Freedom and Technology (Planned book) - Revision history

Santiago Pinault: /* Reconstruction of the book */

2020-08-04T13:33:35Z

Reconstruction of the book

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:33, 4 August 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== ~~Reconstruction~~ of the book ==		== General thesis of the book ==

	~~=== General thesis =~~==
	“The thesis of the book is that in our Complex technological civilization there is inherent a basic loss of freedom, not of a legal or political but of an operational nature, which goes to the roots of the metaphysics of everyday life. Here lie the roots of our moral disorientation which leaves us helpless in the face of the portent of science, technology of the reality of society we gain is real. This is the meaning of maturity. (The last paragraphs of the "[[The Great Transformation\|Great Transformation]]” spoke of three revelations, but the thought was the same).”		“The thesis of the book is that in our Complex technological civilization there is inherent a basic loss of freedom, not of a legal or political but of an operational nature, which goes to the roots of the metaphysics of everyday life. Here lie the roots of our moral disorientation which leaves us helpless in the face of the portent of science, technology of the reality of society we gain is real. This is the meaning of maturity. (The last paragraphs of the "[[The Great Transformation\|Great Transformation]]” spoke of three revelations, but the thought was the same).”

	==~~= Chapters =~~==		== Book Content ==

	==== Introduction ====		=== Introduction ===
	'''Content''' - “The Introduction must be different and comprise the whole argument [that "a totally planned society is utterly rejected" but "in a mixed economy, we need a number of people with a profit motive we shouldn’t idealize them"]. It should be possible to start with Owen and go on to Marx and Shaw.”<ref>[[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#p40\|Weekend Notes XXII, 40]]</ref>		'''Content''' - “The Introduction must be different and comprise the whole argument [that "a totally planned society is utterly rejected" but "in a mixed economy, we need a number of people with a profit motive we shouldn’t idealize them"]. It should be possible to start with Owen and go on to Marx and Shaw.”<ref>[[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#p40\|Weekend Notes XXII, 40]]</ref>

	“The introduction would start from technology but would instantly proceed to the idea that adjustment to this involves reshaping human consciousness. The moral part is introduced by our criticism of the market.”<ref>[[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#p45\|Weekend Notes XXII, 45]]</ref>		“The introduction would start from technology but would instantly proceed to the idea that adjustment to this involves reshaping human consciousness. The moral part is introduced by our criticism of the market.”<ref>[[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#p45\|Weekend Notes XXII, 45]]</ref>

	==== (1.) The discovery of society / The social discontent ====		=== Chap. (1.) The discovery of society / The social discontent ===
	'''Why?''' -		'''Why?''' -

	'''Content''' -		'''Content''' -

	==== 2. The young Hegel ====		=== Chap. 2. The young Hegel ===
	'''Why?''' - “Chapter Two (…is) still to be written. [It is] about (Chp. 2) the young Hegel.”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>		'''Why?''' - “Chapter Two (…is) still to be written. [It is] about (Chp. 2) the young Hegel.”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>

	==== 3. The young Marx ====		=== Chap. 3. The young Marx ===
	'''Why?''' - “Chapter Three (…is) still to be written. [It is] about (…) the young Marx (Chp. 3)”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>		'''Why?''' - “Chapter Three (…is) still to be written. [It is] about (…) the young Marx (Chp. 3)”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>

	==== 4. On post-existentialist thought ====		=== Chap. 4. On post-existentialist thought ===
	'''Why?''' - “…there ought to be a Chapter Four: On post-existentialist thought.”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>		'''Why?''' - “…there ought to be a Chapter Four: On post-existentialist thought.”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>

