Alienation the ‘Is-Ought’ Gap and two Sorts of Discord

Abstract

The notion of alienation has excited a great deal of interest in recent years, especially among reformists and revolutionists in social-scientific circles. Much of this interest would appear to be related to the widespread belief that this notion enables one to bridge the seemingly impassable gap between ‘is’ and ‘ought’, by means of an ‘ought not’ — and thereby to establish normative conclusions without paying the price of going beyond the limits of sound scientific method. Marx himself, whose rather recently discovered early writings initially inspired high hopes along these lines, seems to have been drawn to the notion for something like this reason. Before the already extensive alienation-literature is swelled even further, however, it is desirable and even imperative to pause and consider whether in fact the notion of alienation enables us to perform this remarkable feat. If it does, then social scientists and social philosophers are indeed fortunate. But if it does not, those who would continue to make use of it must revise their thinking about the status of the notion, and about the role(s) it is capable of playing in the kinds of intellectual endeavor in which it is to be employed.