[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! Steve Gabosch bebop101 at comcast.net Thu Jun 2 18:45:46 MDT 2005 Previous message: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! Next message: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author

[Marxism-Thaxis] O and class struggle

Thomas Frank on the latest Obama flap Charles Brown Hi Eli I thin it is interesting how Obama, for whatever reason, is violating key taboos. He has talked about race in an amazingly open way for a bourgeois politi

[Marxism-Thaxis] O analysis from Marxism list

http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/marxism/2008-April/026811.html Fred wrote: Ruthless can hear condescension in and contempt in Obama's criticism but not at all in Clinton's and McCain's orgies of praise for the decent, hard-working, glorious, salt of the earth, patriotic, fantasy- or really gu

[Marxism-Thaxis] O discussion

obsessive opposition to Obama Fred Feldman Walter quotes the Militant: A March 18 speech on race relations by Barack Obama helped convince a broader layer of the U.S. ruling class that he is competent to be president for the next four years. It also opened a discussion on racism in the United Sta

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism

^ > CB: There was a long term 20th Century pattern , division of labor > between Dems and Reps, wherein Dems brought war and Reps brought > depression , with Reps not bringing war and Dems not bringing economic > downturn. This pattern was broken by Carter not bringing a war.>> Well, I think t

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism

>>> CeJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03/29/2008 12:17 AM >>> Poor Bill, if only he had Cameron Diaz's surname! This is why I say Obama needs either an ethnic or Hispanic strategy, and I think he is probably smart enough that he does have one--as soon as he gets rid of the Clintons. ^^^ CB: Believe me, Bi

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism

>>> CeJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03/28/2008 9:54 PM >>> Another thing the discussion so far seems to have overlooked is finances. McCain isn't Bush 3.0 (or is that Bush 1.2?) because unlike Poppy Bush and Bushwa Jr., he can't seem to raise money. The fundamentalists and evangelicals aren't going to pa

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism

Poor Bill, if only he had Cameron Diaz's surname! This is why I say Obama needs either an ethnic or Hispanic strategy, and I think he is probably smart enough that he does have one--as soon as he gets rid of the Clintons. However, by his very nature, he has upset the status quo of the Demoncrats. T

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism

Another thing the discussion so far seems to have overlooked is finances. McCain isn't Bush 3.0 (or is that Bush 1.2?) because unlike Poppy Bush and Bushwa Jr., he can't seem to raise money. The fundamentalists and evangelicals aren't going to pay for his campaign (they didn't even really pay for H

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism

>>> CeJ 03/25/2008 8:07 PM >>> About Richardson. Does anyone outside New Mexico know he is Hispanic? Yes,. Everybody knows. It is very significant that he came out for O after the important speech on race, because, as I had anticipated, a lot of other people of color would really "get it" o

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism

>>> CeJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03/25/2008 8:07 PM >>> About Richardson. Does anyone outside New Mexico know he is Hispanic? Yes,. Everybody knows. It is very significant that he came out for O after the important speech on race, because, as I had anticipated, a lot of other people of color wou

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism

About Richardson. Does anyone outside New Mexico know he is Hispanic? He looks very white male ethnic, but his name says Anglo-Celtic elite. He seems to have positioned himself with a future Obama presidency, perhaps he does have V.P. stars in his eyes. I think an Hispanic from California or Texas

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism

on should be the running mate, or O as vp for Clinton. Otherwise, some of their followers may not vote Dem or at all. -Original Message- >From: CeJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Mar 24, 2008 10:16 PM >To: marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu >Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and raci

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism

CeJ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Mar 24, 2008 10:16 PM >To: marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu >Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism > >I think the biggest problem O. has got is that he won a lot of states >in the primaries and caucuses that no Democrat, of any race

[Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism

I think the biggest problem O. has got is that he won a lot of states in the primaries and caucuses that no Democrat, of any race or gender, is going to win in a national election. Also, the Republicans benefit from the OVER-REPRESENTATION of some states at the expense of more populous states. So u

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism

t;Sent: Mar 24, 2008 2:41 PM >To: marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu >Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism > > >Of course, the term "racist" should be used here. Obama has racist obstacle in >his path. He took a tack of "transcending" race as the only w

[Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism

Of course, the term "racist" should be used here. Obama has racist obstacle in his path. He took a tack of "transcending" race as the only way he could remotely get masses of white votes. Charles Racial problems transcend Wright By JIM VANDEHEI & JOHN F. HARRIS | 3/18/08 8:16 PM EST Text Siz

[Marxism-Thaxis] O

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/01/lawyers_for_git.html http://habeaslawyersforobama.blogspot.com/ http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/02/29/7373/ See discussion of Senate Amendment 4882 at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jan/22/hillaryclinton.barack

[Marxism-Thaxis] O

Obama's Community Roots David Moberg http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070416/moberg In 1985, freshly graduated from Columbia University and working for a New York business consultant, Barack Obama decided to become a community organizer. Though he liked the idea, he didn't understand wha

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst (response toarrowlessness)

t;Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and thethinkers he inspired" Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 13:36 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst (response toarrowlessness) At 12:00 PM 7/5/2005 +0200, Oudeyis wrote: "Steve, I really do not ha

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst (response to arrowlessness)

At 12:00 PM 7/5/2005 +0200, Oudeyis wrote: "Steve, I really do not have enough time to devote to answering this message as it deserves. So please excuse the briefness of my responses." No problem at all. I am happy to let that response be the last major word on this discussion for now, which

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst (response to arrowlessness)

Wha' happened to the arrows?? - Original Message - From: "Victor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marxand thethinkers he inspired" Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 11:47 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

ised by Karl Marx and thethinkers he inspired" Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 19:36 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst Here is a follow-up on a passage Victor offered in an interpretation of an Ilyenkov quote. I made some claims and promised to try to show their basis. First, I

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Here is a follow-up on a passage Victor offered in an interpretation of an Ilyenkov quote. I made some claims and promised to try to show their basis. First, I deconstruct both of these passages from my viewpoint and criticize Victor's formulation. Second, I touch on why Victor's formulati

[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Hello Victor , Comments below 1. We tend to exaggerate the importance of linguistic communication or at least the importance of developed language in linguistic communication.[Noam Chomsky is the paragon of this. He's so impressed by the size and complexity of the syntactic analytical system he

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

gt; To: "'Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx andthe thinkers he inspired'" Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 20:03 Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst Victor : CB, Continued from last message. First, let's not forget that a lot of

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

I've not had time to keep up with your ongoing debate on Ilyenkov. Since you are apparently preparing something for publication, I hope you will apprise us of the finished product. This line of enquiry, it seems to me, is much more important than most philosophical projects being undertaken.

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :BakhurstVictor

of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx andthe thinkers he inspired'" Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 17:08 Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :BakhurstVictor Victor > > CB: Here we see why the transgenerational transmission of how to make and use tools is the key typ

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

social activity. Oudeyis - Original Message - From: "Charles Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx andthe thinkers he inspired'" Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 16:49 Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] O

[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :BakhurstVictor

Victor > > CB: Here we see why the transgenerational transmission of how to make and use tools is the key type of social connection defining humans. There are studies showing that chimps , on their own , int the wild, make and use tools, such as sticks to dig in ant hills. Bu

[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

> Victor: I'm not sure of it either. However, it appears to me that we can distinguish social labour, direct cooperation, from characteristically human labour, that is social labour that is special since it involves the production and use of tools for realization of material social goals.

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Steve and Ralph, Thanks for all the help. Oudeyis - Original Message - From: "Steve Gabosch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and thethinkers he inspired" Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 21:31 Subje

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

___ At 07:32 PM 6/26/2005 +0200, Oudeyis (Victor) wrote: - Original Message - From: "Steve Gabosch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and thethinkers he inspired" Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 12:

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

- Original Message - From: "Steve Gabosch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and thethinkers he inspired" Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 12:40 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

This is going to take a little time, you raised some heavy questions here. Oudeyis - Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 17:17 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst At 02:12 PM 6/22/2005 +02

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

I am responding to a 6/22/2005 post from Victor, which I quote from. The quote below is a good example of where I think Victor gets Ilyenkov wrong 180 degrees. In the general section of Ilyenkov's 1977 essay "The Concept of the Ideal" that Victor quotes from, I believe Ilyenkov is making just

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :BakhurstVictor

- Original Message - From: "Charles Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx andthe thinkers he inspired'" Sent: Friday, June 24, 2005 19:01 Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Ba

