It's a fascinating story, and it illustrates the incredible ideological
naivete the intellectuals produced by class societies, whether of the
capitalist or Stalinist sort. Wilson and Skinner on the one hand, the
Soviets on the other (except this Dubinin looks like a smart fellow)--what
fools!
The reviews are interesting, esp. that of Raya Dunayeskaya. It breaks off
though in mid-sentence. Either there is something wrong with my Internet
connection (which might well be the case) or this web page. Anyway, the
reviewer captures the essential problem with deciphering Raya. Also, in
It is always worthwhile to look beneath the surface and investigate the
facts, but I don't trust Lil Joe's rhetoric. There's something sectarian
and dishonest about this. Do you have any better sources that would help
people unravel the situation?
At 06:34 PM 8/1/2004 -0400, Jim Farmelant
Said web site is very depressing. Aside from the personal biography, the
site seems to be a mixture of Afrocentrism and extreme left sectarianism.
Some of it is literate, and some of it is stupid. The article by tow other
folks labeling Michael Moore as a white nationalist is enough to
This shows you the despicable consequences and delusions of
Stalinism. Monthly Review would like to get itself off the hook but one
must recall its despicable support for Maoism. The very wording of this
article implies that nothing was really wrong in the beginning except
excessive
It is essential not to have illusions. It is also crucial to defeat Bush.
At 12:47 PM 10/24/2004 -0400, Jim Farmelant wrote:
Sunday Telegraph October 24, 2004
John Kerry will make his adoring anti-war groupies look like fools
By Edward Luttwak
___
little shit in refusing to stick up for black voters in Florida. This is a
trivial election only for leftists with one hand stroking their putzes and
their head up their ass.
At 01:43 PM 10/24/2004 -0400, Jim Farmelant wrote:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 13:07:30 -0400 Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Stalinist leanings aside, Parenti got to the heart of the issue of globalism:
Globalism is the elevation of the property
value above all democratic values, above all other social values. So any
kind of public service can be wiped out for interfering and creating lost
market opportunities for the
A-fucking-men!
But:
Born: 4 Jan 1643 in Woolsthorpe, Lincolnshire, England
Died: 31 March 1727 in London, England
Isaac Newton was born in the manor house of Woolsthorpe, near Grantham in
Lincolnshire. Although by the calendar in use at the time of his birth he
was born on Christmas Day 1642, we
Reading this old thread of my late beloved Lisa brings back a lot of
memories. I do not, remember, however, how this discussion proceeded from
there. I do remember that it was an unfinished discussion, and that I had
it in the back of my mind to engage Lisa once again attempting to divert
I made a comparable argument as part of a recent discussion in a local
philosophy group. The topic was emergence. I made a pitch for Engels as a
pioneer of this concept. Curiously, much of the literature on the
subject--including encyclopedia articles--is heavily biased in citing its
At 11:17 PM 2/19/2005 -0800, Steve Gabosch wrote:
What wonderful descriptions of an obviously wonderful person. 35 is way,
way to soon to go, what a tragedy. What was Lisa's full name? Does she
have a representative piece of writing on the internet or otherwise
published? Whether she does
At 09:05 PM 2/22/2005 -0800, Steve Gabosch wrote:
Interesting comment on the Dewey Decimal System. Now I am curious about
how it was invented and constructed, and how Hegelianism was part of
that. The Library of Congress system also has a logic I haven't
investigated but would like to
. London: Duckworth, 1973. 130 p. illus. 23 cm.
At 01:24 AM 2/23/2005 -0500, Ralph Dumain wrote:
At 09:05 PM 2/22/2005 -0800, Steve Gabosch wrote:
Interesting comment on the Dewey Decimal System. Now I am curious about
how it was invented and constructed, and how Hegelianism was part
This essay is now on my web site:
Matter and Motion by L. Bazhenov
http://www.autodidactproject.org/other/bazhenov.html
While generally this kind of material has a tendency to get tedious, this
article sums up the issues very succinctly and is useful both to the
general reader and the miseducated
She's a co-author of EINSTEIN A-Z. I saw both of them here in Washington,
and both are foxes. The book itself seems to be primarily of value to
those not already well versed in Einstein lore.
