I know that's right. Well, well, well.

You might want to take a look at that collection of articles, _Dialectical
Contradictions : Contemporary Marxist Discussions_. Somebody mentions, maybe
Lawler, the square root of negative one. There is an article by Narski
there.

^^^^

"Marquit (1981) endeavors to clarify the three 'laws of dialectics' 
beginning with a formulation of what he calls "law zero",  the law of
universal interconnection."

^^^
CB: Cornforth emphasizes interconnectedness first in his book critiquing
Popper. It is the issue of the whole and parts. Anti-reductionism, so
important in Caudwell, derives from holistic emphasis, moving from the whole
to the parts primarily rather than from parts to wholes. Lewontin and Levins
emphasize this in _Dialectical Biologist_.

It may be that Marxist philosophy developed outside of the SU in the
Stalinist period. Britain had Caudwell and others. 

^^^^


"A changing object 
exists in a given state and not in the given state at the same time." 

^^^^
CB: This is the general paradox in Zeno's paradox for displacement, I
believe. It is the paradox inherent in conceiving of motion in this way. But
what other way is there to conceive of motion ? It's a trivial paradox in a
way.


CB

^^^^

 (1)Ralph Dumain :

Erwin Marquit's articles in Science and Society offset the two articles by 
Graham Priest previously described.

Marquit, Erwin. "Dialectics of Motion in Continuous and Discrete Spaces," 
Science and Society, vol. 42, Winter 1978-79, 410-425.

Marquit, Erwin. "Contradictions and Dialectics and Formal Logic," Science 
and Society, vol. 45, no. 3, Fall 1981, 306-323.

Marquit, Erwin. "A Materialist Critique of Hegel's Concept of Identity of
Opposites," Science and Society, vol. 54, no. 2, Summer 1990, 147-166.

See also Marquit's article in NST:

Marquit, Erwin. "Distinctions Between the Spheres of Action of Formal Logic 
and Dialectical
Logic," Nature, Society and Thought, vol. 3, no. 1, 1990, 31-37.

Both Marquit (1981) and Priest (1990-91) refer to Marquit 
(1978-79).  Marquit also refers to Marquit (1981) and Marquit's article in 
NST.  Marquit (1990) reacts to Priest (1989-90), and Priest (1990-91) 
reacts to Marquit (1990).

There, now that we've cleared that up . . .

Marquit (1981) endeavors to clarify the three 'laws of dialectics' 
beginning with a formulation of what he calls "law zero",  the law of 
universal interconnection.  He then clarifies the logic of the famed three 
laws and their relation one to one another.  His next step is to clarify 
objective and subjective dialectics and their relation to one 
another.  Taking examples of antinomial statements which seem to embody 
logical contradictions, Marquit then argues that dialectical contradictions 
are not logical contradictions. (319).  Examples chosen from Hegel, Engels, 
and quantum mechanics can be expressed in the form: "A changing object 
exists in a given state and not in the given state at the same time." Other 
views are brought in from Ilyenkov, F.F. Vyakkerev, Gottfired Stiehler, and 
D.P. Gorskii.  Marquit's main inspiration is Igor S. Narski.

While I have not really described Marquit's argument, I will give him 
credit for treating this matter in an uncommonly precise and sophisticated 
manner, which Priest (the logician!) unaccountably shortchanges.  I don't 
know what I've seen by Narski if anything, though I am familiar with the 
name.  Also in evidence is the increasing professionalism and 
sophistication of Soviet philosophers following the death of Stalin.




_______________________________________________
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
[email protected]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Reply via email to