감성의 정치경제학: 마사 누스바움(M. Nussbaum)과 칼 맑스(K. Marx)의 해방적 감성론을 중심으로

This paper begins by comparing and reviewing the aesthetics of the 19th century dialectical materialist Karl Marx and the 20th century feminism philosopher Martha Nussbaum. Though the critical mind differ due to the different time setting, but both Marx and Nussbaum recommends to focus on ‘humans as emotional existences’ in order to eradicate oppression, exploitation, exclusion and hate against humans. The two philosophers break from the traditional western reason paradigm that deems humans as an existence of rational self-fulfillment and propose the human existence with a ‘body’ as the most fundamental regulation of humans. To these two philosophers, before being rational entities, humans are sensible and emotional existences with bodies. But based on the human regulation as physical existences that act sensibly by Marx, attention is focused on the systematic exploitation resulting from 19th century industrial capitalism and the ensuing ‘alienation’ due to the fragmentation and deformation of human senses, while searching for solutions for this in radical criticism against capitalism and social practices that ensure revolution. Meanwhile, Nussbaum lays all of the imperfections and deficiencies of human existence from the human regulation as physical beings as the basis for human equality and dignity as physical existences, and then suggests ‘politics of love’ or ‘emotion-led politics’ as the alternative for discord and hate between races, nationalities, genders, classes and generations based on this. This paper roughly classifies the aesthetics of Marx and Nussbaum that achieves extensionality in the philosophical regulations on the human body, but have some fine differences in a few points and texture through the two concepts of ‘practice’ and ‘sympathy.’ Based on this, this paper claims that 1) the politics of love for a solidarity of emotions claimed by Nussbaum has more than enough practical validity today, but 2) Nussbaum’s politics of love should be supplemented through the social practice concept of Marx that guarantees criticism and problem-posing against capitalism. And through this, 3) it diagnoses the practical significance of Marx’s dialectical aesthetics and Nussbaum’s politics of sympathy in our world today in which the extreme concentration of wealth on very few people, worsening of poverty, and hate and stigmatizing of the socially vulnerable have become as common as the air we breathe.