David Leopold

Traditional explanations of multistable visual phenomena (e.g. ambiguous figures, perceptual rivalry) suggest that the basis for spontaneous reversals in perception lies in antagonistic connectivity within the visual system. In this review, we suggest an alternative, albeit speculative, explanation for visual multistability – that spontaneous alternations reflect responses to active, programmed events initiated by brain areas that integrate sensory and non-sensory information to coordinate a diversity of behaviors. Much evidence suggests that perceptual reversals are themselves more closely related to the expression of a behavior than to passive sensory responses: (1) they are initiated spontaneously, often voluntarily, and are influenced by subjective variables such as attention and mood; (2) the alternation process is greatly facilitated with practice and compromised by lesions in non-visual cortical areas; (3) the alternation process has temporal dynamics similar to those of spontaneously initiated behaviors; (4) functional imaging reveals that brain areas associated with a variety of cognitive behaviors are specifically activated when vision becomes unstable. In this scheme, reorganizations of activity throughout the visual cortex, concurrent with perceptual reversals, are initiated by higher, largely non-sensory brain centers. Such direct intervention in the processing of the sensory input by brain structures associated with planning and motor programming might serve an important role in perceptual organization, particularly in aspects related to selective attention

Facial appearance changes with age and health affecting skin color as well as facial and head hair. Yet somehow the brain is able to see past shared structure and dynamic deformations to focus on subtle details that distinguish one face from another. This article argues that the brain takes an efficient approach to this problem using prior knowledge about the structure of faces in its analysis. It employs intrinsic norms to focus on subtle variations in the shared face configuration that differentiate one face from another. The study reviews evidence that the brain uses multiple norms to extract face identity that these norms are shaped by visual experience, and that norm-based coding is well-suited to meeting the challenges of image-based face perception mentioned above. By encoding faces with reference to stored perceptual norms the visual system can focus on what is unique to each individual, allowing for the discrimination of thousands of faces despite their similarity.

This chapter discusses the account of ideology found in the writings of Karl Marx, and its fate in the subsequent Marxist tradition. Marx understood ideology as consisting of certain social ideas which periodically dominate in class-divided societies. More precisely, ideology was characterized as having a particular epistemological standing, social origin, and class function. In the subsequent Marxist tradition that ‘critical’ account was often displaced by non-critical, predominately ‘descriptive’, accounts of ideology. This historical pattern is exemplified by the writings of Antonio Gramsci and Louis Althusser. This displacement of critical by descriptive accounts is portrayed as regrettable, not least because it involves a loss of the explanatory purchase and emancipatory potential found in Marx’s original account.

The Young Karl Marx is an innovative and important new study of Marx’s early writings. These writings provide the fascinating spectacle of a powerful and imaginative intellect wrestling with complex and significant issues, but they also present formidable interpretative obstacles to modern readers. David Leopold shows how an understanding of their intellectual and cultural context can illuminate the political dimension of these works. An erudite yet accessible discussion of Marx’s influences and targets frames the author’s critical engagement with Marx’s account of the emergence, character, and (future) replacement of the modern state. This combination of historical and analytical approaches results in a sympathetic, but not uncritical, exploration of such fundamental themes as alienation, citizenship, community, antisemitism, and utopianism. The Young Karl Marx is a scholarly and original work which provides a radical and persuasive reinterpretation of Marx’s complex and often misunderstood views of German philosophy, modern politics, and human flourishing

This article examines Friedrich Engels's little noticed communitarian sympathies, especially as expressed in his 1844 article 'kommunistischen Ansiedlungen'. These sympathies are in conflict with the considered and more critical view of communitarian socialism that he subsequently came to share with Karl Marx. I have four ambitions in the article: first, to provide some characterisation of this 'communitarian moment' in Engels's early intellectual evolution; second, to raise a number of worries about the argument of this particular article; third, to illuminate some of the interesting variety in nineteenth-century communitarianism; and fourth, to insist on the complexity of questions about 'feasibility'. I maintain that Engels underestimates the variety of contemporary communitarianism, and that his appeal to the existence of intentional communities in America and Britain as proof of the feasibility of communism is unsuccessful

“utopophobia” is a diverse and long-established phenomenon. Recent discussion of the notion of “realism” in political philosophy has illuminated one form that the fear of utopia can take—namely, suspicion and disapproval of normative standards that are unlikely ever to be achieved—but has not exhausted all that is of interest here.1 The present paper is concerned with a different variety of utopophobia: namely, the historically influential but not well-understood hostility of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels toward the provision of plans and blueprints of the ideal society of the future.2There seems little doubt about the existence of this Marxian utopophobia. (Note that I use the..

INTRODUCTION It is a commonplace to observe that the left-Hegelian Max Stirner is little-known.gure in the history of political and philosophical thought. However, that obscurity should not be exaggerated. The author of Der Einzige und sein Eigentum is not only familiar to certain rather specialised and largely academic circles-those with an interest in Hegelianism, for example, or in the early intellectual development of Karl Marx -he is also, and more widely, known as a member of, and in.uence upon, the anarchist tradition. Stirner's best-known work is often excerpted in anthologies of anarchist writings, and his name is regularly included as part of the modern pantheon in historically orientated surveys of anarchist thought.