu&polar current. 0he deep (ater around *ntarctica flo(s north(ard into the Indian and
Pacific >ceans, returns to the surface, and eventually flo(s ac" into the *tlantic. 8ust ho(
slo(ly does deep dense (ater flo(2 Recirculatin% all the oceanic deep (ater, the entire circuit
ta"es aout 1,000 years to co&plete.
0he ther&ohaline circulation is responsile for up(ellin% and sin"in% re%ions, distriution of
ocean ecolo%ical syste&s, and as ocean (ater is possessed of an ovious at&ospheric
relational co&ponent 4land9sea te&perature contrast, and interactions achieved throu%h
evaporation, precipitation, radiation and "inetic ener%y e'chan%es, the latter the effect of
friction and (inds, thou%h this last feature lar%ely characteri=es ocean (ater as surface (ater
not as deep (ater5. 0he up(ellin% re%ions, li"e the sin"in% ones 4such as the one et(een
Iceland and ?reenland5, are particularly i&portant+ 0hey rin% nutrients that are found in
oceans depths and rise (ith the cold (ater 4as it is pushed up5 to the surface. 0hese nutrients
feed the surface &icroor%anis&s and al%ae that asor at&ospheric caron dio'ide.
0he great rainforests are lar%ely tropical, to e found in South *&erica, Central *frica and in
the 6alay and Indonesian archipela%os. 4;ar s&aller ones can e found scattered in other
parts of Southeast *sia, in *ustralia, the 3orth *&erican Pacific 3orth(est and Central
*&erica.5
0he role of forests in the caron cycle is deter&ined throu%h their aility to store caron and
e'chan%e it (ith the at&osphere. Plants asor caron dio'ide throu%h photosynthesis, so&e
of (hich is released throu%h respiration or the deco&position as plant life dies, (hile the
re&ainder is stored in io&ass, necro&ass 4i.e., fully deco&posed ve%etation5 and the soil.
;orests therey act oth as a reservoir 4storin% caron5 and a sin", asorin% 4and
transfor&in%5 caron. 40hey are also a source of caron, so&e of (hich is released durin%
deco&position to the at&osphere in the for& of &ethane.5 :ense lo(land forests specifically,
and tropical forests %enerally are particularly i&portant as a caron store, ecause of their
hi%h io&ass, containin% on avera%e C0Z &ore caron than te&perate forests and as &uch
as 209C0 ti&es &ore caron than cleared lands.
0he *&a=on.s, Con%o Basin.s and the 6alay and Indonesian rainforests play a crucial role in
cli&ate processes throu%h the e'chan%e of (ater and ener%y (ith the at&osphere+
:eforestation affects, chan%es, local cli&ate, creatin% oth a decline in rainfall and an
increase in te&peratures. 0hese re%ion.s forests are also &a1or drivin% forces of lar%e9scale
at&ospheric circulations, and so land9use chan%es (ithin each influence oth re%ional and
%loal (eather patterns. 0hus, deforestation (ithin *&a=onia, Central *frica and the
Indonesian archipela%o is e%innin% to issue in lar%e9scale cli&ate effects, chan%in%
te&peratures, the distriution of rainfall and cli&ate variaility in other, distant parts of the
(orld. 0ropical rainforests have lar%e9scale cli&atic effects, e%innin% (ith transpiration 4and
the *&a=on, thou%h not uni)ue in this respect, does this in a )ualitatively %reater fashion5+
Plants 4trees, especially those for&in% forest canopies5 %enerate their o(n rainfall. So %reat is
the (ater volu&e *&a=onian tropic forest plant life %ives off throu%h its leaf structure that it
for&s clouds. 0hese for& in the east and, driven y the prevailin% Southern $e&ispheric
(est(ard (inds, are lo(n (est, (here their &oisture falls as rain, that, in turn, is repeatedly
transpired. *t&ospheric circulatory and convection processes over the *&a=on, so&e risin%
fro& the very cloud for&ation 1ust descried, produce enor&ous thunderclouds, that, in turn,
transfer or can transfer hu%e a&ounts of ener%y to hi%her altitudes, (hich can carry the&
north (here these air &asses collide (ith those &ovin% south fro& the *rctic, and (hen
collisions of this sort occur, rain over central 3orth *&erica 4as (heat and corn elts, precisely
the re%ion of %reatest a%ricultural productivity5 is the result. *lready shrin"in%, the destruction
of rainforest trees in the Bra=ilian *&a=on is producin% increase aridity over the *&erican
6id(est, the lar%e scale stor&s 4spa(nin% tornadoes5 of the past sprin% not(ithstandin%. 0he
co&plete loss of the *&a=onian rainforest is li"ely to e'tent deserts of the *&erican
South(est north(ard and east(ard.
6ethane %as hydrates, called clathrates, are crystalline structures, solids that loo" li"e ice.
0hey for& as (ater &olecules entrap s&aller &olecules in a ca%e li"e arran%e&ent or
structure. 0he &ethane in the %as hydrate is as a rule produced y the acterial rea"do(n of
or%anic &atter in lo( o'y%en environ&ents. $ence, &ediated y the action of earthly life they
occur naturally and al&ost e'clusively in the polar re%ions 4hi%h latitudes5 and alon% the outer
li&its of the continental shelves 4(here carried y river runoff there is sufficient decayin%
or%anic &atter to %enerate &ethane5, that is, in the per&afrost and fro=en peat o%s of the
*rctic and on the ocean floors.
It should co&e as no surprise that at&ospheric &ethane levels have een lo(er durin%
%lacials than inter%lacials, and have, durin% the Pleistocene, een directly connected to
(ar&in%s that have rou%ht aout the end of %lacials (ithin the overall ice a%e 9 (hich leads
strai%hta(ay to the 4correct5 suspicion that clathrate for&ation depends on ther&al cold. *lon%
the outer continental shelves, te&peratures are close to free=in%, and, of course, the *rctic
%round is fro=en. In fact, %as hydrates are stale at lo( te&peratures 4per&afrost5 or hi%h
pressures or oth 4sea floors5, and are correspondin%ly unstale, and can and (ill at so&e
point e dissociated 4fro& their ice li"e structure releasin% &ethane in %aseous for& into the
at&osphere5 y cli&ate (ar&in%.
0hree final points need to e &ade in this re%ardE first, ta"en to%ether clathrates contain aout
D,000 ti&es as &uch &ethane as currently e'ists in the at&osphereE second, &ethane is in
e'cess of 20 ti&es as potent in the lon% ter& 4100 years5 and 100 ti&es as potent in the short
ter& 420 years5 a %reenhouse %as as caron dio'ideE and, third, it (ill ta"e aout a D_C
4C.#_;5 rise to e%in a natural process of dissociation especially in the *rctic, and a O_C
410.F_;5 rise to unleash a full scale release of clathrate9ased, &ethane %as into the
at&osphere. In this, the last re%ard, a release of this order is re%ularly &ooted in the cli&ate
chan%e science co&&unity as the i&&ediate precipitatin% cause of the (ar&in% that
inau%urated the Eocene, so&e CC &illion years a%o and the e'tinctions on land and in the
oceans 4so&e #0Z of all sea or%anis&s5 associated (ith it.
1
The ther&ohaline circulation, the %reat rainforests, and &ethane %as hydrates, &% no $eans
the onl%, are y far and a(ay the &ost i&portant natural processes and for&s that have
eco&e fully inte%rated (ith the caron cycle over the past t(o &illion years 4since e%innin%
of the %eolo%ically &ost recent %laciation5.
Each of these i&portant natural processes 4ther&ohaline circulation, rainforests, &ethane
hydrates5 is su1ect to disruption. 0a"e, for e'a&ple, the ther&ohaline circulation. War&in%
induced &elt of the ?reenland %laciers add ne( fresh (ater to the 3orth *tlantic at those
points (here deep (ater is for&ed. 40his in opposition to sea(ater free=in% in a cli&ate (ith
cold (inters that concentrates salinity, increasin% density, since only the (ater free=es.5
*sent salt, the fresh (ater is far li%hter. With a vie( to (ei%ht, the volu&e of this ne(,
additional (ater chan%es the co&position of the ocean at these critical points, that is, addition
of enou%h fresh (ater9%lacial &elt (ill &ean there is not sufficient heavy (ater to drop, thus
shuttin% do(n the ther&ohaline circulation. 4In perhaps a do=en places south of ?reenland in
the ther&ohaline circulatory upper ranch, (ater droppin%, funnelin% do(n(ard, can actually
e seen. *t a couple or three of these spots failures of (ater to drop, shutdo(ns, have een
1
;or further e'plication of a full9scale clathrate release and the real dan%er it entails 4a &ethane9ased, hydro%en
sulfide &ass e'tinction, see 3ote 1 to The Converging Crises in Nature and Societ% and their Denounce$ent in
1rigins and 2ndings+ HEditorIs note.J
very recently een (itnessed. 0he ther&ohaline circulation (ill start up a%ain, ut at a vastly
different re%ion of the oceans.5 Si%nificant capitalistically %enerated transfor&ation of this or
any of the other t(o %reat processes, resultin% in their full9scale disruption y (ay of
shutdo(n, destruction or release as the case &ay e, (ould initiate a cascade of events and
further processes 4involvin% all three %reat processes5 the iospheric staili=ation of (hich
(ould create a ne(, hot and (et earthly cli&ate. In each case, a disruption has the sa&e root,
cli&ate (ar&in%+ Rnder conditions of capitalist production, the hu%e develop&ent of
hu&anityIs o1ective sustance 4real societal (ealth produced capitalistically, i.e., plant,
e)uip&ent, industrial sites, infrastructure, uran landscapes and the &ass of circulatin%
co&&odities5, ta"en to%ether (ith the lar%ely che&ical yproducts of this develop&ent, are, in
an on%oin% sense, disruptin% or reconfi%urin% 4or oth5 those specific processes, relations and
life for&s y (hich the iosphere as self9re%ulatin% totality over %eolo%ical ti&e &odified and
transfor&ed the %eneral effects of 6ilan"ovitch cycles 4orital eccentricity, oli)uity and
precession5, y (hich iospheric self9re%ulation has restricted the ran%e eyond (hich coolin%
durin% %lacial periods has not %one, has created (ar& inter%lacials, and in particular has
,distriuted,/ as it (ere, specific, distinct cli&ates across the face of the Earth.
Cli$ate Change 2ffects
0he level of at&ospheric caron dio'ide is no( annually risin% at a rate sli%htly in e'cess of 2
parts per &illion 4pp&5 &olecules of air. 0his, the rate of capitalistically %enerated cli&atic
forcin% is four orders of &a%nitude, ten thousand ti&es, &ore po(erful than any current
natural forcin% 4e.%., orital eccentricity5.
0he &eltin% of the ?reenland ice sheets &ay already e irreversile.
0he West *ntarctic ice sheets (ill si&ply collapse 4on the (estern side, @arson *, @arson B
and Wordie have already collapsed5 and the %reat ice pac" on the east connected to the
%laciers of the interior have already e%un to &elt. Risin% te&perature (ill e%in to &elt *rctic
per&afrost to a depth %reat enou%h that the periodic release of %as hydrates (ill occur 4in fact,
in the northern reaches of Sieria it has already e%un5, portendin% the prospects of a truly
enor&ous release of poisonous &ethane %as.
Enou%h heat (ill e %enerated at the surface of the (orld.s oceans to create a (ar& layer
thic" enou%h to prevent cold, nutrient rich (aters fro& risin%, (hile at the sa&e ti&e the
oceans (ill eco&e so acidic as to prevent for&ation of caron9ased shell life. War&er (ater
di&inishes the a&ount of o'y%en that can e dissolved in the seas. 0he conse)uences (ill e
t(ofold, slo( suffocation of &arine life and dissolution of calciu& caronate shell for&s that
have asored at&ospheric C>2 for a half illion years. Releasin% caron ac" into the
at&osphere instead of asorin% it is a particularly insidious naturally for&in% process a
,positive feedac"/ or a natural process that not only continues ut e'acerates, y
intensifyin% and increasin% the rapidity of, a %iven develop&ent, here (ar&in%. 0his (ould
&ar" the e%innin% of the end of &arine life, plant and ani&al, as such.
*lready occurrin%, continuous floodin% of lo( lyin% coast areas (ill recreate the& as
per&anent parts of the sea, and inundations of coast &etropolises (ill e re%ular features that
recur several ti&es annually.
6ountainous %laciers in all the ran%es of the (orld are disappearin%. ;lo(s durin% the sprin%
risin% fro& &ountain and %lacier fed rivers (ill slo( to a tric"le. In these re%ions, drin"in%
(ater and (ater to irri%ate a%riculture (ill not e availale fro& these riverine sources.
:rou%ht (ill eco&e per&anent, desertification (ill proceed apace, and haitale environs (ill
accordin%ly contract.
:riven not 1ust y (ar&in% 4ut also y lo%%in% and clear cuttin% for a%riculture usa%e5, the
tropic forest ecolo%y, already rapidly disappearin%, (ill succu&, the %reatest source of
iodiversity on Earth eli&inated, as rainforests are reduced to scru and eventually desert.
0he asis of life (ill dra&atically and disastrously narro( still further, (hile rainforest collapse
(ill produce a loss, this ti&e of a truly decisive caron reservoir thus enhancin% C>2
concentration in the at&osphere, still further e'aceratin% (ar&in%.
Cyclonic seasons are e%innin% to &ove north. 0hey (ill &ove to a latitude as far north as
@ondon 4C1.C_3, the latitudinal e)uivalent of the ;al"land Islands in the southern he&isphere5,
and appear elo( the e)uator (here they have not efore. 0heir seasons (ill e e'tended
five or si' (ee"s annually.
Periods of searin% heat, once one hundred year events, have no( occurred 4in Europe in
su&&er 200D, this su&&er here and no( in the Rnited States5 and (ill eco&e a re%ular
feature of su&&er ti&e in once te&perature =ones as arid tropic cli&ates &ove north and
south to the &id9latitudes.
It &i%ht ta"e over a hundred years, ut &eltin% the %reat ice pac"s on Earth (ill raise sea
levels at least GC &eters 4rou%hly 2C0 feet5. 0a"en to%ether, risin% sea(aters and increasin%ly
intense, severe stor&s and possile super stor&s 4(ith increasin% &oisture in the air and as
the at&osphere heats up creatin% fuel for such stor&s5 (ill (rec" coastal uilt environ&ent
not &erely on the order of ut far, far %reater than $urricane Latrina did. @o( lyin% and coastal
areas face inundation and salination (rea"in% havoc (ith drin"in% (ater supplies+ 0he
(holesale 4and not 1ust a partial, nei%horhood ased5 aandon&ent of sea level uran
&etropolises (ill e%in. 0his (ill include not 1ust Bo&ay ut &uch of coastal India and
southern Pa"istan, Ban%ladesh northeast to :a"ar, not 1ust Sai%on and coastal Indochina, ut
all of coastal east *sia, especially $on% Lon%, Shan%hai, all of coastal 8apan, the island
archipela%os of 6alay and Indonesia< the islands of the South Pacific (ill disappear<
Borneo, Ban%"o" as (ell as Sidney, not 1ust the *sian ut the :utch lo(lands, to%ether (ith
*le'andra, !enice and &ost 6editerranean port cities, inland @ondon, Copenha%en,
Stoc"hol& and $elsin"i and their environs, not 1ust 3e( >rleans and 6ia&i ut the R.S. ?ulf
coast includin% coastal @ouisiana, 6ississippi and *laa&a, a %ood portion of ;lorida, the
*tlantic Carolinas and coastal and 0ide(ater !ir%inia, the West Indies, Pana&a City, Caracas,
Recife and Rio, inland Buenos *ires, and islands li"e $a(aii and the Canaries, central coastal
(est *frica especially 3i%eria, and so on. With desertion of these areas and re%ions, risin%
sea(ater and super stor&s (ill (itness &assive voluntary and chaotic, then forced and
enforced &assive population &i%rations, the li"es of (hich the (orld has never seen... In a
hi%hly &ediated (ay, this is capitalIs reaction to the prole& of %loal surplus population it has
created...
Population &i%rations (ill not 1ust e%in fro& lo( lyin% coastal re%ions, ut also fro&
increasin%ly arid re%ions, areas pla%ued y (ater shorta%es under%oin% actual desertification
and )ualitatively increased incidents of (ildfires, and (rac"ed y fa&ine (hich is no lon%er
periodic, ut re%ular and fre)uent, y internal conflict and al"ani=ations as productive
a%ricultural lands are lost to the &ove&ent of arid tropical cli&ates north(ard and south(ard.
,n the short run, cli&ate chan%e &a"es resources less accessile, in capital.s lan%ua%e it
interrupts and &a"es production of a%ricultural foodstuffs and industrial ra( &aterials less
dependale, places &ore de&ands on the infrastructural foundations of capitalis& (hich
capital.s &ove&ent at once produces and re)uires to reproduce 4rene(in%, developin% and
recreatin%5 itself on an e'panded asis, and narro(s the asis in earthly nature for hu&an
activity in its capitalist for&.
$ere (e can already see and %rasp the converging crises in nature and societ%+
0he stress on infrastructure is readily apparent in roads and hi%h(ays uc"lin% under heat,
stor& da&a%e to housin%, co&&ercial structures, etc. *s for a%ricultural production, recall the
very recent (estern Russian (ildfires 4su&&er 20105, the conse)uent poor (heat harvest and
the resultin% up(ard push on the (orld price of %rain. >r, a%ain, (ith re%ard to the sa&e
production and its ,natural/ causation, the (ildfires appearin%, for us, as a crisis ,in/ nature,
(hile Ben Bernan"e, the ;ed chair&an, aout the sa&e ti&e initiated policies ostensily to
loosen credit availaility as a spurn to usiness e'pansion and a return to ,econo&ic %ro(th,/
policies that have per&itted an"s to use funds &ade availale y the ;ed to invest (here
returns are hi%hest and safest 4and not to ease credit re)uire&ents5, i.e., to invest in (orld
co&&odities &ar"ets, in oil, (heat, %old, etc., the effects of (hich have een to %enerate a
dra&atic increase in the prices of these co&&odities, thus contriutin% to a (orld(ide
inflation. 0his, in turn, (as at the ori%ins of the e'plosions in the 6a%hre, in 0unisia and
E%ypt (here revolts initially started fro& the re&oval of state susidies on food, %rains, and
oil. So here too you see, in a &ore &ediated &anner, the conver%ence of a crisis in nature
4(ildfires, poor (heat harvests5 (ith the crisis in society 4deepenin% econo&ic contraction
revealed lar%ely in une&ploy&ent, the ;ed response, risin% %loal co&&odity prices, the
uprisin%s in the 6ideast5.
0he tendential direction of these develop&ents is t(ofold+ ;irst, in the near future these crises
(ill continue to conver%e, to interpenetrate and e'acerate each other, to a point at (hich they
(ill e inseparale. Second, all the socio9natural prole&s %enerated y cli&ate chan%e, as
)ualitative and utterly novel and unprecedented, hei%hten inter9i&perialist rivalries, tensions
and stru%%le+ Without a &assive proletarian challen%e to the order of capital, the drift to(ard
inter9i&perialist conflict and (ar is, (e thin", inevitale.
