Ethics and Philosophy of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels - Essay Example

Ethics and Philosophy Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels have been close friends and partners since 1844. Sharing the same views on capitalism and finding common ground in other aspects of numerous theoretical fields, it only made sense to them that they should work together. It was noted that “it was a good partnership, whereas Marx was at his best when dealing with difficult abstract concepts, Engels had the ability to write for a mass audience.” In concern with equality, Marx and Engel believed that “economic inequalities do not affect political equalities.” They also believed that equality should not be focused on specific individuals or citizens, but on complete classes. In their eyes, they only thing to decide an inequality is based on who owns the means of economic productions and those who do not have the means to do so. Another basis of inequality is said to be found in the differences between the sexes. This can have a foundation in economic inequality. “For Marx, the central normative problem with capitalism is not simply the poverty or powerlessness of the proletariat or the inequality between the classes in and of itself. The central problem is that no one is truly free in a capitalist regime.” Marx and Engel agree that the nature of our species is to produce things that we need to survive, as well as things that we can sell for monetary survival. People that have others produce their goods are considered to not be free; it alienates people from their nature as producers. This would mean, then, that freedom would mean the end of alienation and the conclusion that people are meant to be producers of their own goods. Capitalism is an economic and social system that claims the means of production should be privately owned, are operated for profit, and gain investments, distributions, and income, all at the costs and leadership of the “inventor,” so to speak. If the means of production is handed down to someone who was not a part of the original plan, than it is not considered capitalism. Capitalism was the first thing to heavily provide the means for the industrialization around the world. In concern with modern capitalism and equalities, it is debated whether or not economic inequalities have anything to do with political equalities. The argument is that “if a political economic system provides all persons with an equal opportunity to succeed, then inequality of outcome or result is acceptable.” Whether they make their own means of produce or not has no place in equalities or inequalities. Class status only reflects the work ethics and aptitudes of individuals, and has no place in an entire class. To make things “equal,” the power of the government would have to sacrifice already free lives and rights to provide genuine equality, which is unadvisable. Peter Singer in an Australian philosopher and was born in 1946. He specializes in practical ethics, such as viewing ethical issues from an atheistic and utilitarian perspective. He also had something to say on the ideas of inequality and equality, things of which contradicted the ideas of Marx and Engel. The first major difference is that Singer has more concern for animal rights and equalities than he has for humans. As quoted by Peter Singer himself, “the kind of equality I care about is equal consideration. […] the pain of a member of our own species is still radical.” Singer believes that to produce equality, there should be a greater act in getting and keeping people happy and content, and a lesser concern with getting people angered and not content. Unfortunately, as Singer points out, the biggest conflict in achieving this is that people must be able to give equal consideration to the pleasing preferences of each other. People will be trading equality for equality; it seems to be an impossible task, seeing as this is not a case of “fighting fire with fire.” Peter Singer is approaching equality in an almost nonconventional way, while Marx and Engel are going at it from economic and political points of view. It can be assumed that Peter Singer is going about it the proper way, in the sense that he is thinking of a more logical approach (although the “equality for equality” might be the biggest failing). Marx and Engel are going about it in a sense that people are willing to go about doing their own work, as opposed to hiring others to do it. As with many things that help to control our economy and politics, capitalism has its pluses and negatives. Capitalism is a good thing to follow because it allows people to earn what they put into their productions as far as their efforts are concerned. However, looking from a different point of view, if one were to hire people to do the work for them, these people would be paid. Whether a person is making their own product or is having others do it for them, they still end up in the same area: they are being paid for the products they create and sell, and are being compensated for their actual work. A negative aspect of capitalism is that not many of the specific items can be produced by just a few people. Industrialism has seen to it that many of one specific thing can be made in a short span of time. This goes against the idea of capitalism. A person must be responsible for their own work, and yet they can only get so much done on their own. Peter Singer’s idea is that each individual can help one another in their productions, as well as in many other aspects of life, just as long as they are able to appreciate what it is that each person wants. It has to do with cooperation and gaining an understanding of each other. Singer’s ideas go against the foundations of capitalism in all of its ways. Each side has viable arguments and good supportive facts to prove that their ideas would be best in the long run. Unfortunately, with industrialism taking over, neither of these options would be of much help in this world today. Read More