[Marxism-Thaxis] Trotsky biography recommendations
An academic friend has asked me for recommendations concerning biographies of Trotsky. He is interested in something that would be in his words, not quite pop but easy enough to read He wants something that would be not too laden with historical or technical controversy but would still give the reader a good sense of what Trotsky went through and was trying to do. Thank you, Jim Farmelant Find the right teaching school to meet your educational needs. Click to learn more. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw25lE4rfd8A46RV8YEDQSKEvNZxqaH9Wi1dCWksjRqTsUcBT/ ___ 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
[Marxism-Thaxis] Obama
I posted the following earlier this morning on Marxmail: -- Obama has made no secret of his intention to govern as a centrist in the Bill Clinton mode. He has certainly not hidden from the public his views concerning a whole range of issues both foreign and domestic. Liberals and progressives, it seems to me, have managed to do a bang-up job of deceiving themselves concerning Obama's true political inclinations. It's as if they have bought into the characterizations of Obama that the GOP made during the campaign and put plus signs where the Republicans had placed minu signs: that Obaba is really a closet socialist who intends to engage in a massive redistribution of wealth and so forth. So, I expect that after Obama has been in office a while and he has managed to make a few crucial decisions, and perhaps bombed a country or two, that maybe a certain level of disillusionment will begin to set in. The ascension of Obama into the White House merits comparisons with JFK's ascension of forty-eight years ago. Like Obama, JFK's ascension was greeted with very high expectations from his supporters. Eventually, a certain level of disillusionment set in, and of course his assassination would be the most disillusioning event of all. However, at that time there were thriving social movements, most notably the civil rights movement. So when disillusionment set in, for many people that would lead not to a relapse back into apathy but to a radicalization which would drive much of the politics of the 1960s. So, it will be interesting to see how things play this time around. Jim F. _ Not making enough money? Click here to get free info on medical jobs http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3m4c4dFwv9Zc1YhUMuPum0cyUIMtHZhMoBEtnB12Q384GKgJ/?count=1234567890 ___ 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
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] The playboy philosopher
That is correct too. In the late 1940s, he was part of a movement to found a new radical left party that would provide an alternative to the PCF. However, when the cold war began to heat up in earnest, especially after the outbreak of the Korean War, Sartre shifted to a very pro-Soviet stance, and he began to lend his support to the PCF, without ever joining it. That lasted until the famous Khrushchev speech and the Soviet invasion of Hungary. However, even after that, Sartre tended to define his political stances in relation to the PCF, both on points of agreement and points of disagreement (Hungary, Algeria, later the 1960s student movement). Jim F. -- Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I believe that in the late '40s Sartre was anti-Stalinist and highly suspicious of the USSR. He tried to found a third way movement, which interested Richard Wright, who had recently gone into exile in France. At 09:08 PM 10/9/2008, Jim Farmelant wrote: On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 10:09:38 +0900 CeJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: BTW, I admire Sartre's contributions to philosophy, social science and politics. And his relationships with Camus, De Beauvoir and Merleau Ponty have long fascinated me. I think JF you are thinking of someone else on another list, since you contribute on the philsophy of history on those lists while at the same time CB cross-posts from those very same lists to this list (for example this thread on the playboy philosopher, which seems to have sprung up already fully discussed somewhere else). I had your posts confused with the individual who posts on Marxmail as Ruthless Critic of All That Exists. He was the one who got Sartre's position on Hungary. However, that is not to deny that in the early 1950s, had been very much an uncritical supporter of the Soviet Union and Stalin. It was Khrushchev's 1956 speech at the 20th Party Congress on Stalin that seems to have removed the scales from his eyes. In a broader sense Sartre remained something of a Stalinist and this was presumably reflected in his involvement with the Maoists in the early 1970s. Jim F. CJ ___ 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 Click for free info on online degrees and make up to $150K/ year. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nlXGOnAH3F9brB8xHHHPyK2ttGoirK8NYmXZqkYOd88Prsl/ ___ 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
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] The playboy philosopher