*nd (hat aout the societal effects and conse)uences of cli&ate chan%e in the long run2
0he current (ar&in% (ill, inseparaly distinct fro& the outco&es of capitalist recreation of
earthly nature as a ra( &aterial asin at the e%innin% and a to'ified (asteland at the end of
the cycle of co&&odity production, precipitate a species e'tinction 4one already under(ay5
that (ill rival the %reatest ones of Earth.s %eolo%ical history, devastatin% iolo%ical diversity to
such an e'tent that it (ill ta"e 200,000 years to reach the arest &odicu& of recovery, one
nonetheless entirely unsuited to ade)uately supportin% hu&an life. 4In the evolutionary sense,
this level of recovery (ould not have sustained specifically hu&an life as it first e&er%ed.5
*s it intensifies and even efore it reaches a tippin% point after (hich cli&ate (ill e%in to re9
e)uilirate as the on%oin% cli&atic transition %ive (ay to a ne( hot &ode, cli&ate chan%e (ill
enter into and decisively shape rivalries, )ualitatively e'aceratin% tensions, et(een
interi&perialist po(ers. 6ediated y states funtionin% as a national capitals and the
interi&perialist rivalries this entails, the la( of value
1
operates oth direct and indirectly in the
drift to(ard a rene(al of i&perialist (orld (ar, i&&ediately and directly in the stru%%le for
%loally circulatin% surpluses and indirectly and &ediately in a vicious political stru%%le for
&ar"ets and resources. Cli&ate chan%e, then, (ill and has already e%un to %reatly
e'acerate and hei%hten this, the latter stru%%le, and, in so doin%, le%iti&i=es and socially
1ustifies intensified e'ploitation and (or"place re%i&entation, (hich is only reinforced y
specific state repression, social :ar(inian and 6althusian politics and policies.
Inseparaly intert(ined (ith cli&ate chan%e and ithout an e&ancipatory (or"in% class ased
counterstri"e, this doule &ove&ent 4in nature and society5 is a asis for a reconfi%uration of
and creation (ithin the decayin% societies of the (orld of an entire array of truly horrendous
1
We intend here the roadest sense of this usa%e 4the ,la(/ of value5, na&ely, the tendential reduction of social
relations to productive ones, that is, the disciplinin% and re%i&entation of the for&er y the latter i&plied in the
re%ulation of the production of co&&odities and the e'pansion, au%&entation and thus reproduction of the a%%re%ate
totality of capital y socially necessary laor ti&e.
proailities. Without a proletarian response co&&ensurate (ith the depth of the crisis, (hat
other a%ency< other than the state< has the po(er to or%ani=e society2
>nce thou%ht part of the past 4at least in the developed capitalist (orld5, ancient diseases and
those confined to re%ions of poverty and de9develop&ent N den%ue fever, &alaria, perhaps
s&allpo' and polio N not to &ention diseases and disorders only recently de9locali=ed throu%h
capitalist co&&erce such as (est 3ile N (ill rapidly spread throu%h de&o%raphical %roups
i&&unolo%ically (ea"ened y hun%er, (ar, &ove&ent and a distrau%ht spirit. Population
&ove&ents 4fro& the *&erican south(est to the north and central portions of the country,
fro& European 6editerranean to the continental interior, fro& coastal *sia inland to the deep
*sian interiors, etc.5 (ill sharpen conflicts (ithin nations, creatin% the& (here they do not
already e'ist, over access to (ater and food, then to housin% and already &ini&alistic and
rapidly disappearin% social services. Crossin% international orders, they (ill hei%hten and
&ultiply ethnic, national and class conflicts. Ethnic cleansin%, %enocide, open conflict and (ar
are li"ely to e re%ular outco&es of &assive population &i%rations. 0he sa&e &ove&ent of
populations fleein% lo( lyin% areas (ill force the displaced into ca&ps, no dout proclai&ed
te&porary, and &ove&ents across international orders (ill produce enor&ous enca&p&ents
(ithout sanitary facilities, (ithout ade)uate food, and (ithout hope. If open conflict and lar%e9
scale (ar develop, these ca&ps could (ell eco&e sites of slave laor, if not this, then lieral
,eni%n ne%lect,/ i.e., &ass starvation.
0hree realities of the recent past captured in the na&es !erdun, *usch(it= and $iroshi&a hint
at a %hastly future. But even as, unchec"ed, the current (ar&in% hei%htens the tendential drift
of the &ove&ent of capital to(ard i&perialist (orld (ar, and (ith its reali=ation inau%uration of
autarchy9ased, universal totalitarian politics characteri=ed y nothin% so &uch as death
(orlds ased on forced laor, that (ar&in% (ill destroy hu&anityIs de&o%raphic density
4hundreds of &illions and perhaps illions (ill die5, our%eois civili=ation, and the (orld
capitalist &ar"et as the (orld sin"s elo( the levels of o1ective sustance as it e'isted at the
ori%ins of a%riculture and stratified co&&unities so&e 10,000 years a%o.
0hus, the conse)uences of %loal (ar&in% induced cli&ate chan%e (ill e disastrous, for us
as hu&ans, and eyond us for &ost for&s of life that currently reside on Earth.
Part II
Capital and the Crisis in Society
If the despoliation of nature, &ass species e'tinction and, in particular, cli&ate are %rounded
in the dyna&ics of capitalist develop&ent, it is necessary to e'plain the nature of capital and
those dyna&ics. 0o do so re)uires (e pinpoint that &o&ent at (hich capitalist develop&ent
ca&e to rest on its o(n foundations, at (hich it e%an to e'hiit itself purely as itself (ithout
ein% shaped y historically prior for&s of productive activity. In this (ay, (e can identify
capital as capital and its relation to cli&ate chan%e can stand out in sharp relief. If nature
do&ination is not a contin%ent series of processes and events, if it is a necessary outco&e of
capitalist develop&ent, then it is precisely under these historical conditions that their relation
e%an to for&.
Capitalist D%na$ics and the Do$ination of Nature
Rnder propitious &ar"et conditions, particularly increased de&and, the capitalist e&ploys
&ore (or"ers. 0he %ro(th of de&and also leads to enlar%e&ent of the scale of production. *t
a certain point, a point different for each industry and at least initially in the historical sense for
each capitalist, this increase in the volu&e of capital e&ployed co&&its the capitalist 4(ho
had previously &erely supplied &eans and &aterials of production to KhisK laorers5 to directly
ta"in% control of the process of production itself. 0his co&&it&ent transfor&s hi& fro& a
&erchant into an industrialist, a capitalist (ho actually intervenes in and or%ani=es the for&s
laor ta"es in the (or"place, and (ho transfor&s the &eans of production y rin%in% to ear
on the& ne( technolo%ical inputs 4&achinery5. 0he capitalist no( preferentially e'tracts
surplus value y &eans of increases in laorIs productivity. $e loses his individual character,
i.e., he increasin%ly ehaves as a personification of capital, (hile capital itself assu&es direct
social proportions. Production itself calls forth a %ro(th in population, ne( ranches of
industry that &ultiply and diversify their suspheres, a %reater productivity of laor and
cooperation of laor on a &assive scale, and an increasin% &ass of e'istin% and novel
co&&odities. Each of these features in turn calls forth the others. 0his, in the strict sense,
inau%urates the capitalist &ode of production proper or, the real susu&ption of laor under
capital, real do$ination, and it estalishes capitalis&, capital, on its o(n foundations.
What &a"es real do&ination irreversile, and &a"es it possile to spea" not &erely of real
do&ination in production ut as a periodi=ation in the history of capitalis&, is not the
increasingl% detailed division of laor itself 4thou%h in its scienti=ed for& it is an e'pression
and develop&ent of real do&ination5 ut the s%ste$atic, sustained incorporation of science
and technolo%y into production+ ;or it is scientific inputs, for e'a&ple, fertili=ers in a%riculture
4(hich (ould not e conceivale (ith che&ical analyses of soil and plant %ro(th, and the
&anufacture of ne( sustances5 and &echani=ation in industry that have &ade astract laor
so enor&ously productive. It is these ,inputs/ that revolutioni=es production and per&its, on
the asis of inter-capitalist co&petition (hich in turn de&ands the inputs 4it is either this or
face ruination5, capital to develop on its o(n asis and thus allo(s us to spea" of ,production
for productionIs sa"e/ or the ,self9valori=ation of value./
Characteri=in% real do&ination and directly &ediatin% the vast increases in the productivity of
astract laor, science and a separate technolo%y are not si&ply incorporated into production
throu%h introduction of novel inputs 4&achinery5. 0he &odern science of nature is
si&ultaneously and at all ti&es 4incessantly5 incorporated into the (or" processes y direct
invention of the capitalist, no( as a personification of capital, y (ay of (or"Is reorgani/ation
and the direct &ana%e&ent of production. 0he vast array of supernu&erary personnel
attached to capital N fore&en, supervisors, technicians and ad&inistrators lordin% over
production N &ediate those &achine inputs and the rationali=ed (or" processes achieved on
their ases. 0hey do so as earers of &easure&ent, calculation and classification 4ori%inally
develop&ent in the sciences of nature and &athe&atics5, as earers of scientific &ethods,
concepts and rationality
1
i&parted to 4i&posed on5 (or"ers N y settin% production nor&s,
throu%h speedups, in harass&ent N already captured in &achinery 4i.e., in (or"er &otions and
rhyth&s ro"en do(n into astract co&ponents o1ectified and &ateriali=ed in e.%.,
se)uentially arran%ed, continuous flo( production5. 0heir function and role in production as
production for productionIs sa"e is reunification of fra%&ented (or" processes 4(ith a vie( to
the production of a (hole product5, reunited hierarchically (ith all layers of supervision and
&ana%e&ent suordinated to the capitalist. 0hou%h it is infre)uent, tas" fra%&entation and
reunification 4scientific &ana%e&ent, 0ayloris&5 can e achieved (ithout &echanical inputs.
0he point to note is the underlyin% unity of science and capital+ >nce estalished, oth 4in
their see$ingl% separate historical &ove&ents5 develop on the dual asis of rationali=ation of
activities and the ho&o%eni=ation pro1ected y science 4(herein nature appears as
contentless e'tension that is )uantitatively deter&ined in the strict, i.e., &athe&atical, sense5
and produced y capital 4(hich recreates hu&anity as Teil$enschen and nature as ra(
&aterials asin5. Science and capital co&e to%ether &ost i&&ediately and directly &oth in the
production of &achinery, at the start of co$$odit% production, utili=ed in &ineral e'traction
4the end process of (hich is &ountains %ou%ed (ith open pits, sea&s split do(n their sides
and &ountain tops torn off5, in lo%%in% 4(hich leaves forests shorn of trees that have een
ripped out of, uprooted fro&, their &oorin%s in &ass5, in earth &ovin% 4in (hich hills and
valleys are leveled, prairie fields are denuded, native plants and ani&als disappear, the for&er
dead, destroyed, the latter forced to &ove, find ne( haitat in ever &ore narro(, confined
spaces, and as an overall conse)uence also li"e to die5, and in the production of fossil fuels
4in (hich sea otto&s are plu&ed in &iles of interconnected lines fro& (hich to'ic
sustance ini&ical to &arine life are periodically released5E and in the disposal aove all of
non9iode%radale, petro9che&ical products 4plastics of all sorts5, at the end of co$$odit%
consu$ption, as (aste du&ped alon% streets, roads, (oods and forests, la"es, stea&s and
rivers, seas and oceans.
:eter&ined fro& the re%ular, intensified introduction of science and technolo%y into
production, fro& that &o&ent real do&ination e%an to effectively hold s(ay over the (orld,
capitalis& has developed and can only develop throu%h the destruction of the self9or%ani=in%
cohesiveness and otherness that is earthly nature and that is the very pre&ise of vital and
hu&an life, y destroyin% it in its o1ectivity, reconstitutin% it as a sin" of unprocessed supplies,
a standin% reserve of &atter (hose &eanin% and e'istence, for it and lar%ely for us, is
e'hausted in ein% re(or"ed in capitalist production.
Capital and the D%na$ics of its Develop$ent
We do not e'plain capitalist dyna&ics startin% fro& a syste&ic tendency for the rate of profit to
fall, in relation to a hi%h or%anic co&position of capital or, for that &atter, as a funda&ental
contradiction e'pressed in ter&s of the unhin%in% of the creation of real (ealth fro& the
production of value. Rather, (e ta"e conflictin% class su1ectivities in production 4not the
co&&odity, or the constitution of the value for&5 as our point of departure and and ai& at an
account of the lo%ic and &ove&ent of capital ecause this is for& of a return to ,foundations,/
that is, to livin%, concrete su1ectivity as the asis of the understandin% of the (orld, and it is
this for& of presentation and, it alone that is theoretically ade)uate to our pro1ect, a %eneral
e&ancipation as the pre&ise of salva%in% (hat (e can of the inter%lacial and %eolo%ical
pre&ises of previous hu&an develop&ent.
1
Recall our discussion, aove. See he Second Interlude, ,Real :o&ination, I+ 0he Real Susu&ption of @aor under
Capital./
So fra&in% the presentation in this &anner, (e can as", ,What is capital2/ 0o start, capital is
aove all a social relation et(een %roups of (a%e laorers and those (ho e&ploy the&, at
the sa&e ti&e the production process in (hich this relation is for&ed and (hich it for&s, and
a product of this relation<
?enerally spea"in%, the laor that produces co&&odities is astract or, as (e say, reduced+
Rnder conditions of capitalist production, hu&an laor is %enerali=ed, )uantified and as such
&easured in units of )uantitative ti&e. E'pressed fro& the perspective of actual production,
the laor of a (or"er &a"in% a product 4or participatin% in the &a"in% of a product5 has een
reduced to )uantitatively &easurale, te&poral units.
If the concrete, purposive laor of a (or"er is purchased y an e&ployer, a capitalist insofar
as he &a"es such purchases, then it is not even concrete laor that is purchased. @aor as a
co&&odity is Klaor po(erK or the (or"erIs capacity to laor, since it is not the concrete,
useful product of (or" the e&ployer is interested in it, ut the profit, the surplus of KvalueK or,
prosaically, return over invest&ent, that can e reali=ed y sellin% this product, any product,
as a co&&odity. Capitalist production renders concrete laor astract, i.e., %enerali=ed or
unspecific, te&porally )uantified, &ateriali=ed and o1ectified as Kvalue.K
Capitalists as a %roup, y and lar%e, rarely achieve e'clusivity in the sale of their co&&odities+
6onopolies oviously e'ist ut the &ass of capitalists face co&petitive conditions (hen
see"in% to sell their co&&odities in the &ar"etplace. E'cept under occasional conditions of
product scarcity 4(hich is a contra9historical, ideal condition opposed to the actual tendency,
product superfluity, of capitalist develop&ent5, capitalists &ust confront other capitalists (ho
atte&pt to &ar"et si&ilar if not identical co&&odities. *ccordin%ly, capitalists &ust at least
&atch or etter the price of their co&petition. In &ar"ets (here co&&odities sell lar%ely as
co&&odities re%ardless of their specific uses, a condition is reached that typifies the tendency
of &ar"et co&petition, one that illu&inates the uni)uely capitalist conditions under (hich
co&&odities are produced+ ;earin% co&petitive ruin, capitalists strives often frantically to
achieve a cost advanta%e in the production of their co&&odities. Profit can only e reali=ed if
fro& the capitalists. perspective costs of production of a co&&odity are lo(er than the
avera%e in the industry in )uestion. 40hat avera%e is, of course, the socially necessary laor
ti&e e&odied in a %iven co&&odity.5 While occasionally there are individual capitalists or
fir&s that achieve a co&petitive advanta%e in costs of &eans of production and ra( &aterials,
those costs tend to(ard an avera%e for entire industries. Co&petitive advanta%e can e
%ained y introducin% ne( &achinery or technolo%ies into production, ut this &ay e eyond
the &eans of an individual capitalist or a fir&E ut it can also e %ained in reducin% laor costs
4pushin% (or"ers to fi%ht ac"5, and this is not eyond his, her or its &eans.
Capitalists e'ert %reat effort to drive do(n laor costs. If successful, this reduction insures
profitaility ecause those costs have een driven elo( (hat is socially necessary to
produce a %iven co&&odity. Since the distin%uishin% feature of co&&odities as co&&odities
is their Kvalue,K i.e., astract and %eneral, te&porally )uantified, and &ateriali=ed laor, the
reduction of laor costs is constituted throu%h decreasin% the a&ount of ti&e that is re)uired
in production 4of the co&&odity in )uestion5 (ithout an e)uivalent co&pensation to those, us,
(ho are producin% 4it5. 0he decrease in ti&e re)uired in production of a specific co&&odity
4i.e., an increase in the productivity of laor so9called5 can e achieved in three (ays 4or y
co&inin% the&5E first, y len%thenin% the (or"in% day in order to increase the &ass of
co&&odities produced 4for&al do&ination, asolute surplus value e'traction5E second, y
reor%ani=in%, or incorporatin% ne( &achinery into, the (or" process in order to produce the
sa&e or a %reater &ass of a specific co&&odity in a shorter period of ti&e 4real do&ination,
relative surplus value e'traction5E or, third, y inte%ratin% the affect and need structures of
concrete (or"ers &echanically reasse&led as a collective (or"er to production 4totali=in%
do&ination, e'traction of Hr$ehrert5. *ll (ays allo(, oviously, for the production of &ore
co&&odities. But in all cases, there is no increase in productivity unless (or"ers are
unco&pensated for the increase+ 0his unco&pensated relation, (hich is an essential,
necessary feature and structural condition of capital accu&ulation and hardly an aritrary act,
(e call e'ploitation. 0he e'cess of value 4surplus value5 created throu%h increased
productivity is reali=ed as such, and appears pheno&enally, (hen the co&&odity is sold.
Profit, actually e'cess 4surplus5 value, can no( e returned to the capitalist.
