The hedgehog, fox, and quasi-hedgehog approaches in Isaiah Berlin’s, David McLellan’s, and G. Stedman Jones’ Marx research

Abstract

Abstract Isaiah Berlin divides thinkers into two categories—monist hedgehogs and the pluralist foxes; for him, Marx belongs to the first category. According to such distinction, the research approaches can be classified into the hedgehog approach and the fox approach, the former highlighting the unique essence of the objects and the latter striving to display various characteristics of the objects. Berlin, McLellan, and Stedman Jones are famous for their research on Marx, which relates to the composition of intellectual biography rather than to other scholarly projects and genres. Berlin’s research represents the hedgehog approach since he summarizes Marx’s thought as a monist conception of history, while McLellan’s research exemplifies the fox approach by covering multiple facets of Marx’s life and thought. Although both Berlin and McLellan begin to study Marx because of their interest in the hedgehog approach, Berlin adopts the hedgehog approach despite his opposition to it, and McLellan employs the fox approach while showing a great appreciation of the hedgehog one. Whether to hold fast to their own theoretical position or not is the crucial reason for which they study Marx and even intellectual history using different approaches. Accordingly, Stedman Jones’ Marx research embodies the quasi-hedgehog approach as it sees more facets of Marx than the hedgehog approach but is less comprehensive than the fox approach. In fact, the hedgehog (quasi-hedgehog) approach and the fox approach have their advantages and disadvantages, and the purpose of reflection is to clarify the scope of application for each.