I believe that it was CeJ who when detailing Sartre's Stalinist politics, asserted that he supported the Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956. But everything I have seen about Sartre's politics indicates that the opposite was the case. That is, he denounced the Soviet invasion of Hungary. In fact, that was one of the first times in the 1950s, where he found himself at loogerheads with the PCF. Within a few years, he was at odds with them again, because of their foot dragging over supporting the Algerian independence struggle, which Sartre avidly and courageously supported, at a time when that was not very popular in France, even on the left. Jim F. -- Charles Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ralph Dumain What a useless piece of shit Badiou is. His politics are even more worthless than his philosophy. As for Sartre, there are others on the anti-Stalinist left who bear a grudge against him for his erstwhile apologetics for the Communist Party. Some might wonder what he was doing with Maoist students. As for Sartre's philosophy, the philosophy he is known for seems to me a failure. I think one would have to read Critique of Dialectical Reason in search of a lasting contribution. ^ CB: Funny, this reminds of the old Marx/Engels rule of intellectual thumb: Marxism as French politics, British political economy and German philosophy. Sartre, French, has good politics , but not so good philosophy. This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com ___ 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 Seeking a career in Web Design? Find a school near you. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3oHUEfg1Thcd9GpuWO02PGldZ6phD7cxF7b5GpCeoMovrmy1/ ___ 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
[Marxism-Thaxis] Moderator's Note
Today, I received a request from someone who posted to this list some years ago requesting that his name be removed from the archives. He stated that when he joined the list, he was not informed that his posts would be publicly archived. He is almost certainly mistaken in that regard, since right on the info page of this list, there is a link to the list's archives. I very much doubt that things were much different back when he was posting to this list. Therefore, to avoid any misunderstandings, you should be aware that all posts to this list are publicly archived. That means that search engines like Google can and will pick up your posts. Anyone here concerned about possible repercussions from employers or repressive governments, should get themselves a Yahoo or Hotmail account and post here under an alias. Jim Farmelant Moderator of Thaxis Click for online loan, fast no lender fee, approval today http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3m3WMF0nSKH13Xo22IcmarNh6vXaU7pX0tTKQMZVvdn6cRnr/ ___ 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
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Parting of the Ways
To some extent the analytic/continental divide was reproduced within Marxism. In eastern Europe during the 1960s and 1970s sophisticated academic Marxist philosophers tended to look towards either continental philosophy or towards analytic philosophy. For example in Poland, starting after 1956, there emerged humanist interpretations of Marxism such as Leszek Kolakowski's which emphasized the writings of the young Marx and which drew upon phenomenology and existentialism in interpreting them. By the 1960s this approach to Marxist philosophy gained official status when Adam Schaff, who was the house philosopher of the Polish CP, endorsed it. On the other hand, there also emerged in the 1960s and 1970s the Poznan School which drew upon the analytic philosophy of the Lwów-Warsaw School in the interpretation of Marxism. The Poznan School, among other things, developed an adaptationist version of historical materialism that was not unlike the one that G.A. Cohen and his fellow Analytical Marxists were developing at roughly the same time. It is my understanding that parallel developments in academic Marxist philosophy took place in other eastern European countries during the same time period too. Jim F. -- CeJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Heidegger sees logical positivism as the culmination of a project begun with Descartes, a mode of thinking according to which truth is no longer disclosedness of what is and thus accommodation of grounding of Dasein in the disclosing being, but truth is rather diverted into certainty--to the mere securing of thought, and in fact the securing of mathematical thought against all that is not thinkable by it. (22) That was interesting because it explains the so-called analytic vs. continental division in basically 'Germanic' terms. I would say, though, Heidegger is reacting more to the attention that logical positivism was getting among intellectuals. The breaks occur way before. See, for example, the exchanges between Frege and Husserl. One reason why Wittgenstein intrigues so many is he moved across the analytic and the continental 'traditions', baffling the logical positivists. Rorty seemed original to people in the analytic tradition mostly because he didn't devalue continental philosophy and understood it better than most of his peers. Is it too much to say, though, that German-language analytics were largely absorbed by the US and UK? I find the distinction between analytic and continental traditions rather useless for engaging philosophy seriously (much of Marxist political philosophy never fit into either rough category), but it can be used to help explain, for example, what happened in linguistics after the structuralists. It doesn't mean that there are two schools of linguistics, but the various schools can be traced back to these two usually diverging streams of thought. C ___ 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 Smart Girls Secret Weapon Read Unbiased Beauty Product Reviews, Get Helpful Tips, Tricks and Sam http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/JKFkuJi7U3x0B0zlS2q9CrSprLvPY3Tmi9cMBhEm2YIgMDWQgo8AUJ/ ___ 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
