----- Original Message ----- From: "Gautam Mukunda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 7:34 PM Subject: Re: Voodoo Economics
> --- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > At what point do we get to say that he was full of > > it > > > and move on, really? > > > > I'm not sure about that. In many many ways his > > ideas are both wrong and > > dangerous. His focusing on classes and the > > inevitability of class > > struggle, his inability to see the possibility of > > moderation and compromise > > all are firm foundations for the evil done in his > > name. Yet, his works are > > not without valid points. I think his work on the > > origin of alienation is > > good. The historical dialectic is a worthwhile > > tool. > > Dan M. > > OK, Dan, your philosophy is better than mine, and I > agree with you about his work on alienation, although > I wasn't terribly impressed by it (I admit that my > response after reading it was something along the > lines of "So what?"). But wasn't the historical > dialectic more Hegel's work? The dialectic was; the historical dialect was Marx. I don't need to remind you that he was a young Hegelian. :-) My philosophy professor did think that the advance was worth noting. He was also fairly impressed with the subtly of theory/practix/practice, but said he didn't understand it well enough to teach it. Dan M. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
