Karl Marx vs Georg Simmel Key Ideas.
Order#21081455
Creating a conversation refers to Kari Marx’s and Georg Simmel’s key ideas
Pages: 2
Deadline: 2hrs
The past two weeks we talked about different classical sociological theorists and sociological frameworks. Based on course readings and material covered during lecture, you will have a choice of two essay topics. Choose only one of the following options (and clearly indicate which option #1 or #2 you chose):
Option #1
I want you to consider the following scenario: Karl Marx and Georg Simmel walk into a cafeteria. They sit at the same table. And they begin talking with each other.
What would Marx and Simmel talk about? What do their theories about society have in common? How do their theories differ?
The goal here is to pretend you are observing/overhearing a back-and-forth conversation (at the lunch table) between two of sociology’s classical theorists. As you construct this imaginary dialogue, you must demonstrate a thorough understanding of each theorist’s key ideas (which were covered during lecture and course readings). Your creativity will be rewarded.
This essay must be between 600-700 words.
Karl Marx vs. Georg Simmel
If you happen to walk in a cafeteria, occupy a lone table, and listen keenly to other people’s conversation, much may unravel before your eyes. In my academic journey, I have always been used to overhearing conversations that do not shape my life that much. However, in one of the recent lunch breaks, I popped into some well-known sociologist, and I had to confirm from the phone archives whether the ideal images corresponded to the personalities. Arguably I was among the lucky individuals and I chose to listen keenly as the two scholars engaged in a battle of wits. I was interested to know what the two individuals will talk about, similarities between their theories, and also differences.
The initial conversation the two scholars had to catch up one was the originality and historical aspect of their contributions in sociology. Simmel agreed that in his workings, he generally stands out as being Micro, while Marx was classified as being macro. The analogy configured with my analogy, and I was quick to monitor their lively recurring interaction. Karl max explained that being born in Germany contributed to the scope of his studies that revolved around politics, economics, and sociology (Marx, 2020). He went ahead to explain that he configures the term Marxist and associates it with overwhelming influence realized from his workings. Further, Max accounted for an existing close relationship with his father and accredited it to the strong character accorded to him. Simmel recognized that his background and upraising was similar to Marx and the unraveling increased the intensity and cohesion between them. Finally, Simmel explained of how he lost his father in 1874 and, with the turn of events, requested heightened debate to reduce the emotional captivity within the room.
As the conversation deepened, they pointed out some similarities in their theories within society. At first, they agreed that individualism by Simmel and capitalism by Marx served to shape the financial world within the community. Simmel agreed that his theory on consumerism has facilitated in molding the world as compared to how it was initially. Both believed that economy had played a significant role in altering, defining, and designing modern life. In their economic theory, they pointed out that consumerism has been diversified to materialism in the modern world (Marx, 2020). Arguably they conformed to the ideology that their economic theories and aspect of money shaped the society to individuals with both givers and receivers. Rise of funds has been soul reason for a detached endeavor between the two sociologists, and they did not fail to recognize that. Ultimately, I can confirm that I enjoyed the similarity bit as they pointed out the cognitive and theoretical similarities of their work in modern society.
Another mouth-watering conversation was fitted up when Marx suggested that they can divert their attention to the differences existing their theories. Simmel did not fail to respond, and one alluding concept that came along was an analogy related to alienation. The mentioning of the word struck my nerves, and I had to request for some additional coffee to keep me going. Marx’s correct version stood out as a revolutionary who is out seeking to guide the masses in achieving the impossibilities of the earth (Marx, 2020). In particular, the development of a new society, free from alienation and any existing ruins. Dually, Simmel believes in the idea of cultivation as the driving force towards the realization of an alienated society (Simmel, 2020). Intellectual integrity and attainment of scientific milestones allude to investment in personal abilities guiding one to attain the desired goals. Generally, Marxist believes in incitement while Simmel configures individual experience to shape the direct experiences.
When the interaction finally came to an end, I went back to school rethinking and configuring of such a crucial moment. It was an experience of its kind. An academic lunch it was since I understood the ideal insights scholars could engage in when they finally meet and how they appreciate their similarities and differences.
References
Marx, K. (2020). Classical Theorists and Their Ideas. Presentation.
Simmel, G. (2020). Social Interaction. Presentation.