Classical Frameworks:

Historical Materialism and

Human Personality
 Learning Objective
• To know the classical frameworks
of historical materialism and
human personality
Key Understanding
• Understanding of historical
materialism and human personality in
relation to the study of society

Key Question
 What is historical materialism and
human personality?
 Historical Materialism
and Karl Marx
• The 19th century German social thinker, Karl Marx,
approached the nature of Western society from a different
perspective, that is from the perspective of the
“economy.”
• Critiquing primarily a society characterized by
unparalleled economic processes such as capitalism and
industrialization, he saw a “modern” society as not an end
in itself but a transitional phase of what he believed is a
historically shaped social order— socialism.
 Historical Materialism
and Karl Marx
• He drew heavily from a Hegelian (i.e., ideas of Georg
Wilhelm Hegel, a German philosopher of the late 18th to
early 19th century) concept of “dialectics,” which refers to
the process of movement and change in human society.
• According to this notion of dialectics, across history, there
had been opposing forces in human society—the so-called
“thesis” and “antithesis” —that clash with one another, shape
one another, and, as a consequence, create new forms that
are the “synthesis” of two diametrically opposed forces.
 Historical Materialism
and Karl Marx
• The result is a new situation, a new order, and a new
structure, which has elements from the two opposing
natures or entities. This dialectical process underscores
that “conflict” is not at all bad; in fact, it is a critical
ingredient in order to move history and society forward.

• How Marx viewed “modern” society from the perspective

of economy—the material conditions of the people—lies
in the core of his social theory.
 Historical Materialism
and Karl Marx
• Classes or categories of people are markedly defined according
to where they stand in the productive process. Marx called the
owner of the factory (or any piece of technology) as the
capitalists; and the workers, the proletariat.
• Social relations depend on who owns or controls the means of
production (land, technology, and capital)—in this case, the
capitalist.
• Anyone going into this capitalist system enters a definite social
relation determined by “relations of production.” Anyone who
controls the capital (raw materials and the means of production)
becomes the ruling class.
 Historical Materialism
and Karl Marx
• Society consists of two parts: first, the “base,” which is the
economy; second, the “superstructure,” which consists of
social structures such as religion, family, law,
government, culture, values, etc., that rest on top of the
economic base.
• Therefore, the class that controls the base shall control
the social structures of society. In this light, Marx saw
cultural forms as not only economic in nature but also
“ideological” because they represent the interests of the
ruling class. with such system of relationship.
Diagram of the structure of society according to
Marx
Social “Ideological” —that is subtly representing
Superstructure the interests of the ruling
class; embedded in the mind and
everyday life of the people

Economic base Consists of the means of production (raw

materials, technology) and
the social relations of production
(owner/landlord or worker/renter)
 Historical Materialism
and Karl Marx
• Going back to Hegelian dialectics, and using a theory of
how society evolves, Marx surmised that humans
underwent a unilineal historical process based on economic
or materialist framework. This is known in social theory as
“historical materialism.”

• In other words, history, according to Marx, has been a story

of conflict between classes—between the haves and have-
nots, the ruling class and the dominated class, and the
elites and the workers.
 Diagram showing various epochs of human society based on changing
modes of production
Modes of Means of production Characteristic Historical
production period
Primitive Foraging in nature Tribal society. No ruling Prehistory
communism class, Egalitarian
Ancient mode Slave labor Ancient society. Ancient times
of production Ruling class exists
Feudalism Land Reciprocal relations Medieval period
between landlords
and peasants
Capitalism Machines, factories Ruling class exploiting Industrial,
the working class capitalist
society
Socialism Publicly and collectively Production intended Post capitalism
owned machines, factories, to directly satisfy
and other productive forces human needs
Communism Publicly and collectively “Perfect and ideal” Hypothetical
owned machines, system of human future
factories, and other a airs
productive forces
 Historical Materialism
and Karl Marx
• For Marx (and this is where the radical part of him will
come into the picture), the people themselves can change
the social order, the exploitative order, if they will start to
realize that there is no objective reality, only certain
ideologies put forward by whoever is controlling it and
preserving the status quo. They can always reclaim
control over the very structures that they create. If this is
all about economics, then, workers could seize control of
their forces of production and reverse the system.
Classical Psychoanalysis and
Sigmund Freud
 Sigmund Freud, the influential German
psychologist of the early 20th century,
provided not only a revolutionary way of
understanding human personality but
also how society affects our psychology.
 Freud’s theory of human personality
revealed another facet of society, which
does not only remain up there above our
heads but resides even in the recesses
of our minds, of our consciousness.
 Freud’s ideas have been used in many
different formulations of social theory
way beyond his era.
 Classical Psychoanalysis and
Sigmund Freud
• Based on Freud’s formulation, the individual human mind—the
source of our subjectivity—is created by social and cultural
forces that operate beneath the level of the unconscious self.
• It is like saying that even within our minds, there are facets of
ourselves, our inner selves—that we cannot control but others
want to control. As we do not have complete influence over our
own selves, we do not have total power over our own
subjectivities as well. It is like certain aspects of our minds lay
there objectively, outside of our manipulations—we are alienated
from it.
 Classical Psychoanalysis and
Sigmund Freud
• On the other hand, it is society that dominates that part—of our
inner psychology. Society is embedded and internalized in our very
consciousness. Our subjectivities are also socially determined.
• In Freudian perspective, “socialization,” the lifelong process of
learning the ways and behaviors appropriate to a particular society,
is not only an external or structural process but also an internal,
mental process. It is the product of the interaction between the
inner mind and the outside world. More importantly, socialization
reflects the ongoing conflict—an inner war—between biology and
society.
 Three Parts of Self According to
Sigmund Freud
• The first one is called the “id.” In its natural state, the
human being has uncontrollable instinctual desires, say,
things that pertain to violence or sexual drives, which need
to be gratified. In the deepest recesses of the mind lies the
id, the unconscious aspect of the human mind. In child
development, it is the first one to be developed, but slowly
being restrained and suppressed as the child grows older.
 Three Parts of Self According to
Sigmund Freud
• Next is the “ego,” the conscious and rational part of the self. Just
like in a government, it is the executive branch, the one
executing or performing action and decisions. It is torn between
gratifying the tendencies of the id and censoring them. It
mediates between the biological and social needs of the person.
• Lastly, the “superego.” It is the internalization of societal values
and beliefs. It plays a moralizing role for the individual because it
serves as the person’s conscience. It is the last to be formed in
the development of a person and inculcated in his or her
personhood.
 Three Parts of Self According to
Sigmund Freud
• Ultimately, this leads to Freud’s prescription for modern society: That for
social order to be achieved and for chaos to be avoided, the superego must
tame the id and restrain it within the bounds of social expectations, mores,
and regulations; otherwise, everybody will be doing anything that he or she
wishes to do. That will be chaotic! Inner desires, which are expressions of
the id—the natural side of the self—when restrained too much, will cause
psychological disorder in the unconscious mind and hamper the individual’s
mental health. For society to be healthy, it must have the ego side of every
person. Socialization—especially during the critical stages of child
development—is the mechanism for societal
• preservation and survival.