Georg Lukács
Under capitalism human relations appear as relations between things, and only the working class, seeing the whole, can break this spell.
Placement
History and Class Consciousness: reification as the basic form of capitalist society.
Key ideas
- Reification
- Class consciousness
Teachers: Georg Simmel
Students: Agnes Heller
Influence
Influenced by 7
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
influenced by
Lukács read Marx through Hegel’s categories of totality and subject–object identity in History and Class Consciousness (1923), later tracing Hegel’s economics in The Young Hegel (1948). G. Lukács, Geschichte und Klassenbewußtsein (1923); Der junge Hegel. Über die Beziehungen von Dialektik und Ökonomie (written 1938, publ. 1948); SEP “Georg [György] Lukács”
Evidence: AI draft
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel › 1770–1831
Karl Marx
influenced by
Lukács built his theory of reification on Marx’s account of commodity fetishism, extending it to bureaucracy, law and thought (‘Reification and the Consciousness of the Proletariat’, 1923). G. Lukács, “Die Verdinglichung und das Bewußtsein des Proletariats”, in Geschichte und Klassenbewußtsein (1923); SEP “Georg [György] Lukács”
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Karl Marx › 1818–1883
Wilhelm Dilthey
influenced by
In his 1962 preface to The Theory of the Novel (1916) Lukács traced its method to Dilthey’s Das Erlebnis und die Dichtung (1905) and the Geisteswissenschaften. G. Lukács, Die Theorie des Romans (1916; book 1920), preface (1962); W. Dilthey, Das Erlebnis und die Dichtung (1905)
Evidence: AI draft
Wilhelm Dilthey › 1833–1911
Georg Simmel studied with
studied with
Lukács attended Simmel’s private seminar in Berlin (1906–07 and 1909–10); in History and Class Consciousness (1923) he still drew on Simmel’s Philosophie des Geldes while criticising it. SEP “Georg [György] Lukács”; G. Lukács, “Georg Simmel” (1918)
Evidence: AI draft
Georg Simmel › 1858–1918
Max Weber
influenced by
In his reification essay (1923) Lukács drew on Weber’s analysis of calculable, rational bureaucracy and law to show how commodity form shapes modern institutions. G. Lukács, “Die Verdinglichung und das Bewußtsein des Proletariats”, in Geschichte und Klassenbewußtsein (1923); M. Weber, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft (1922)
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Max Weber › 1864–1920
Rosa Luxemburg
influenced by
In History and Class Consciousness (1923) Lukács praised Luxemburg’s Accumulation of Capital for its standpoint of totality while criticising her views on party organisation and the Russian Revolution. G. Lukács, Geschichte und Klassenbewußtsein (1923), “Die Marxistin Rosa Luxemburg” and “Kritische Bemerkungen über Rosa Luxemburgs ‚Kritik der russischen Revolution‘”
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Rosa Luxemburg › 1871–1919
Emil Lask
influenced by
Lukács’s early philosophy of art in Heidelberg rests on a neo-Kantian framework in which Lask’s influence is especially strong. SEP “Georg Lukács” (T. Stahl, rev. 2023), §1 and §2.2, citing Kavoulakos 2014
Evidence: AI draft
Emil Lask › 1875–1915
Influenced 7
Walter Benjamin
influenced ✓
Benjamin read History and Class Consciousness (1923) on Capri in 1924 and wrote to Scholem that Lukács reached epistemological positions partly close to his own. W. Benjamin, letter to G. Scholem (Sept. 1924), in Briefe (1966); G. Lukács, Geschichte und Klassenbewußtsein (1923)
Walter Benjamin › 1892–1940
Karl Mannheim
influenced
A member of Lukács’s Sunday Circle, Mannheim took up History and Class Consciousness (1923) on class-bound thought, generalising it into a sociology of knowledge (Ideologie und Utopie, 1929). K. Mannheim, Ideologie und Utopie (1929); G. Lukács, Geschichte und Klassenbewußtsein (1923); D. Kettler, V. Meja and N. Stehr, Karl Mannheim (1984); SEP “Georg [György] Lukács”
Evidence: AI draft
Karl Mannheim › 1893–1947
Paulo Freire
influenced
In Pedagogy of the Oppressed (ch. 1) Freire took up Lukács’s demand, in his book on Lenin (1924), that the party “explain to the masses their own action” – but as dialogue with the people rather than explanation to them. P. Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1968; English 1970), ch. 1; G. Lukács, Lenin (1924)
Evidence: AI draft
Paulo Freire › 1921–1997
Karel Kosík
influenced
Kosík took from History and Class Consciousness (1923) the category of concrete totality, setting it against atomism and empty, abstract totalities (Dialectics of the Concrete, 1963). K. Kosík, Dialektika konkrétního (1963); G. Lukács, Geschichte und Klassenbewußtsein (1923)
Evidence: AI draft
Karel Kosík › 1926–2003
Jürgen Habermas
influenced ✓
Habermas reconstructed Lukács’ theory of reification as a reading of Weber’s rationalisation and recast it as the colonisation of the lifeworld (Theory of Communicative Action, 1981). J. Habermas, Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (1981), vol. I, “Von Lukács zu Adorno: Rationalisierung als Verdinglichung”; vol. II