[Marxism-Thaxis] May Day
Today is the tenth anniversary of the launch of two important progressive email lists: Doug Henwood's LBO-Talk List: http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/lbo-talk.html and Louis Prpyect's Marxmail List: http://www.marxmail.org Happy anniversary to both lists. Jim Farmelant _ Get Comcast High Speed Internet! $19.99 each month for first 6 months. Plus FREE Modem and $100 Cash Ba http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/JKFkuJi7P2fkC1Lrk9Gs3md4ivoY8TxN4dzbUrnfaRcgYL6CzGFSgh/?count=1234567890 ___ 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
[Marxism-Thaxis] Fwd from Juan De La Cruz
Contra los festejos del Primero de Mayo | en castellano | en franc�s | en ingl�s | en checo | en portugu�s | en h�ngaro | A continuaci�n reproducimos un panfleto elaborado y difundido por compa�eros sudamericanos contra los festejos burgueses del primero de mayo. La claridad con que estos compa�eros afirman las posiciones invariantes del programa revolucionario, contra el Estado, contra la democracia, contra la liberaci�n nacional, contra la esclavitud asalariada, contra el trabajo, contra el capital, contra los festejos burgueses del primero de mayo,... hacen innecesarias otras observaciones. Queremos resaltar, sin embargo, la defensa que los compa�eros hacen del verdadero sujeto de la revoluci�n, el proletariado, en un momento hist�rico en que todos los ide�logos est�n empe�ados en diluir y dividir a nuestra clase en un conjunto de categor�as diversas como vimos en el subrayado Am�rica, arriba los que luchan contra el capital y el Estado. Con los compa�eros afirmamos a contracorriente que el Primero de Mayo fue, es y ser� un momento y una bandera de lucha contra la explotaci�n y con ellos gritamos la consigna: POR LA CONSTITUCI�N DEL PROLETARIADO EN CLASE REVOLUCIONARIA. Primero de Mayo La utop�a del comunismo tiene en las palabras de Manuel Gozalez Prada, arengadas por el 1� de mayo de 1908, como el d�a en que los proletarios, esparcidos en todo el mundo, comprenden ya no la iron�a de conmemorar la fiesta del trabajo y ve en el 1� de mayo el d�a simb�lico en que los oprimidos y los explotados se juntan para contarse, unificar sus aspiraciones y prepararse a la acci�n demoledora y definitiva del Estado y del Capital, toda la vigencia hist�rica por un mundo nuevo por construir. El 1� de mayo conmemora el d�a internacional del proletariado, d�a que recuerda el, asesinato legal efectuado por el Estado yanqui en 1887 de cuatro militantes anarquistas en Chicago. Hay quienes en este d�a tratan de conciliar las contradicciones de clase, vociferando que el 1� de mayo es la fiesta del trabajo o el d�a del trabajo, palabras tan pat�ticas no pueden venir nada m�s y nada menos de todos los agentes contrarrevolucionarios (izquierdistas de toda laya) que se mezclan entre nosotros y se apropian de nuestras banderas para desviarnos por el camino del pacifismo de la democracia es decir de la dictadura legal del capital. Los anarquistas de Chicago no murieron por ello, murieron por un mundo nuevo que ganar sin Estado ni democracia ni capital. Reforzando la l�nea hist�rica de la Revoluci�n, en la que se encuadran Marx, Bakunin, Flores Mag�n, Gonz�lez Prada y todos los que supieron identificar al Estado, la democracia y al capital como los enemigos m�ximos que niegan nuestra humanidad, seguiremos gritando que el 1 de mayo es d�a internacional de la lucha proletaria y No la fiesta del trabajo. Festejar el trabajo es festejar la explotaci�n, es festejar la acci�n permanente de vender d�a a d�a nuestra fuerza de trabajo por dinero, en fin es festejar y dar vivas a la puta Comunidad del dinero de los Estados burgueses. Es por ello que desde la ONU, que es la Organizaci�n Internacional del Capitalismo (donde est�n representadas todas las dictaduras democr�ticas), salen las arengas a la fiesta del trabajo a fin de que festejemos la inhumanidad de vivir felices dentro de la explotaci�n del Estado y del capital. El 1� de mayo en estos momentos de reacci�n generalizada del capital, debe ser del d�a en que la l�nea hist�rica de la revoluci�n comience nuevamente a cobrar vida zanjando posiciones y desmitificando al oportunismo burgu�s radical pintado de rojo representadas por todas las izquierdas (la fracci�n intelectual de la peque�a burgues�a radical) leninistas, estalinistas, trotskistas, maoistas, guevaristas, castristas, mariateguistas, apristas, etc, etc, que en todas partes del mundo, nos infunden celebrar el trabajo, seguir con el argumento reaccionario de la gesti�n del capital a manos obreras, y el reciclado de la democracia Popular y liberaci�n nacional, con lo cual boicotean la constituci�n del proletariado en clase revolucionaria y la desv�an continuamente a los causes de la mentalidad capitalista. Entre izquierda y derecha no hay oposici�n ideol�gica ni pr�ctica, ambas son l�neas democr�ticas y por tanto hermanos capitalistas diferenci�ndose solo en los modelos econ�micos de como gestionar el capital a manos del Estado. En esta forma dentro de la democracia en la que juegan izquierdistas y derechistas no hay oposici�n hay uniformidad dentro de la cloaca de la gesti�n del capital y el trabajo, generando todas sus taras: mercanc�a, acumulaci�n y comercio; patrias y guerras; fronteras, explotaci�n y miseria; democracia y esclavos asalariados. Por ello y por siempre recordando a Gonz�lez Prada celebrar el 1� de mayo como la fiesta del trabajo es hacer el papel de ingenuos, infelices, e inconscientes defendiendo la miseria y el rol de esclavos asalariados, es
