Is there a decent argument against Marx's idea of a "species-being"?

>>9099594
>man's true nature
Foucault. Post structuralists in general actually.

>>9099594
>Is there a decent argument against Marx's idea of a "species-being"?
Not making a mess by mixing the young Feuerbach-reading Marx of 1844 with the rest of his opus. Especially when he attacks muh human nature in These VI the year after.

Luis Althusser's book For Marx is the best way to be introduced to the increasingly less humanistic progression of thought of Marx.

>>9099617
This looks perfect. An anti-humanism reading of Marx. Thanks

if you find the idea that man has a nature to be laughable, darwin is your cure, not philosophy.

you're a hairless ape with a big brain, that's all. just like chimps and bonobos have a nature, so do men

>>9099656
Well, yes, Darwin and Althusser are the reasons contemporary marxists* aren't too fond of the idea of a human nature. Foucault and post-structuralists picked up after Althusser who was a sensation in France.

*unless they're some kind of religious "marxists", then if they believe in souls unlike Marx did, chances are that that there's room for human nature as well

>>9099656
Believing that man has any inherent properties which raise him above nature, or that he can transcend his own animal nature is pure ideology

>>9099674
so you're agreeing with me

human nature is chimp nature plus a higher iq

this conflicts with the marxist view that so much of society is social constructed. it may be, but the social is just the consequence of biological, animal impulse, like everything else, and therefore a consequence of the genetic

>>9099729
But what's the point of making that argument? Unless you believe that nature steers us towards a certain kind of society, it's basically just semantics. Most advocates of naturalism use it as a cheap way to make an argument for their own worldview, which is retarded given that nobody can actually agree on what is fundamental human nature. Ultimately that is what "social constructivists" are arguing against, not the idea that nature forms generic, basis impulses, which social constructs are imposed upon.