	'''Content''' - …Research proved lengthy and difficult on account of the tortuous French. However, the paradox of Pasternak might offer a key to that of Sartre - both are noble representatives of a counter-revolutionary era, reactions to a barebones rationalism of the Fascist and Bolshevik holocaust. My wife remarked that Pasternak's gripping lyricism is a direct descendant of Jens Peter Jacobsen, the Danish poet (1885    ), and added: - but so is Sartre of Kierkegaard (1855    ), of course. In this light French existentialism (like Pasternak) <u>provokes a next step</u>. In practical terms this means that my positive thoughts on freedom may be easier to present in the face of Sartre: Pasternak than of Sartre alone.<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>		'''Content''' - …Research proved lengthy and difficult on account of the tortuous French. However, the paradox of Pasternak might offer a key to that of Sartre - both are noble representatives of a counter-revolutionary era, reactions to a barebones rationalism of the Fascist and Bolshevik holocaust. My wife remarked that Pasternak's gripping lyricism is a direct descendant of Jens Peter Jacobsen, the Danish poet (1885    ), and added: - but so is Sartre of Kierkegaard (1855    ), of course. In this light French existentialism (like Pasternak) <u>provokes a next step</u>. In practical terms this means that my positive thoughts on freedom may be easier to present in the face of Sartre: Pasternak than of Sartre alone.<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>

	==== (5.) Robert Owen ====		=== Chap. (5.) Robert Owen ===
	'''Why?''' - “The Owen chapter reflects his magic ease of writing. Our analysis of Owen's “second plans” (p. 22) and their interpretation (pp. 24-5) is new: hitherto these plans were ignored since they were as impraticable as the first. Actually they are of the very greatest interest for the understanding of Robert Owen's genius.”<ref>[[To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959)]], 12.</ref>		'''Why?''' - “The Owen chapter reflects his magic ease of writing. Our analysis of Owen's “second plans” (p. 22) and their interpretation (pp. 24-5) is new: hitherto these plans were ignored since they were as impraticable as the first. Actually they are of the very greatest interest for the understanding of Robert Owen's genius.”<ref>[[To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959)]], 12.</ref>

Line 54:		Line 52:
	He had three periods, the factory: unemployment, currency, and the business cycle, and Villages of Union, (which were impossible and would break down); and socialism.”<ref>[[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XIII#p14\|“Weekend Notes” XIII, 14]], </ref>		He had three periods, the factory: unemployment, currency, and the business cycle, and Villages of Union, (which were impossible and would break down); and socialism.”<ref>[[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XIII#p14\|“Weekend Notes” XIII, 14]], </ref>

	==== (6.) George Bernard Shaw ====		=== Chap. (6.) George Bernard Shaw ===
	'''Why?''' - <ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#Shaw_.285.29\|“Weekend Notes” XXII]]</ref>		'''Why?''' - <ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#Shaw_.285.29\|“Weekend Notes” XXII]]</ref>

	==== Conclusion ====		=== Part IV – The reform of consciousness ===
	'''~~Why?~~''' - “Preceding this chapter the Introduction would supply it on Owen (myself: and perhaps in the conclusion).”<ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XV#p4\|“Weekend Notes” XV [45/11, 4]]]</ref>		'''Why?''' - "Rousseau might open up the fourth part where we go on to the reform of consciousness and part of the Rousseau problem and the reform of consciousness would be something the West and East try to accept. The West would drop the profit motive and the East accept the democratic and individualistic implication of the Rousseau problem.”<ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#Shaw_.285.29\|“Weekend Notes” XXII, 40-41.]]</ref>

			This is an old question for Polanyi since "P. has a lecture which he gave on the emergence of reform of consciousness in 1927 or ‘29. P. gave this lecture to a small group[. …] The lecture was called "Reformietes Bewusstsein”. It maintained that first there was conscious religious consciousness and second to take upon oneself the burden of society with unalterable alternatives. Thirdly, the reform of consciousness was not absolute but it is a reform of consciousness which receives in itself the need for compromise as resignation, and turns without any qualification to the reaching of these ideals: "in fascism there is a false resignation – social reality is set as impossible to salve it. Out of this national socialism finds no way out but to attack the basic religious position”.<ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XIX#p31\|“Weekend Notes” XXII, 31-32]]</ref>