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Vienna Circle etc.
On Vygotsky: http://www.mail-archive.com/marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu/msg01947.html -- CeJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: JF: I am interested in them because of my general interest in the philosophy of science and the broader implications: culturally, socially and politically of differing philosophies of science. Concerning the Vienna Circle, I am in agreement with George Reisch that because of the peculiarities of the reception of logical empiricism into the anglophone world, especially in the US, people have generally failed to understand or appreciate the broader concerns of the Vienna Circle, so that it was generally understood in the US as having been mainly about modern logic and the philosophy of science, whereas they in fact had much broader interests. I'm interested in issues in philosophy of social sciences (psycho-, logico-formal, cognitive, linguistic, social, etc.), but my limited knowledge of the VC leads me to think (perhaps quite wrongly) there wasn't much fruitful work done amongst them in such areas. I haven't had time to search down info. on all the official members listed in that manifesto. And although Popper never got listed as a VC member (and was down officially as an opponent of the logical positivists), they published at least of his books, didn't they? Of their contemporaries, I find Husserl and Vygotsky much more interesting on scientific approaches to the social and psychological realms. And in education, I would cite Freire and his use of non-positivistic approaches. (You could say variations of positivism pervade academic social sciences in the anglophone world and much of Europe. And that would include the way academia co-opts 'practitioner sciences' in order to make more high-paying work for itself and to control certification and indoctrination in education and other applied and clinical specialities. For example, academic approaches to 'qualitative research' , 'classroom resarch', and 'action research'.) Husserl, I believe, is a hugely under-estimated influence on so much of modern and post-modern philosophy. Directly and indirectly. He got somewhat dismissed because of anglo-analytic propaganda about Frege. Popper seems to have got some of his ideas about open society directly from Husserl, but Popper is a direct product of the logical positivists/empiricists and Husserl is not. He is a true opposition to it. You can dismantle Popper with Kuhn, Lakatos and Feyerabend. You can find parallels between late Popper and Piaget. But you can also demolish Popper using Husserl's analysis of why positivist programs fail in the 'sciences of man'. Interestingly enough Carnap's itinerant education led to his being taught by a who's who of philosophy, including Husserl, Frege, and Bruno Bauch, as well as personal correspondence with Russell. Also, you could say Heidegger's philosophy starts with the teaching of Husserl. Even Goedel cited Husserl as an influence. I should like to re-read Wittgenstein on psychology in light of having read more of Brentano, Husserl and the gestaltists. Husserl is that rationalist hinge on which so much modern and post-modern philosophy swings. So why did Husserl and Vygotsky refer to a CRISIS in naturalistic and positivist approach to the 'sciences of man'? (Though it is often forgotten that to quite an extent positivism originates in attempts to shift social philosophy into a scientific framework--such as Comte's sociology.) (I think RD has reviews and essays that relate to Husserl (such as Husserl vs. positivism). Could he post some links and excerpts if he has time? ) Here are some online Husserl and Vygotsky primary sources, typical of what I have I have been reading off and on for the past two years at marxists.org. 1. http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/husserl2.htm (by the way, I have the book, but am citing an online source for list participants) small excerpt �61. Psychology in the tension between the (objectivistic-philosophical) idea of science and empirical procedure: the incompatibility of the two directions of psychological inquiry (the psychophysical and that of psychology based on inner experience). ALL SCIENTIFIC empirical inquiry has its original legitimacy and also its dignity. But considered by itself, not all such inquiry is science in that most original and indispensable sense whose first name was philosophy, and thus also in the sense of the new establishment of a philosophy or science since the Renaissance. Not all scientific empirical inquiry grew up as a partial function within such a science. Yet only when it does justice to this sense can it truly be called scientific. But we can speak of science as such only where, within the indestructible whole of universal philosophy, a branch of the universal task causes a particular science, unitary in itself, to grow up, in whose particular task, as a branch, the universal task works itself out in an originally vital grounding of the system
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Vienna Circle etc.