0his effort 4to drive do(n laor costs to co&petitively position herself in the &ar"etplace to
secure profitaility5 %ives a special &eanin% to the astractions in and throu%h (hich concrete
laor 4purchased y the e&ployer as the &ere capacity to laor5 is reduced. ;or the siphonin%
off of livin% laorIs capacity to laor, the e'penditure of laorIs ti&e in production, and not the
for&al act of e'chan%e of capacity to laor for &oney, is the actual process in and throu%h
(hich concrete laor is astracted and reduced+ * (or"erIs sensiility, affection, corporeality,
e'perience and reflection are all irrelevant to the production of co&&oditiesE in fact, as a rule
they %et in the (ay, i&pedin% capitalists &ain o1ect, producin% at a co&petitive advanta%e y
lo(erin% laor costs. :urin% actual production, on the shopfloor, the asse&ly line, in the
office, etc., these astractions 4in the for& lar%ely of speed9ups, i&posed production nor&s,
harass&ent, and su1ection to &achine rhyth&s5 are constituted. 0hey are, to e sure,
repressive. Wor" under conditions of capitalist production renders laor for capital. It is a
social process in (hich occurs that &iraculous transustantiation of specifically hu&an
aspirations, concerns, sensiilities, and even &undane hu&an products 4such as s(eat5, into
astracted and %enerali=ed, )uantified, o1ectified and &ateriali=ed, e&ptied 4socially
necessary5 ti&e, i.e., into Kvalue.K
0he follo(in% are &o&ents in the production of co&&odities+ 0he entire (or" process itself
(hich produces co&&odities, includin% the KinputsK in ter&s of &eans of production 4tools,
instru&ents, &achinery and other e)uip&ent5 that are directly used in the production of
co&&oditiesE purchased as co&&odities, %oods 4ra( &aterials5 that are incorporated into a
final product durin% the (or" processE the housin% 4plant, (arehouse, office, etc.5 e&ployed in
the production of co&&oditiesE the institutional for&s 4fir&s, corporations5 that &a"e up the
socio9le%al fra&e(or" in (hich co&&odities are producedE and, the &oney on the asis of
(hich these various co&ponents of the production process are purchased. Because they
each and all are e&ployed or en%a%ed< ut only to the e'tent they are so utili=ed< in the
production processes in and throu%h (hich capitalis& as a syste& is created and reproduced,
they are all capital.
0his is capitalIs real nature+ Capital is value, i.e., con%ealed, astract and %eneral,
)uantitatively te&porali=ed and o1ectified laor, as (ell as the process of its Kvalori=ation,K
i.e., the social relation of (or"ers and capitalists that at once enco&passes, on the one side,
the practices in and throu%h (hich astraction is for&ed 4na&ely, the valori=ation process
proper in (hich the capacity to laor is reduced and reappears as value e&odied in
co&&odities5, and, on the other side, inseparale and only analytically distinct, the
suordinate (or" process, its various &o&ents and co&ponents 4&eans of production, ra(
&aterials, etc., enu&erated aove5 as (ell as its useful end products. 0he &ove&ent of
capital 4the entire cyclical process of its for&ation and develop&ent, its production and
reproduction5 constitutes societyIs intelli%ile structureE capital constitutes society.s real
Ksu1ectK<
Because each and every capitalist see"s to drive do(n production costs, the a&ount of
socially necessary laor ti&e e&odied in each co&&odity is not, accordin%ly, static. >ver
ti&e, it declines 4as the &ass of co&&odities produced increases5. Because this decline also
confronts each and every capitalist as an o1ective necessity, an event of a total societal
production process utterly eyond her control, yet a product of each and every capitalistIs
efforts to reduce production and specifically laor costs< "e call this o&9ective necessit% the
logic of capital < Each capitalist is co&pelled to produce &ore to co&pensate for declinin%
prices< This co$pelling necessit%, this logic, creates capitalis$ as a s%ste$, as an
interconnected, interloc!ing production-&ased netor! of &ehaviors, practices, processes and
institutions that incessantl% undergoes change and develop$ent 0expansion and quantitative
enlarge$ent5+ ,t is this change and develop$ent of capital 0it is c%clical5 that e call its
$ove$ent+++ 0he all9around increase in production leads to an i&passe, to a situation in
(hich, considerin% their enor&ous &ass, not all co&&odities availale for purchase can find
uyers< "hile the effort to understand this crisis of overproduction $a!es visi&le the logic
and $ove$ent hich for$ the d%na$ics of capitalist develop$ent, it is on the &asis of the
logic of capital and in and through its $ove$ent that the do$ination of nature is achieved?
Colossal resources are poured in avoidin% 1ust such a crisis of overproduction. 40hin", for
e'a&ple, of the &assive a&ounts of profits that are diverted into advertisin% ca&pai%ns in
order to create ne( needs to asor the &ass of potential co&&odities readily availale (ith
e'istin% productive capacity.5 But the real dan%ers of a crisis of overproduction 4actually and
essentially, one of ,under/ or insufficient production of surplus value5 are depression, social
unrest and (ar as the last hundred and t(enty9five years have de&onstrated. Considered
solely in ter&s of the lo%ic and &ove&ent of capital, ho(ever, the crisis of overproduction is
an inte%ral phase of capitalist develop&ent+ 0(o for&s of crisis resolution stand out, the
characteristic and ui)uitous underutili=ation of productive capacity durin% a depression
results in &assive deflation, a collapse of e'istin% prices (hich effectively devalues enor&ous
a&ounts of e'istin% capital, and (ar, (hich produces an e)ually &assive destruction of capital
in its sensily e&odied for&s 4hu&an life as potential capacity to laor, plant, e)uip&ent, ra(
&aterials, and co&&odities5. Resolution of crisis &ay entail the earers of these social
relations 4especially (or"ers, cannon fodder, "illed in fi%htin%5 are no( different, ut this
destruction of achieved levels of o1ective sustance per&its the production process in (hich
and throu%h (hich the entire syste& of social relations (e call capitalis& is for&ed to rene(
itself, that is, to e%in ane(.
What ree&er%es 4and is synony&ous (ith rene(ed e'pansion5 is, of course, precisely the
lo%ic of capital 4or, if you prefer, of accu&ulation5, that is, the activity of co&petin% capitalists
out of (hich ori%inates that co&pellin% o1ective necessity that suordinates each and every
individual capitalist. 0his su%%ests that not only is capitalis& a syste& of social relations
eyond the control of at least one %roup of earers 4capitalists5 of these relations... they have,
as (e pointed out aove, eco&e in all si%nificant historical events and actions &ere earers
of capitalIs lo%ic... it su%%ests that the very &ove&ent of capital that creates capitalis& as a
syste& is &ove&ent y (ay of (renchin% contraction and e'pansion. Capitalis& unfolds and
develops throu%h this cyclical process of rapid %ro(th and retrench&ent, e'pansion and
contraction, oo& and ust. 0hus contraction, then, crisis appears as a product of
overproduction, an inaility of e'istin% &ar"ets to asor co&&odities as products of e'istin%
4productive5 capacity, in the syste&atic sense it is a product of an inaility to reali=e surplus
value throu%h e'chan%e, that is, a product of the insufficient production of surplus value, the
outco&e of techno9scientific innovation that is created y capitalist co&petition and that
&a"es too &uch laor9po(er superfluous, &a"es it i&possile for capitalists to valori=e
ade)uate a&ounts of astract laor to sustain production at e'istin% levels of develop&ent of
productive forces.
In all this, the capitalists, o(ners or e&ployers (ho pursue the production of co&&odities, and
the fir&s in (hich and throu%h (hich this pursuit is conducted, ehave in identical (ays
re%ardless of their personal thou%hts, feelin%s and pronounce&ent+ In all stru%%les a%ainst
(or"ers and in all socially si%nificant events, capitalists ehave as if they &erely personified
the astract econo&ic cate%ories that descrie the lo%ic and &ove&ent of capital. 0hey
ehave in this &anner ecause they have fully internali=ed and assi&ilated this lo%ic and it
%overns all their actions. It is for this reason that (e spea" of capitalists and fir&s as &ere
refle'es of its &ove&ent, as personifications of its lo%ic, as capital+
,7nthropogenic> Cli$ate ChangeK
0he entirety of the hu&anly for&ed uilt environ&ent as its e'ists today (ithin hu&ani=ed,
earthly nature, and the social relations in (hich production, institutions and ideas are all
for&ed, is an outco&e of capitalist develop&ent. 0he su1ect of this societal develop&ent is a
process (ithout consciousness or intent, a syste&s lo%ic that %overns this develop&ent, one
personified y individuals and social %roups that have assi&ilated and internali=ed this lo%ic.
0his is the overarchin% conte't in (hich cli&ate chan%e unfolds, for at this historical &o&ent
the latter enco&passin% ,event/ is still co&prehended y the &ove&ent of capital.
It is not as if %loal (ar&in% has never occurred efore. >ver the course of tens of thousands
of &illennia do(n to, say, the last D0 &illion years, caron dio'ide concentrations had on
several occasions reached (ell in e'cess of a 1000 pp&. But, then, those occurrences too"
place on an entirely different Earth, one on (hich a far less lu&inous sun radiated 4and thus
one on (hich elevated at&ospheric C>2 concentrations helped &aintained te&peratures
suitale to co&ple' life for&s5, ut one that (ould not support the &ost co&ple' life for&s
4&a&&alian life, especially hu&an life5 as they e'ist today<
0he over(hel&in% consensus a&on% scientists and spo"espeople of capitalist states in the
(orld today 4and a&on% the &ost recalcitrant of states, say the Rnited States, there is
%rud%in% acceptance5 that, in ter&s of causation, ,&an/ is responsile for (ar&in% induced
cli&ate chan%e, or, it is the ,species./ While (e shall return to the &ystifyin% concepts of
,&an/ and ,species,/ for no(, thou%h the evidence is strai%htfor(ard, the attriution oth of
culpaility and the liale a%ent are effectively ideolo%ical, &as"in% real a%ency and
responsiility.
Consider the evidence.
;irst, current, ongoing cli&ate chan%e is a not a ,natural/ pheno&enon+ With a vie( to
6ilan"ovitch cycles, it is countercyclical, &eanin% that it is not (hat is to e e'pected as the
outco&e of the %eolo%ically conte&porary ice a%e %laciation+ Presently, the eccentricity of the
Earth is %reater than O,000 years a%o 4i.e., Earth is presently at a further distance fro& the sun
in the course of the 100,000 years it ta"es to co&plete its elliptical orit5E and at this point in
that cycle, orital forcin%s are to e e'pected, i.e., (e should e see indications 4e.%., %ro(in%
ice for&ation at the poles and at very hi%h altitudes, transfor&ation of sno( fields into incipit
%laciers5 of a rene(al of %laciation.
1
But (hat (e are actually (itnessin%, to the contrary, is
(orld(ide (ar&in%. 0his in itself is stunnin%.
Second, series of radical, far reachin% and s(eepin% cli&ate chan%e events have in the
%eolo%ically reconstructed past < resultin% in those &ass e'tinctions that, for e'a&ple,
constitute the Per&ian90riassic and the 0riassic98urassic oundaries< occurred over several
&illion years 4e.%., rou%hly 12 &illion in the case of the Pa0 oundary.5 0he current
transfor&ation concentrates a %reenhouse %as9ased (ar&in% and a 4potential5 &ass
e'tinction (ithin the sa&e rief historical ti$e fra$e, an event for (hich there is no precedent
in earthl% nature.
2
1
Willia& Ruddi&an, 4los, 4lagues and 4etroleu$: Ho Hu$ans Too! Control of Cli$ate+ Princeton 4385, 200C+ 779
100.
2
Strati%raphic evidence indicates the i$pact e'tinction 4product of an asteroid collision5 that for&ed the Cretaceous9
0ertiary 4L905 oundary so&e OC &illion years, lastin% no &ore than 200 years, (as the only other !non rapid &ass,
0hird, fro& the outset of the current inter%lacial so&e 11,O00 years a%o do(n close to the
advent of real do&ination in production, the Industrial Revolution so9called, C>
2
e&issions
4drivin% avera%e %loal surface te&perature increases5 have risen slo(ly, very slo(ly, ut
steadily. 0his increase, it should e noted, is relative+ Plot at&ospheric caron dio'ide
concentrations a%ainst chronolo%ical ti&e fro& the pea" of the last ice a%e 4last %lacial
&a'i&u&5 22,000 years a%o do(n to 1GO0 in the co&&on era, and that incre&ental increase
is not noticeale 4and fro& circa 7O00 BC to 1GO0 it re&ains unnoticeale5. But plot those
concentrations fro& 1GO0 to 1FG0, and the plotted line approaches a positive 1C_ an%le of
incline. Plot those concentrations fro& there to the present and the an%le of incline rises to
rou%hly #C_. Bac" up and plot it fro& F000 BC to the present, and those last 2DC years
present a nearly strai%ht vertical rise. The current rate of at$ospheric C1' increase is not
$erel% the fastest in the geologicall% recent 0to thousand $illennia old5 ice age, this rate is
the fastest rate of increase reconstructivel% !non over the hole span of the last half &illion
%ears, for the present rate of increase is a&out one hundred ti$es faster than those
geologicall% ancient rates?
*s (e have ar%ued else(here,
1
(e &ar" the e%innin%s of sedentary a%riculture and
pronounced social division at aout 10,000 years a%o, for it is there that of hi%hly stratified
societies ased on &aterial ine)uality that (ould %ive rise to the state could e said to have
for&ed. *nd 1GO0 &ar"s that point at (hich (e can date the co&&ence&ent of the
&echani=ation of industry in the West 4i.e., in capitalist En%land5, that point fro& (hich (e
date the ori%ins of the real do&ination in production of capital over laor. In the for&er case,
initial a%ricultural life and (ith it risin% population e%an to %enerate a hu&an input, &ethane
4C$#5 and caron dio'ide 4C>25, into the at&osphere, nothin% that efore 1GO0 &i%ht delay a
%laciation, ut incre&entally over the entire period noticeale. 0he develop&ent of capitalist
industry after 1GO0, ho(ever, has indeed transfor&ed the che&ical &a"e9up of the
at&osphere. $o(2
>n a %eolo%ical ti&e scale, at&ospheric C>2 concentration has ran%ed fro& lo(s of 200 parts
per &illion 4pp&5 of at&ospheric air durin% the &a1or %laciations of the current ice a%e to hi%hs
of 2F09D00 pp& durin% (ar& inter%lacials. 0oday, at&ospheric C>2 concentration stands
no$inall% at D70 pp& 4if &ethane, nitrous o'ide and C;Cs are factored in, effectively those
levels are currently... as of this (ritin%, *u%ust 2007... at #D0 pp&5, and is risin% in %eolo%ical
ter&s at an e'traordinary and unprecedented rate (ith at this &o&ent no end in si%ht. We
esti&ate a ,tippin% point,/ that point at (hich ice cap &eltin% (ill )ualitatively hasten and
eco&e irreversile, at (hich %as hydrates 4clathrates5 &i%ht dissociate fro& their ice9li"e
structures, etc., as lo( as #O0 pp&, reachale (ith even &odern e&issions reductions lon%,
lon% efore the e'ceedin%ly conservative esti&ate of 20F0, desi%nated at any rate to forestall
i&&ediate, decisive action.
0hese, then, are the &a1or pieces of evidence for anthropo%enic ased (ar&in% so9called.
Consider, no(, the attriution of a%ency and, accordin%ly, responsiility for cli&ate chan%e.
0he Inter%overn&ental Panel on Cli&ate Chan%e tells us ,&an,/ ,his/ activity, is alterin%
cli&ate. In one sense, a very crude ar%u&ent can and has een &ade 4thou%h not e'plicitly
y the IPCC5 that sheer hu&an nu&ers, a %loal population of si' and a half illion, and the
outputs that result fro& the volu&e of activity of so &any people, ear direct responsiility.
0his is the &\te noir of the 6althusians (ho are so co&&only found in the scientific cli&ate
chan%e co&&unity. *ll those tee&in% &asses in the capitalist periphery and the ne( centers
of capitalist develop&ent alon% the *sian industrial arc (ant to live li"e us, Europeans and
or catastrophic, e'tinction that has occurred on Earth.
1
See Hierarch% and Social Division, Social Division and Modern Man: )ro$ the 2nd of the 3ast ,ce 7ge and the
1rigins of 7griculture to Capitalist Modernit% at its 1utset, appearin% in 1rigins and 2ndings+ HEditorIs note.J
*&ericans. 0hat, it is astractly ar%ued, (ould e disastrous. While the )uality of hu&an 4and
ani&al and plant5 life &ay (ell e %rounds for li&itin% population %ro(th, %loal (ar&in% does
not result &erely fro& the activity of &asses of hu&ans at any level of develop&ent+ 0oday, as
(e have pointed aove,
1
an Indian child livin% on the sucontinent in so&e of the &ost
densely populated re%ions on Earth, consu&es nearly t(o orders of &a%nitude less, 1a70
th
, of
the annual ener%y that her *&erican counterpart does. Patently, the prole& is not
consu&ption (ithout re%ard to societal and historical conte't, ut for&s of consu&ption, in
particular, not &erely ener%y inefficient ut profli%ate consu&ption, and 4even (ithin
capitalis&5 the socially and historically specific for&s of develop&ent that underpins that
consu&ption, i.e., the prole& is capitalist develop&ent or, if you prefer as (e do, the
&ove&ent of capital.
$u&an population, either in the conte&porary sense or the historical sense 4%oin% ac" so&e
10,000 years5 or oth, is, then, neither the a%ent nor is it, accordin%ly, responsile for cli&ate
chan%e. ,6an/ 4here, the astraction hu&an ,population/5 as such is a &erely for&al concept
(ithout deter&inately real referent. ?rant the force of this ar%u&ent and (e have dissolved
one &ystification. Perhaps, then, the ,industrial syste&/ is at issue. >r, perhaps, it is a
)uestion of ,&an/ in the ,industrial syste&./ In either case, (e are dealin% (ith e&pty
astractions. 0he issue is the historically specific confi%uration of %roups of livin% &en and
(o&en (or"in% (ithin that ,industrial syste&,/ i.e., capitalist production. 6ore precisely, the
issue is the %roup that do&inates that production. We refer, here, to those personifications of
econo&ic cate%ories, capitalists 4as (ell as the loc of classes they have in to( includin% their
intelli%entsia, scientific social %roups5. Capitalists 4and states that unify other(ise disparate or
co&petin% capitals5 &a"e decisions concernin% the allocation of &onies and capital,
concernin% (hat and the &anner in (hich ,natural resources/ are e'ploited and utili=ed, and
concernin% the technolo%ies on the asis of (hich those activities are carried out. Still, it not
1ust those decisions, ut the entire syste& of social relations at the level of the (orld, that is at
issue in cli&ate chan%e. In this sense, it is the su&9ect of societ% 0a part of nature %et
confronting it as a ra unprocessed $aterials sin! for the capitalist production of
co$$odities5 that is the agent responsi&le for cli$ate change+ It is not ,&an/ that is re&a"in%,
as it (ere, the earthly nature at its surfaceE that re&a"in% is a product of ,his/ o(n o1ectified
and alienated po(er. ,6an/ is not that su1ect+ *nd capital, that e&pty lo%ic of production for
its o(n sa"e, of accu&ulation2 Capital canniali=es hu&an creativity, e%innin% (ith its
(a%ed laor reduction 4astraction5 in production 4i.e., e%innin% (ith a for& of violence and
repression specific to the laor processes of capitalis&, that is, (ith valori=ation, (ith the
transfor&ation of concrete, livin% laor into con%ealed, astract and %eneral, )uantitatively
te&porali=ed and o1ectified laor as the for&ally first act in the process of the creation of
value, of capital5+ 0his o1ectified and alienated po(er is capital. Capital is the real su1ect of
hu&an society under conditions of capitalist production 4real do&ination5. Capital, as
o1ectified and alienated hu&an po(er, is the ,a%ent/ responsile for cli&ate chan%e...