At 09:33 PM 2/21/2005 -0500, Jim Farmelant wrote:
Science writer, Karen C. Fox, has posted on her
THE CLASSIFICATION RESEARCH GROUP AND THE THEORY OF INTEGRATIVE LEVELS
L OUISE F. S PITERI
http://www.lis.uiuc.edu/review/summer1995/spiteri.pdf
or
http://alexia.lis.uiuc.edu/review/summer1995/spiteri.html
Integrative level classification
Research project
I have stumbled onto some long sought material in my files, i.e. my notes
from 1991 on debates on dialectics conducted under pseudonyms, featuring
William Warde (George Novack) and Marc Loris (Jean Van Heijenoort), with
interventions by John G. Wright, J. Weber, George Sanders, Irwin Hyper
W.T. Harris, the most influential of the St. Louis Hegelians, is determined
to be the decisive influence on the organization of the Dewey Decimal
Classification system:
Hegel's Philosophy as Basis for the Dewey Classification Schedule by
Eugene E. Graziano
causation.
BTW, did Whitehead have any kind of social theory?
At 02:35 PM 2/25/2005 -0500, Charles Brown wrote:
Ralph Dumain:
There's a treasure trove buried inside mountains of crap,
CB: No doubt true. Maybe we can even use some of the crap as fertilizer for
fruitful endeavor
Glad I could be of service. It took a hell of detective work to unearth
it, and all night to edit it to some decent level of acceptability. I
think I discovered the article in 1980 in either a comprehensive Hegel
bibliography or a library science literature search. As far as I can
At 06:01 PM 2/25/2005 -0800, Steve Gabosch wrote:
Yes, that would be an interesting discussion to read. Where does one get
SWP internal bulletins from the 1940's?
In New York, the best place is Tamiment Library at NYU, where I did a great
deal of research in the '90s. Also Prometheus Research
The Philosophy of Marxism: An Exposition is the book I had in mind. It
is often used as a standard textbook. What a piece of crap! But rather
typical, esp. of the books that muck around with dialectical logic. (The
later Soviet textbooks became a bit shrewder, pretty much avoiding the
I've addressed the Somerville question elsewhere. I always assumed he was
Cp, judging by the company he kept. But I don't think so; that's why I
referred to him as a fellow traveller.
I've not visited CSH in Berkeley, which is based on Hal Draper's work, but
I would assume it is
Pass out?--meaning got to get some sleep and can't hold out any longer.
There are a number of important connections between people that drop out of
historical awareness. One task of scholarship is to restore those
connections. The 1990s were a marvelous decade for historical research and
We should find out more about what the Chinese have done. It would also be
interesting to know if in some way, Marx's attempts to think through the
problem based on outdated math books anticipated future
developments. However, the account below looks silly to me.
The existence of multiple
I've got to run now, so briefly: At some point, a modus vivendi was worked
out, which allowed the propaganda apparatus to do its thing while leaving
scientists and mathematicians alone to do theirs. This has roots towards
the end of the Stalin era, in the late 1940s, when formal logic was once
I haven't been online since mid-afternoon, so I'm just now catching up.
I hope others paid more careful attention to my recent posts. There are
serious consequences when one allows oneself to get trapped in a narrow
corner. It is incumbent upon anyone attempting to speak for the whole to
You are correct about Lenin as well as Marx and Engels. Lenin was careful
about communists' overstepping their bounds of competence. However, even
during the 1920s, when activity in all areas was quite creative before
Stalin's clampdown, certain bad habits got established.
I don't recall
I'm substantially in agreement with you here. Now, if one wants to unify
the marxist and natural-scientific perspectives, in place of relegating
them to separate perspectives, then one has to rise to that level of
abstraction to construct a unified account of both. This ridiculous meme
It depresses me that we still have to have these discussions in 2005. But
once more into the breach . . .
First, I'd suggest looking at Engels' motives for doing what he did, which
was not to present a finished ontology for all time but to combat the
half-assed philosophical vulgarities of
I'm still waiting for your account of biosemiotics. From what I've found
on the web, it looks like crackpot mystical pseudoscience to me.
Once again, my EMERGENCE BLOG:
http://www.autodidactproject.org/my/emergence-blog.html
As for current objectives, one ought to consider refining one's tools
Engels gives an impressive historical overview. Of great interest is the
relationship between the advances in science and the overall legitimating
philosophy--deism or French materialism. This illustrates a subtlety often
lacking in such discussions.
