>>> "Charles Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/24/00 01:47PM >>>
Engels uses "materialist dialectics" in _ Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical
German Philosophy_.
CB
>>> Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/24/00 10:31AM >>>
I wrote:
> >actually, there are good reasons to avoid the terms hist
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/23/00 10:34PM >>>
In a message dated 5/23/00 9:56:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
<< I blow hot and cold on the usefulness of the term "dialectical
materialism,"
but even when I warm to it I don't like to see it posited as *the*
philosophica
Louis Proyect wrote:
>scholasticism tended to put a damper on scientific investigation. With
>the >rise of the bourgeosie and the Englightement, challenges to the
status >quo >often took on a materialist form, such as the case of Francis
Bacon, >Diderot, Gassendi et al.
>Louis Proyect
>(The M
and "historical materialism" in letters to Joseph Bloch
Mine
>Engels uses "materialist dialectics" in _ Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of
>Classical German Philosophy_.
>CB
>>> Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/24/00 10:31AM >>>
I wrote:
> >actually, there are good reasons to avoid the te
>I wrote:
> >actually, there are good reasons to avoid the terms historical materialism
> >and dialectical materialism. They aren't Marx's terms.
Mine replies:
>Really? Marx says in Preface to the French edition of Capital (Tucker
>ed, p.301) the following:
>
>"My DIALECTIC METHOD is not only d
In my view, while Marx's work before the mid-1850s focuses
on a socio-historical theory of knowledge, which necessarily
removes Philosophy from its privileged place in a hierarchy of
knowledges, Marx's remarks in later life (see his conversations
with Alexei Voden and Liebknecht's reminiscences)
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/24/00 03:36PM >>>
Incidentally, Marx never "contributed a chapter to Anti-Duehring."
He had written a journal article on Duerhing, which he allowed
Engels to incorporate into his book, published serially at first
without much attention. Despite Engels' comments much
late
>>> Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/24/00 11:04AM >>>
Carroll writes"
><< I blow hot and cold on the usefulness of the term "dialectical
>materialism," but even when I warm to it I don't like to see it posited
>as *the* philosophical basis for "historical materialism." <<
Right. "a" phi
Engels uses "materialist dialectics" in _ Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical
German Philosophy_.
CB
>>> Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/24/00 10:31AM >>>
I wrote:
> >actually, there are good reasons to avoid the terms historical materialism
> >and dialectical materialism. They aren't
Those interested in the issue of Naturdialectik or what has
been known since Plekhanov as "Dialectical Materialism'
may want to read my paper on 'Marx's Ecology:
Synthesizing Dialectics of Praxis and Nature" at
http://www.egroups.com/files/red-green/
To read it, you'll have to subscribe to the m
Carroll writes"
><< I blow hot and cold on the usefulness of the term "dialectical
>materialism," but even when I warm to it I don't like to see it posited
>as *the* philosophical basis for "historical materialism." <<
Right. "a" philosophical basis for Marx's materialist conception of
his
I wrote:
> >actually, there are good reasons to avoid the terms historical materialism
> >and dialectical materialism. They aren't Marx's terms.
Mine replies:
>Really? Marx says in Preface to the French edition of Capital (Tucker
>ed, p.301) the following:
>
>"My DIALECTIC METHOD is not only dif
>There are different meanings to the word "materialism" Please clearify
what you
>mean.
>
>Rod
Okay. There is the kind of materialism expressed in Epicurus's philosophy,
which was the topic of Marx's dissertation. With the rise of the church,
officially sanctioned Aristotelian philosophy in the f
There are different meanings to the word "materialism" Please clearify what you
mean.
Rod
Louis Proyect wrote:
> Carrol Cox:
> >with any precision in *Poverty of Philosophy*; and (b) most of what I
> >would think of as historical materialism can be defended independently of
> >any particular vi
Louis Proyect wrote:
> . For example, only 4 years ago Joel Kovel wrote a lengthy piece in
> CNS that argued that Marxism is weak on ecological questions because it
> lacks a spiritual dimension.
