Digital society and multi-dimensional man (repositioning Marcuse’s "One-Dimensional Man")

A.Z. Chernyak, E. Lemanto

RUDN University

One of the major concerns of the social philosophy is the technological revolution and its impacts on the social systems. Critical views on the systems from the social philosophers depart from the social predicaments of their time. The pivotal critic of Karl Marx in his work of Das Capital, for example, is on poverty caused by the system of capitalism. Capitalism, for him, only produces various social downturns such as slavery, oppressions, exploitations and impoverishment. Herbert Marcuse, meanwhile, pointed at the same problem, but he came from a different point of view from Marx. Marcuse criticized the abundant society. In One Dimensional Man Marcuse rendered a couple of incisive critics on the industrial society. Industrial society, for him, is marked by the abundance and surplus but this society is still oppressed under a new type of slavery, called voluntary slavery. We may briefly say that both philosophers rendered critics on the same matter of the industrial society, but the two stood on the different position. Marx's critic was on the hungry and deficient society, while Marcuse on a satiated, plenteous and surplus society. The aim of this paper is to present of how Marcuse's One-Dimensional Man ends in the digital age.

Keywords: One-Dimensional Man, Multi-dimensional man, Dehumanization, Exploitation, Instrumentalization, Industrial society, Digital society, Capitalism

Цифровое общество и многомерный человек (новая постановка вопроса «одномерного человека» Маркузе)

А.З. Черняк, Э. Леманто

Одной из основных проблем социальной философии является технологическая революция и ее влияние на социальные системы. Критические взгляды на эти системы со стороны социальных философов отталкиваются от социальных проблем своего времени. Ключевым критическим тезисом Карла Маркса в его работе Das Capital является бедность, вызванная системой капитализма. Для него капитализм порождает только негативные социальные последствия, такие как рабство, угнетение, эксплуатация и обнищание. Герберт Маркузе указывает на ту же проблему, но выбирает иной угол зрения. Маркузе критикует общество изобилия. В «Одномерном человеке» Маркузе выступил с резкой критикой индустриального общества. Индустриальное общество, с его точки зрения, характеризуется изобилием и избытком, но это общество все еще угнетено новым типом рабства, называемым добровольным рабством. В итоге можно резюмировать: оба философа построили критику индустриального общества, но при этом стояли на разных позициях. Критика Маркса -- это критика общества недостатка, голодного и неполноценного, критика Маркузе -- критика сытого, обильного и избыточного общества. Цель этой статьи -- показать, как одномерный человек Маркузе заканчивается в цифровую эпоху.

Ключевые слова: одномерный человек, многомерный человек, дегуманизация, эксплуатация, инструментализация, индустриальное общество, цифровое общество, капитализм

1. Marcuse's One-Dimensional Man

The 18^th century was the industrial age, the zenith of the progress and the advancement of industries in European countries. The development is like a double- edged sword. On the one hand, the invention and the advancement of the industrial machineries help man producing goods on a large scale. But on the other hand, social problem arose. The advancement of the industrial technology coincided with the problem of social inequality between the capitalist class and the working class. Before the social problem, the social sciences are compelled to criticize.

The characteristic of the social philosophy since the time of Karl Marx's Das Capital (published in 1867) is unique. Das Capital was written as a radical criticism against capitalism of the industrial age. Capitalism, for Marx (1818--1883), solely bears an unjust social system and produces a wide social gap between the capitalist class and the working class. Capitalism alienates man from their humanity because of its oppressive system. For example in the system of labor, the employers are exploited for the sake of productivity. Marx named it as the greed of surplus-labor. Karl Marx. Capital: a Critique of Political Economy. Volume I. First Published In German in 1867 and English first edition in 1887. Moscow: Progress Publishers, 2015. P. 164. The discrepancy between the two classes is immensely extreme. The capitalist class is considered as the gorged class. They are the haves and the rich, while the working class as the starveling class. They are unskilled laborers, uneducated and poor. The relation between these two classes is not partnership, but exploitative like in the master-slave relation. The capitalists are the exploiters and the working class the exploited.

Marx's critical philosophy intends to criticize not only capitalism but also modernism. Modernism is defined as an advanced development of human civilization that is distinguished form the ancient time in all aspects such as character, way of living, worldview, actions, or quality of thought, beliefs, expression and technique. He obviously denotes the feebleness of modern rationality. The profound irony of modernism, for Marx, lies in the contradictory of the ideal goal of the project of modernism and its ill-impacts on the social system. This irony afflicts almost on all social systems from culture, religion, education, politic to the economy.

The primary concern of Marx's Das Capital is the defects of the economic system inherent in capitalism. Marx clearly shows the failure of capitalism. Basically the heading goal of industries and its giant machines, for him, is to alleviate human work physically. The machines replace human's physical works, but ironically it is for the sake of productivity and for the benefit of the capitalist class humans -- the working class -- are treated like robots. That is the same to say that the creation of the industrial machine is not to replace human physical work, but instead leads man to a robotizing process -- robotization; the process of turning a human being into a robot. Capitalism is the system that enslaves humans. In the presence of this social downturn Marx longs a classless society. It is a society that is egalitarian.

In the post-Marxist era social philosophy came up with distinctive social criticism. The post-Marxian philosophers generally were standing on the same line with Marx, but their underlying concern was dissimilar form him. Marx's attention was on the hungry working class and the post-Marxian social philosophers were on the abundant society. It is the same to say that Marx's critical philosophy renders strong criticism on the capitalism because it is exploitative, enslaved and impoverished the unskilled laborers. Some of Marx's social critics are still relevant for the next century that slavery remains, but the rest is irrelevant.