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Jürgen Habermas › 1929–2026
Agnes Heller taught
taught ✓
Heller studied with Lukács in Budapest from 1947, became his assistant and doctoral student (doctorate 1955) and a central member of the ‘Budapest School’ around him. J. Grumley, Agnes Heller: A Moralist in the Vortex of History (2005); A. Heller, Der Affe auf dem Fahrrad (1999)
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Agnes Heller › 1929–2019
Sandra Harding
influenced
Harding drew on Lukács’s claim that the proletariat’s position allows insight closed to the bourgeoisie as a model for feminist standpoint theory (The Science Question in Feminism, 1986). S. Harding, The Science Question in Feminism (1986); G. Lukács, Geschichte und Klassenbewußtsein (1923); SEP “Feminist Epistemology and Philosophy of Science”
Evidence: AI draft
Sandra Harding › 1935–2025
Criticism
Criticized by 1
Theodor W. Adorno influenced
influenced
In ‘The Idea of Natural History’ (lecture, 1932) Adorno took up Lukács’ concept of ‘second nature’ from The Theory of the Novel, reading it with Benjamin’s allegory. T. W. Adorno, “Die Idee der Naturgeschichte” (lecture 1932, printed 1973); G. Lukács, Die Theorie des Romans (1916); SEP “Theodor W. Adorno”
Evidence: AI draft
criticised by
Adorno charged that Lukács’ ‘extorted reconciliation’ with socialist realism measures art by party doctrine and dismisses modernist works as decadent (‘Erpreßte Versöhnung’, Der Monat, 1958). T. W. Adorno, “Erpreßte Versöhnung”, Der Monat 11 (1958), on G. Lukács, Wider den mißverstandenen Realismus (1958)
Evidence: AI draft
Theodor W. Adorno › 1903–1969
Criticizes 5
Immanuel Kant
criticised
Lukács read Kant’s unknowable thing-in-itself and the split between form and content as antinomies of bourgeois thought rooted in reification (History and Class Consciousness, 1923). G. Lukács, Geschichte und Klassenbewußtsein (1923), “Die Verdinglichung und das Bewußtsein des Proletariats”, part II
Evidence: AI draft
Immanuel Kant › 1724–1804
Arthur de Gobineau
criticised
Lukács read Gobineau’s Essay on the Inequality of Human Races as founding the racial theory that fed into fascism (Die Zerstörung der Vernunft, 1954, ch. VII). G. Lukács, Die Zerstörung der Vernunft (1954), ch. VII
Evidence: AI draft
Arthur de Gobineau › 1816–1882
Friedrich Nietzsche
criticised
Lukács read Nietzsche as the founder of the irrationalism of the imperialist period, which prepared the ground for fascism (Die Zerstörung der Vernunft, 1954, ch. III). G. Lukács, Die Zerstörung der Vernunft (1954), ch. III (“Nietzsche als Begründer des Irrationalismus der imperialistischen Periode”)
Evidence: AI draft
Friedrich Nietzsche › 1844–1900
Houston Stewart Chamberlain
criticised
Lukács placed Chamberlain’s Foundations of the Nineteenth Century in the line of racial theory from Gobineau to fascism (Die Zerstörung der Vernunft, 1954, ch. VII). G. Lukács, Die Zerstörung der Vernunft (1954), ch. VII (“Der Sozialdarwinismus, die Rassentheorie und der Faschismus”)
Evidence: AI draft
Houston Stewart Chamberlain › 1855–1927
Alfred Baeumler
criticised
Lukács treated Baeumler’s heroic-political reading of Nietzsche (Nietzsche, der Philosoph und Politiker, 1931) as an example of the fascist appropriation of irrationalism (Die Zerstörung der Vernunft, 1954). G. Lukács, Die Zerstörung der Vernunft (1954); A. Baeumler, Nietzsche, der Philosoph und Politiker (1931)
Evidence: AI draft
Alfred Baeumler › 1887–1968
Works
Reification and the proletariat as the subject-object of history.
Position
Lukács gave Marxism a philosophical depth that drew on Hegel and Max Weber. His central concept is reification: under capitalism relations between people take on the form of relations between things, so that society appears as a second nature governed by impersonal laws. This affects not only economics but science, law and everyday consciousness. Only the proletariat, he argued, can see through this illusion, because in it the commodity form becomes conscious of itself. History and Class Consciousness was condemned by party orthodoxy but became a founding text of Western Marxism and the Frankfurt School. He also wrote major works on the novel, realism and aesthetics.
Life & context
Lukács came from a wealthy Jewish banking family in Budapest and moved in Max Weber’s circle in Heidelberg. In 1918 he joined the Communist Party and served in the short-lived Hungarian Soviet Republic. Decades of exile in Vienna, Berlin and Moscow followed; back in Budapest he was a minister in Imre Nagy’s government in 1956 and was briefly deported afterwards.
Further main works
- Soul and Form (1911)
- The Theory of the Novel (1920)
- The Destruction of Reason (1954)
- The Specificity of the Aesthetic (1963)
Appears in
- Journey ‘Hegel’s Heirs’ · Stop 6 of 10
As of November 2026 · Sources · Improve this page · How Agora is made