Rational Choice Marxism

Carling, Alan

doi:10.1007/978-1-349-24183-5_3

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Roemer, unlike in neoclassical theory, crucial to Marxism, and to RCM, is ‘a commitment to the malleability of human preferences, to the social formation of the individual’ (Roemer, 1986b, p. 201; see also Roemer, 1988, p. 62, 1989, p. 378). And a similar emphasis on the essential relevance of endogenous preferences can be found in many other RCM writings (Przeworski, 1985b, p. 384; Carling, 1986, p. 55; Mayer, 1989, p. 421ff).…”

Section: Lost In Translation: Structural Constraints and Endogenoumentioning

confidence: 52%

“…Methodologically, to acknowledge the importance of social structures and of the social formation of individuals supports an anti‐reductionist perspective which allows for ‘the irreducibility of macro‐level accounts to … micro‐level explanations’ (Wright et al ., 1992, p. 115). Further, it raises doubts on the standard model of agency endorsed by RCM and on the narrow view that ‘it is only within the rational‐choice context that some of the leading items on the classical agenda of Marxist theory … can be fruitfully discussed’ (Carling, 1986, p. 55). As shown in this paper, the standard conception of agency is rather un suitable to analyse various core issues in Marxist theory.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…C1’ and C4’ are much stronger than C1 and C4, and, contrary to a common misconception (Carling, 1986, 1990; Hunt, 1986; Hunt, 1992; Kirkpatrick, 1994; Philp and Young, 2002; Tarrit, 2006), Definition 2 incorporates a strongly reductionist stance that is not shared by all analytical Marxists 10 . For example, Cohen's (1978) interpretation of HM relies on functional explanations; Van Parijs (1982; 1993, chapter 4) supports the search for micro‐foundations but does not subscribe to C4’; Wright et al .…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Second, given its analytical, rather than historical focus, this paper does not provide a thorough analysis of AM from the viewpoint of the history of thought. A detailed account of the birth and development of AM and of the so‐called ‘September group’, which started to meet in London in 1979, can be found in Carling (1986),Wright (1989, 2001) and Levine (2003) 3 . This paper does suggest, however, an original interpretation of the different trajectories of AM and RCM from the viewpoint of the history of thought that focuses on the narrower methodological commitments of RCM and on the limits of its analytical models.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6 6 This may partly explain the debate in the literature concerning the adherents of AM. See Carling (1986), Ware (1989), Wood (1989), Mayer (1994) and Tarrit (2006). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Analytical Marxism

Veneziani

2010

Journal of Economic Surveys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides a comprehensive survey of the literature on Analytical Marxism (AM) and analyses its relevance for social theory. AM is precisely defined and distinguished from Rational Choice Marxism (RCM). The different substantive implications of the two approaches are discussed: according to RCM, the role of Marxism in the social sciences is exhausted, whereas AM has reconstructed a set of propositions that aim to provide the foundations of a distinctive approach in social theory. The methodological debate around and within AM is analysed and the shortcomings of methodological individualism and rational choice theory are stressed, raising doubts on the claim that RCM is the only scientific approach to Marx's theory. Yet, wholesale rejections on a priori methodological or exegetical grounds are questioned. A focused, immanent critique of RCM is developed, which emphasizes the lack of an adequate analysis of structural constraints and endogenous preferences in RCM models. It is argued that the analysis of endogenous preferences and structural constraints is consistent with an anti-reductionist AM approach and it may provide the outline of a fertile, distinctive research programme in explanatory social theory that builds on the core of Marxism identified by AM.

show abstract

Section: Lost In Translation: Structural Constraints and Endogenoumentioning

confidence: 52%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6 6 This may partly explain the debate in the literature concerning the adherents of AM. See Carling (1986), Ware (1989), Wood (1989), Mayer (1994) and Tarrit (2006). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Analytical Marxism

Veneziani

2010

Journal of Economic Surveys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Hauptwerke der Ungleichheitsforschung

Eickelpasch¹,

Müller²,

Voß³

et al. 2003

Hauptwerke Der Ungleichheitsforschung

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hegel, Marxism and Mysticism

Fraser

2000

Bull. Hegel Soc. G.B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marx's comments on Hegel's philosophy have left an ambiguous legacy for Marxism. One pervasive theme, though, is the interpretation of Hegel's idealist philosophy as being shrouded in mysticism. Marx's main contribution, according to this view, was to demystify Hegel's thought through a more materialist dialectical approach. At the same time, however, there have been those who have sought to rupture this Hegel-Marx connection and purge Hegelianism from Marxism altogether. Appropriate and expunge have therefore been the two main responses to Hegel's influence on Marxism. I will argue against these traditions, however, to assert a more direct relationship between Hegel's and Marx's dialectic. To do so, I want to identify some of the main Marxist thinkers that can be linked with the two main schools above. I will term these the Hegelian-Marxist Materialist Appropriators and the Idealist Expungers. In contrast I put forward the Hegelian-Marxist Materialist school which states that ultimately the dialectic of Hegel is the dialectic of Marx. Before this, I begin by considering some examples of Marx's critique of Hegel. The leitmotif of this critique is a depiction of Hegel's dialectic as mystical or idealistic in contrast to Marx's more materialist dialectic. As we shall see, such a criticism was begun by Marx, perpetuated by Engels as ‘orthodox’ Marxism and ultimately accepted even by those who sought to place themselves within an Hegelian-Marxist tradition.

show abstract

Rational Choice Marxism

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

Analytical Marxism

Analytical Marxism

Hauptwerke der Ungleichheitsforschung

Hegel, Marxism and Mysticism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About