Page 250 - Communication and the Evolution of Society

227 Notes

cept that exhibits the same duality, namely that of the holy. The holy
object instills in us, if not fear, then certainly respect, which keeps us
at a distance from it. At the same time it is an object of love and de-
sire; we aspire to get closer to it, we strive toward it. Thus we have to
do here with a double feeling.” Cf. also A. Gehlen’s theses on “‘inde-
terminate obligations” in Urmensch und Spatkultur (Bonn, 1956), pp.
154 ff.
17. On the concepts of “internal” and “external” nature, cf. J. Haber-
mas, Knowledge and Human Interests (Boston, 1971), and Legitimation
Crisis (Boston, 1975), pp. 8 ff.
18. Stalin, Dialectical and Historical Materialism.
19. J. Pecirka, “Von der asiatischen Produktionsweise zu einer marx-
istischen Analyse der friithen Klassengesellschaften,” Ezrene 6 (Prague,
1967), pp. 141-174; and L. V. Danilova, “Controversial Problems of the
Theory of Precapitalist Societies,” Soviet Anthropology and Archeology, 9
(Spring 1971): 269-327.
20. M. Godelier, Perspectives in Marxist Anthropology (Cambridge,
1976).
21. Recently, O. Marquardt, Schwierigkeiten mit der Geschichtsphi-
losophie (Frankfurt, 1973).
22. Cf. the preceding essay.
23. In an unpublished manuscript on the theory of evolution, Niklas
Luhmann expresses doubts about the applicability of the concept of mo-
tion in this connection.
24. Luhmann points this out in the manscript mentioned in n. 23.
25. Cf. my critique of Luhmann in J. Habermas, N. Luhmann, Theorie
der Gesellschaft (Frankfurt, 1971), pp. 150 ff; cf. also R. Débert, Sys-
temtheorie und die Entwicklung religiéser Deutungssysteme (Frankfurt,
1973), pp. 66 ff.
26. For example, H. Gericke, in “Zur Dialektik von Produktivkraft
und Produktionsverhiltnis im Feudalismus,” Zeitschrift fur Geschichts-
wissenschaft, 16(1966):914-932, distinguishes the “increasingly higher
degree of mastery of nature” from the “increasingly maturer forms of
corporate social life’: ‘““The most important criteria and the decisive fac-
tors in historical progress are improvement of productive forces, espe-
cially the increase in conscious, goal-directed, success-oriented activity of
immediate producers, as well as altered productive relations, which per-
mit an evet increasing number of people to participate competently and
actively in economic, social, political, and cultural processes” (pp. 918-
919).
27. K. Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, M.
Dobb, ed. (New York, 1970), Preface, pp. 20-21.
28. K. Kautsky, Die maserialistische Geschichtsau ffassung, 2 vols. (Ber-
lin, 1927), vol. 1, pp. 817-818.