skip to main content
Goldsmiths - University of London
  • Students, Staff and Alumni
  • Search Students, Staff and Alumni
  • Study
  • Course finder
  • International
  • More
  • Search
  • Study
  • Courses
  • International
  • More
 
Main menu

Primary

  • About Goldsmiths
  • Study with us
  • Research
  • Business and partnerships
  • For the local community
  • Faculties and Schools
  • News and features
  • Events
  • Give to Goldsmiths
Staff & students

Staff + students

  • New students: Welcome
  • Students
  • Alumni
  • Library
  • Timetable
  • Learn.gold - VLE
  • Email - Outlook
  • IT support
  • Staff directory
  • Staff intranet - Goldmine
  • Graduate School - PGR students
  • Teaching and Learning Innovation Centre
  • Events admin
In this section

Breadcrumb navigation

  • Events
    • Degree Shows
    • Black History Month
  • Calendar

Phil Homburg (Sussex): 'Can a materialist dream? Marx and Benjamin on Fourier’s Utopianism'


6 Mar 2012, 5:00pm

305, Professor Stuart Hall Building

Event overview

Cost Free
Department Research Group in Continental Philosophy (InC)
Contact Sebastian Truskolaski

InC Seminar Series: 'The future: philosophy between utopia and end-time prophecy'

Phil Homburg (Sussex): 'Can a materialist dream? Marx and Benjamin on Fourier’s Utopianism'

Both Benjamin and Marx defend Fourier as an exemplary figure among the so-called Utopian Socialists, while, at the same time, criticizing Fourier on a number of grounds, particularly his hypostatization of labour and his adherence to certain mechanical materialist principles. Fourier’s radicalism, however, stands in stark contrast other Utopian Socialists. As Marx claims, Fourier differs from Proudhon—whom Marx called a petty-bourgeois utopian—in that his utopianism lies in anticipation and imagination of a new world, rather than ultimately siding with already existing social reality.

Despite this radicalism, however, it is necessary to examine the limits of Fourier thought, particularly his hypostatization of labour. Benjamin writings on Fourier demonstrate that his utopian construct—the phalanstère—is a unique synthesis of utopianism and mechanical materialism. Underlying this, however, is an antithesis between a utopian impulse and the inability to see beyond a subject and world governed by mechanical laws. Thus, while Fourier treats social reality as something that can be altered, the subject—an ahistorical physiological construct of natural impulses and passions— is treated as ontologically prior. As with his conception of labour, Fourier does not account for the historical specificity of his account. This paper aims to bring together the Marxian and Benjaminian criticisms of Fourier through a shared conception of the problem of natural history. Fourier’s account, despite its radical break with the existing social order, remains one-sided as long as it does not take into account the formation of the subject and the reciprocal relationship between that account and the critique of social reality.
Phillip Homburg is a DPhil candidate at the Centre for Social and Political Thought at Sussex University. His research is on Walter Benjamin’s materialism and his critique of neo-Kantian epistemology.

Dates & times

Date Time Add to calendar
6 Mar 2012 5:00pm
  • apple
  • google
  • outlook

Accessibility

If you are attending an event and need the College to help with any mobility requirements you may have, please contact the event organiser in advance to ensure we can accommodate your needs.

Event controls

  • About us
  • Accessibility statement
  • Contact us
  • Cookie use
  • Find us
  • Copyright and disclaimer
  • Jobs
  • Modern slavery statement
Admin login
  • Twitter
  • Linkedin
  • TikTok
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
© Goldsmiths, University of London Back to top