In the post-Marxian period, industrial society was marked by the abundance. Slavery remains existed but was more subtle. In Herbert Marcuse's words it is a smooth slavery. This subtle slavery was designed by the capitalist system that seemed egalitarian, but was actually exploitative and oppressive. The slavery is mantled by the fulfillment on the single aspect of human life that is economy; material needs. That is exactly the core point of Marcuse's analysis. His critical philosophy is on the abundant society. His insightful critic has its own place among the post-Marxist philosophers, particularly among the leading thinkers of the Frankfurt School (the group of philosophers of the Institut fьr Sozialforschung in Frankfurt, Germany) from Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Walter Benjamin, Herbert Marcuse to Jurgen Habermas.

This essay notably addresses the ideas of Marcuse. His position in the critical philosophy is noteworthy because of his observant analysis on the hidden defects of capitalism that bears the social injustice. Marcuse sharply unmasked all sorts of camouflage of the capitalist system. It is deceitful and contained of various forms of injustice, oppression and slavery. Many are deluded by the economic fulfillment, but Marcuse does not. He basically dismantled the deceptive components of the capitalist system. That abundant society, for Marcuse, stay remains in the new form of slavery. Public awareness is sedated by the system of capitalism that seems egalitarian, but is actually full of repression.

Marcuse's exhaustive research and analysis are convincingly presented in his two widely read tracts, Eros and Civilization and One-Dimensional Man. In his critics on the industrial society, Marcuse's analysis renounces the Freudian psychoanalytic perspective. Civilization, for Freud, necessarily supposes oppression. In Freudian worldview, society and its culture are formed through the process of human development. In his theory of human development and the theory of Oedipus complex, Freud stressed that a human being grows into an adult through pressures, suppression and through the process of restraint of their sexual desire. The desire of a child to have his own biological mother is suppressed by the presence of a father who is the symbol of the social order (laws, moral values, norms and ethics). Franz Magnis-Suseno. Dari Mao ke Marcuse. Jakarta: Penerbit PT Gramedia Pustaka Utama, 2013. P. 254.

Unlike Freud's psychoanalytic theory, Marcuse precisely observes that human civilization does not have to presuppose oppression. He refuses the presumption that civilization necessarily presupposes oppression. His observation on the capitalist system discovers a new system of suppression. Modern industrial systems and the capitalist system no longer work with oppressive mechanisms like in the ancient capitalism, but the new enslavement works in a very subtle way. Oppression in modern capitalism actually works with the law of attraction. In Marcuse's words, the suppression in Freudian worldview is replaced by Eros: enticement. See Herbert Marcuse. Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud, New York: Vintage Books, 1955. P. 185.

What makes the oppressive system in the ancient capitalism is transformed into enchanting oppression? Marcuse stresses that by fulfilling the economic needs of the working class the capitalist is able to mantle its oppressive system. It could be said that the fulfillment of the economic needs is a fetish blunting the consciousness of the working class to fight against the unjust system. See Herbert Marcuse. One-Dimensional Man. Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society, London: Routledge & Kegan, 1964. P. XIII.

The dimension unfulfilled in the Marxian society, for Marcuse, is completed in the modern industrial society through the fulfillment of the material needs, even though he realizes that poverty still exists. Indeed, there is a huge transformation from the time of Marx to the time Marcuse. As presented in the previous part that Marxian society is marked by the lacking, while Marcuse's society by the surplus. This surplus society, for Marcuse, is not critical society. They are not aware of the system repressing and exploiting them. The freedom they have is an illusion, because the totalitarian and the exploitative economic system are still imposed on them. We may briefly say that the life of modern industrial society is wholly controlled by the system that benefits the capitalist class.

If Marx longs a society capable rebelling against the exploitative system, Marcuse indeed longs the existence of a society that is aware of the covert exploitation of the capitalism. Why mindful society? The abundant society, for Marcuse, is a complacent society. It is a society that asocial. The fulfillment of material needs leads them to anti-social. It is a nonchalant society to the social issues. They are heedless and senseless of the exploitative and the oppressive system imposed to them. This satiated society accepts any unjust systems charged to them without critically questioning. They no longer are able to sort out the primary needs from secondary needs. The capitalist system creates needs which ultimately serve the economic interests of the capitalists themselves.

Marcuse's One-Dimensional Man is a critic of the totalitarian hegemony of capitalism, as well as criticism of the satiated society or the surplus society. This plenteous society is an apathetical society. They accept the whole system without questioning and resisting the unjust system, unfair policy and discriminative regulation imposed to them. This society is like a total passive society in front of the exploitative system charged to them. This society is unaware and less understanding of the importance of the other dimensions such social, culture, art, spirituality, solidarity, and other, except the material needs.

Placing human being only on that single dimension is a form of dehumanization. It is the same as saying that the oppressive systems imposed to the society place human beings like cattle. The working class is exploited like a flock for the benefits of the capitalists. They are like machines working beyond the human capability. The laborers are used like tools for the benefit of the capitalist. The question needed to be discussed here is that how human civilization should be built according to Marcuse? Is it possible to find the exit of the Freudian reality principle -- civilization necessarily presupposes oppression? Marcuse believes that the exit is possible through the development and the advancement of technology itself.

one dimensional man marcuse

2. Multi-Dimensional Man