More spit flying
>>> "russell p" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/07/99 12:02PM >>>
>Charles: The point here in debate is not whether matter obeys dialectical
>laws, but whether Karl Marx believed that it does. The above is some very
>good evidence that he did. And there is a lot more that he did .
>
>So, instead of treating Marx as infallible, with whom you can't disagree,
>why not have the courage to say you disagree with Marx, and that you
>believe that matter does not follow dialectical laws, yourself.
Except I don't believe he did.
(((((((((((
Charles: What is the evidence for your belief ?
(((((((((
>Prometheus stole fire from the gods and gave it to people.
So he did.
>Charles: Would you call her a "materialist" ? Is it just dialectics or is
>it materialism too that you believe Marx didn't think that chemistry
>adheres to ? Do you believe that Marx didn't believe that materialism is an
>ineluctible law of natural science ?
This don't make sense.
(((((((((((
Charles: Yes it does. You have to ask a question if you don't understand it.
((((((((((((
>Charles: But that this dialectic of engagement is not material but ideal is
>a dialectical idealist proposal. The dialectic of our engagement with the
>material world is not just in our heads. It is, as Marx said in the
>Afterward to the Second German edition to _Capital_, in our heads a
>reflection of the material world. Science is not just an idea, but an idea
>that reflects the material world. Dialectics is not just added to this
>reflection for decoration.
>
>If dialectics are not part of reflecting the material world for the
>scientist, what do they have to do with the scientist's ongoing and
>necessary engagement with the material world ?
It's a question of engagement with the material world not its reflection.
(((((((((((
Charles: Where is the dialectics in this "engagement with the material world" ? In
your head or in the material world ?
((((((((((((
>Charles: Yes, and what about Newton's law of universal gravitation, the law
>of velocity of light in vacuum, First and Second laws of thermodynamics,
>Boyle's law, Charles' law, Maxwell's laws, Kepler's laws, Lenz law, E = mc
>squared, law of combining volumes, law of conservation of atoms, law of
>mass, law of definite composition. etc, etc. ? Are they on the statute
>books ? Do all of these physicists and chemists have law degrees and
>legislative power , or what ?
Do what?
(((((((((((((
In response to this
>
>"The molecular theory of modern
>chemistry first scientifically worked
>out by Laurent and Gerhardt rests on
>no other law. "
Russ had said, making a joke about chemistry laws on the statute books:
Anyone know what law Laurent and Gerhardt discovered? Is it still on the
statute books?
So , the question is do all the other chemists and physicists put their "laws" on the
statute books.
CB
--- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