1
Second Study, Part I, ,0he :efense of the *r%u&ent/ 4footnote5, and Part I!, ,Partisan of the 6onera,/ aove.
Part III
Science+ Technolo#y and Capital
0he relations et(een capitalist dyna&ics and cli&ate chan%e can e ade)uately %rasped
(ithout accountin% for the central, nay, the asolutely decisive roles of science and technolo%y
in facilitatin% and deepenin% this relation. It is a central 4productivist5 &ystification of our era to
elieve other(ise, and it is ende&ic to 6ar'ists as it is to any other %roup, includin% the
pivotal classes in society.
Science, &odern technolo%y and capital are inti&ately, and necessarily, lin"ed to one another,
and to the class (hich is the earer of each, the our%eoisie.
*s a socially si%nificant for& of "no(led%e, the &odern science of nature, (hatever practical
tas"s underlay it, (hatever truth it aspires to reveal, is an e'pression of a vision of hu&anity,
society, nature and our place and role in the (orld, in society and nature ta"en to%ether, call it
the totality, cos&os or universe. 4Such (orld visions are specific to lar%e scale social %roups
involved in those activities that produce and reproduce a co&&unity or society, to social
classes.5
0o%ether (ith those studies that &ethodolo%ically and episte&olo%ically &odel the&selves on
it, the &odern science of nature is our%eois theory, a theory (hich historically rose fro& and
&ediates the daily accu&ulative practices of this class, clarifyin% for it its tas"s in society, its
relations to other social %roups and its relation to nature.
It is in this sense that (e &ay say science cohered the our%eoisie as a class and, in so
doin%, per&itted it to act in history.
0his state&ent of the relation of science to the our%eoisie can e deter&ined, historically,
fro& the fierce political stru%%le that an early or%anic our%eois intelli%entsia (a%ed on the
asis of this theory it ori%inally created a%ainst the old order "in%ship order do&inated y a
phalan' of lords and %reat prelatesE it can e deter&ined, ideationally, fro& the for&al identity
et(een decisive ele&ents of the conceptual structure of the &odern science of nature and
the practical structure of si&ilarly decisive ele&ents 4laor po(er, ra( &aterial inputs, etc.5 of
capitalist production as they appear once they have entered the laor processesE it can e
deter&ined, socially, fro& the unity of the underlyin%, preco%nitively %rounded co&prehensive
&eanin% and ai& 4telos5 of science 4the do&ination of nature5 (ith the tas" of the our%eoisie
in history 4uninterrupted, relentless e'pansion of productive forces5E and it e deter&ined fro&
and can found in efforts to resolve the prole&s that rise fro& the our%eoisie.s pursuit of its
central historical tas", often astractly and oli)uely posed, in even the &ost rarefied, e'ulted
(or"s of its %reat theorists 4in ?alileo.s ne( science, in 6althus. population theory, in :ar(in.s
evolutionary account of the ori%in of species, in Einstein.s special relativity, in Bohr.s and
$eisener%.s for&ulation of )uantu& &echanics, in Popper.s defense of postulative9deductive
science5<
Nature, Bourgeois Science and Capital
Even if societies of capital (ere ale stave off the &ost disastrous conse)uences of on%oin%
cli&ate chan%e in a (ay that (ould per&it the& to &aintain their ,achieve&ents/ 4e.%.,
prevent densely populated reserve industrial ar&ies of laor, no( a %loal surplus population,
fro& ein% transfor&ed into &i%rants and i&&i%rants housed in enor&ous orderlands
ca&ps, prevent capitalist polities fro& en%a%in% in lar%e9scale slave laor practices5< at est
i&proale (ithout estalish&ent of revolutionary proletarian societal he%e&ony< the
on%oin% destruction of iolo%ical diversity and the unravelin% of the coherency of countless
interconnected and interrelated ecolo%ies that constitute earthly nature, to%ether the
foundations of life on Earth, (ill not cease.
0his destruction and disinte%ration start fro&, continues on the asis of and is deepened y
the &ove&ent of capital+ It has its %round and is effected y the practical reduction of earthly
nature to a ra( &aterials sin" for capitalist production. 0he &odern science of nature is the
theoretical fra&e(or" (hich co%nitively anticipates 4pro1ects5 and &ediates the technolo%ical
process that actually achieve this reduction. 0his science is not (ithout conte't, since it
appears (ith the e&er%ence of the our%eoisie in history.
What distin%uishes the our%eoisie as a class in history is the pro1ect of nature &astery
throu%h e'pansion of productive forces+ It is i&portant to reco%ni=e that reconstruction of the
pro9ect of nature $aster% as the co&prehensive &eanin% of and hidden ai& 4i.e., its telos5
ani&atin% &odern science need not solely e underta"en fro& the standpoint of the
perspective of the technolo%ical achieve&ents of scientific practice. Rather, this pro1ect, one
that necessarily presupposes our%eois life9practices centered on &oney 4and later capital5
accu&ulation, can e read off the internal conceptual structure of science itself.
Be%in (ith earl% &odern science. 0his e%innin% is not aritrary. Early &odern science (as
the intellectual &o&ent in a political stru%%le for societal he%e&ony. Its proponents effected a
confrontation (ith the hitherto rei%nin% cultural for& of nature theory, &edieval 4*ristotelian5
natural philosophy.
Rnfoldin% in a political stru%%le a%ainst the old order, the earers of early &odern, scientific
self9consciousness conducted this stru%%le (ith the &ethods and concepts that for&ed "ey
contents of a ne( theory of nature. Characteristically, clai&s (ere &ade that its activity
produced, first, a syste&atic ody of "no(led%e ased upon a description of reality as natural,
the contents of (hich are to e pulic and co&&unicale thou%h al(ays technically so, and
hence trans&ittale and codifileE second, a syste&atic ody of "no(led%e (hich is
theoretical, i.e., not &erely a co&pilation of rules or precepts, ut derivin% its prescriptions
fro& %eneral principles ased upon a totality of verifiale factsE and, third, a ody of
"no(led%e (hich does not rely on authority, that is, de&ands rational e'planation rooted in
results that can e chec"ed and confir&ed y &eans of practical proof< We note that the first
t(o points characteri=e the self9understandin% of science at its ori%ins, and not as it appears
on the asis of the &ost i&portant tradition e&er%in% fro& its i&&anent historical
develop&ent, a'io&atically (ith hypotheses that are deduced 4not %enerated y inductive
%enerali=ation5 and verified y ,facts/ that are e'peri&entally constructed, (hile the third point,
concernin% proof, does not refer us ac" to a for& of practice, not to free creative activity as
(e understand it, ut controlled e'peri&ent. Peripatetic accounts e'plained natural
occurrences 1ust as (ell as ?alileoIs, (hile ?alileo en%a%ed these %entle&en in e'peri&ents
ai&ed at validation only (hen it suited hi&< 0his &uch said, a descriptive, pulic and
trans&ittale, and theoretical and rational science, sharply counterposed to, (as a hu%e
advance over speculative, esoteric and divinely inspired, do%&atic and reli%iously %rounded
Peripatetic natural philosophy and Scholastically ased Church social doctrine. ?alileo,
Bacon, and others as theorists of early &odern science pursued theoretical activity (hose
o1ective (as to disclose the intelli%ile structure of reality itself... call it ,truth/... 0hese early
scientists (ere )uarrelso&e, en%a%ed in an on%oin% itter dispute (ith &edieval, natural
philosophy restin% on Church do%&a. So&eti&es hidden, so&eti&es e'plicit in scientific
accounts, al(ays 4or nearly so5 in opposition to *ristotelian physics in the era of the decline of
Castile 4that of the rise in En%land of a Puritan our%eoisie5, (as a vie( of the (orld, at once
pro1ected and operative in scientific thin"in%, that oli)uely articulated the our%eois vie( of
&an, co&&unity, and nature. Since the stru%%le et(een these ,t(o chief (orld syste&s/ (as
carried out discursively and co&petitively in this search for ,truth,/ social contents and the
latent precate%orial telos shapin% and or%ani=in% scientific theory could not surface.
*ccordin%ly, early scientific theorists did not see" to rip aside the veil over and reveal the
internal relation of the (orld vision e&edded in the old natural philosophy and the
or%ani=ation of European and 6editerranean social for&ations 4na&ely, the for&al ho&olo%y
of a closed, hierarchically ordered, unchan%in% cos&os and the divinely ordained, stale and
eternally %iven (orld of lord, cleric, and peasant5E nor, to e sure, did they su%%est that each
&i%ht find the i&a%e of itself in the other, and that to the e'tent the for&er (as proclai&ed
per&anent, and unchan%in%, it effectively constituted an ideational veil thro(n over and
le%iti&i=in% e'ploitative and oppressive social relations.
;unctionin% for the &ost part preco%nitively, there is ,in/ consciousness 4in the road sense5
often a tacit sense of contradiction. Really it is 1ust uneasiness. $ere, early &odern scientific
thin"ers did not e'pose this connection et(een the old natural philosophy and the old order
ecause they in their (hole ein%s (ere &oili=ed a%ainst a relativi=ation of their o(n
perspectives, for such a char%e and accusation (ould have i&&ediately co&pelled )uite
another reco%nition+ *&on% these &en, &ost of (ho& (ere theoretically penetratin% and
intellectually honest, it (ould have forced into consciousness intuitive reali=ation that the (orld
understood as an open, unounded, and internally unstructured universe 4(hose underlyin%
reality (as constituted y perceptually inaccessile, internally unrelated, and indivisile
particles, ato$s5 had the sa&e for&al shape as our%eois society in the process of for&ation
4no &atter ho( va%ue and ill9defined this insi%ht5E that is, it reproduced theoretically the
structure of a (orld of isolated, privati=ed and e%oistic individuals confrontin% the du&
&assive presence of an econo&y 4and (ith it society5 co&in% to e or%ani=ed around
e'chan%e, (here social relations (ere felt and lived very &uch on the order of a &ellu$
o$niu$ in o$nes. 0hat reali=ation... the social 4if not yet historical5 relativity of such an
insi%ht... (ould have contradicted... this contradiction e'press and fully conscious... the
principle of truth in the na&e of (hich stru%%le a%ainst Peripatetic physics and Church do%&a
(as underta"en. 40his principle of ahistorical truth and the lindness to preco%nitive
&otivatin% telos (ere and re&ain interloc"ed. 0a"en to%ether, they secure the i&possiility of
thin"in% science at its ori%ins as a social class pro1ect. 0his thin"in% is as po(erfully operative
today as it (as four centuries a%o5<
6echanics is the study on (hich science at its ori%ins (as ased. It is an in)uiry concerned
(ith odies in &otion, one that considered these odies solely in their )uantifiale,
&easurale aspect. In itself this (as revolutionary, and, to e sure, such as study also had,
and still does have, clear advanta%es over Peripatetic natural philosophy. 0hose enefits,
thou%h, only accrue fro& the utilitarian9technical perspective of nature &astery. 1therise
$echanics is $eaningless.
?alilean &echanics 4si&ilarly 3e(ton.s, as (ell as EinsteinIs relativity theori=ations, and
BohrIs and $eisener%Is )uantu& theory5 starts fro& the astraction of sensuous,
perceptually %iven nature+ *l(ays understood fro& its instances, nature is re%arded strictly in
its for&al odily aspect, ta"en to e an a%%re%ate totality of odies in &otion. $ence it is a
priori )uantifiale. 0his is crucial+ *lready restin% on the astraction fro& sensuous nature, the
&odern science of nature does not treat of nature as lived and e'perienced 4the apperceived
totality of unitarily e'perienced perceptual, i.e., tan%ile, visile, audile, etc., pheno&ena5
(hich al(ays presents itself an undivided (hole, a unity of )ualitative and )uantitative,
e&otive, valuative and aesthetic characteristics< 0oday, the unrivaled he%e&ony of science
as a cultural for& shapin% the co&&on sense cate%ories of everyday lan%ua%e
not(ithstandin%, e.%., the lin%uistically e&odied assu&ption that natural odies are ,physical/
odies, is the outco&e of a len%thy historical develop&ent that actually e%an to ta"e hold as
real do&ination in production e%an to hold s(ay in society< ?uided y the ai& of
do&ination 4a co&prehensive telos that &ethodolo%ically %overns all a'io&atically %rounded
deduction, e'peri&ent, its assess&ent, etc.5, the scientist proceeds on the asis of this initial
astraction+ She selects data 4pheno&ena5 (ith a vie( to possile connections that &ay hold
et(een certain )uantitative properties of pheno&ena. 0here follo(s a series of for&ali=in%
and &athe&ati=in% operations. 0hese additional astractions are products of &ethodolo%ically
canali=ed su&9ective capacities of the scientist 4her su1ectivity5. *s a necessary conse)uence
sensuous nature re%arded )uantitatively is further reduced to a series of for&ulae that
e'press the Kla(ful re%ularityK of natural pheno&ena, a re%ularity constituted for the purposes
of prediction. 0his &ethodolo%ical orientation decides (hat (ill and (hat (ill not pass as
scientific "no(led%e<
Episte&olo%ically, (e are supposed to elieve that scientific thin"in% has arrived at odies in
&otion. In point of fact, it has constituted 4i.e., constructed5 the& as such+ It ,proceeds/ (ith
e'peri&ental oservation and description &ut on the &asis of, i+e+, starting fro$, a
$etaph%sical pro9ection of the orld as a $athe$ati/a&le asse$&lage of &odies in $otion
i&portant deter&inants of (hich are a distinction et(een pri&ary and secondary )ualities,
)uantity and )uality, and, &ore radically, reality and illusion. In point of fact, oservation and
description of sensuous nature itself is entirely irrelevant+ 0his construction, call it odies in
&otion or K&atter,K is product of oth theoretically &ediated laoratory conditions, of
e'peri&ents (hose o1ects e'ist no(here in nature, and of scientific i&a%inin%s 4so9called,
these ,thou%ht e'peri&ents/ have een crucial for science fro& ?alileo do(n to Einstein and
$eisener%5<
0a"en to%ether, these astractions therey (arrant the asurd assertion of pseudo9o1ectivity,
that %od9li"e or effectively o&nipresent and perspectiveless total ,vie(/ of a scientific o1ect.
0hey are, thou%h, theoretically urdened constructions startin% fro& an ontolo%ical pro1ection.
0hat is, prior to all $ethodologicall% grounded, alle%edly strict oservation and ri%orous
description is, (e reiterate, the anticipation and pro9ection of a funda$entall% $athe$atical
orld-in-itself, that asse$&lage of &odies in $otion calcula&le in advance hich, having
alread% ontologicall% eighted pri$ar% against secondar% qualities, ta!es this orld to &e the
reall% real+ 0he (orld of nature 4includin% &an as natural5 that is anticipated is thus one of
ho&o%eni=ed odies, events and processes, (hich lac" )ualitative &eanin% and
deter&ination. 3ature, a calculale coherence of forces, no( appears as an a%%re%ate totality
of o1ects ready to e de9for&ed, de9structured and de9or%ani=ed. ,t is onl% ithin the
fra$eor! constituted &% this pro9ection 0anticipation5 that an event in nature can occur as
such, i+e+, &eco$e visi&le as an event, process or relation+
0he distinctions of pri&ary and secondary )ualities, etc., and, &ore funda&entally, the
anticipatory ontolo%ical (ei%hin% of the for&er a%ainst the latter ta"en to%ether constitute the
scientific pro1ection of the (orld of nature as o1ect9li"e< It is &erely the other, theoretical or
ideal side of the reality of societies of capital... >1ect9li"eness is i&&ediately apprehended
and then thou%ht, in reductionist and crude &aterialist ter&s at least since :escartes, as
essentially and si&ply e'tension, as contentless, infinitely &alleale K&atterK susistin% in
ho&o%eneous space, devoid of any internal lo%ic, life or su1ectivity.
...-et scientific concepts of the structure and or%ani=ation of daily life re&ain astractions, an
ideolo%ical veil cast over us, &ystifyin% our activity as productive su1ects and the &anner in
(hich sensuous nature enters into that life...
But K&atterK is not KrealK in the ontolo%ically pri&ary sense assu&ed y the &odern science of
nature or, for that &atter, y all sciences 4iolo%ical, social, etc.5 that, incorporatin% its
&ethods or operatin% on the asis of its naYve episte&olo%ical assu&ptions 4or oth5, &odel
the&selves on itE rather, ,&atter/ is the outco&e and a product of scientific analysis and
construction. *ll &odern physical theory is analysis, conceptually deco&poses its o1ect,
natural odies. *nalysis is constituted in the reflection on laoratory ased, e'peri&ental
conditions (hich do not e'ist in nature... 6y favorite e'a&ple here is actually not done in
physics 4for ovious reasons5, ut is the testin% of the physiolo%ical refle'es of decererate
cats. -ou fuc"in% "ill, %ratuitously &urder, a cat for your e'peri&ent. 4*ctually it is done for you
efore it ever %ets to your laoratory.5 Wonderful. * cat (ithout a rain is an aortion, (hat
used to e called a &onster of nature. It is not orn alive, is not a pet, does not roa& the
streets or run feral, i.e., it does not e'ist in nature, ut only in a laoratory... This is the &asis
on hich understanding is arrived at and achieved< in our e'a&ple of the decererate cat, a
refle' physiolo%y that asserts a one9to9one correspondence et(een events of the ,e'ternal/
(orld and various ,places in/ the ani&al.s nervous syste& for&s that understandin%< >nce
achieved, a (hole can e reconstructed, this o1ect can e reconstituted fro& the ele&ental,
itself a construct, on up. 0a"e up a%ain the e'a&ple descried in the Introduction, aove+
Scientific understandin% of a roc" one &i%ht (ish to )uarry is reached only (hen it is
conceptually dissolved into its che&ical co&ponents, the&selves understood in ter&s of their
ato&ic structures and their interactions. >nly then can (e say (e have understood (hat this
roc" is, an ore consistin% in so &uch &a%nesiu&, alu&inu&, iron, etc., co&ponents (hich
the&selves have such and such ato&ic structures and are related 4onded5 in such and such
(ays, all of (hich allo(s us to ,understand/ the o1ect 4roc"5, to %rasp it in ter&s of a ra(
&aterial 4iron ore5 to e used in co&&odity production 4steel5. 0hus, scientific understandin%
is al(ays attained a&stractl%, in the $ove$ent fro$ a hole to the $ost ele$ental, itself a
conceptual construct. 1nl% then are these ele&ental constructs a%%re%ated, a (hole
reconstructed. 0hat (hole is an astract totality, a conceptual (hole that is in a practical
sense entirely ho&olo%ous (ith its ele&entary, infinitely &alleale &aterial co&ponents+
Preco%nitively, this understandin% penetrates a(areness at all levels of society per&ittin% the
o1ects science has constructed to function as ideal, &anipulale &o&ents of our%eois
practices in accu&ulation and all the attendant activities, social relations and institutions those
practices %enerate and inte%rate.
