Re: Re: Re: Darwin's dilemma (fwd)

2000-05-08 Thread Carrol Cox
Ricardo Duchesne wrote: As one of the most boring books ever written, one which 99% of Marxist do not have the patience or even temper to read, should we not but sympathize with poor Darwin's rejection of this offer? I read *Capital* (Vol.I) several years before I became involved in

Re: Re: Re: Re: Darwin's dilemma (fwd)

2000-05-08 Thread Jim Devine
At 09:57 AM 5/8/00 -0500, you wrote: As one of the most boring books ever written, one which 99% of Marxist do not have the patience or even temper to read, should we not but sympathize with poor Darwin's rejection of this offer? since when do we let mere boredom stand in our way?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Darwin's dilemma (fwd)

2000-05-08 Thread Doug Henwood
Jim Devine wrote: At 09:57 AM 5/8/00 -0500, you wrote: As one of the most boring books ever written, one which 99% of Marxist do not have the patience or even temper to read, should we not but sympathize with poor Darwin's rejection of this offer? since when do we let mere boredom

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Darwin's dilemma (fwd)

2000-05-08 Thread JKSCHW
Has anyone else here read R.P. Wolff's lovely litearry appreciation of Capital, Moneybags Should be So Lucky? Also, SS Prawer has a nice book on Karl Marx and World Literature, which is an old-fashioned (i.e. pre-Theory) lit critter's approach to Cpitala nd a lot more. As someone who has

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Darwin's dilemma (fwd)

2000-05-08 Thread Brad De Long
Has anyone else here read R.P. Wolff's lovely litearry appreciation of Capital, Moneybags Should be So Lucky? Yes... If Wolff is correct in his assessment of what Marx is trying to do in chapter 1, volume 1, then all I can say is that Marx failed--that Wolff is perhaps the first and only

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Darwin's dilemma (fwd)

2000-05-08 Thread Jim Devine
At 09:22 AM 5/8/00 -0700, you wrote: Has anyone else here read R.P. Wolff's lovely litearry appreciation of Capital, Moneybags Should be So Lucky? Yes... If Wolff is correct in his assessment of what Marx is trying to do in chapter 1, volume 1, then all I can say is that Marx failed--that

Re: Re: Re: Darwin's dilemma (fwd)

2000-05-08 Thread Michael Perelman
Margaret Fay wrote about the letter to Darwin. It was from Aveling, not Marx. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You are misreading the point. The point was not about Marxists' sympathy with Darwin's rejection of the offer. Of course, it was a nice behavior that Darwin did not want to popularize

Re: Re: Re: Darwin's dilemma (fwd)

2000-05-08 Thread md7148
I know that the letter was from Aveling.What about Gould's claim that there was a correpondence between Marx and Darwin? Is this another correpondence? or is Gould making up? Mine Margaret Fay wrote about the letter to Darwin. It was from Aveling, not Marx. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You

Re: Re: Re: Re: Darwin's dilemma (fwd)

2000-05-08 Thread Michael Perelman
I think that Gould is wrong. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that the letter was from Aveling.What about Gould's claim that there was a correpondence between Marx and Darwin? Is this another correpondence? or is Gould making up? Mine Margaret Fay wrote about the letter to Darwin. It was

Re: Re: Re: Re: Darwin's dilemma (fwd)

2000-05-08 Thread Rod Hay
It has been established long ago that Marx did not offer to dedicate Capital to Darwin. Check Louis Feuer's article in the Journal of the History of Ideas, (some time in the 1970s). Rod Hay Carrol Cox wrote: Ricardo Duchesne wrote: As one of the most boring books ever written, one which

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Darwin's dilemma (fwd)

2000-05-08 Thread Mine Aysen Doyran
I strongly think so too, but i spying on him. there is something fishy there.. Mine Michael Perelman wrote: I think that Gould is wrong. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know that the letter was from Aveling.What about Gould's claim that there was a correpondence between Marx and Darwin? Is