			=== Conclusion ===
			'''Content''' - “Preceding this chapter the Introduction would supply it on Owen (myself: and perhaps in the conclusion).”<ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XV#p4\|“Weekend Notes” XV [45/11, 4]]]</ref>

	== Contract ==		== Contract ==

Santiago Pinault: /* Introduction */

2020-08-04T13:10:35Z

Introduction

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:10, 4 August 2020
Line 7:		Line 7:

	==== Introduction ====		==== Introduction ====
	'''~~Why?~~''' -		'''Content''' - “The Introduction must be different and comprise the whole argument [that "a totally planned society is utterly rejected" but "in a mixed economy, we need a number of people with a profit motive we shouldn’t idealize them"]. It should be possible to start with Owen and go on to Marx and Shaw.”<ref>[[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#p40\|Weekend Notes XXII, 40]]</ref>

	~~'''Content''' -~~ “The introduction would start from technology but would instantly proceed to the idea that adjustment to this involves reshaping human consciousness. The moral part is introduced by our criticism of the market.”<ref>[[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#p45\|Weekend Notes XXII, 45]]</ref>		“The introduction would start from technology but would instantly proceed to the idea that adjustment to this involves reshaping human consciousness. The moral part is introduced by our criticism of the market.”<ref>[[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#p45\|Weekend Notes XXII, 45]]</ref>

	==== (1.) The discovery of society / The social discontent ====		==== (1.) The discovery of society / The social discontent ====

Santiago Pinault: /* (5.) Robert Owen */

2020-08-04T10:26:23Z

(5.) Robert Owen

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:26, 4 August 2020
Line 33:		Line 33:

	'''Content''' - “The chapter on Robert Owen might be written in the form of a prologue and three scenes.		'''Content''' - “The chapter on Robert Owen might be written in the form of a prologue and three scenes.
	The prologue might contain Robert Owen's original endowment:		The prologue might contain Robert Owen's original endowment:<br />
	1. Infinite compassion (p. 35, 40, 41).<br />		1. Infinite compassion (p. 35, 40, 41).<br />
	2. Boundless faith in reason (the visible fact)<br />		2. Boundless faith in reason (the visible fact)<br />

Santiago Pinault: /* (5.) Robert Owen */

2019-04-23T00:39:23Z

(5.) Robert Owen

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:39, 23 April 2019
Line 31:		Line 31:

	“We might call it “Robert Owen Discovers Society”, but P. said this of Aristotle.”<ref>[[Abraham Rotstein, Weekend Notes XV\|Weekend Notes XV [45/11, 6]]]</ref>		“We might call it “Robert Owen Discovers Society”, but P. said this of Aristotle.”<ref>[[Abraham Rotstein, Weekend Notes XV\|Weekend Notes XV [45/11, 6]]]</ref>

			'''Content''' - “The chapter on Robert Owen might be written in the form of a prologue and three scenes.
			The prologue might contain Robert Owen's original endowment:
			1. Infinite compassion (p. 35, 40, 41).<br />
			2. Boundless faith in reason (the visible fact)<br />
			3. Dedication unto death (pp. 94, 108, 109, 216).<br />
			4. Dread of revolution (anti-violence, gradualism, anti-anti…)<br />
			5. Gradualism (against prematureness)<br />
			6. Miracles of reason expected (in no time).<br />
			7. Tolerance - the fruit of knowledge (of what? society)<br />
			8. A weakly boy (never worked in a mill).<br />

			Scene 1:
			Owen stepped into hell – a secluded infant’s slaughter mill in the darkest Scottish congo, (these were not the highlands and there were no roads.) His father-in-law had notice the horde (500) of derelict pauper children and tried to help them. He came face to face with the children and the machines. Owen notices the adults too. They were all criminals. Also he saw the machine (p. 158).