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

- Original Message - From: "Charles Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx andthe thinkers he inspired'" Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 17:38 Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :BakhurstVictor

Victor The second comment is based on Marx's discussion of the role of direct cooperation in the initial development of social labour. See Economic Manuscripts 1861-63 Section 3 Relative Surplus Value Notebook IV Cooperation. Marx discussion is interesting because his discussion of crude

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

- Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 17:45 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst At 11:18 AM 6/22/2005 +0200, Victor wrote: This is pure Ilyenkov. He uses this argument to explain how

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

At 11:18 AM 6/22/2005 +0200, Victor wrote: This is pure Ilyenkov. He uses this argument to explain how ethical/cultural descriptions are given the status of statements on Nature. For example a statement that nature provides man with a natural calendar in the yearly solar and lunar cycles, a na

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

At 02:12 PM 6/22/2005 +0200, Victor wrote: Hegel regards objectification as simply the alienation of spirit in the object. The ideal itself is the alienated spirit that has become a universal through the mediation of language. True, I've not addressed the problem of whether Hegel regarded lab

[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Victor: Ilyenkov (and I suggest Marx as well) argue that the ideal originates as a tool for regulation of social life and only later is appropriated (hijacked may be too strong a word) to the purposes of describing material reality (labour activity). CB: I'm not so sure about this. At the or

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Comments on the commentary included below. - Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 10:25 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst Comments to selected extracts below At 01:43 PM 6/19/2005 +02

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

I've isolated the difficult passages and commented on them below. - Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 10:16 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst I am confused by this beyond the reaso

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

The originals were certainly rubbish and needed revision. Your objections to the revisions need to be explained. - Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 10:11 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhur

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Comments to selected extracts below At 01:43 PM 6/19/2005 +0200, Victor wrote: Ideality like spoken language is not one thing or another, but two things, the objectified notion in consciousness and its material representation by some form of language, united as a more concrete concept, the

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

I am confused by this beyond the reasonably clear first and third sentences of the first paragraph and the first sentence of the second paragraph. At 07:51 PM 6/20/2005 +0200, Victor wrote: I regard Ilyenkov's contribution rather as the Logic (method or met) for a practical (materialist or natu

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

forts with this gibberish. At 10:46 AM 6/21/2005 +0200, Victor wrote: - Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 10:17 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst What in bloody hell does this mean? At 09:32

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

- Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 10:17 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst What in bloody hell does this mean? At 09:32 AM 6/21/2005 +0200, Victor wrote: Science is founded as i

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

What in bloody hell does this mean? At 09:32 AM 6/21/2005 +0200, Victor wrote: Science is founded as ideas, but unlike Hegel's ideal (which as Marx put it is "as nothing else but the form of social activity represented in the thing or conversely the form of human creativity represented as a thi

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

CB, See below: - Original Message - From: "Charles Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx andthe thinkers he inspired'" Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 21:06 Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dia

[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

uot;'Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx andthe thinkers he inspired'" http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis> > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 15:24 Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst > > Victor >

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

ans of production in response to changing natural conditions. Oudeyis - Original Message - From: "Charles Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx andthe thinkers he inspired'" Sent:

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

inkers he inspired'" Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 15:43 Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst Victor The social relations are not embodied in a particular coat or in a particular bale of linen. These are material objects whose concreteness are beyond the capacity

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

thinkers he inspired'" Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 15:18 Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst And to be more precise, Oudeyis, I think the point below is that the matter of deriving the materiality discussed here based on what is "outside" of a concrete individu

[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Steve Gabosch a) where is ideality "located"? I would answer a) "in cultural artifacts," using the term in its broadest possible sense (tools, signs, all human creations and observations, etc.) I think you would answer a) "in representations." ^ CB: How about in the relationship between

[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Victor The social relations are not embodied in a particular coat or in a particular bale of linen. These are material objects whose concreteness are beyond the capacity of human conceptualisation. After all a particular linen coat may have been made by an apprentice and taken twice as long

[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Victor > As I see it, the key concept in this regard that Ilyenkov offers is that just as Marx discovered how social relations can be "embodied" into things in the form of commodities - through the incorporation of abstract labor into the value-form - so too, Marxists can explain that social rel