At 09:36 AM 3/9/2005 -0500, Charles Brown
At 10:28 AM 3/9/2005 -0800, andie nachgeborenen wrote:
--- Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't speak to THE DIALECTICAL BIOLOGIST, as I
haven't read it, though it
is gathering dust somewhere. The Dialectics of
Biology group produced a
couple of interesting books, mostly without
Justin has already spoken for himself. However, I'll remind you that our
current discussion (originating on the marxism-thaxis list) involves solely
diamat as a general ontology and its applications to the natural
world. Justin sees no use for this and you don't either, though from
different
Wow! Thanks for the synopsis. I don't understand how biosemiotics is
Neo-Kantian, though. If you are referring to Soviet philosopher David
Dubrovsky, I'd appreciate some expansion on this topic as well.
Do you know whether Whitehead had a social theory? The lack of social
theory in the
There's a fundamental miscommunication gong on here. But first . . .
At 07:02 PM 3/11/2005 +, redtwister666 wrote:
Facilitating Organization Change: Lessons from Complexity Science
by Edwin E. Olson, Glenda H. Eoyang, Richard Beckhard, Peter Vaill.
Notice the E. O. Wilson of sociobiology fame
This is as good a way as any to celebrate Einstein's birthday. Cheers.
I read the first 50 pages of Rebecca Goldstein's new book on Goedel,
INCOMPLETENESS. A good read read. I loved Goldstein's first novel THE
MIND-BODY PROBLEM. I saw here about the time she was hawking her third or
fourth
I'm not aware that he was a social critic, but according to Rebecca Goldstein,
he was a first class metaphysical control freak, leaving nothing to ambiguity
or contingency. I don't know whether Godel would say anything about law, but
surely it hardly holds up to the standards of formal
I don't quite understand the remark about the mixing od semnatic and syntactic
arguments by Godel. Also, what is the relation to physics?
-Original Message-
From: Jim Farmelant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mar 16, 2005 1:40 PM
To: marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis]
I'm skeptical of many of these analogies of formal systems and dialectics.
However,
it could be said that the inexhaustibility and incompleteness of the process of
axiomatization, along wth other seminal discoveries of the 20th century, accords
with the Marxist perspective as well as with a yet
I've heard conflicting things about Heisenberg's politics. His behavior during
the war was ambiguous, as was the case with many other German scientists.
After Einstein emigrated to the USA, he was so pissed off at his german
colleagues he requested his greetings to be forwarded to only one
In view of an upcoming local discussion of pragmatism, I've organized some
of my material on the subject:
Pragmatism and Its Discontents: Selected Bibliography (sans annotations)
http://www.autodidactproject.org/bib/pragmabib.html
Pragmatism and Its Discontents: Annotated Selected Bibliography
More like backwardness and ignorance.
At 03:01 AM 3/20/2005 +0530, A. Mani wrote:
Re: 1. They're back! Church Bulletins: (Charles Brown)
It is the result of Hegelian Dialectics.
___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To
Just stumbled onto this paper:
CHARBEL NIÑO EL-HANI and SAMI PIHLSTRÖM
Emergence Theories and Pragmatic Realism (Draft version, February 2002.
Comments welcome. Please do not quote.)
http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/papers/emergentism.pdf
manner in the logical empiricist and analytical philosophy
traditions: for example the issue of emergentism versus
reductionism. I remember Ralph Dumain pointing out
on his marxistphilosophy list, that most of the anglophone
literature on this issue neglects the contributions of
Hegel, Engels
Some comments interleaved:
At 12:16 PM 5/20/2005 -0400, Charles Brown wrote:
Charles: The demonstration that Mach is an idealist in general is the main
thesis of Lenin's book _Materialism and Empirio-Criticism_. I don't know
whether a reiteration of the main arguments is worthwhile here.
of this article breaks off just at the
point where he needs to begin to analyze why Wilson's attempt to analyze
religion as a branch of genetics cannot succeed.
At 01:39 PM 5/25/2005 -0400, Ralph Dumain wrote:
At 02:14 PM 5/25/2005 +, redtwister666 wrote:
Long-winded? I am hurt!
And I do
I don't think anyone has paid attention to a word I've said, but I am
intrigued by this intervention, particularly the key assertion:
NOTE, THAT THE ISSUE OF THE RELEVANCE OF LOGIC (DIALECTICS) TO HUMAN HISTORY
IS NOT A MATTER OF THE NATURE OF THE WORLD BUT OF MAN'S INTERACTION WITH THE
WORLD.