			Scene 2:
			Twenty years of preparation in the wilderness. He was his own John the Baptist (p. 95, 154). There was a shower of miracles – general health, wealth, world fame. They were innumerable reminders to his audiences of this. Owen felt entirely the part of the saviour but was the selfless.

			Scene 3:
			Days of continuous revelation, 1813-1821 with 8 years of rededication. (p. 108, 111, 116, 119, 150). This was a typical climax of rededication, undaunted by the recognition of growing obstacles. (p. 108, 109). (Redeemed – p. 108). 1813 was the opining essay on the New View of Society, and in 1821 the Report to New Lanark. In every one of the steps during the 8 years, he says “it begins today”. The 25 years boom was at an end. All the wealth and fame came from the boom. From the factory came the discovery of unemployment and the whole of “society” emerges from the Villages.

			He had three periods, the factory: unemployment, currency, and the business cycle, and Villages of Union, (which were impossible and would break down); and socialism.”<ref>[[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XIII#p14\|“Weekend Notes” XIII, 14]], </ref>

	==== (6.) George Bernard Shaw ====		==== (6.) George Bernard Shaw ====

Santiago Pinault: /* (5.) Robert Owen */

2019-04-18T16:09:37Z

(5.) Robert Owen

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:09, 18 April 2019
Line 28:		Line 28:

	==== (5.) Robert Owen ====		==== (5.) Robert Owen ====
	'''Why?''' - “The Owen chapter reflects his magic ease of writing. Our analysis of Owen's “second plans” (p. 22) and their interpretation (pp. 24-5) is new: hitherto these plans were ignored since they were as impraticable as the first. Actually they are of the very greatest interest for the understanding of Robert Owen's genius.”<ref>~~See.~~ To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 12.</ref>		'''Why?''' - “The Owen chapter reflects his magic ease of writing. Our analysis of Owen's “second plans” (p. 22) and their interpretation (pp. 24-5) is new: hitherto these plans were ignored since they were as impraticable as the first. Actually they are of the very greatest interest for the understanding of Robert Owen's genius.”<ref>[[To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959)]], 12.</ref>

			“We might call it “Robert Owen Discovers Society”, but P. said this of Aristotle.”<ref>[[Abraham Rotstein, Weekend Notes XV\|Weekend Notes XV [45/11, 6]]]</ref>

	==== (6.) George Bernard Shaw ====		==== (6.) George Bernard Shaw ====

Santiago Pinault: /* (6.) George Bernard Shaw */

2019-04-18T14:05:21Z

(6.) George Bernard Shaw

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:05, 18 April 2019
Line 32:		Line 32:
	==== (6.) George Bernard Shaw ====		==== (6.) George Bernard Shaw ====
	'''Why?''' - <ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#Shaw_.285.29\|“Weekend Notes” XXII]]</ref>		'''Why?''' - <ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#Shaw_.285.29\|“Weekend Notes” XXII]]</ref>

			==== Conclusion ====
			'''Why?''' - “Preceding this chapter the Introduction would supply it on Owen (myself: and perhaps in the conclusion).”<ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XV#p4\|“Weekend Notes” XV [45/11, 4]]]</ref>

	== Contract ==		== Contract ==

Santiago Pinault: /* Reconstructed Table of Contents */

2019-04-06T22:31:05Z

Reconstructed Table of Contents

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:31, 6 April 2019
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== ~~Reconstructed Table~~ of ~~Contents~~ ==		== Reconstruction of the book ==

			=== General thesis ===
			“The thesis of the book is that in our Complex technological civilization there is inherent a basic loss of freedom, not of a legal or political but of an operational nature, which goes to the roots of the metaphysics of everyday life. Here lie the roots of our moral disorientation which leaves us helpless in the face of the portent of science, technology of the reality of society we gain is real. This is the meaning of maturity. (The last paragraphs of the "[[The Great Transformation\|Great Transformation]]” spoke of three revelations, but the thought was the same).”