Constructed y scientists, the la(s of natural pheno&ena, and hu&anly natural events and
relations in society and history, per&it the %eneration of predictions. *nd, it the prediction itself
that re)uires e'tra9theoretical confir&ation &eanin% validation eyond science, and that
therey secures scientific corrooration. -es, if science is to e successful in its predictions, it
&ust conceptually capture ideali=ed, aleit fetishi/ed aspects of reality itself 4i.e., )uantifiale
thin%ly aspects5. 0his &uch said, the usually road reco%nition and confir&ation that science
as theory has achieved does not refer us ac" to its theoretical acco&plish&ents, or to its
a'io&s, hypotheses and ,la(s/ of pheno&ena, ut to e'peri&ental verification in scientific
activity and, aove all, to practical verification in the order of society+ ;or it is in daily societal
life that ,proof/ has eco&e efficacious. It is ,pulic opinion/ and in the &edia spectacle 4and
not in scientific 1ournals and pulications5 that a socially %enerali=ed seein%, approval, and
acclai& for the technolo%ical achieve&ents e'hiited in nature do&ination %uarantees for
science its reputation, its intellectual he%e&ony and its fundin% and, thus, it is here that the
theory is sustantiated. 0here is solid reason for this, and that reason is constituted in the
order of society+ 0he confir&ation of those la(s de&onstrates they are also social
prescriptions for the re-structuring of o&9ect-li!e $atter in the production of a orld of
co$$odities. If the relation of capital to nature is to e'ist at all, if the socio9historical (orld (e
call capitalis& as it has e'isted since the inau%uration of real do&ination is to persist in ein%,
then construction of that (orld re)uires the constitution of such la(s+ ,n the societal
corro&oration of prediction science and capital are reunified, the categorial telos of scientific
activit% 0prediction5 re9oins the original class 0&ourgeois5, precategorial, and hidden telos of
the do$ination of nature?
Ideationally constructed in ri%orous pursuit of scientific &ethod, nature qua &athe&ati=ed
(orld is an anticipatory pro1ection of a socio9historical life(orld created and shaped in and
throu%h penetration of the value for& into all institutions, relations and processes of society
and earthly nature and their conse)uent suordination to the capitalist production of
co&&odities for e'chan%e. 0he co%nitive construct (e call ,&atter,/ its sense and si%nificance
apprehended as contentless odies susistin% in ho&o%eneous space, is the theoretical
state&ent of the &eanin% and ein% of ,ra( &aterial/ as it appears in co&&odity production,
infinitely &alleale natural o1ects ripped fro& deconte'tuali=ed surroundin% nature.
Science pro1ects a nature that has lost its )ualitative di&ensionality and in this sense is a
surveyale and &anipulale o1ect that lac"s )ualitative deter&ination 4(hether sensuous,
aesthetic, productive, or other(ise5+ 3ature ,e'ists/ as an astraction, as an a priori
)uantifiale series of points deter&ined e'haustively y positions %iven (ith o1ective ti&e
and e'tended space. 0his astraction further e'ists (ithout purpose, (ithout internal lo%ic
%overnin% its &ove&ent and &o&ents 4the odies so9called5, and (ithout inherent or definin%
characteristics apart fro& those &athe&atically pro1ected< ,n the societall% efficacious
sense, this is the $eaning and significance nature has no acquired< *t the hands of
4capitalIs5 science, nature, appearin% in history at once as its %round and as a product of a
develop&ent inseparale fro& its interaction (ith social develop&ent, has eco&e
aestheticall% uglified $atter, a product of do&ination 4in the sense specified y entire
develop&ent of this (or"5, i.e., nature is (hat science and capital have &ade and re&ade it.
This is nature as $atter, as unprocessed resources &asin for co$$odit% production on a
capitalist &asis+ 3ature as science understands, thou%h, is o1ectively necessary illusion+
Startin% fro& de&ystified daily e'perience, the nature of science can e est co&prehended
as an ideational product &as)ueradin% as real.
0he theoretical anticipation of this e&pirical9utilitarian, i.e., narro(ly technical and
technolo%ical, reduction of nature is &odern science+ ,t is as science that the conceptual
fra$eor! for this reduction is constituted, and out of hich production of a capitalist orld
can &e underta!en, a orld in hich science is at ho$e and ithout hich it ould &e a
stranger ithout a ho$e 0hence, theoreticall% &arren5, i.e., (hich constitutes the societal
presuppositions of scienceIs full develop&ent and (ithout (hich it (ould e undevelopale<
@et us point out that the our%eoisie is the first class in history for (hich nature has this sense,
for (hich its relation to social %roups, strata, or classes it he%e&oni=es is i&&ediately and
directly &ediated y nature do&ination, for (ho& the theori=ation of this relation is not
,&ytholo%ical/ or reli%ious, ut ,rational/ in the specifically capitalist sense of econo&ically
rational, and for (ho& this theori=ation itself has eco&e an issue 4as in the ,prole&/ of
cli&ate chan%e5...
$o(, then, do (e situate our%eois science (ith a vie( to the despoliation of earthy nature,
species e'tinction and cli&ate chan%e2
$o&o%eni=ation of hu&anly natural landscapes, destruction of iodiversity and cli&ate
chan%e each and all have their %roundin% in the practical reduction of nature to ra( &aterials
for capitalist production< 0he ense&le of activities and processes in and throu%h (hich this
reduction is carried out is &odern technolo%y< 0he reduction is %iven (ith the ai& that
&otivated the conceptual production of science, for this ai& 4telos5 9 its co&prehensive
&eanin% 4nature do&ination5, can only e %rasped in ter&s of the social tas"s of the
our%eois in history 4i.e., in ter&s of the endless e'pansion of productivity5. *s conceptual
&ediation, science is this reduction, for, as indicated, it is as science that the conceptual
fra&e(or" for this reduction is produced. 0he thorou%h%oin% ho&olo%y of the internal
conceptual structure of science and the structure of the hu&ani=ed nature in its ui)uitous,
specifically capitalist for& or%ani=ed y the la( of value no( eco&es visile+
;or science, all of earthly ein% 4aiotic nature, a %ood deal of acterial life, plant and ani&al
life and hu&ans too as natural or%anis&s5 is &ere ,&atter,/ or%ani=ed and re9or%ani=ed,
e'istin% only as e'tension, as contentless, infinitely &alleale ra( &aterial in ho&o%enous
space, devoid of any internal lo%ic, as vital nature is e)ually devoid of life, as hu&ans are
devoid of su1ectivity.
This is the theoretical anticipation of ra( &aterial in the capitalist sense, in (hich products
appear as a su& of de9structured, de9or%ani=ed o1ects to e shaped, refined and passed on
in future co&&odity production. So that the nature pro1ected y science is si$ultaneousl%
and necessaril% a (orld that is fully con%ruent and structurally ho&olo%ous (ith the structure
of value characteri=ed y the sa&e )ualitatively indeter&inate and undistin%uished unifor&ity,
a practical product of the reduction of concrete laor that, o1ectified and &ateriali=ed, is
co&pletely ho&o%eni=ed, is in other (ords a %enerali=ed con%ealed ,sustance/ &easurale
only in ter&s of units of )uantitative ti&e. 0he pro1ection of nature as funda&entally
&athe&atical (orld9in9itself, that is, an asse&la%e of odies in &otion calculale in advance
is, thusly, fully con%ruent and ho&olo%ous in the structural sense (ith the sensile nature as it
has een no( een reconstructed throu%h capitalist activity.
$o(, then, do (e situate our%eois science (ith a vie( to the despoliation of earthy nature,
species e'tinction and cli&ate chan%e2
Science is the theori/ation operative in the ense$&le of capitalist Npractices> reconstructing
nature as ell as in accu$ulation, and it is these practices, actuall% processes, ith their
operative theori/ation that is generating ecological collapse+ Science in this sense is an
anticipator% pro9ection of a socio-historical orld produced through the su&9ugation of societ%
and surrounding nature to the production of co$$odities on the &asis of the a&straction of
concrete la&or in the aged or! of capitalist la&or processes+
TechnI, ,
Capitalis$ and Technolog%
In the &illennia old history of hu&anity, the )uestion of technolo%y had never een, and could
not in principle e, posed efore the %enesis of capitalis&, in particular, efore the
develop&ent of capital on its o(n foundations and the recreation of hu&an creativity in (or"
as, first capacity to laor 4laor9po(er5, then astract laor. The actual historical condition of
the ver% possi&ilit% of this reduction depends upon the separation out of an =econo$%= fro$
the other as %et undifferentiated spheres of social life 4and their constitution as separate
spheres each (ith distinctive nor&s %overnin% ehavior and e'pectations5,
1
and its for$ation
as an autono$ous regulator of the totalit% of that life,
2
i+e+, upon the constitution of a s%ste$ of
social relations founded upon and continuousl% reproducing a&stract la&or, i+e+, this reduction
has, dialecticall%, as its condition the si$ultaneous constitution of capitalist societ%+ ;or
capitalis& under conditions of totali=in% do&ination, technolo%y and its develop&ent is of the
essence of the ,productive forces of hu&anity./ 0he assu&ption that technolo%y 4or, for that
&atter, productive forces, i.e., o1ectified and &ateriali=ed hu&an activity in the for& of
instru&ents deployed in &aterially rene(in% social life, in production5 is at all ti&es in all
places an o1ectively separate and distinct feature of hu&an society in its relation to
surroundin% nature is &ista"en, &ecause it retrospectively pro1ects this recent historical
develop&ent, the for&ation of distinct spheres of activity 4pri&arily the econo&y, ut fa&ily,
&ilitary, or%ani=ed reli%ion, for&al education, etc.5, the for&ation of separate spheres of daily
1
*n ,econo&y/ for&ed in and throu%h the constitution of capitalIs for&al do&ination over laor in production,
recounted in outline in the ;irst Interlude, aove.
2
:iscussed aove under the headin%s of auto&ati=ation and autono&i=ation in the Second Interlude, ,Real
:o&ination and *utono&i=ation of Capital./
life 4(ith standards specific to each %overnin% ehavior and activity5 out of institutionally
undifferentiated, societally precapitalist (holes (hich (ere characteri=ed y functionall%
distinct activities that &ay have corresponded to stratification (ithin a division of laorE and
&ecause, even &ore recently, the coal9oil9auto productive co&ple' on (hich current thin"in%
aout the transfor&ative ,essence/ of ,&an/ in relation to nature appears to e ased is
historically specific, renderin% the clai& that technolo%y is a separate and distinct ense&le of
procedures and practices in hu&an society an illicit %enerali=ation or, if you prefer, an
ontolo%i=ation.
0hus, prior to the creation of institutional distinct spheres of society e%innin% (ith an
,econo&y,/ technolo%y as such had no separate e'istence. It is the syste&s driven
co&pulsion to accu&ulate< %enerated y the activity of individual capitalists pursuin% their
o(n particular interests<
1
that necessarily leads to rationali=ation of activity devolvin% on
institutionally separate spheres in society. Within this develop&ent, technolo%ies are created
throu%h the conscious pursuit of for&ali=ed and codified &eans, procedures and processes
that enhance capital accu&ulation, even if that enhance&ent is out(ardly, ostensily and
inseparaly ai&ed at, e.%., sustainin% &edically disaled or diseased populations, space
e'ploration, i&prove&ent of athletic perfor&ance, etc. Rnder conditions of the real do&ination
of capital over laor, this pursuit is done scientifically, and today scientific activity is increasin%
reduced to producin% novel and refinin% e'istin% technolo%ies of capital.
Every estalished and distinctive undivided co&&unity and social for&ation in history has its
o(n ense&le of technics< even if has there has never een a social consciousness of a
distinct technolo%ical sphere, and for %ood reason ecause none e'isted, i.e., respective
technical ense&les (ere ound up (ith, intert(ined (ith and inseparale fro& an array of
activities, productive, co%nitive and other(ise all of (hich &ay een understood reli%iously,
&ytholo%ically, politically in ter&s of the po(er of a divine "in%, etc< *ccordin%ly, it is only
astractly, and solely fro& a &odern, capitalist perspective that (e can spea" aout< in the
(hole era of divided societies stretchin% fro& the ori%ins of a%riculture, and the appearance of
social stratification cul&inatin% in the for&ation of the state do(n to the present< various
historical for&s of technics as socially do&inant, instru&entally practical for&s of our relation
to nature that si&ultaneously e'pressed the &astery of a he%e&onic social %roup, stratu& or
class in society. ;ro& this perspective all technical ense&les e'press social i&peratives<
&ore forcefully, they e&ody and con%eal social relations ani&ated y a social %roup, stratu&
or class teleolo%y, a teleolo%y actually orne y and infor&in% individuals 4the&selves
relationally deter&ined as ele&ents of that social %roup, etc.5 (hose daily activities reproduce
the technical ense&le as such< Respectively ascertained, ,technolo%y/ is neither ,neutral/
nor ,purely instru&ental/ lac"in% in social content+
2
0his holds even &ore forcily for
conte&porary technolo%y, i.e., technolo%ies of capital and, ta"en to%ether in their essential
unity, capitalist technolo%y.
So ho( do (e distin%uish capitalist technolo%y fro& all for&s of pre9&odern technics2
0he latter (ere y and lar%e or%anically %rounded, either as a pro1ection or e'tension of
hu&an or%ans 4hand, ar&, le%5 or on the &odel of the &otion of such an or%an 4or even
ani&al &otion5. ;or e'a&ple, a sa( is ori%inally &odeled on a ro( of teeth, a ha&&er on the
fist and a chisel on a fin%ernail. Even (here so&ethin% novel, an occasional techni)ue or
instru&ent that (as non9or%anic, appeared, the ense&le of technics (as heavily (ei%hted to
the or%anic side. 0hus, the technolo%y itself (as or%anic. With &odern technolo%y, ho(ever,
this chan%es. While instru&ents that are or%anically %rounded continue to e utili=ed and to
appear in the epoch of our%eois civili=ation, the tendency especially (ith re%ard to &achine
1
See the Second Interlude, ,Real :o&ination, II+ Capital Si&ply as Capital,/ aove.
2
Bolshevis$ and Stalinis$ 0Hrgeschichte5, ;irst Study, Part I!, sections !, !I, !II, !III.
technolo%y is for the invention and production of instru&ents and technics that are non9
or%anic or Kartificial.K ;or e'a&ple, a se(in% &achine neither rese&les 4that is, is not
&odeled on5 a sea&stress (ho se(s y hand, nor does it operate in the &anner that she
doesE a %asoline9po(ered auto&oile has no analo%ue in the hu&an ody or the natural
(orld. 0his tendency to(ard Kde9organ9i=ationK &a"es the peculiar character of &odern
technolo%y possile,
1
and this de9or%ani=ation is a develop&ent s)uarely ased upon
historically ne( orders of conceptual astraction that have een, and continue to e, achieved
in scientific efforts 4e%innin% fro& physical theory lin"ed to &athe&atics5 to penetrate ever
deeper the ,inner essence/ of nature.
0he &odern science of nature is the co%nitive, and indivisily and indissoluly &odern
technolo%y the practical9instru&ental historically specific, for& of our relation to nature. *t its
ori%ins, the for&er is a "no(led%e specific to the our%eoisie as a historical class. *t its
&eridian an institutionally separate technolo%y is the crucial, decisive &eans on the asis of
(hich capitalis& develops and (hich in social practice of daily life i&&ediately and directly
connects the for&er, science, to capital.
0he technolo%ical e&odi&ent of social i&peratives, and the i&&anent relation of science
and technolo%y 4techno9science5 to capital, indicate &odern capitalist technolo%y possesses
only a sha$ independence. -et the appearance of autono&ous technolo%y is an o1ectively
necessary illusion, for the develop&ent of autono$ous technolo%y so9called is at the
&echanical, dead heart of the process of capital.s autono$i/ation and (ith it the
transfor&ation of the our%eoisie, (hich, re%ardless of eliefs and convictions, has co&e to
ehave in all si%nificant social events and historical develop&ents as a collection of capitals
that are personifications of econo&ic cate%ories, &eanin% that it 4i.e., the our%eoisie as a
class actin% in history5 is deco&posin%, si%nifyin% that if technolo%y is actually out of control it
is only ecause the entire syste& of social relations (e call capitalis&, its ,su1ect/ capital, is
truly runnin% a&uc", &ost visily in the acceleration of its essential feature vis9P9vis nature,
the reduction of the latter to ra( &aterial for production of a (orld of co&&odities, a ,runnin%
a&uc"/ that is here and no( devolvin% into a cli&ate chan%e catastrophe<
-et the ro&antic criti)ue of technolo%y fails to %rasp this+ 0echnolo%y is neither autono&ous
nor out of controlE or, it is oth precisely to the e'tent that capital accu&ulation is an anti9
hu&an process (ithout apparent a%ency, as lon% as conditions of capitalist production hold
s(ay, as lon% as the real su1ect of society re&ains capital. Rnli"e $odern &achine
technolo%y 4or conte&porary electronic and iotechnolo%y5 that unfolds on the asis of the
society of capital, no technolo%y need necessarily e instru&entalist and one9di&ensional,
that is, centered strictly on econo&ically ,rational/ conditions for the &aterial9productive
reproduction of society. 6oreover, unli"e the capitalist (orld in (hich &odern &achine
technolo%y has developed, the social practice of daily life in societies of the precapitalist past
did not %ive rise to a specific, separate and alle%edly autono&ous sphere of technolo%y and
its achieve&ents. Precapitalist cultures ta"en to%ether de&onstrate the reality of concrete
technolo%ies vis9P9vis nature, cultures in (hich sensuous nature is inhaited, in (hich nature
yields itself up to societyIs needs (ithout the violence inherent in &odern, capital.s,
technolo%y. ,f a ne, free societ% 0co$$unis$5 is possi&le, then necessaril% it ill find
generali/ed, cognitivel% non-scientific and practical expressions in a vision of the orld that
full% integrates N$an> and nature and a novel technical ense$&le that is li!eise entirel%
integrated into dail% life+
$ere, (e oppose ourselves to capital.s pro1ect+ Instead of (or" and hu&an creativity reduced
to a &echanically asse&led, socially co&ined laor po(er, endless develop&ent of
productive forces entailin% a per&anent ar&y of occupation 4technolo%ies of capital5 (here
1
Ernst Bloch, The 4rinciple of Hope, ,,+ Ca&rid%e 46*5, 17FO 417C75+ OO19OO2.
nature is the ene&y, a technocratic, totalitarian dystopia, (e counterpose the possiility of
constitution of the 8esa$tar&eiter 4productively connected, sentient hu&an ein%s strivin% to
aolish ourselves as astract laor5 and (ith it destruction of the value for&E eyond the order
of capital, a concrete technolo%y of alliance (ith nature, an ense&le of technics throu%h
(hich (e re9situate ourselves in the heart of nature+ @ivin% in nature, an end to the (ar (ith it,
on this asis insi%ht into its i&&anent intelli%iility and the underta"in% to co9produce sensile
nature (hile &a"in% that ho&e in it. 0his perspective cannot e reached fro& a &ere
pro1ection of e'istin% technolo%y, only fro& a radicall% novel departure in science and
technolog%, a ne( vision of our relation to nature and a concrete technolo%y of alliance ith it
that has the revolutionary overthro(in% of the order of capital as its pre&ise<
1
Toda%, $ediated, driven and enco$passed &% capital 0value5 accu$ulation, specificall%
$odern technolog% is the for$ that our practical relation to nature ta!es, and as such is
deepl% i$plicated in the d%na$ics of nature do$ination that has resulted in Nanthropogenic>
cli$ate change that, reall% and as fact, is actuall% generated and enco$passed &% the
$ove$ent of capital+
TechnI, ,,
Capitalist Technolog% and Technologies of Capital
0he )uestion of technolo%y does not have the sense of this or that techni)ue, industrial
process and those devices, instru&ents and &achinery that e&ody this techni)ue or
industrial process. 4Such are technolo%ies of capital5. Rather, (hat &ust e %rasped is that
(hich is characteristic of those techni)ues and processes ta"en to%ether and as a (hole
4na&ely, capital.s or capitalist technolo%y5, that is, the &anner in (hich they &ediate our
relation to nature and the &eanin% this &ediation and relation has for us. 0echnolo%y is the
ense&le of activities, faricated thin%s 4in particular instru&ents5, productive processes, and
&ethods and procedures e&ployed (ithin those processes in (hich, throu%h (hich and on
the asis of (hich (e as hu&an ein%s for& and ne%otiate our relation to nature, and it is one
of the (ays 4today, the do&inant (ay5 (e co&prehend and e'plain to ourselves our place and
role in the (orld.