[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

And to be more precise, Oudeyis, I think the point below is that the matter of deriving the materiality discussed here based on what is "outside" of a concrete individual's head, and a concrete individual's interaction with her non-human "outside" is a main error of positivism and much bourgeois

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

19, 2005 10:11 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst Victor, I have read your response carefully. I think I am getting a handle on our differing approaches. They seem to emerge in the way we understand issues such as: a) where is ideality "located"? b) where is value i

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Victor, I have read your response carefully. I think I am getting a handle on our differing approaches. They seem to emerge in the way we understand issues such as: a) where is ideality "located"? b) where is value is "located"? c) what is the "essence" of ideality? d) what is the "essence"

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Yeah I'm writing it up now. Oudeyis - Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 18:55 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst This is refreshing after wasting my time reading Rorty's worthless

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Karl Marx andthe thinkers he inspired'" Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 21:58 Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst Ilyenkov explains that plain materialists and idealists alike make the error of viewing the boundary between the material and the ideal as being the world of t

[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Ilyenkov explains that plain materialists and idealists alike make the > error of viewing the boundary between the material and the ideal as being > the world of the inside versus that of the outside of each individual > human head. In contrast, he argues that according to dialectical > materialis

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

This is refreshing after wasting my time reading Rorty's worthless crap. Have you published anything on these subjects? Also, it seems a thoroughgoing analysis of Popper's 3-worlds schema is in order. The Soviets criticized Popper, but not in sufficient detail, it seems. At 01:41 PM 6/17/20

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

ry out the ideas in the paper in this response is much appreciated. - Original Message - From: "Steve Gabosch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and thethinkers he inspired" Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Thanks. Popper has an idea of how the 3 worlds interact (which has direct causal impact on which), but I don't remember exactly how. I'm not happy with the terminology, which seems to me misleading, and I'm not certain how in his scheme something belongs to more than one world at one time. Bu

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

I am not at all up to speed on the German Marxist Sohn-Rethel (please help), but a thought immediately comes to mind on Popper's "Three Worlds" cosmology. If one ignores the positivist framework of these three worlds invented by Popper and attempts to make them as dynamic and "dialectical" as

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

This is the key. How would you compare Ilyenkov's view to that of Sohn-Rethel, or to Popper's 3-worlds theory? At 07:16 PM 6/15/2005 -0700, Steve Gabosch wrote: .. As I see it, the key concept in this regard that Ilyenkov offers is that just as Marx discovered how social

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

t theory and I think you'll recognize his work in this paper. Thanks for the help. Oudeyis - Original Message - From: "Steve Gabosch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and thethinkers he inspired"

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

cal Materialist theory and I think you'll recognize his work in this paper. Thanks for the help. Oudeyis - Original Message - From: "Steve Gabosch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and thethinkers he i

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Hi Victor, Interestingly, footnote one in a paper by Lantolf and Thorne that is getting discussed on the xmca list - the paper is at Introduction, in Sociocultural Theory and the Genesis of Second Language Development -

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Victor, Thanks for the refresher course on Rosenburg, which becomes a history of the Nazi party from 1921. It is always good to be reminded of what happened in Germany. Your comments on Dubrovsky are very interesting, as is your analysis of Bakhurst. I also read your descriptions of ideali

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!: domains

CB said: However, analogizing to chemistry and biology, biology does not reduce to chemistry. Human psychology does not reduce to individual physiological psychology. Absolutely. On the first point, yes, biology cannot be reduced to chemistry. On the second point, I also completely agree:

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

Too bad. Oudeyis - Original Message - From: "Steve Gabosch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 2:10 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst Hi Victor, If I am getting your first point, that Bakhurst incorrectly takes "Dia

[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

Steve Gabosch On CB's second comment, about the subject matter of Marxist psychology, I think it is true that a dialectical materialist psychology must begin with sociology and social psychology, and the study of the individual must be based on sociology and social psychology - and as CB I thi

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

On CB's first comment on SOCIO-history, I certainly completely agree, and think Ilyenkov would, too. On CB's second comment, about the subject matter of Marxist psychology, I think it is true that a dialectical materialist psychology must begin with sociology and social psychology, and the stu

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst

olini's masterful contributions to human thought as serious theory? Oudeyis - Original Message - From: "Steve Gabosch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and thethinkers he inspired" Sent: Wednesday, June

