On Sun, 21 May 2006 05:50:54 -0400 Ralph Dumain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I finally secured the missing issue containing two commentaries on > Llorente's article on Cornforth: > > Goldstick, Danny, On Marxist Ethics, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 11117 > > On Reappraising Maurice Cornforth, by Edwin A Roberts, NATURE, > SOCIETY > AND THOUGHT, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 11923 > > The latter article is the important one. Roberts has a major > ongoing > project concerning Cornforth. I'm tempted to ask permission to put > this > article online, but perhaps these salient points will suffice for > now:
I think it would be a good idea for you to seek Roberts' permission, so that you can post the article on your website. > > (1) Cornforth came to doubt Engels' dialectics of nature; see his > 1980 book > COMMUNISM AND PHILOSOPHY. That doesn't surprise me given his ongoing engagement with analytical philosophy from the 1960s on. > > (2) MARXISM AND THE LINGUISTIC PHILOSOPHY (1965) was not written so > much to > critique analytical philosophy as to demonstrate that Cornforth had > shaken > off his _own_ dogmatism. That seems apparent to me too. Actually, Cornforth's encounters with analytical philosophy go back as far as his student days, given that he had studied under C.D. Broad, who had been an associate of Betrand Russell. And Cornforth was also a friend of Wittgenstein. Nevertheless, before the 1960s, he apparently felt constrained to adhere to traditional diamat, given his membership in the British CP, where he was one of the top ideologists. > > (3) IN DEFENCE OF PHILOSOPHY (1950) was 'rabidly polemical', > influenced by > Zhdanov. > > (4) Following the events of 1956, Cornforth underwent study and > reexamination and transcended his the dogmatism of his earlier > works. Apparently, the Soviet thaw under Khrushchev was mirrored by a similar thaw within the western CPs. > > (5) Cornforth was influenced by Wittgenstein's view of language > throughout > his career. Shouldn't surprise anyone. > > (6) Cornforth believed that ordinary language philosophy had rooted > out > much of the subjectivism in analytical philosophy, and that it could > be > useful to Marxism. > > (7) The most important of Cornforth's works for today is THE OPEN > PHILOSOPHY AND THE OPEN SOCIETY (1968). It might be worthwhile to see if you or the Marxists Internet Archive can put that book online. > > If Roberts is correct that 1965 marks a turning point and a > rejection of > former dogmatic tendencies, then perhaps his trilogy--his party > textbook--on diamat and histomat should be permanently retired > (though I am > assisting in putting this into the hands of others even though I > dislike > it),and other pre-1956 works reevaluated. SCIENCE VS. IDEALISM > (1955) is a > meld of two earlier books, the first of which is termed pioneering > study of > the history of empiricism and thus may still be of some use. > Furthermore, > I need to get hold of COMMUNISM AND PHILOSOPHY because it may > contain some > useful nuggets previously neglected. > > > _______________________________________________ > Marxism-Thaxis mailing list > [email protected] > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis > _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list [email protected] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