While I have some idea of what I don't like about the other arguments
presented so far, I am baffled by this one. What exactly are you asserting
about the relation of philosophy and politics?
What do you think about the assertion made by Chris (and others over the
past century) that Lenin
Interesting post! But I don't understand all of it. Comments interleaved
. . .
At 07:09 AM 5/26/2005 +0200, Oudeyis wrote:
In regards to this thread on emergence and dialectics:
Your discussion (the whole thread) on dialectics and emergence conflates
several contradictory objectives: the
First see my reply to Steve Gabosch. I would also suggest that your
conclusion requires clarification:
Of course, this unifrom worldview as
an epistemological claim has something to do with class ineterests.
Therefore, it is not surprising that Marxism is subject distortions. But
how far
Very interesting. It is difficult to judge Korsch, Pennekoek, or Lenin
from these fragments alone. A more detailed study of all three is
indicated, I see. Just a few hurried notes on the Korsch piece.
He never conceived of the difference between the historical materialism
of Marx and the
Well, if you got my point (2), the rest shouldn't be so mysterious. ME
openly admit they're not going to tackle directly either the natural
sciences as an intellectual enterprise or their objects of study (laws of
nature). At the same time they admit that's part of the picture, though
they
I do not understand the meaning of the three quotes from Ilyenkov.
At 02:03 PM 5/30/2005 -0700, Steve Gabosch wrote:
...
from my 1977 Progress edition, which I was lucky to get through the
internet last year. I corrected a couple scanning errors from the MIA version.
Copied
Don't forget the extensive discussion of materialism in THE HOLY FAMILY.
Of course, what distinguishes home sapiens from the other monkeys is not
labor as an abstraction, but the brain difference, which means the
genetic capacity for language and hence cultural transmission of
information,
Note my interleaved comments on a fragment of a key post of yours
At 03:08 AM 5/28/2005 +0200, Oudeyis wrote:
..
I don't see this. I see the problem this way: that stage of the
development of materialism is inadequate to grasp the nature of human
activity, both
Interleaved comments on further fragments of your post:
At 03:08 AM 5/28/2005 +0200, Oudeyis wrote:
..
I see your not going to let me deal with the dogmatics of classical
materialism briefly.
The kernel of my argument is that in general, discourse segregated from
practice can only be
Well, my reaction here re-invokes my sense of the tautology of all such
arguments. That is, there can be no meaningful claims about the universe
apart from our interaction with the universe since we can't make any claims
about anything without interacting with the phenomena about which we are
Your reasoning is fine up until the braking point I note below.
At 03:10 PM 5/29/2005 +0200, Oudeyis wrote:
Steve,
Well, now I know what comes after the snip.
First paragraph:
Oudeyis is saying nothing about what nature is, but rather is writing that
whatever understandings man has of nature
if they are to realize their goals. Labour is
a cooperative activity in which men work with nature as their partner.
Oudeyis
- Original Message -
From: Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism
Yes, I have this book somewhere. So are you going to forward your review
to this list?
At 03:31 PM 6/7/2005 +0200, Victor wrote:
Unfortunately, the mainstay of Western interpretations of
Ilyenkov's works is the absolutely wierd product of a Brit academic who
represents them as a sort of
Very interesting post. Just a few isolated comments to begin . . .
At 03:10 PM 6/7/2005 +0200, Victor wrote:
..
The fact that life forms activities are directed to concrete future
states, they are, no matter how simple or mechanical, exercises in
reason. This why, if you
Is anyone else finding that the MIA search engine doesn't work properly
now? I get the number of results for a search, but not the results themselves.
___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or
I'm assembling some key quotes relevant to recent discussions on these
lists and also to projects I'm working on. I would appreciate suggestions
for additional quotes surrounding this theme:
Marx Engels on Skepticism Praxis
http://www.autodidactproject.org/quote/marx-skeptic.html
I'm sure
, of practical-critical, activity.
At 07:52 AM 6/10/2005 -0400, Charles Brown wrote:
I notice you start with the second thesis on Feuerbach. Any reason not to
include the first thesis where the terms practical-critical activity or
praxis occur ?
Charles
^^
Ralph Dumain
I'm assembling some
quotes I've used.