	=== ~~2. The young Hegel~~ ===		=== Chapters ===
	~~'''Why?''' - “Chapter Two (…is) still to be written. [It is] about (Chp. 2) the young Hegel.”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>~~

	=== ~~3. The young Marx~~ ===		==== Introduction ====
	'''Why?''' - ~~“Chapter Three (…is) still to be written. [It is] about (…) the young Marx (Chp. 3)”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>~~		'''Why?''' -

	~~=== 4. On post-existentialist thought ===~~		'''Content''' - “The introduction would start from technology but would instantly proceed to the idea that adjustment to this involves reshaping human consciousness. The moral part is introduced by our criticism of the market.”<ref>[[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#p45\|Weekend Notes XXII, 45]]</ref>
	'''~~Why?~~''' - ~~“…there ought~~ to ~~be a Chapter Four: On post-existentialist thought~~.”<ref>~~See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959)~~, ~~11.~~</ref>

	'''~~Content~~''' - …Research proved lengthy and difficult on account of the tortuous French. However, the paradox of Pasternak might offer a key to that of Sartre - both are noble representatives of a counter-revolutionary era, reactions to a barebones rationalism of the Fascist and Bolshevik holocaust. My wife remarked that Pasternak's gripping lyricism is a direct descendant of Jens Peter Jacobsen, the Danish poet (1885&nsbp;&nsbp;&nsbp;&nsbp;), and added: - but so is Sartre of Kierkegaard (1855&nsbp;&nsbp;&nsbp;&nsbp;), of course. In this light French existentialism (like Pasternak) <u>provokes a next step</u>. In practical terms this means that my positive thoughts on freedom may be easier to present in the face of Sartre: Pasternak than of Sartre alone.<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>		==== (1.) The discovery of society / The social discontent ====
			'''Why?''' -

	~~=== The discovery of society ===~~		'''Content''' -

	=== The ~~social discontent~~ ===		==== 2. The young Hegel ====
			'''Why?''' - “Chapter Two (…is) still to be written. [It is] about (Chp. 2) the young Hegel.”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>

	=== ~~Robert Owen~~ ===		==== 3. The young Marx ====
			'''Why?''' - “Chapter Three (…is) still to be written. [It is] about (…) the young Marx (Chp. 3)”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>

			==== 4. On post-existentialist thought ====
			'''Why?''' - “…there ought to be a Chapter Four: On post-existentialist thought.”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>

			'''Content''' - …Research proved lengthy and difficult on account of the tortuous French. However, the paradox of Pasternak might offer a key to that of Sartre - both are noble representatives of a counter-revolutionary era, reactions to a barebones rationalism of the Fascist and Bolshevik holocaust. My wife remarked that Pasternak's gripping lyricism is a direct descendant of Jens Peter Jacobsen, the Danish poet (1885    ), and added: - but so is Sartre of Kierkegaard (1855    ), of course. In this light French existentialism (like Pasternak) <u>provokes a next step</u>. In practical terms this means that my positive thoughts on freedom may be easier to present in the face of Sartre: Pasternak than of Sartre alone.<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>

			==== (5.) Robert Owen ====
			'''Why?''' - “The Owen chapter reflects his magic ease of writing. Our analysis of Owen's “second plans” (p. 22) and their interpretation (pp. 24-5) is new: hitherto these plans were ignored since they were as impraticable as the first. Actually they are of the very greatest interest for the understanding of Robert Owen's genius.”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 12.</ref>

	=== George Bernard Shaw ===		==== (6.) George Bernard Shaw ====
	<ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#Shaw_.285.29\|“Weekend Notes” XXII]]</ref>		'''Why?''' - <ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#Shaw_.285.29\|“Weekend Notes” XXII]]</ref>