6odern technolo%y and the &odern science of nature are historically specific for&s, one
utilitarian9instru&entalist and the other deductively co%nitive (ith e'peri&ental intent, of our
relation to nature. So, (e repeat, if a ne, free societ% 0co$$unis$5 is possi&le, then
necessaril% it ill find practical and intellectual expressions in cognitive activit%, perhaps a ne
science 0perhaps not5, and a novel ense$&le of techniques, that are no longer separate,
speciali/ed !noledges and practices &ut are full%, consciousl% and freel% integrated into dail%
life+
0he deepest, underlyin% unity of &odern science of nature and 4see&in%ly5 autono&ous
technolo%y is that unity for&ed at the level of the asic structure of the civili=ation that oth
are central to, na&ely, the lo%ic of capital accu&ulation.
In this re%ard, t(o points are %er&ane. ;irst, in see"in% to uncover and e'plicate the relation
of physical science to &odern technolo%y, (e are not concerned (ith this or that techni)ue
e&edded in this or that production processE rather, (e are concerned (ith the
1
It is not incu&ent on us to elaorate the &ethod, structure, or%ani=ation and contents of any ne( science, to%ether
(ith (hat is characteristic of those techni)ues and processes 4not to &ention their construction and sensuous
confi%uration5 that as a (hole &ediate our relation to nature and that for& a ne( technical ense&le. Such
elaoration (ill occur in and throu%h a historical practice that revolutionarily transcends capital or not at all. We have,
ho(ever, atte&pted to e'hiit the contours of oth< a vision that ai&s at co&prehendin% potentialities fro=en in
nature that, if released, (ould enhance hu&an freedo& ine'tricaly ound to a concrete technolo%y of alliance (ith
nature that see"s to co9produce, ,re&a"e,/ earthly nature ith nature and not against it+ See Co$$unis$+ the section
entitled ,Co&&unis& and 3ature 4Earthly 3ature5,/ appearin% in 1rigins and 2ndings+
co&prehensive &eanin% and si%nificance of this technolo%y (ith a vie( to the role it plays in
the entire spectru& of social relations that are at the heart of a specific hu&an, historical9
cultural for& of life. Second, at the ris" of ein% unduly repetitive it is necessary to stress that
ever% culture in the sense of this deter&ination has its characteristic ense&le of technics, its
technolo%y+ 0hus, unli"e instru&ental9utilitarian &echanical, di%ital or io%enetic technolo%y
all of (hich have unfolded on the asis of societies of capital, no past technolo%y in the history
of hu&anity (as detached fro& the practico9&oral structure of daily co&&unity life, none
ai&ed at au%&entation of estran%ed, o1ectified and reified realities, none incarnated a
&eans9ends econo&ic rationality, etc. Co&&unities and societies of the precapitalist past did
not "no( a separate, autono&ous sphere of technolo%yE a free society (ill not either...
0echnolo%y, ecause it &ediates our relation to nature, does not e'ist in relation to itself 4or
solely to hu&ans5 ut itself is a relation to nature. 6odern technolo%y challenges nature.
Challen%in% nature is a settin% upon an o1ect 4nature5+ 0his is a elli%erency that
presupposes and re)uires a specific type of hu&anity and society 4i.e., a%%ressive,
co&petitive e%oistic individuality that arises out of daily life in societies of capital across the
entire eras of real and totali=in% do&ination5E and, it is a elli%erency that not &erely
transfor&s nature, ut plies natural o1ects open, reconstitutes the& throu%h industrial
processes, la%s aste to all Nexternalities> involved in this anti-hu$an process of unhu$anl%
anti-natural construction, and reduces said natural o&9ects to co$ponent for$s in hich the%
reappear as ra $aterials: Surrounding nature in its hu$anl% shaped naturalness disappears
as such, and reappears as ra $aterial or N$atter,> that is, it is transfor&ed and prepared to
function as ele&ents to e fashioned in, as co&ponents of, co&&odity production in the (orld
of capital. In settin% upon nature, &odern technolo%y de&ands it provide the Kener%yK that is
concealed (ithin it, and that this ener%y e unloc"ed, e'tracted, transfor&ed, stored up and
eventually distriuted 4i.e., &ar"eted5+ In reappearin% as K&atter,K nature is at once Kener%y,K
literally, oil, electricity, or nuclear po(er that functions as a decisive co&&odity in capital.s
reproduction.
1
This hole process constitutes a transfor$ation, it is not a practice, in hich ha&itat,
ecological niches and entire ecos%ste$s are destro%ed, and species are extinguished:
4roduct of its $ove$ent, the challenging and setting upon nature that is capital.s technolog%
is an o&9ectivel% alien, unhu$anl% anti-natural societal process that rests fro$ nature its
otherness, o&literating, its o&9ective su&stance 4i.e., its autono&y, self9orderin% and self9
&ediatin% cohesion, all, at any rate, denied to it y science5E stated &ore prosaically, capital.s
technolo%y ros earthly nature of, destroyin%, its internal diversity, in particular its iolo%ical
diversity, it ho$ogeni/es distinctive landscapes and creates in their place a%ricultural, forestry
and uran 4&etropolitan5 &onocultures, transfor&in% natural settin%s and once hu&anly
for&ed landscapes and prepares (hat can e e'tracted fro& the& as &atter or stuff for
production in the (orld of capital. 4>il, coal and lu&er are such co&ponents, ra( &aterials.
0he polluted seas, stripped &ined Earth and rava%ed forests are all ,e'ternalities/< 0he &ost
asic co&ponent is ener%y as such. 0hat e'alted pinnacle of the ne( physics in its relativist
1
0his is authentic insi%ht and (e lar%ely o(e to $eide%%erIs ,0he Suestion Concernin% 0echnolo%y/ 417CC5 in 6artin
$eide%%er, The Ouestion Concerning Technolog% and 1ther 2ssa%s, edited and translated y Willia& @ovitt. 3e(
-or", 17CC+ 1C917. $eide%%erIs criti)ue is not entirely ro&antic, for he notes that all (or" ,today is co&&anded y
profit9&a"in%/ 4,Iid,/ 1F5... crude ut correct.
0here is too &uch %enuine insi%ht in $eide%%er to si&ply i%nore hi& 4or, dis&issin% hi&, to ar%ue as one
ac)uaintance has, ,(hat is valid in 3iet=sche and $eide%%er is in 6ar', and (hat is not in 6ar' is not valid/5. Instead,
(hat is %enuine and valuale in $eide%%er &ust e assi&ilated and in the co&prehensive sense rationally
reconstructed+ $ere, (hat is at issue in the so9called )uestion of technolo%y is a &atter of e'tractin% those insi%hts
and syste&atically relatin% the& to their conte't and those historical practices that %enerate4d5 it 4technolo%y5, relatin%
it to the value9for& and capitalist production in its historical specificity.
for&ulation, the e)uation, en&c
2
, perfectly su&&aries this (hole &ove&ent, the essential
feature of the relation descried here.5 Every(here nature, natural o1ects and ein%s, no(
ripped open, reduced and so transfor&ed, are co&&anded to e ready or i&&ediately to
hand. 0hey are co&&anded and arran%ed, that is, produced and ordered, to stand y, to e
&erely present for further, future production and orderin%, for the sa"e of achievin% a
&a'i&u& yield (ith a &ini&al e'penditure+ 0he &eanin%, si%nificance and real ein% of
nature is, to one side, (antonly destroyed residue, ,e'ternalities,/ to the other, K&atterK that is
&erely ready to hand or inventoried as unrefined &aterial resources for co&&odity
production. Pheno&enally spea"in%, the entire societal practice is deter&ined y the pursuit of
profitaility+ 0he hu&an9social lo%ic that essentially %overns &odern technolo%y, its i&port,
function and develop&ent, is the lo%ic of capital accu&ulation<
So the ro&antic criti)ue of technolo%y not only fails to %rasp that technolo%y is neither
autono&ous nor out of control 4or is so lon% as that de&on, an anti9hu&an process (ithout
apparent a%ency, capital, holds s(ay5, it also fails &iseraly to understand that curtailin% the
aneful hu&an inputs producin% cli&ate (ar&in% is not a )uestion of less technolo%y or, for
that &atter, of &ore technolo%y. Every hu&an society in history has ne%otiated its relation to
nature of (hich it is part throu%h an ense&le of technics, a technolo%y, it produces and
&asters. 0he )uestion is ho( practically do (e envision our relation to, or 4in the crude
iolo%istic lan%ua%e of 6ar'5 our ,&etaolis&,/ (ith nature+ It should e clear here that it is
not ,&an/< hu&ans are a part of nature, in nature, are nature, are hu&anly natural< (ho is
so&eho( an ,intruder/ in nature+ 0he intruder, as it (ere, is the su1ect of that anti9hu&an
process (ithout apparent a%ency, capital<
If (e consider physical science and &odern technolo%y (ith a vie( to the &anner in (hich
each KrelatesK to nature, (e note a decisive ho&olo%y. Science pro1ects nature as calculale
asse&la%e of odies in &otion, a pro1ection that per&its prediction and control and i&plies
the possiility of actual do&ination. 6odern technolo%y challen%es nature and sets upon it in
order to open it up, reduce or chan%e it in its sensile for&, and store this distillation or
product. In so doin%, &odern technolo%y, no lon%er en%a%ed in &ere &astery, reali=es the
do&ination i&plicit in physical science< the cru' of this relation is the e'peri&ent, especially
on the vastly e'panded social asis on (hich it is conducted today< In oth cases, sensuous
nature has disappeared. Precapitalist cultures ta"en to%ether de&onstrate the reality of
concrete technolo%ies vis9P9vis nature, cultures in (hich sensuous nature is inhaited, in
(hich nature yields itself up to societyIs needs (ithout the violence inherent in &odern
technolo%y. In this respect, the aolition of capital de&ands a concrete technolo%y of alliance
in (hich (e co9produce its for&s (ith earthly nature+ 0his is the future, or there (ill e no
future...
K6atterK is an astraction. 0he astraction is crucial+ It is of the essence of the process in and
throu%h (hich do&inated nature is su1u%ated 4in and throu%h (hich the aiotic (orld is
despoiled, de%raded and ho&o%eni=ed, in and throu%h (hich &icroiotic life restin% on this
inor%anic foundation, interactin% (ith and transfor&in% it, and for&in% the crucial di&ension of
the iosphere, is under%oin% rapid, severe contraction, and (ith it in and throu%h (hich &ore
developed life for&s, includin% hu&anity itself, are i&poverished, &utilated, and threatened
(ith e'tinction5. 0hus, the astraction itself (e shall desi%nate as at once re%ressive and
repressive+ 0he ho&olo%y too is crucial+ 3ot only are physical science and &odern technolo%y
inseparale 4(ith the ein% of each rooted in the practice of the other5, the ho&olo%y su%%ests
they for& a unitary structure. 4What aove (e called techno9science.5 It reveals the essential
affinity of these t(o cultural for&s (ithin our%eois civili=ation, the distin%uishin% &ar" of
(hich is repressive astraction. 0hat astraction is %rounded in the totality of capitalist (or"9
processes the&selves dialectically foundin% and founded on the our%eois pro1ect of
accu&ulation. 6ediated, driven and enco&passed y capital 4value5 accu&ulation, specifically
&odern technolo%y is the for& that our practical relation to nature ta"es, and as such is the
dyna&ic throu%h (hich the nature do&ination that has created capitalistically %enerated
cli&ate chan%e unfolds and develops.
The Solution is Not 7cceleration and ,ntensification of Modern Scientific and Technological
Develop$ent
$ere, (e oppose ourselves to capital.s pro1ect+
Instead of endless develop&ent of productive forces driven y the lo%ic of capital and entailin%
a per&anent ar&y of occupation 4technolo%ies of capital5 (here nature is the ene&y, a
technocratic, totalitarian dystopia, (e ta"e our stand (ith the possiility of constitution of the
revolutionary proletariat (hose pro1ect, ours, is the aolition of capital and (ith it destruction of
the value for&E eyond the order of capital, a concrete technolo%y of alliance (ith nature, an
ense&le of technics throu%h (hich (e re9situate ourselves in the heart of nature+ @ivin% in
nature, an end to the (ar (ith it, on this asis insi%ht into its i&&anent intelli%iility devolvin%
in the underta"in% to co9produce the for&s of sensile nature (hile &a"in% that ho&e in it.
0his perspective cannot e reached fro& a &ere pro1ection of e'istin% technolo%y, only fro& a
radically novel departure in science and technolo%y that has the revolutionary proletarian
aolition of capital as its pre&ise.
* ne( science and technolo%y cannot, thou%h, start fro& &erely fro& a theoretical
develop&ent, they presuppose &oth the revolutionary overthro( of the order of capital and the
elaoration of ne( e&ancipatory practices in daily life e%innin% (ith the suppression of or!+
*olishin% all in (or" that is socially unnecessary, undesirale and oscenely profli%ate. If
(hole industries (ould e shut do(n< ut shutdo(n y conscious decision of &en and
(o&en in asse&lies and councils< then so &uch the etter. It is of para&ount i&portance
to de9co&&odify, and follo(in% fro& this, de9reify, %oods that (e do produce. 0hus, it (ill e
necessary 4as lon% as &oney or so&e for& of e'chan%e e'ists5 to &a"e as &any %oods as
possile costless and lo(er others to the level of actual costs of production allo(in% %oods to
appear as si&ply useful, as pleasin% to the eye, hand or ear, so that co&pulsion to personally
accu&ulate and the allure of havin% and sho(in% over ti&e dissipates.
>n this asis, the surroundin% (orld in its entirety (ould e%in to appear different+ Because
sensuous nature as hu&anly for&ed at once appears as part of the landscapes that constitute
the uilt environ&ent and as the actual &aterial9sensuous pre&ise of hu&an e'istence 4as
earthly nature5, it too (ould appear different 4ne%atively stated, it (ould not appear even
indirectly as a for(ard arena for sta%in% unprocessed resources and it (ould eco&e
increasin%ly difficult to construct our relation to it, i.e., to for& and shape those technics that
&ediate our relation to it, in such ter&s5.
In all this, (hat is at sta"e here is our conscious entry into the %eophysiolo%y of Earth, the co9
production of earthly nature, in other (ords, an endless, &utual for&ation that is achieved (ith
nature and not a%ainst it, i.e., (ith earthly nature in its o(n incessant re&a"in% 4that is, the
&odification and transfor&ation of the inor%anic y life, especially &icroiotic life, that is
si&ultaneously shaped y aiotic nature5+ 0his notion, re%ardless of ho( va%uely articulated
here, presupposes reco%nition that nature, here earthly nature, ecause it is visily self9
re%ulatory, has its o(n inte%rity, its o(n coherency of (hich (e, as hu&an, are part 4and
(hich (e can contriute to and au%&ent in our o(n self9e'pansive develop&ent5, its o(n
autono&y, its o(n presuppositions, (hich (e can, as it (ere, enter into allo(in% us to re&a"e,
to 1ointly create, hu&ani=ed nature ane(, (hich in a non9Pro&ethean, entirely unproductivist
&anner (ill au%&ent natural evolution and develop&ent+ What han%s in the alance here is a
vision, so&eti&es tacit so&eti&es openly if fleetin%ly, appearin% across &illennia of hu&an
e'perience, creatin% the relation of a hu&anly natural ein% and a hu&ani=ed nature in (ays
the assure our and its inte%rity, that i&prove, increase and intensify the (ell9ein% of oth, for
(hich a %enuinely sy&iotic and co9productive relationship (ith earthly nature %enerates a
future, of course &ediated y the past ut unurdened y its dead (ei%ht, that instead
e&er%es fro& a continuous practice of co9creation<
Part I-
Remarks on the Reconstruction o the .eolo#ical Past
Before (e conclude this discussion, it is necessary to descrie so&e of the less (ell9"no(n
issues involved in cli&ate chan%e that, in revealin% the depth %eolo%ical character of the crisis
in nature and society, (ill leave us (ith a far clearer, and perhaps lastin% sense of the si&ply
enor&ous sta"es involved in the stru%%le a%ainst capital.
The Hniqueness of 2arthl% Nature
0he Earth &ay e uni)ue in the universeE it surely is in the s&all portion (e have co&e to
understand. -et confrontin% the rapacious plunder of nature and its cu&ulative conse)uences,
there are those... lar%ely those (ho %re( up on Star 0re"9Star Wars type pap and today are
productivist... (ho elieve (e &i%ht escape, as it (ere, off9Earth, find a ne( planet in (hich
the sa&e shit can e e%un ane(.
>ne here, for e'a&ple, thin"s of the Si%ourney Weaver fil&, 7liens, (ith its deep space planet
ein% &ade haitale y &echanical9technolo%ical production of a reathale at&osphere,
(hen in point of fact scientifically "no(led%eale or%anic intellectuals of capital, a&on% others
3*S* scientists, fully reco%ni=e that< efore any ,terrafor&in%/ is possile< an uninhaited
planet &ust, unli"e for e'a&ple 6ars, have a stron% enou%h &a%netic field to deflect solar
(inds to prevent alation 4re&oval of all (ater vapor and other %ases in the at&osphere5, and
then its surface &ust e inundated y a &assive, viale livin% presence, that is, y a %loal
acterial, non9acterial al%ae, fun%i and plant presence such as on Earth. It (as 1ust such a
presence that created Earth.s o'y%en at&osphere as a (aste product of its &etaolic activity.
But that presence presupposes a functionin% hydrosphere and repetition of the evolutionar%
$icro&ial coloni/ation activit% that occurred on Earth and created a reathale 4o'y%en5
at&osphereE and, it &i%ht e noted, these earthly features are the outco&e of rou%hly t(o
illions years of %eophysiolo%ical interaction et(een early life and inor%anic nature.
