In answer to Lew's pragmatic plea,
>'So now we can be told the relevance of dialectical materialism ...'
John writes:
>The relevance is that it is all
>scientifically correct regardless of the revolutionary needs of the
>toiling masses.
As if that science does not present us with constantly ch
Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked again,
'So now we can be told the relevance of dialectical materialism ...'
You clearly haven't got the point of my differentiation between
radical agitational politics and scientific socialism. From the point
of view of utopian socialism then you are absolutely ri
At 09:42 14/12/99 GMT, you wrote:
>Chris,
>
>As I work in the university library I have tried to find some of the
>papers of Schorlemmer but I have not suceeded in locating anything of
>interest. I have looked through all his published works in English
>but do not know enough about chenistry to
Chris,
As I work in the university library I have tried to find some of the
papers of Schorlemmer but I have not suceeded in locating anything of
interest. I have looked through all his published works in English
but do not know enough about chenistry to spot the interesting bits.
All the bio
At 12:07 13/12/99 GMT, John Walker wrote:
>Here are a few more quotes from Marx OWN writings on dialectics
>existing in nature:
Bravo!!
If you are in Manchester have you been able to inspect in the rare books
section of the John Rylands University Library for the 2000 page documents
of the c
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, J.WALKER
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>To ask, 'What is the relevance of dialectical materialism to the class
>struggle?' demonstrates the very problem. Their commitment to the
>class struggle is not in doubt but it misses entirely the whole point
>of Marxism's solut
>>> Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/10/99 05:29PM >>>
Of course they produced a lot of work together. But it would take a very
extreme contortion to see them as always speaking with one voice. They
were two separate human beings with their own strengths and weaknesses,
and different interests.
(
The following is more demonstration of dialectics as process of natural history :
Reason
and Revolt: Marxism and Science by Alan Woods and Ted Grant online @
http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~zac/maindex.htm
CB
(
>>> Rob Schaap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/13/99 09:00AM >>>
You've c
Hi again,
IMO comrades - who are outraged at the economic system they find
themselves in; who are morally offended by the massive poverty which
sits unpleasantly next to the exclusivity of the great wealth of
society - are drawn to Marxism as one amongst a number of possible
solutions to this sta
Good one , John,
You have found even more examples than we did last time,directly from Marx, directly
of Marx expressing the opinion that dialectics has validity not only in human history
but in natural history.
Maybe Marx was wrong, but those who are arguing the other side should say that th
You've convinced me, John!
I'm off to buy up big on E-Bay and Amazon - that should keep me in lager
and tabs whilst I observe the natural transformation of capitalism into its
one and only immanent other from my verandah.
Bugger decades of penury in the reading room, eh?
Cheers,
Rob.
>Hi,
>
>>
Hi,
>From what I've read it I think that Marx just presumes that the
dialective pervades both the physical natural world and its subset the
human social world. He had read the ancient writers as we know from
his dissertation (a work I haven't read, yet) and they certainly
thought that the dialect
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Brown
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Charles: Yes, but after Marx was dead, it would have been superstitous to defer
>to him as the leading thinker. Marx wouldn't have wanted Engels to stand mute
>because Marx was dead. What would have happened to the last t
At 16:04 10/12/99 GMT, Russ wrote:
>
>Lew writes:
>
>>Whether Engels turned this materialist methodology into a metaphysics
>>(as I believe) or not, the issue now is one of political practice. In
>>what way does "dialectical materialism" contribute to the struggle for
>>socialism?
>
>It hinders th
Lew writes:
>Whether Engels turned this materialist methodology into a metaphysics
>(as I believe) or not, the issue now is one of political practice. In
>what way does "dialectical materialism" contribute to the struggle for
>socialism?
It hinders the struggle by turning Marx into a metaphysic
G'day Charles,
>It takes an extreme contortion not to see that Marx's correspondence and
>much >other work is literally dripping with evidence that he considered
>his work to >be joint with Engels's.
The two consciously disagreed about many things, Charles! From the
personal (lovers and bereave
>>> Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/09/99 04:03PM >>>
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, J.WALKER
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Also when Engels wrote (and presumeably while he was writing)
>Anti-During - as a manifesto of their joint position within the
>German Socialist Workers Party - we would have
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, J.WALKER
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Also when Engels wrote (and presumeably while he was writing)
>Anti-During - as a manifesto of their joint position within the
>German Socialist Workers Party - we would have to believe he neither
>read it or knew what it con
Dear all
Just been of for a few days (using up the sick leave!) and your all
back to Dialectical Materialism. It clear must be a significant
issue. I haven't read all the messages but Chris' substantial reply
of 7/12/99 (23:24) seemed to sum up my position most clearly.
It is NOT possible to
I have been holding back from this debate because it was very thoroughly
thrashed out to the point of exhaustion previously. Lots of examples were
gathered of Marx's dialectical attitude to the natural world.
The biggest example of Marx's dialectics in Capital, particularly volume 1,
itself. I w
>>> "The World Socialist movement (via The Socialist Party of Great Britain)"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/05/99 07:34PM >>>
Dear all,
> >Towards this, I suggest a debate on the real issue behind all of this -
> >historical materialism vs dialectical materialism.
>
> Only the former can be found
Not willing to go along with you and Russ. The dialectical materialist concept
originates with Marx. Engels knew him better than you and Russ.
CB
>>> "The World Socialist movement (via The Socialist Party of Great Britain)"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/05/99 05:57PM >>>
Dear Russ,
This was
>>Russ,
>
>
>If you don't mind, can you give me a brief explanation of the difference
>between the two?
>
>Thanks
>
>Pete
Hi Pete,
Okey doke. This is an old hot chestnut for Thaxians and one that sharply
divides us!
Raymond Williams summarises it nicely:
'Historical materialism refers to human
G'day Simon,
Thaxis had a pretty good go at the 'materialist conception of history'
interpretation question a little while back - which may explain the paucity
of responses to this question. Not surprisingly, some of us defended the
necessary social basis of HM and some didn't. But those who di
>>> "r.i.p" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/02/99 11:56AM >>>
>Towards this, I suggest a debate on the real issue behind all of this -
>historical materialism vs dialectical materialism.
Only the former can be found in Marx's writings.
Only the former can be found in Marx's writings by
>Towards this, I suggest a debate on the real issue behind all of this -
>historical materialism vs dialectical materialism.
Only the former can be found in Marx's writings.
Russ
__
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
26 matches
Mail list logo