I always have thought that the Unconscious was the Holy Ghost in 19th-c
positivist disguise. That
Carrol Cox:
>with any precision in *Poverty of Philosophy*; and (b) most of what I
>would think of as historical materialism can be defended independently of
>any particular view (pro or con or neutral) of the "dialectics of nature."
Actually Marx was fully involved with the editing of Engels' "D
In a message dated 5/23/00 9:56:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
<< I blow hot and cold on the usefulness of the term "dialectical
materialism,"
but even when I warm to it I don't like to see it posited as *the*
philosophical
basis for "historical materialism."
Even a
Jim Devine wrote:
> I made two errors in this thread. (1) it's not "historical materialism"
> that meshes so well with critical realism; rather, it's "dialectical
> materialism," which is interpreted as the philosophical basis for
> "historical materialism." (2) It wasn't Roy Bhaskar who expres
>Mine wrote:
>>in any case, a self-identified Marxist would instead use historial
>>materialism. If this methodology has the same connotations with h.m,
then
>>why to substitute h.m with a different name?
>actually, there are good reasons to avoid the terms historical
>materialism
>and dialecti
Mine wrote:
>in any case, a self-identified Marxist would instead use historial
>materialism. If this methodology has the same connotations with h.m, then
>why to substitute h.m with a different name?
actually, there are good reasons to avoid the terms historical materialism
and dialectical mate
in any case, a self-identified Marxist would instead use historial
materialism. If this methodology has the same connotations with h.m, then
why to substitute h.m with a different name?
Mine
>It doesn't differ as far as I can tell.
At 02:21 PM 5/23/00 -0400, you wrote:
>This methodology doe
It doesn't differ as far as I can tell.
At 02:21 PM 5/23/00 -0400, you wrote:
>This methodology does not seem terribly clear to me. how does it differ
>from historical materialism to be brief?
>
>Mine
>
> > >>> Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/23/00 11:53AM >>> >I'm
>following critical-realist
This methodology does not seem terribly clear to me. how does it differ
from historical materialism to be brief?
Mine
> >>> Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/23/00 11:53AM >>> >I'm
following critical-realist methodology, in which paradigm X can only >beat
paradigm Y by incorporating its valid
>okay, but what was true?
Sandinistas were pragmatists. They sought to develop what can be accurately
called a "mixed economy" despite the Reaganite charge that they were
Communists. The important difference between their attempt and failed
attempts such as Arbenz's in Guatemala is that the Sandi
> >Jim Devine:
> > >Also, the Nicaraguan Sandinistas argued that the active participation and
> > >enthusiasm of the people could substitute for the narrowly-defined forces
> > >of production.
> >
> >Not true.
>
> okay, but what was true?
> Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://liberalarts.lmu.e
At 12:38 PM 5/23/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Jim Devine:
> >Also, the Nicaraguan Sandinistas argued that the active participation and
> >enthusiasm of the people could substitute for the narrowly-defined forces
> >of production.
>
>Not true.
okay, but what was true?
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & htt
Jim Devine:
>Also, the Nicaraguan Sandinistas argued that the active participation and
>enthusiasm of the people could substitute for the narrowly-defined forces
>of production.
Not true.
Louis Proyect
(The Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org)
I wrote:
> >yes, it's true that the actual revolution in Russia turned into the kind
> of sh*t that he and Engels predicted would occur if a revolution
> occurred in a poor country (in the GERMAN IDEOLOGY). <
Mine wrote:
>by the way, do you have any evidence to your claims from German Ideology
by the way, do you have any evidence to your claims from German Ideology?
Mine
Jim Devine wrote:
>yes, it's true that the actual revolution in Russia turned into the kind
>of >sh*t that he and Engels predicted would occur if a revolution
occurred in >a >poor country (in the GERMAN IDEOLOGY).
29 matches
Mail list logo