;urther&ore, our nitro%en9o'y%en 4i.e., reathale5 at&osphere e%an fro& an already
e'istin% at&ospheric presence of %aseous hydro%en, a&&onia and &ethane, sulfides,
for&aldehyde, and so on. 0hat is, this too is a cos&olo%ical9%eolo%ical pre&ise for a haitale
planet. Even if all these %ases (ere in place at once, %eneratin% a livale planet (ould ta"e,
even if that evolutionary coloni=ation (as co&pressed y several orders of &a%nitude,
thousands of %ears, and then only ase ca&ps or colonies entirely dependent on Earth for
food and supplies could e estalished.
0here is, ho(ever, no anato&ical9physiolo%ical evidence to support the elief that hu&an
ein%s can reproduce the&selves as endurin% de&o%raphic %roupin%s any(here else than on
Earth (here the &ost &ini&al re)uire&ents, sociall% $ediated, are not satisfied. 4*
sustainale population is opposed, for e'a&ple, to another (orld colony dependent upon the
lar%er populations of Earth and Earth9ased resources.5. 0he evidence indicates the opposite
4and (hat to the contrary counts as ,evidence/ for technolo%ically renderin% a hostile planet
haitale is co$pletel% o&fuscator%, exclusivel% fil&ic and novelistic science fiction5. 0here is
si&ply no %rounds for elievin% that such a colony &i%ht so&eday e ale to deploy an
advanced technolo%y currently eyond us in order to overco&e these re)uire&ents+
:e&o%raphically hu&anity cannot reproduce itself (ithout sufficient (aterE (ithout a nitro%en9
o'y%en at&osphere for the ease (ith (hich (e, hu&ans, respire, an at&osphere that at the
sa&e ti&e is ,thic"/ enou%h to urn up co&&on space deris 4includin% s&aller &eteors5
durin% entry and lar%e enou%h to insure that it is not destroyed y lar%e &eteors or s&all
planetoidsE and, (ithout a planet ,si=ed/ to a sin%le %ravity environ&ent 4i.e., hu&anity
evolved and is anato&ically and physiolo%ically ,fitted/ <for the ease (ith (hich (e &ove
aout <to a planet (ith the celestial &ass of Earth5< In all these respects, it is iolo%ically
diverse life that in its constant &ove&ent purifies and provides clean (ater and the very air (e
reath, that rene(s soils fro& (hich (e %ro( the foods (e consu&e, and that in death and
deco&position provides the %eolo%ically co&pressed for&s for fuels (e urn to re%ulate
te&perature (ithin the structures constitutin% our uilt environ&ent...
2arth is in the right location in our galax% <6ost stars in %ala'ies are close to the center, ut
at the center stars and their oritin% planets are su1ect to innu&erale 4not thousands or
&illions, ut over the life of the planet, trillions5 of co&et passes causin% very hi%h rates of
o&ard&ent. 6oreover, intense radiation and fre)uent e'plosions of lar%e stars prevent the
e'istence of life near %alactic centers. ;urther, at the ed%es of %ala'ies, the nature of star li%ht
su%%ests that star syste&s are starved for &etals 4very lo( levels of silicon, iron, &a%nesiu&5
and all the other re)uire&ents for planets and the uildin% loc"s of life< 1ur sun is 9ust the
right si/e< 0he ,life/ of lar%e stars is too short for intelli%ent life to have developed. ;urther,
they e&it too &uch ultraviolet radiation. 0he haitale =one for our sun is aout .7C to 1.1C
ti&es the distance of the Earth to the sun. ;or s&aller planets that haitale =one is far closer
to a sun type star ecause, for these planets 4assu&in% they are not dead roc"s5 internally
%enerate only lo( levels of ener%y 4far lo(er than Earth5. $o(ever, planets close to a sun ris"
the dan%er of solar flares. 0hey, &oreover, also tend to e tidally loc"ed+ >ne side al(ays
faces the sun and urns, (hile the other al(ays faces a(ay and free=es< Gupiter is 9ust the
right !ind of gigantic shado planet? It prevents Earth fro& %ettin% o&arded y proaly
1,000

ti&es the nu&er of co&ets and &eteoroids that actually hit it, instead thro(in% the&
out into space. If 8upiter.s orit (ere &ore elliptical, 1ust ever so &uch, or if it (ere any lar%er,
it (ould have the opposite effect and %ravitationally destaili=e Earth.s orit and the asteroid
elt. *nd, it &i%ht e noted, that all of the 8upiter9si=ed planets that have een oserved so far
in other solar syste&s have very eccentric orits< *nd the 2arth.s $oon is &oth the right si/e
and at 9ust the right distance fro$ 2arth< 0he &oon ehaves li"e a %yroscope+ It &ini&i=es
the chan%es in the tilt of Earth.s a'is and steadies that tilt. What is the i&portance of this2
;irst, it renders 6ilan"ovitch cycles s&all enou%h to &aintain a relatively stale cli&ate, and,
second, it provides us (ith seasons. 4Cli&atic variaility producin% seasonal and distinctive
flora affects the %eo%raphical distriution of species, species isolation, and even on &odified
:ar(inian assu&ptions is a crucial ele&ent in the evolution of life on the Earth.5 ;urther&ore,
the &oon.s for&ation has provided the Earth a fast rotation rate that "eeps day and ni%ht
te&perature s(in%s fro& ein% too %reat. ;inally, the 2arth.s nearl% circular or&it !eeps it at
9ust the right distance fro$ the sun to &aintain li)uid (ater, a pre&ise of life as it has evolved.
0o oot, there is no astrophysical evidence that (ithin the lifeti&e of a sin%le individual 4even if
today.s avera%e life span (as douled5 that an off9Earth settin%, a planet if not i&&ediately
haitale then not unalteraly hostile, is (ithin reach, (ithin several li%ht year travel. >n
relativistic assu&ptions, it &i%ht e recalled, that the &ass of o1ects approaches infinity as
the velocity of the o1ect approaches li%ht speed, that is, travel at li%ht speeds is ot possile
4i.e., anti9%ravitational drives, (arp drives, etc., and their capacities for ,1u&ps/ to li%ht speed
are all fictional fantasies (ithout real foundation in space9ti&e5.
0hose (ho, in the face of species e'tinction, cli&ate chan%e and the on%oin%, &ountin%
despoliation of Earth &% capital, advocate aandonin% Earth live in a drea&< *s if there (as
a choice in this &atter. 0he drea& and the choice it see&s to offer are orn of fantasy fed y
capitalIs critical sensiilities dullin%, visual &edia spectacle<
1rigins of 3ife, 7ncestral Bacteria, Biological Diversit%
We &i%ht say the ori%inal &odel of a dialectical totality is earthly nature itself, for it is for&ed
as &ulti9layered and &ulti9ordered, interconnected (hole of relations, processes and
sustances that in their interactions inte%rate the at&osphere in its ther&al structure
4troposphere, stratosphere, &esosphere5E oceans 4(ar&er surface (aters, cold, nutrient rich
deep (aters5E and land &asses (ith their specific features, e'tendin% do(n(ard to several
"ilo&eters of crust that are effectively co&pressed, dead, past or y%one iospheres, and
include &assive plates &ove&ents (hich are responsile for shifts in continental land
&asses, the silicate &antle, and the outer li)uid iron core fro& (hich arises the &a%&a that
erupts in volcanoes and creates the uplift responsile for plate tectonic activityE and, the
internal iron solid core 4&a%net &ass5, the shape, &ass and the uneven, off9center distriution
of (hich has created planetary (ole, hence deter&ines orital precession.
But (hat is really i&portant is (hy (e refer to these processes and relations ta"en alto%ether
as geoph%siological as opposed to %eophysical+ It is not ecause the Earth is alive 4as if it
(ere so&e super or%anis&5 ut ecause of the deter&inate role of life 4the iota in its
entirety5 in its evolution.
0o %rasp this, to really %et a sense of the force, reality and si%nificance of cli&ate chan%e (e
&ust reach all the (ay ac" to the ori%ins of earthly life itself (ith a vie( to (hat is distinctive
and characteristic aout it. Start (ith a (ell9estalished datu& (e have reconstructed+ *n
o'y%en at&osphere as (e "no(n it today, in fact, an at&osphere that (ould support co&ple',
varie%ated life as (e ta"e for %ranted, did not e'ist for at least the first 2.C illion years of
Earth.s %eohistory.
Since 17CD 4the 6iller9Rrey e'peri&ent5, (e have "no(n that in the presence of sunli%ht
co&&on &olecular %ases 4&ethane, C$#E a&&onia, 3$DE &olecular hydro%en, $2E and (ater
vapor5 found in a pri&itive planetary at&osphere
1
can e synthesi=ed y electrification, that is,
y li%htnin% stri"es+ >r%anic co&pounds (ill for&, includin% a&ino acids 4(hich, (hen
&olecularly onded in lon% chains, for& proteins5. >r%anic co&pounds are, in te'too"
lan%ua%e, the ,uildin% loc"s/ of life< 3o( the early Earth at&osphere, che&ically, &ay not
have had een pri&arily a&&onia, &ethane, hydro%en, one that (as concentrated and hi%hly
reactive. It &ay have een far &ore dilute and &uch less reactive 4as %eolo%ical evidence
su%%ests5, for e'a&ple, predo&inately nitro%en and caron dio'ide ased. 0o oot,
&acro&olecules do not do (ell in hi%hly ener%i=e environ&ents 4li%htin%, ultraviolet radiation5
(hich ioni=e &olecules, rea" do(n &olecular onds. *t life.s ori%ins, there need only have
een sufficient caron, (ater and ener%y present and there (ere &any early Earth
environ&ents 4e.%., at hydrother&al vents on the oceans. floors5 (hich che&ically possessed
these features< *t any rate, it is, of course, a lon% (ay fro& si&ple or%anic co&pounds to the
co&ple' arran%e&ent that constitutes a livin% or%anis& even in its &ost ori%inal, archaic
for&< Sha"e oil (ith (ater and ules for&, ules (ith insides separated fro& outsides.
So&ethin% on this order occurred+ In its &ost ele&entary for&, (hen life on Earth first
e&er%ed so&e D.C illion years a%o it consisted &ini&ally in a cellular &e&rane, a %reasy
little lipid a% containin% phosphates and nucleotides that, in &etaolis&, in a continuous
che&ical e'chan%e of an inside (ith an outside, %re( increasin%ly co&ple' and capale of
self9&aintenance and, eventually (ith real consistency, self9reproduction< 0his (as the
ancestral 4proto5 acteriu&, and its ori%ins (as not an event that happened 1ust once, ut
occurred si&ultaneously and se)uentially countless ti&es over in different earthly
environ&ents< Ener%y (ould have een provided y sunli%ht, ut (hat (as i&portant for this
increasin% co&ple'ity is s%nthesis 4includin% the &olecular syntheses of su%ars, *0P, and
proteins, even if unre%ulated5+ It is synthesis that defines life at all levels and orders fro& the
&ost ele&entary 4the si&ple pro"aryote5 to the &ost co&ple' 4&an5. In the *chaean
pro"aryote cell, defined as non9nucleated, anaeroic cellular life 4as non9o'y%en respirin%
1
Pri&itive ut not pri&ordial and ori%inal at&osphere of Earth+ 0he co&position of the latter, lo(n a(ay y the sunIs
intense and unfiltered ultra9violet radiation in the initial phases of its and the EarthIs for&ation, cannot e
reconstructed and is un"no(ale in principle.
acteria5 that first identifialy appeared as life on Earth, this synthesis is &etaolis& 4in its
specific acterial for&5, as the continuous transfor&ation of inor%anic &olecules into or%anic
ones (ithin the cell itself and the eli&ination of &olecular (astes e'pelled fro& the cell.
In reconstructin% early Earth.s at&osphere, (e (ould note that the early at&osphere (as not
only not o'y%en9ased, ut li"ely rich in hydro%en 4$25 and hydrates, say, hydro%en cyanide
4$C35, a&&onia 43$D5 and &ethane 4C$#5. >ver the course of an eon 4aout 29C91.C illion
years a%o5 cyanoacteria 4lue %reen al%ae (hich are si&ultaneously anaeroic and aeroic5
in the &etaolic synthesis of inor%anic &olecules created the o'y%en at&osphere as a (aste
product of that &etaolis&, an at&osphere that characteri=es the (orld today and, ecause
o'y%en respiration is an essential necessity of life, is 4(ith the e'ception of anaeroic
acteria5 the foundation all life since. *s &uch as 1.C illion years old, that at&osphere is
&aintained today, as it has een over the past #00 &illion years, y synthesis, first and
fore&ost y acteria, lue9%reen al%ae and phytoplan"ton, and then y the photosynthetic
activity of plants 4to%ether (ith the sa&e acteria5 in (hich caron dio'ide to%ether (ith (ater
and sunli%ht is &olecularly transfor&ed in plant &etaolis& producin% o'y%en, >2.. 0his
&etaolic process 4production of o'y%en5 for&s a decisive &o&ent of the caron cycle, and is
inte%rated (ith other cycles 4nitro%en, sulfur, etc.5 that incessantly involve the acterial
transfor&ation of inor%anic into or%anic sustances and vice versa in %aseous, solid and li)uid
for&s and settin%s. Plants die, deco&pose throu%h the (or" of acteria, for&in% or%anic
sedi&ent, a land surface, (hich is co&pressed and co&pacted further for&in% layer upon
layer of the upper layers of the Earth.s crust, effectively the landed aspect of y%one
iospheres, that reappears and is utili=ed in synthetic hu&an activity as hydrocaron fossil
fuel 4coal, petroleu&5. @ivin% sy&iotically and interactin% (ith trees roots, acteria ,fi'/
nitro%en 4synthesi=e it in or%anic for&5 fro& the soil and rin% &ineral salts to these plants.
*ni&als 4in the ta'ono&ic sense5 produce &ethane as %aseous &etaolic (aste, and caron
dio'ide in respirin%, oth at&ospheric %ases. *ni&als, &a&&als in the narro( sense,
specifically cattle, horses, do%s, rats and &ice, carry not fully di%ested plant deris in their
%uts, and, (herever they (ander or travel in lar%e %roups 4(ith hu&ans5, e'crete these
re&nants as (aste, (hich in turn seed soils and that in so&e cases in the historical past have
transfor&ed the entire flora of continents, not &erely re&a"in% visile landscape ut
transfor&in% the nature and character of ve%etatively iotic activity. Such (as the case in 3e(
Bealand, (ith the *&ericas, etc., especially the 3orth *&erican continent in the centuries
follo(in% the ,con)uest./ @ife is in continuous interchan%e (ith itself and (ith iolo%ically
&ediated inor%anic nature, as one of life.s for&.s (astes is nutrients for others.
7ll life, not 1ust hu&anity in for&in% socio9historical (orlds, is ceaseless activity en%a%ed in
synthesis that &a"es and re&a"es surroundin% nature of (hich it itself is part and in (hich it
is for&ed. >nce life appears, it en%a%es in re&a"in% its o(n inor%anic conditions, (hich as
such disappear. @ife incessantly re&a"es those conditions that are the&selves the product<
over thousands of &illennia< of the interaction of or%anic (ith inor%anic earthly nature...
With the partial e'ception of the &ost intensely tropic re%ions, visile nature did not appear
the sa&e 1C,000 years a%o as it does today, or as it did 2C0 years a%o at the outset of
capitalist develop&entE it did not appear the sa&e 1C0,000 years a%o as it (as 1C,000 years
a%oE 1,C00,000 years a%o it did not appear the sa&e as it did 1C0,000 years a%oE and,
1C,000,000 years a%o it did not appear the sa&e as it did 1,C00,000 years a%o. In the early
Cretaceous, 1ust less than 1C0,000,000 years a%o, the Earth (as a &ild ,ice house/ planet
(ith sno( and ice durin% the (inter seasons and cool te&perature forests coverin% the polar
re%ionsE the continents did not e'ist in their present locales and did not even e'ist in their
current shapes 4the British Isles did not e'ist, eastern 3orth *&erican north of the St.
@a(rence River, ?reenland and north(estern Eurasian land&ass (here conti%uous, all of a
pieceE and *frica and South *&erica had only e%un to separate and only near the e)uator5,
the Pacific >cean (as perhaps three ti&es its present si=e, and the *tlantic >cean had not
really e%un to open yet, effectively it did not e'ist. 48ust in e'cess of fifty &illion years earlier,
a sin%le continent, Pan%aea, for&ed Earth.s only land&ass and it (as very arid and hot as
deserts covered the tropics of today.s *&a=on and Con%o rainforests.5 0he pri&ordial
contours of Earth cannot e %eolo%ically and topolo%ically reconstructedE (hen &easured in
%eolo%ical ter&s, the face of the Earth has under%one incessant chan%eE and (hile on%oin%
ecolo%ical collapse and species e'tinction can e li&ited and cli&ate chan%e can still e
a&eliorated 4it is no lon%er possile to prevent it5, there is no Earthly paradise, an Eden, to
return to<
;ro& it very ori%ins, life is pri&arily and funda&entally autopoiesis, &eanin%, first, life literally
&a"es itself and &eanin%, second, that life is independent, ut an independence that is only
for&ed on the asis of prior dependency.

0he very nature that is perceptually %iven in hu&an
e'perience is the outco&e of thousands of &illennia of non9:ar(inian co9evolution, of
&utually penetration, shapin% and transfor&ation, of life in its riotously diverse for&s (ith (hat
is astractly characteri=ed as inor%anic nature+ 0he %eolo%ical and tectonic processes 4uplift,
suduction and plate spreadin%, volcanis&5 that for& &ountains, oceans and at&osphere are
all &ediated< controllin% the pace of occurrence, transfor&ed or literally created< y life<
throu%h plant accelerated (eatherin% of roc", the deposition of sedi&ents, y acteriolo%ical
&etaolic production of %ases and &aintenance of te&perature and oceanic al"alinity. Rnli"e
the other terrestrial planets in the solar syste&s 46ars and !enus5 that are dead roc"s, there
are no purely %eolo%ical processes on Earth< ;or the &atter, there are no other planets in
the "no(n universe li"e Earth...
