No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 July 2024
The term “alienation” designates a state which is simultaneously both cognitive and affective in character.* It involves an awareness of the other and a felt estrangement from it, accompanied with a feeling that this ought not to be so. The “otherness” of the other is a necessary precondition for the feeling of alienation, but the “other” is only a correlate of the “I” in reference to which alone alienation can ever arise. Things are not related by the relation of “I-other,” nor can they possibly be related by it. Even among animals the relation is only implicit, for the consciousness of the “I” is never explicitly there. With man, who is essentially a being conscious of himself, the relation “I-other” constitutes the very essence of his distinctive being in this world.
This is a slightly revised version of one of the articles presented at the Fifth East-West Philosophers Conference on “Alienation of Man,” held from 22nd June to 26th July, 1969, at Honolulu, Hawaii, U.S.A. It provided the background for the Fifth week's discussion at the Conference devoted to Philosophy of Alienation.
1 The terms "anomie" and "alienation" are generally used to refer to different, though related, phenomena. The first refers primarily to the individual psyche while the latter does so to social classes. However, the difference is not very relevant to the point I am trying to make here.
2 John Horton, "The Dehumanization of Anomie and Alienation: A Problem in the Ideology of Sociology," British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 15, 1964, pp. 283-98.
3 Leo Srole, "Social Integration and Certain Corollaries," American Socio logical Review, December, 1956.
4 Gwynn Nettler, "A Measure of Alienation," American Sociological Review, December, 1957.
5 Melvin Seeman, "On the Meaning of Alienation," American Sociological Review, December, 1959.
6 Dwight Dean, "Meaning and Measurement of Alienation," American So ciological Review, October, 1961.
7 The hold of authority as a constraint on thought is supposed to be a special characteristic of Oriental cultures. It is, however, amusing to see the great care taken by disciplines to ensure the unsullied purity of thought of a Marx or Freud or Wittgenstein against the supposed contaminations of deviant heretics or unrespectful, independent innovators.
8 This notion of self as essentially alone should not be confused with Melvin Seeman's notion of isolation, which he defines in terms of "Low reward value to goals or beliefs that are typically highly valued in the given society " (p. 789. Italics author's). The author does not seem to reflect that on this definition all creative innovators would inevitably be suffering from alienation. Further, the inclusion of both beliefs and goals in the definition complicates the situation further by treating cognitive and conative deviation on a par, while in most societies other than the strictly totalitarian ones they tend to be treated differently.
9 John P. Clark, "Measuring Alienation within a Social System," American Sociological Review, 1959, p. 849.
10 Leo Srole, "Social Integration and Certain Corollaries," American Socio logical Review, December, 1956, pp. 709-716.
11 "Rightly or not, what I am after in the long run is a social-psychological test of the logic and limits of mass society theory." Melvin Seeman, "A Reply," American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 70, 1964-65, p. 82.
12 Alienation and Freedom: The Factory Worker and His Industry, Chicago and London, University of Chicago Press, 1964, p. 15.
13 Ibid, p. ix.
14 The term, "classical," it should be remembered, has different implications in the realm of art and literature on the one hand and of science on the other. In science the classical formulations are bound to be outmoded and inadequate, while in art and literature they have a perennial value and serve as standards of achievement. Yet even there a bondage to them would reveal a lack of creativity in the individual or culture which perpetuates it.
15 Toynbee, Change and Habit: The Challenge of Our Time, London, Oxford University Press, 1966, p. 212.
16 The same limitation applies to Professor Merton's discussion also. His delineation of anomie as resulting from a discrepancy between the culturally prescribed aspirations and the socially structured avenues for realizing them could not be considered as peculiar to any one culture.
You have
Access