Marquit, Erwin. "A Materialist Critique of Hegel's Concept of Identity of
Opposites," Science and Society, vol. 54, no. 2, Summer 1990, 147-166.
Marquit details the treatment by Hegel and Engels of dialectical
contradictions as logical contradictions. Marquit claims that materialist
dialectics
Erwin Marquit's articles in Science and Society offset the two articles by
Graham Priest previously described.
Marquit, Erwin. "Dialectics of Motion in Continuous and Discrete Spaces,"
Science and Society, vol. 42, Winter 1978-79, 410-425.
Marquit, Erwin. "Contradictions and Dialectics and Fo
>>History is the progressive accumulation of productive forces (Engels). What
this means is that history is the accumulation of productive forces and what
constitutes its progressiveness is its spontaneous qualitative development
and expansion. This qualitative development has at its center the
rev
1. Correspondence vs coherence theories of truth (Charles Brown)
> Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 16:25:38 -0400
> From: "Charles Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] Correspondence vs coherence theories of
> truth
> Ralph D:. In any case, I favor correspondence over coherence theorie
V: Restriction itself is either a function of recognized need
(self-restriction: what Hegel and Marx regard as the real nature of freedom)
or of coercion by others to realize their needs in contradistinction from
one's own. Of course the subject of restriction is here is that of human
interact
CB: The plants are run away overseas more to run them away from the working
class in the U.S.I said the plants are moved away from the owners "as a
byproduct" as in indirect result, of running them away from the U.S.
workers.
WL: I call this national chauvinism. I will not seriously engage this k
History is the progressive accumulation of productive forces (Engels). What
this means is that history is the accumulation of productive forces and what
constitutes its progressiveness is its spontaneous qualitative development
and expansion. This qualitative development has at its center the
revol
WL: Interesting proposition. What you end up stating and illustrating is
that
relations of production or property relations are the laws defining property
CB: What kind of laws are you speaking of here ?
and peoples relationship to property in the process of production. You
define
CB: Relations of production or property relations are class relations. The
organization of material productive forces, including the organization of
people "on the shop floor", the technical division of labor, is not class
relations. The capitalist owner is not even there overseeing the shopfloor
a
CB: In other words, the bourgeoisie doesn't fetter the development of the
material productive forces outside of the U.S.national territory where it
runs the plants away to. It buildsup the productive forces in Mexico, Korea,
and other places to which industrial production has been moved. It has not
CB: Relations of production or property relations are class relations. The
organization of material productive forces, including the organization of
people "on the shop floor", the technical division of labor, is not class
relations. The capitalist owner is not even there overseeing the shopfloor
a
>>CB: The computer revolution might become a fettering of productive forces
that generates social revolution, if the runaway plants made possible by
computers fetters the development of productive on the U.S. territory to the
point that the U.S. labor aristocracy bolts its collaboration with the
b
12 matches
Mail list logo