While acterial co&&unities are essential, and (hile for over three illion years of life on Earth
acteria 4not hu&ans5 &ust e accorded pri&acy, it is not any specific for& of life that shapes
the %eolo%y of the EarthE rather, it is &ultiple, co&ple' and differentiated life in its entirety that
does+ It is iolo%ical diversit% that is crucial. ;or that diversity is at once the heart of the
iosphere and its, life.s, o(n central presupposition as viale, self9sustainin% life, and in this
re%ard it is the presupposition of specifically hu&an life<
Beyond the &eanin%, the significance of the autono&y, cohesion and otherness of earthly
nature can e for&ulated thusly+
Because earthl% nature is inelucta&l% su&9ect to cos$ological and, product of its on
interactions as an evolving planetar% &od%, see$ingl% purel% geological distur&ances, literall%
$illions of different life for$s, species, and &illions upon &illions of organis$s, are requisite to
$aintain the necessar% Nelasticit%,> responsiveness and even superfluit% that functionall% and
interactivel% sustain the self-regulator% character of the &iosphere in the face of insta&ilit% and
pertur&ation: Biodiversit% sustains the &iosphere, and &e%ond this earthl% nature itself: ,t is
$ediatel% responsi&le for its coherence &ecause, the greater the nu$&er of for$s of life and
species on 2arth, the greater their integration and their $utual interdependence, the $ore
sta&le and resilient is earthl% nature as a hole, the $ore resistant it is to dis-ordering or
disruption that stri!es at an% of its $o$ents, the $ore resistant &iospheric life to that disorder,
de-structuring or disease that attac!s, stresses or afflicts an% specific for$ of life+
0he presupposition of ho&eostatic, iospheric nature 4i.e., nature as a self9re%ulatin% totality
capale of internally &odifyin% and ad1ustin% its &o&ents to &aintain staility and e)uiliriu&
in the face of e'ternal chan%es, e.%., increases in ultraviolet radiation5 is sufficient internal
diversit%. 0his diversity includes, a&on% other thin%s and relations, an array of different
cli&atic re%i&es and =ones, a &ultitude of re%ional landscapes, and, centrally, a vast (ealth
of various, differin% life for&s. 0hus, it is precisel% this internal diversit% that the $ove$ent of
capital is o&literating+
It is not 1ust that life as a (hole reaches into the Earth.s central dyna&ics, as it shapes the&
as they for& it. @ife on Earth reaches ac" to the &ost pri&ordial conditions in nature to
actively &ediate its o(n cos$ological presuppositions+ In conte&porary astrophysical
theori=ations, the sun is a class ? star (ith an anticipated life of perhaps 10 illion years.
$avin% reached rou%hly the half(ay point of its e'istence, it urns far ri%hter than it did (hen
the Earth first for&ed so&e #.C illion years a%o. 0oday, its lu&inosity is DDZ, DCZ or DGZ
%reater dependin% on (hose calculations are used. "ithout qualitative develop$ent of the
&iosphere 6 especiall% &acterial and plant life, its increasing co$plexit% and groing
integration ith the che$ical processes of the at$osphere and oceans through respiration
and transpiration, and specificall% a&sent te$perature $odified &% life at 2arth.s surfaces, the
necessar% and actual condition of hich is &iologicall% diverse life - this vastl% increased light
0solar radiation5 ould have long ago rendered the 2arth un&eara&l% hot, a $eta&olicall%
intolera&le setting for an% aero&ic 4o'y%en respirin%5 &eings and for hu$an life in particular, a
dead roc! li!e Mars or Lenus+
The Situation Toda%
:urin% the entire 110,000 year hu&anity has e'isted Earth.s cli&ate has never een as stale
as it has een durin% the past 10,000912,000 years. 6oreover, there is no evidence that in the
past # &illion years it has ever under%one a runa(ay (ar&in%. But as a real possiility, this is
the situation (e confront today.
While the process is far &ore co&plicated, caron dio'ide, (ater vapor and &ethane a&on%
other %ases essentially trap solar radiation in the at&osphere producin% (hat is co&&only
called a %reenhouse effect. Caron dio'ide, C>2, is che&ically decisive.
>n a %eolo%ical ti&e scale, at&ospheric C>2 has, as (e have already pointed out, ran%ed
fro& lo(s of 1F09200 pp& durin% the &a1or %laciations of the current ice a%e to hi%hs of 2F09
D00 pp& durin% (ar& inter%lacials. 0oday, at&ospheric C>2 concentration stands no$inall% at
D7# pp&, and for&ed as the output and (aste of capitalist civili=ation, itself considered here
as a historically for&ed pheno&enon of %eolo%ical si%nificance, is risin% in %eolo%ical ter&s at
an e'traordinary and unprecedented rate (ith at this &o&ent no end in si%ht. We esti&ate a
tippin% point, that point at (hich ice cap &eltin% (ill )ualitatively hasten and eco&e
irreversile, and at (hich %as hydrates 4clathrates5 &i%ht dissociate fro& their ice9li"e
structures %eneratin% &assive and deadly &ethane releases, as no hi%her than C00 pp& 4and
proaly lon% efore, say, at #O0 pp&5, reachale (ith at current levels of their production 4not
to &ention accelerated ones5 (ithin no &ore than t(o decades.
7ctuall%, not no$inall%, the situation is far, far (orse. 0o %rasp this &erely re)uires (e re&ind
ourselves of three features that relate to this chan%e+ ;irst, caron dio'ide re&ains in the
at&osphere aout 100 years efore rea"in% do(n. Second, in the cyernetic lan%ua%e of
capital.s science of totality the at&osphere and oceans as ,coupled, partial syste&s,/ as
integrated $o$ents of earthl% nature, constantly interact (ith one another particularly in ter&s
of the caron cycle. 0he oceans, as (e "no(, are oth the %reatest reservoirs of heat on
Earth and (ar& ver% slol%, &eanin% the full i&pact of existing levels of at&ospheric caron
dio'ide have yet to e felt< In point of fact, this is at the heart of the co%nitive prole&+ !ast
and deep, the oceans are slo( to (ar&, ut once they do, once it eco&es noticeale to us, it
(ill already e far too late as the heat they retain (ill e released for hundreds and &aye
over several thousand of years, the reestalish&ent of iodiversity 4thou%h in all li"elihood in
for&s (ith (hich (e (ould not e fa&iliar5 (ill ta"e a &ini&u& of t(o hundred thousand
years and proaly &uch lon%er, and a dra( do(n of at&ospheric C>2 to levels as they
e'isted at the start of industrial capitalis& &illions of years< Ri%ht no(, (e are e'periencin%
cli&ate chan%e that is a product of levels as they e'isted in rou%hly 17F#, aout DDO pp&.
0his &eans that if the coal9oil9auto econo&y (ere to %rind to a co&plete halt today, at this
&o&ent here and no( the full force of this chan%e (ould first &e felt decades into the future.
0hird, the entire conventional assess&ent of current levels of %reenhouses %ases is %rossly
inade)uate+ 0oday 48uly 20115, C>2 levels are as (e said no$inall% at D7# pp&.
1
0here is
so&ethin% very unreal aout these &easure&ents, &eanin% that they do not &easure
at&ospheric C>2 levels as they are lived and e'perienced y al&ost all life for&s, e.%.,
hu&ans and the nu&erous do&estic and feral life for&s that attach the&selves to hu&ans,
livin% in densely populated &etropolitan re%ions. 0hus, (e stress their no&inal character+
6easure&ents for at&ospheric C>2 levels are &ade at the R.S. state.s 6auna @oa
>servatory in $a(aii, 11,1#1 feet aove sea level, that, due to the trade (inds that lo( over
it, has so&e of the cleanest air on Earth. 0o e sure, at&ospheric caron dio'ide content does
not depend on altitude. $o(ever, the intense heat produced y C>2 (ar&in% of the
at&osphere (hen ta"en to%ether (ith already %aseous and particulate pollution of
&etropolitan air e'acerates the respiratory stress on &ost all for&s of life resident to densely
populated uran settin%s. 0hus, e%innin% fro& the irrealit% of D7# pp&, if &ethane, nitrous
o'ide and C;Cs are ,factored/ in effectively those no&inal levels are currently sli%htly in
e'cess of #DD pp&<
1
0he ,achieved/ levels are not unifor& throu%hout the course of any %iven year. 0he %enerally pea" in 6ay, fall out in
the ensuin% &onths and then start to cli& efore the year is out. *n endurin% feature of capitalist develop&ent,
industrial e&issions of all sorts, of course, %uarantee they invarialy rise fro& year to year.
Conclusion
Cli"ate Change, %rigins of 0Man1 and Ice 'ges
0he sta"es in the on%oin% transfor&ation of the Earth co&pel us reach ac" to hu&an ori%ins,
precisely ecause it is, for us, a sense of hu&anity in its evolutionary, natural e&eddedness
and the perspective it provides that is &issin% in &ost cli&ate chan%e discussions. We can
conclude, then, (ith the relation of inter%lacials, hence oth cli&ate chan%e and ice a%es, to
the evolutionary develop&ent of hu&anity.
Start y revie(in% the %eolo%ical reconstruction of ice a%es.
0he avera%e annual te&perature at the surface of the Earth had een coolin% sli%htly over
several &illion years prior to the date (e are aout to provide+ *out 1.F &illion years a%o the
Earth entered an epoch called the Pleistocene and in a %eneral (ay "no(n as an ice a%e.
What this &eans is that there is a year round ice cover over the poles and that periodically
4actually for lon% periods of ti&e5 the Earth under%oes a dra&atic coolin% in (hich that ice
e'tends south(ard fro& the north pole into Sieria, European Russia, Europe 4the last ti&e it
reached as far south as today.s Bavaria5 and over the northern half of 3orth *&erica, and it
e'tends north(ard fro& the south pole over lar%e parts of the Southern >cean 4that circles
*ntarctica5, into Pata%onia, even southern 3e( Bealand and southeastern *ustralia. 40he
(hole discussion &ust e stated this (ay ecause these sa&e %eolo%ical reconstructions tell
us over the past G00 &illion years the continents have not al(ays e'isted as (e "no(n the&,
have not e'isted in the sa&e place as (e find the& no(, and for the lon% stretches of
%eolo%ical ti&e there has een no ice at the poles.5 Startin% perhaps as far ac" as &illion
years a%o the ice a%e (e are currently livin% in e%an to assu&e a reco%ni=ale pattern, a
period of e'tensive ice covera%e "no(n as a %lacial lastin% rou%hly a 100,000 years follo(ed
y 4a period of transition lastin%, thou%h not al(ays, a couple thousand years and then5 a
(ar&in% lastin% aout 11,000 years "no(n 4in the strict sense5 as an inter%lacial follo(ed,
al(ays, y a len%thy period of transition leadin% to rene(ed %laciation. 0his shift fro& a %lacial
to an inter%lacial and vice versa is a %enuine for& of %loal cli&ate chan%e, thou%h over the
past C# &illion years no such chan%e has occurred in the radical &anner (e confront today,
one that portends a rapid transfor&ation endin% the %eolo%ically current ice a%e and the shift
fro& a cold, dry to a hot, (et cli&ate.
3o(, if (e e'a&ine the archeolo%ical reconstructions of our evolutionary develop&ent, (e
can note that anato&ically &odern &an, so&eone (e (ould perceptually reco%ni=e as a
hu&an ein% and technically "no(n as Ho$o sapiens sapiens, first appeared aout 110,000
years a%o. By anato&ically, (e &ean she (as characteri=ed not 1ust in ter&s of a t(o le%%ed
creature (ho (al"s upri%ht, ut features such as 4lar%e5 rain si=e, a specific type of 1a( and
dentition, a hand in (hich an opposale thu& is fully developed, and so on. -ou (ould
recogni/e this ein% as a hu&an, ut if you en%a%ed her in discussion (ith a relatively
co&ple' ar%u&ent, you &i%ht find her sli%htly dull9(itted. It (as aout #C,000 years a%o, that
the features that (ould &a"e your discussion (ith her &utually intelli%ile appeared. 0hese
features included syste&ati=ed, articulate speech 4entailin% lan%ua%e that is self9referential,
&eanin% that concepts that do not &a"e i&&ediate reference to visile, tactile, audile, etc.,
thin%s can e produced, e'pressed and understood5. 0here are several other co%nitive and
e'istential features that underline this, her develop&ent and, thou%h these features need not
detain us here, (e have e'plored the& else(here if you, as reader, are interested.
1
0here is
one &ore archaeolo%ically reconstructed date (e (ould &ention+ It is fro& aout 10,000
years a%o, that (e can &ar" the ori%ins of a%riculture, the appearance of the first stratified
1
;or this, see The 7ppearance of NSpirit>: Modern Man, Her Specificit% and Her 4lace in Nature in 1rigins and
2ndings+ HEditorIs note.J
societies ased on fi'ed positions in a division of laor, and in its &ost rudi&entary,
undeveloped for&, the state.
We can, then, conclude y relatin% these archaeolo%ically reconstructed dates to rief survey
of the %eolo%ical reconstruction of ice a%es (e e%an (ith. 0he Riss, the second last %lacial,
e%an to end aout 12F,000 years a%o. Recall that anato&ically &odern &an appeared
rou%hly 110,000 years a%o, that is, as the last inter%lacial (as fully under(ay 4and proaly
e%innin% to end5. 3ote the WAr&, the last %lacial, e%an to end aout 1O,000 years a%o and
ear in &ind that all the hu&an, social develop&ents associated (ith (hat (e call civili=ation
4a%riculture, class society and the state5 e%in to appear as the current inter%lacial, a (ar&
and cli&atically settled period, (as fully under(ay, so&e 10,000 years a%o
3o( those last 10,000 years have een, cli&atically spea"in%, e'traordinarily stale 4not, for
e'a&ple, su1ect to re%ular, sudden and devastatin% occurrences of ,e'tre&e (eather/5, the
&ost stale of all the %eolo%ical periods of Earth history that (e have een ale to
reconstruct. It has een in this period, "no(n as the $olocene, that all those contradictor%
develop$ents, fro& the ane of hu&an e'istence< a%riculture (ith its fi'ed positions in a
social division of laor, stratification (ithin the co&&unity, and the for&ation of the state as an
or%an of repression and popular re%i&entation< to those &ost e'alted hu&an
achieve&ents< a &aterial aundance ade)uate to the nutritional re)uire&ents of healthy
livin% and, (ith it, 4lon%, lon% a%o reali=ed5 ade)uate de&o%raphical density to &aintain Ho$o
sapiens sapiens as a species on Earth, a 4vastly overdeveloped5 uilt environ&ent to sustain
hu&an life, in principle the technical (here(ithal 4itself in need of transfor&ation5 to provide
livin% ti&e to develop s"ills, aptitudes and practices of a hi%h culture a&on% &asses of
people< have ta"en place. 0his contradictory develop&ent has proceeded on the asis of
social division and class conflict and this lar%ely on the asis of capitalist production, and on
that asis y (ay of the rapacious plunderin% of nature+ 0he do&ination of nature is
ine'tricaly lin"ed to and inseparale fro& class e'ploitation and, co&ple'ly &ediated 4and
secured and reproduced y the undisputed he%e&ony of capitalist civili=ation over all aspects
of daily life5 to various for&s of oppression and i%otry (hich that e'ploitation %rounds.
3o( hu&anity has eco&e a %eolo%ical force, a force of nature, ut hu&anity is, as (e said,
torn and sundered y social division+ Rulin% classes intent only on accu&ulation and
or%ani=ed throu%h capitalist states are (rac"ed y nationalist rivalries and en%a%ed in a fierce
and intensifyin% stru%%le for &ar"ets and resources, a stru%%le played out across the (orld.
Lyoto, Copenha%en, Cancun, the IPCC, their ,efforts/ to ste& the &ost deleterious effects of
cli&ate chan%e, are sha&s, circus perfor&ances and diversions. >nly the (or"in% class and
its revolutionary or%ani=ation into councils can offer even the possiility of a %loal fra&e(or"
and a pro%ra& to confront our situation. >nly the return of the proletariat as a historical class,
the revolutionary estalish&ent of a (orld(ide net(or" of federated councils, only councilar
po(er so constituted and there(ith the aolition of capital and its state, can avert a cala&itous
unprecedented, uni&a%ined catastrophe that is no( on the hori=on. >nly on these conditions
can an indefinite e'tension of a (ar& inter%lacial, that e'tant for&s of life (ith (hich hu&anity
has co9evolved, and aove all its natural presuppositions in year round ice at the poles< the
%eolo%ical asis on (hich hu&anity e&er%ed fro& its no&adic e'istence, estalished a settled
social life, and initiated a develop&ent that &a"es a %eneral hu&an e&ancipation possile<
e preserved.
0here is po(er in nature that e'ceeds hu&an &astery. >nce fully under(ay, cli&ate chan%e is
one such force, for proletarian revolution can co&e too late.
Analytic Table o Contents
Preliminary Remarks
Introduction
The !odern Science o "ature 42001, 3ov 20075
Social Basis of the ;or&ation of an >r%anic Intelli%entsia of the Bour%eoisieE Science and the
Bour%eoisieE Ele&ents of the Conceptual Structure of ScienceE 3ote on the Classical
Evaluation of @aor
First Study
Science at its $ri#ins
The Problem o !otion) .alileo and Aristotle 48un9*u% 20105
*ristotleE ?alileoE ?alileo and *ristotleE 3otes on >servation, E'perience and E'peri&ent in
?alileoE ?alileo and the 8esuitsE 0he 6odern Bour%eois Evaluation of @aor
First Interlude 43ov9:ec 2007, 6ar9*pr 20105
;unda&ental ;or&s of SociationE ;or&al :o&inationE @inea&ents of the Epoch of the ;or&al
:o&ination of Capital over @aor in Production at its >ri%insE *dvance and :ecline in the
@ocus of Production and its Shiftin% CentersE Ideal ?enesis and :evelop&ent of CapitalE
;or&al :o&ination and the Bour%eois RevolutionE Bet(een 0riutary ;or&ation and Capital
6odernity
Retrospect and Anticipation
Second Study
"e' (epartures in Science) The Sciences o *ie 4Sept 2007, :ec 20079;e 20105
6althus and the Prole& of PopulationE :ar(in and the Evolutionary :evelop&ent of @ifeE
0he 6odern Synthesis 43eo9:ar(inis&5E ;oundations of the 6althusian9:ar(inian 3e'us in
Potential Species ProductivityE :ecisive, non96althusian, non9:ar(inian and non96endelian
:eter&inants of @ifeE So&e Conclusions
Third Study (Short Study)
"e' (epartures in Science) The !odern Science o "ature Rene'ed/ Three Sketches
42001, 3ov 20075
Science (ithout ;oundationsE 0hree S"etches, $eisener%, Bohr and Einstein+ 0he ,3e(/
Physics. $eisener%, Bohr and Suantu& 6echanicsE Einstein, Si&ultaneity and Relativity,
0echnolo%ical Civili=ationE Bohr and Einstein
Second Interlude 46ar9*pr 2010, *u% 20105
Real :o&inationE Eras of Capital.s :o&ination in the $istory of Capitalis&E *utono&i=ation of
CapitalE 0otali=in% :o&inationE 0ra1ectory of Conte&porary Capitalist :evelop&ent
Fourth Study
The Criti,ue o Scientiic Reason 4*pr98un 20105
Theori0ation Apo#ee o Science or Capital) 1arl Popper+ the Philosopher as
Functionary o Capital
0he Wei%ht of 0raditionsE Popper.s Concept of ScienceE 0he *ntino&ies of Scientific 0hou%htE
Critical Rationality and @ieralis&
Conclusion 48un 20105
Capital and Science
Postscript
Summary and Prospects
@est our $opes and *spirations Beco&e an Endless 3i%ht&are.
0he :o&ination of 3ature+ Capitalist 0echnolo%y, the 6odern Science of 3ature and the
6ove&ent of Capital 46ay, :ece&er 20105