[579] is a declaration of philosophical^a stupidity in the way in which this materialism^b was carried through, at the end of the 19th century. So if you call Marx himself, or the Marxist movement, ''materialist,'' you have the great advantage that besides the genuine meaning of the word, namely historical materialism (where it should be applied), you have the coloring coming from the ethical ^cand the metaphysical ^dmaterialism, which has nothing to do with the Marxian materialism. That is the first thing we must say, and this is a fair statement and a statement of protection against a kind of propagandistic attitude which is beneath the dignity of academic honesty. Then the second point, a critical one: how valid is this derivation? There l gave you at the end of the last hour the I think basic logical criticism which must be applied to this form of deriving all in life on [i.e. from] the economic^e, namely that that from which these things shall be derived is already a summary of these things, so that the whole thing becomes a vicious circle. You have, in what one calls the economic, not only special activities of production, you have also special techniques which are results of special scientific^f analysis of nature, and you have further a special system of law^g and right which makes this kind of production possible, you have special forms of ultimate concern--and this means, of religion--which valuate the goods produced by this economy in different ways. The tremendous valuation of gadgets which we have in this country is a RELIGIOUS phenomenon because it expresses an ultimate concern. And the opposite--which would make a kind of dynamic economy, as we have it, impossible--is based also on the religious idea of being born into a special estate and to be asked by destiny^h to fulfill oneself