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/31/05 07:48AM >>> > >>from page 283: >>"A consistently materialist conception of thought, of course, alters the >>approach to the key problems of logic in a cardinal way, in particular to >>interpretation of the nature of logical categories. Marx and Engels >>establis

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/31/05 07:48AM >>> > >>from page 283: >>"A consistently materialist conception of thought, of course, alters the >>approach to the key problems of logic in a cardinal way, in particular to >>interpretation of the nature of logical categories. Marx and Engels >>establis

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

Again, my stuff is shelved just below your commentary: - Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 3:51 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! Note my interleaved comments on a fra

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

man thought as serious theory? Oudeyis - Original Message - From: "Steve Gabosch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and thethinkers he inspired" Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 0:36 Subject: Re: [Marxism-

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 16:22 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! Yes, I have this book somewhere. So are you going to forward your review to this list? At 03:31 PM 6/7/2005 +0200, Victor wrote: Unfortunately, the mainstay of Western interpretations of Ilyenkov

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

Commentary inserted below: - Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 16:35 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! Very interesting post. Just a few isolated comments to begin . . . At 03:10 PM 6/7/2005 +02

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

I continue to enjoy this thread, but will be gone for some days and it will probably be a little while after that before I can reengage. I will think about the position Charles and Ralph have taken on the relationship of the brain to the origins of humanity. I think Engels' argument about how

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

Very interesting post. Just a few isolated comments to begin . . . At 03:10 PM 6/7/2005 +0200, Victor wrote: .. The fact that life forms activities are directed to concrete future states, they are, no matter how simple or mechanical, exercises in reason. This why, if you wil

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

Yes, I have this book somewhere. So are you going to forward your review to this list? At 03:31 PM 6/7/2005 +0200, Victor wrote: Unfortunately, the mainstay of Western interpretations of Ilyenkov's works is the absolutely wierd product of a Brit academic who represents them as a sort of sociol

[Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

Charles Brown Victor victor Of course objectivity reality exists, but we have to realize that what Marx, Lenin and other intelligent Marxists like Ilyenkov meant by objective reality is not reality contemplated by some totally uninvolved philosophical being. Just the reverse is true obj

[Marxism-Thaxis] Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

to Dawkin's projection of the mechanics of >population genetics to the science of culture (memics and all that). CB: Interestingly this "memics" thing reminds of both Levi-Strauss and Marvin Harris who analogized to the idea in phoneme, with the emphasis on "eme", from phonetics and linguist

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

I've inteleaved my comments in the foliage of your commentary. - Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 3:51 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! Interleaved comments o

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

. Oudeyis - Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 4:15 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! Well, my reaction here re-invokes my sense of the tautology of all such argu

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

My full response is in the prior message. So here I'll just make a couple of short responses (see below). - Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 4:24 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Tha

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

much as we are doing here. Oudeyis - Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 4:28 Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! A question on one of your assertions: Note that this is not the same as saying that

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

ith conditions to which he must accommodate his activity if they are to realize their goals. Labour is a cooperative activity in which men work with nature as their partner. Oudeyis - Original Message - From: "Ralph Dumain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

Your reasoning is fine up until the braking point I note below. At 03:10 PM 5/29/2005 +0200, Oudeyis wrote: Steve, Well, now I know what comes after the . First paragraph: Oudeyis is saying nothing about what nature is, but rather is writing that whatever understandings man has of nature are a

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 6:14 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! > > but what about history of nature? I mean before there wasn't anything that > can be qualified as man's interaction withthe world. does in your view > dialectics start

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

Interleaved comments on further fragments of your post: At 03:08 AM 5/28/2005 +0200, Oudeyis wrote: .. I see your not going to let me deal with the dogmatics of classical materialism briefly. The kernel of my argument is that in general, discourse segregated from practice can only be th

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

Note my interleaved comments on a fragment of a key post of yours At 03:08 AM 5/28/2005 +0200, Oudeyis wrote: .. > I don't see this. I see the problem this way: that stage of the > development of materialism is inadequate to grasp the nature of human > activity, both pra

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics!

to CB Right, I hear the same language. Oudeyis - Original Message - From: "Charles Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx andthe thinkers he inspired'" Sent: Monday, June 06, 20

  1   2   >