	== Contract ==		== Contract ==

Santiago Pinault at 21:42, 6 April 2019

2019-04-06T21:42:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:42, 6 April 2019
Line 1:		Line 1:
	== Reconstructed Table of ~~contents~~ ==		== Reconstructed Table of Contents ==


			=== 2. The young Hegel ===
			'''Why?''' - “Chapter Two (…is) still to be written. [It is] about (Chp. 2) the young Hegel.”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>

			=== 3. The young Marx ===
			'''Why?''' - “Chapter Three (…is) still to be written. [It is] about (…) the young Marx (Chp. 3)”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>

			=== 4. On post-existentialist thought ===
			'''Why?''' - “…there ought to be a Chapter Four: On post-existentialist thought.”<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>

			'''Content''' - …Research proved lengthy and difficult on account of the tortuous French. However, the paradox of Pasternak might offer a key to that of Sartre - both are noble representatives of a counter-revolutionary era, reactions to a barebones rationalism of the Fascist and Bolshevik holocaust. My wife remarked that Pasternak's gripping lyricism is a direct descendant of Jens Peter Jacobsen, the Danish poet (1885&nsbp;&nsbp;&nsbp;&nsbp;), and added: - but so is Sartre of Kierkegaard (1855&nsbp;&nsbp;&nsbp;&nsbp;), of course. In this light French existentialism (like Pasternak) <u>provokes a next step</u>. In practical terms this means that my positive thoughts on freedom may be easier to present in the face of Sartre: Pasternak than of Sartre alone.<ref>See. To Thomas A. Bledsoe (3 January 1959), 11.</ref>

	=== The discovery of society ===		=== The discovery of society ===

	=== The social discontent ===		=== The social discontent ===

	=== Robert Owen ===		=== Robert Owen ===
	~~=== G.W.F. Hegel ===~~
	~~=== Karl Marx ===~~
	=== Bernard Shaw ===
			=== George Bernard Shaw ===
	<ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#Shaw_.285.29\|“Weekend Notes” XXII]]</ref>		<ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#Shaw_.285.29\|“Weekend Notes” XXII]]</ref>

Line 37:		Line 51:
	=== The Speech ===		=== The Speech ===
	* [[Freedom and Technology (Speech)]]		* [[Freedom and Technology (Speech)]]

			== References ==

			<references />

Santiago Pinault at 20:09, 6 April 2019

2019-04-06T20:09:38Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:09, 6 April 2019
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~{{English to type}}~~		== Reconstructed Table of contents ==

			=== The discovery of society ===
			=== The social discontent ===

	== ~~Reconstructed Table of contents~~ ==		=== Robert Owen ===
			=== G.W.F. Hegel ===
			=== Karl Marx ===
			=== Bernard Shaw ===
			<ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#Shaw_.285.29\|“Weekend Notes” XXII]]</ref>

	* Robert Owen		== Contract ==
	* G.W.F. Hegel		{{English to type}}
	* Karl Marx
	* Bernard Shaw<ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#Shaw_.285.29\|“Weekend Notes” XXII]]</ref>

	== Text Informations ==		== Text Informations ==

Santiago Pinault at 15:09, 6 April 2019

2019-04-06T15:09:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:09, 6 April 2019
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{English to type}}		{{English to type}}

			== Reconstructed Table of contents ==

			* Robert Owen
			* G.W.F. Hegel
			* Karl Marx
			* Bernard Shaw<ref>See. [[Abraham_Rotstein,_Weekend_Notes_XXII#Shaw_.285.29\|“Weekend Notes” XXII]]</ref>

	== Text Informations ==		== Text Informations ==
	'''Reference''':<br />		'''Reference''':<br />
	'''Date''': [[1957]]<br />		'''Date''': [[1957]]-[[1958]]<br />
	'''KPA''': [[38/13]] (contracts, 10 p.)<br />		'''KPA''': [[38/13]] (contracts, 10 p.)<br />
	'''Other Languages''':		'''Other Languages''':