rosa lichtenstein
Charles,
I did not thank you for that reference in order to initiate a debate, but
becasues I was genuinely grateful. And we have been through this before. [I
forgot that whatever replies I made to you would go across the e-mail list,
so no wonder you thought I wanted a
Charles, thanks for those comments.
I absolutely agree, much anti-dialectic stuff is hackneyed to high heaven.
As to my claim that my ideas are largely original to me, you will have to
check for yourself. What can I say...?
You know. Like that Lenin is using a metaphysical concept when he
rosa, charles,
sorry for geting involved in this talk. just one remark: rosa says class
struggle will go on. how can she say that if she rejects the concept of
dialectic. since it is dilectic itself that reveals itself in the class
strugle and
if she says class struggle will go on then
IV Online magazine : IVP375 - February 2006
Bolivia
The Morales government
http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/auteur.php3?id_auteur=371 Herve
do Alto
Following the victory of Evo Morales and the MAS Herve Do Alto sends us
his first impressions of the new MAS government.
On the
When I was first apprised of this web site, I read a few chapters, but did
not make it to the text quoted My initial impression was that the author
was a victim of an extremely sectarian milieu and had to go through quite
an ordeal digging herself out of it. The marks of this sectarianism are
This is an odd comment!
The class struggle is not dependent on the 'dialectic', an idealist notion
Hegel pinched from Hermetic philosophers.
We do not need this mystical theory to provide a scientific account of
history. In fact, it gets in the way, since it is incomprehensible.
Anyway,
Ralph,
As far as my comments on wave-particle duality were concerened, I was of
course not trying to resolve this paradox (how could I? I am not a
physicist!).
I was merely pointing out that given the thesis that all of reality is
contradictory, dialecticians should advise physicists to
I don't know how you construct your web pages, but I am unable to fully
access this page using Internet Explorer. My computer keeps freezing
up. After numerous attempts I have been able to get to the beginning of
note 18. Yet I can access presumably much larger size files on other
sites. I
Actually, the argument is framed in an entirely sectarian context, based on
the experience of Trotskyism. Some examples from your home page:
(1)
Dialectical Materialism (DM) has been the official philosophy of active
revolutionary socialists for over a hundred years. During that time, the
Ralph,
Thanks for the comments. I am sorry you cannot access the pages on my site.
I do not know why that is.
As to your specific points:
1) I wasn't sure what you were asking me here, or the relevance of the point
you were making.
I note in the introductory page that I am limiting myself
Rosa Lichtenstein
Even so, since I rubbish all philosophical theories (ranging from all the
classical ones you can name right through to Engles's naive views, and
including Hegel's mystical clap trap) as ruling-class a priori superscience,
your superficial skimming of my site is doubly in
Well, I was a proto-Marxist long before I became a Trotskyist, and I was put
off Marxism by the dialectical gobbledygook I encountered in books written
by communists, and academic Marxists. It was neither good Philsophy, nor bad
science. And the logic was a joke.
So, I think you are reading
What do you find naïve in Engel's views?
Everything he wrote about science, mathematics and philosophy, although the
word naive was a little too mild.
I should have said rubbish.
His other stuff I admire greatly.
RL
Comment
Was Engels writings concerning science, mathematics and
Ralph,
As I have said, I am not interested in anything you have to say.
End of correspondence.
___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
Rosa Lichtenstein
^
Comrades might like to think about this (taken from my site):
The quandary facing dialecticians we might call the Dialecticians' Dilemma
[DD]. The DD arises from the uncontroversial observation that if reality is
fundamentally contradictory then any true theory should
Given time constraints, I can only look in designated places for specific
pieces of information, esp. as I am not a comrade.
The introduction to the argument however is revealing of several aspects of
your orientation:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/page%2001.htm
(1) exposure to
On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 13:53:28 -0500 Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Van Heijenoort argues that Engels was backwards with respect to the
mathematics of his time, and also narrow-minded and provincial with
respect
to the history of science (anti-English prejudice) coupled with an
This is all quite so. Marx's knowledge of developments in the calculus was
also behind the times, but Van Heijenoort absolves Marx of narrow-minded
dogmatism.
I still need to acquire a copy of that obscure bulletin containing Van H's
arguments against Novack. For some reason, I can't find a
On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 16:01:24 -0500 Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is all quite so. Marx's knowledge of developments in the
calculus was
also behind the times, but Van Heijenoort absolves Marx of
narrow-minded
dogmatism.
I still need to acquire a copy of that obscure
Well, shiver me timbers! Didn't realize this was already online.
It's a curious essay, given Van H's later evolution. It is characteristic
of his dogmatism while he was in the Trotskyist movement. In 1942 he let
CLR James have it, in an essay which I think is also online.
Van is also not
Apologies, one or two problems crept into the last e-mail after I ran a
spell check. Here is the correct version:
Charles,
This passage was a response to several comrades who held the views I
criticise, and it seemed to me it dealt with more general ideas that others
held. So it was a
As for critiques of Engels and diamat, there's
little original left to
say. Two sources that immediately come to mind are:
James Scanlan, Marxism in the USSR (1985)
Richard Norman (good) and Sean Sayers (bad), HEGEL,
MARX, AND DIALECTIC.
Both excellent. See also:
Gustav Wetter,
22 matches
Mail list logo
