Class position determines attitude toward nature in bourgeois ideology

Evidence

Lowenthal’s methods were robustly those of class sociology and the critique of ideology. He distinguished between an older and a newer form of the bourgeois feeling for nature. The older one was active and full of trust in humanity’s progressive domination over nature, and this sprang from an optimistic attitude in most sections of the liberal bourgeoisie, who had adapted themselves to material advancement. The new one was passive, full of blind devotion to a form of nature which appeared wild and unruly, and this sprang from a masochistic attitude among the petty bourgeoisie: faced with monopoly capitalism, the petty bourgeoisie had become confused, had resigned itself to the situation and worshipped power. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School, 900

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to Frankfurt School ideology critique and later ecological critiques of domination of nature (Horkheimer/Adorno Dialectic of Enlightenment). — connects to: Bourgeois ideology fragments classes into possessive individual subjects. — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 912
• DEFINE: Illustrates the method of class sociology as applied to aesthetics — the older/newer bourgeois nature-feeling distinction is a compact framework.

Broader Connections

• Bourgeois ideology fragments classes into possessive individual subjects. #expands (0.85) — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 912