At 12:24 PM 6/12/2005 -0400, Ralph Dumain wrote:
Looking over the Theses on Feuerbach, one wants to reproduce the whole
thing without taking anything out. And all my other quotes are out of
context, thus perhaps distorting the overall picture of what Marx was
dealing with, while
The aristocracy and nowadays that also includes the middle classes has
exhausted itself; such ideas as it had, have been worked out and utilised
to their ultimate logical limit, and its rule is approaching its end with
giant strides. The Constitution is its work, and the immediate
Special Announcement: OUP is pleased to announce that ANB Online is now
available by individual subscription for $14.95 a month. For more
information or to subscribe, please visit http://www.anb.org.
American National Biography Online
[ illustration ]
What in bloody hell does this mean?
At 09:32 AM 6/21/2005 +0200, Victor wrote:
Science is founded as ideas, but unlike Hegel's ideal (which as Marx put
it is as nothing else but the form of social activity represented in the
thing or conversely the form of human creativity represented as a
, Victor wrote:
- Original Message - From: Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 10:17
Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O, Dialectics! :Bakhurst
What in bloody hell does this mean?
At 09:32 AM 6/21/2005 +0200, Victor wrote
I am confused by this beyond the reasonably clear first and third sentences
of the first paragraph and the first sentence of the second paragraph.
At 07:51 PM 6/20/2005 +0200, Victor wrote:
I regard Ilyenkov's contribution rather as the Logic (method or met) for a
practical (materialist or
Comments to selected extracts below
At 01:43 PM 6/19/2005 +0200, Victor wrote:
Ideality like spoken language is not one thing or another, but two things,
the objectified notion in consciousness and its material representation by
some form of language, united as a more concrete concept, the
At 02:12 PM 6/22/2005 +0200, Victor wrote:
Hegel regards objectification as simply the alienation of spirit in the
object. The ideal itself is the alienated spirit that has become a
universal through the mediation of language. True, I've not addressed the
problem of whether Hegel regarded
Tuesday was not only the summer solstice, but the 100th birthday of
Jean-Paul Sartre. While he has never been the center of my intellectual
attention, I've had occasion to think about him recently, and in many ways
he serves as an important historical test case for philosophy and social
I've not had time to keep up with your ongoing debate on Ilyenkov. Since
you are apparently preparing something for publication, I hope you will
apprise us of the finished product. This line of enquiry, it seems to me,
is much more important than most philosophical projects being undertaken.
I've created a new web page for emergence-related posts of 23 Feb - 23
March 2005:
http://www.autodidactproject.org/my/emergence-blog.html
The original archive covering 5 Nov 2004-25 Feb 2005 can be found at:
http://www.autodidactproject.org/my/emergence-blog-02.html
The next installment
I'm working on overhauling the format of my emergence blog:
http://www.autodidactproject.org/my/emergence-blog.html
I'm adding a link section, which includes both links from the blog entries
and others. Anyone with good links I've not covered is welcome to suggest
more. I'm particularly
include, for example,
Trotsky and Guevara) that can be continued in our time.
- Steve
On Sat, 02 Jul 2005 11:41:51 -0400 Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What do you think of this encyclopedia entry by George Lichtheim:
HISTORICAL AND DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM
Dictionary of the History
I wrote a little piece called Whitehead or Marx? Or, How to Process
Philosophy, which is now at the head of my emergence blog:
http://www.autodidactproject.org/my/emergence-blog.html
It combines two ideas: the general obfuscatory character of speculative
metaphysical constructions, and the
I must have mentioned this at some time, but anyway, here's a site with
bibliography and translations of various materials on Soviet philosophy,
East European Marxist philosophy, Chinese Marxist philosophy, et al. You
may find a few references to Soviet philosophy I overlooked, though I'm
At 06:47 PM 7/19/2005 +0900, CeJ wrote:
I'm wondering if the cold war actually transformed anything. And is
there really much more to say on the topic after Lakatos, Feyerabend,
but also the post-structuralists?
What does this mean?
More interesting to me has always been LP-related but not
This is horseshit. Who's the moron who wrote it?
