M-TH: Re: dialectical materialism/activist materialism Charles Brown Fri, 6 Aug 1999 10:24:47 -0700
Just to follow up , the error of the claims that Engels and Lenin , etc. deviate from Marx's own method into "ideology" is the exact error that Marx criticizes in the Theses on Feuerbach. What is being termed "ideology" is actually the activist component , the "PRACTICAL-critical ACTIVITY" that Marx makes clear is HIS method as distinguished from other materialists. The historical materialism that the some others on this thread are describing is contemplative and passive like Feuerbach's materialism which Marx differentiates himself from on precisely this point. This is scholastic materialism as Marx mentions in the Second Thesis. Marx's historical materialism unites theory and practice. More specifically, Marxist epistemology demands that we come to know by practice (Second Thesis). A scholastic approach sees this in Engels and Lenin and labels it "ideology", however it overlooks that Marx himself states it more sharply than Engels or Lenin in the Second Thesis on Feuerbach! ! : "The question whether objective truth can be attrributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but is a _practical question_. Man must prove the truth, i.e. the reality and power, the this-sidedness of his thinking in practice. The dispute over the reality or non-reality of thinking that is isolated from practice is a purely _scholastic_ question." Had Engels or Lenin written this, anti-diamats ( and bourgeois academics) would be calling it "ideology" and "not-objective". Charles Brown . >>> "Charles Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 08/06/99 >From the Theses on Feuerbach, Marx says that the chief defect of all hitherto >existing materialism, Feuerbach included, is that it is contemplative and not >active. >Feuerbach critiqued Hegel's idealism and theism, placing objective reality as >primary >to subjective reality, but he treats the process of gaining knowledge about >that >objective reality as if it comes mainly through passive contemplation and not >practical-critical activity. History is made by active classes, so this >contemplative materialism fails to deal with history, the process by which >things >change, or objective reality is changed. Feuerbachian and the other >materialisms are >errors of mechanical or vulgar materialism, treating history like a giant >clock that >mechanically unwinds without human agency. This materialism just observes this >unwinding without integrating theory and practice, or activism. I have a paper >on >Activist Materialism on this point. Marx's is an activist materialism. Charles: This point connects directly to Engels and Lenin's discussion of the epistemology of practice ( _Anti-Duhring_ and _Materialism and Empirio-Criticism) and Marx's main theme of practical-critical activity and practice as the test of theory in the Theses on Feuerbach. Engels says exactly that knowing something in nature is to change it from a thing-in-itself to a thing-for-us. This is the Marxist ( and Hegelian) solution to the Kantian problem of the unknowable thing-in-itself. Engels says we know something when we can make it. The famous example is when coal tar is turned into alizar. We prove the "this sideedness" ( "for-us") of something, Marx says, in practice. This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
