I had composed a post because I wanted to say how excellently well, Ralph Dumain's letter of Jun 14 1996 reads. As fresh as new. But I cannot confirm I sent it. Apologies.
Chris Burford >> >> >> Dialectics of Nature > > >> >> Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Fri, 14 Jun 1996 20:34:44 -0700 (PDT) >> >> Previous message: Dialectics of Nature >> Next message: Labor Party platform >> Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- >> ---- >> >> However amateurish Engels's unpublished writings on the natural >> sciences may >> have been, he doesn't deserve to be equated with pomo analogical >> word magic. >> That is insulting and I won't stand for it. At the time when >> DIALECTICS OF >> NATURE was published, people were still struggling, especially in >> the >> English-speaking world, to figure out what dialectics really meant, >> in the >> absence of a tradition and with only the Russians to follow. I >> would >> suggest that you look for a good historical article that explains >> what >> Engels was trying to do in the context of his time, and also >> remember that >> Engels wasn't the one who made his exploratory work into a >> finished, >> dogmatic philosophy. Remember too that it is not only Western >> Marxism that >> challenged Engels: Lenin criticized Engels's examples of dialectics >> in >> nature, so it was not he who froze Engels in stone either. To be >> scandalized that others worshipped at the throne of Engels >> disregarding his >> imperfections is one thing, but to be scandalized at Engels himself >> is to >> read him through the lenses of Stalinism and thereby to compound >> the >> problem. >> >> I do not have the time to explore this matter, or to respond to >> DIALECTICS >> OF NATURE specifically, but I would at least like to raise some >> issues that >> might make the context more understandable. >> I'm basing these remarks on general considerations, not on a >> reading of this >> text in particular. >> >> These are some of the battles that needed to be fought at the >> time: >> >> 1. The battle against naive empiricism and mechanical materialism >> and a >> disconnected, atomistic view of reality. >> >> 2. The need for a unified, coherent world-picture, that would >> connect all >> phenomena, which was already under way within physics itself in the >> understanding of thermodynamics, motion, electromagnetism in their >> various >> manifestations. >> >> 3. The need to show that the universe undergoes development, >> qualitative >> change, that it is not static and eternally fixeed in the state in >> which it >> is now found. >> >> 4. The need for a non-reductive materialism that recognized >> qualitative >> differences within in the material universe and a stratified >> conception of >> the organization of matter, not merely unity of the universe, which >> itself >> had been rendered in a mystical holist or reductive fashion, but >> also >> qualitative difference, so that the natural sciences -- physics >> interpreted >> in a purely quantitative manner -- could not be misused to explain >> social >> processes. Before ideas of emergent evolution, emergent >> properties, general >> systems, the theory of integrative levels, and related notions >> gained >> currency, there was Engels. >> >> A final note: to approach the world in a piecemeal fashion is >> always to fill >> in the inevitable gaps with ideology. Engels too was aware of this >> and knew >> what blockheads petty bourgeois minds were outside of their narrow >> specialties. Only the working class movement sought to create a >> unified yet >> non-mystical world-picture, neither mechanical materialist (i.e. >> reducing >> our scientific ambition to mere measurement), nor holist nor >> lebensphilosophie. Self-educated workers kept their Dietzgen in >> their >> living rooms in place of the Bible. The significance of >> dialectical >> materialism lies in the general world-picture of the universe >> organized on >> several qualitative levels, from the physical to the chemical to >> the organic >> to the social, and not in spurious examples of dialectical >> processes in >> nature. >> >> >> --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