At 10:07 PM 7/24/2005 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Coming Trade War and Global Depression
By
Henry C.K. Liu
Part 4: Scarcity Economics and Overcapacity
The monotheism myth, the belief in the one true God, creator of heaven and
You should think twice before subscribing to mystical right-wing propaganda
in the name of environmentalism. This anti-montheistic rhetoric is not
only unscientific nonsense, it is the very language of neo-fascist pagan
and Hindutva cults. As for the existence or non-existence of scarcity,
. It
seems that Liu is actually a Chinese nationalist and apologist for Chinese
Stalinism. See, e.g.:
http://atimes01.atimes.com/atimes/others/Henry.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/leninist-international@buo319b.econ.utah.edu/msg00730.html
At 11:18 PM 7/24/2005 -0400, Ralph Dumain wrote:
You
At 04:56 PM 7/25/2005 +0900, CeJ wrote:
..
I guess one question for discussion is whether or not, formal
linguistics as it follows from Chomsky and Halle is really more about
logic than it is about psycholinguistics. Earlier I called it an
epistemologically naive psychologization of
I have initiated a web guide to resources on paraconsistency:
Paraconsistency Philosophy
http://www.autodidactproject.org/bib/paraconsistency.html
If anyone wishes to add further links, please let me know.
I found lots more articles on the subject on the web, but my aim here is to
include
I've already received some responses to my call for feedback on the
philosophy of paraconsistency.
Also, viz. recent discussions on the dichotomy of Platonism and
psychologism (objective vs subjective idealism?), I'm wondering if people
could get something out of my little review of Adorno's
This Russian journal apparently is no longer online. However, I just
discovered a copy of the article I saved on disk. I'll email it to anyone
to wants it.
At 09:08 AM 8/13/2005 -0400, Jim Farmelant wrote:
On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 08:20:03 -0400 Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Some years
There's a fellow in Latvia who needs Maurice Cornforth's THEORY OF
KNOWLEDGE to scan for his students. He will even send the book back when
he's through with it. He cannot find a copy of the book for
himself. Anyone care to help?
___
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this particular work by Cornforth was
later incorporated into his SCIENCE AGAINST IDEALISM.
I'm still trying to process the fact that this person apparently trained in
some sophisticated philosophy could descend to writing the shit he wrote on
dialectical
that Neurath's article in Ayer's anthology, arguing for
physicalist conceptions applied to sociology, was nonsense through and through.
At 10:46 PM 8/16/2005 -0700, andie nachgeborenen wrote:
--- Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this particular
work
OK, jks, after suffering through Cornforth's MATERIALISM AND THE
DIALECTICAL METHOD, I can see why you hate diamat as you do. This sort of
literature corrupts everyone indoctrinated by it. But diamat doesn't have
to be that dumb. I've been defending a more sophisticated version of it on
the
Priest, Graham.
Beyond the limits of thought.
2nd ed.
Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Chapter 14 covers the later Wittgenstein before turning to Derrida. As we
know, Wittgenstein later repudiated the Tractatus, reverting from mystical
logicism to a much more
Priest, Graham.
Beyond the limits of thought.
2nd ed.
Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Chapter 13 is titled Translation, Reference, and Truth. Here is where
Priest engages Quine, Davidson, and others.
The postulation of semantic correlates is deep-sixed by
Sorry, folks, my diagram got completely screwed up by Eudora, dammit! I
don't know how to fix this in an email format.
reality -
--- thought - language -
--- mathematics-logic -- concepts
This might seem like a silly question, but one is bound to forget something
when confronted with internet information overload. I'm so used to
consulting the Marxist Internet Archive for materials, I tend to forget
about other relevant sites. Two recent occurrences reminded me of the need
to
About a year ago I got into a discussion with someone on this
article. This is how it began:
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 06:39:07 -0400
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Logic and Dialectics by Robin Hirsch
In Cultural Logic:
http://eserver.org/clogic/2004
with an interlocked
community in history. For marx nature is advanced in man; for whitehead,
man is advanced in the whole of nature.
At 10:40 PM 9/2/2005 -0400, Jim Farmelant wrote:
I was wondering if Ralph Dumain has seen this book,
*Dialogues on the Philosophy of Marxism: From the
Proceedings
Priest, Graham. 'Dialectic and Dialetheic', Science and Society 1990, 53,
388-415.
Priest is an odd duck. He illustrates the problem of combining two
disparate enterprises: the pursuit of logic as a pure formal enterprise (in
his case paraconsistent logic, which admits of true
1 - 100 of 765 matches
Mail list logo
