Louis Proyect wrote:
>
> Leibniz and Whitehead are
> key to Harvey (while obviously having nothing to do with Marx)
It's not obvious to me. Leibniz is part of the German idealist tradition
sublated by Marx.
The dialectical relation of "sublation" is not a relation of identity. That
Whitehead's ontology, like Marx's, sublates Leibniz' doesn't mean that it is
identical to Leibniz'. (Whitehead's ontology is not, by the way, a species
of "holism" if you mean by this the idea of the "whole" as something apart
from, independent of and superior to the individuals which compose it. In
so far as part/whole relations are concerned, the identifying concept of
Whitehead's ontology, as of Marx's, is "internal relations".) The
Panglossian conclusion you attempt to foist on Harvey and Whitehead in this
way is in fact more consistent with scientific materialism since the latter
has no logical space for the idea of self-determination. Whatever is must
be.
As for Whitehead "obviously having nothing to do with Marx":
"When we think of freedom, we are apt to confine ourselves to freedom of
thought, freedom of the press, freedom for religious opinions. Then the
limitations to freedom are conceived as wholly arising from the antagonisms
of our fellow men. This is a thorough mistake. The massive habits of
physical nature, its iron laws, determine the scene for the sufferings of
men. Birth and death, heat, cold, hunger, separation, disease, the general
impracticability of purpose, all bring their quota to imprison the souls of
women and of men. Our experiences do not keep step with our hopes. The
Platonic Eros, which is the soul stirring itself to life and motion, is
maimed. The essence of freedom is the practicability of purpose. Mankind
has chiefly suffered from the frustration of its prevalent purposes, even
such as belong to the very definition of the species. The literary
exposition of freedom deals mainly with the frills. The Greek myth was
more to the point. Prometheus did not bring to mankind freedom of the
press. He procured fire, which obediently to human purposes cooks and gives
warmth. In fact, freedom of action is a primary human need. In modern
thought, the expression of this truth has taken the form of 'the economic
interpretation of history'." Whitehead, Adventures of Ideas, p. 66.
Ted
--
Ted Winslow E-MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Division of Social Science VOICE: (416) 736-5054
York University FAX: (416) 736-5615
4700 Keele St.
Toronto, Ontario
CANADA M3J 1P3