I am interested in them because of my general interest in the philosophy of science and the broader implications: culturally, socially and politically of differing philosophies of science. Concerning the Vienna Circle, I am in agreement with George Reisch that because of the peculiarities of the reception of logical empiricism into the anglophone world, especially in the US, people have generally failed to understand or appreciate the broader concerns of the Vienna Circle, so that it was generally understood in the US as having been mainly about modern logic and the philosophy of science, whereas they in fact had much broader interests. For example, they had a close working relationship with the Bauhaus. That was partially because the Vienna Circle member, Philipp Frank, had a brother, Josef Frank, who was an architect and a teacher at the Bauhaus, but it was also the case that various members of the Circle, including Neurath and Carnap would regularly give lectures at the Bauhaus. The Circle saw the kind of work being pursued by the Bauhaus as being consistent with their own work as philosophers and scientists. Both the Bauhaus and the Circle were part of the broader social democratic culture that prevailed in Germany and Austria prior to the rise of fascism. Of the members of the Vienna Circle, Otto Neurath was probably the one who was the most concerned with pursuing these broader implications of logical empiricism. This no doubt was due to his experiences of having been an economic planner for the Austrian government during WW I, his participation in the radical left governments of Bavaria during the 1919 revolution, and his work for the Austrian SPD and the trade union movement during the 1920s and 1930s. Jim F. -- rasherrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Jim Interesting! You seem very familiar with the Vienna Circle. What was it that attracted your interest in it? Paddy Hackett - Original Message - From: Jim Farmelant [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu Cc: marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 2:09 AM Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Vienna Circle etc. On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 09:53:37 +0100 rasherrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thank you for the help in relation to the Vienna Circle. It is a circle that has been much misunderstood in radical left circles. When I was in my late teens I was led to the view that it was a crassly reactionary group. The Frankfurters in particular pushed that view of the Circle, as did many Soviet or pro-Soviet writers, who emphasized Leninist opposition to Machism. Why did Wittgenstein not view himself as a logical positivist? The Circle admired Wittgenstein, but he was not inclined to reciprocate. He thought that they misunderstood what he was attempting to do. He was willing to meet with individual members of the Circle, with people like Schlick, Carnap, Feigl etc. but he refused to meet with the Circle as a whole. What, if any, the principal difference(s) between their philosophies in these early days. I can see why there is a difference between Popper and Logical Positivism --the question of verfiability over falsifiablity. There were differences with in the Circle over such issues as physicalist realism versus phenonomenalism, coherence theories of truth versus correspondence theories of truth. Later on there were somewhat different understandings of what was entailed by the unity of science. Did that mean that a straight forward reductionist program was possible with everything being ultimately reduced to the laws of chemistry and physics, or did it simply mean that all meaningul propositions about the world, whether those propositions be from the natural sciences, or the behavioral and social sciences, were expressible in terms of physicalist language? Neurath tended to champion holistic conceptions of truth and knowledge and he shied away from extreme reductionism. His positions were thus akin to those that many Marxists have held over the years. Jim F. Paddy Hackett - Original Message - From: Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu Cc: marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 7:47 AM Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Vienna Circle etc. Interesting. I wonder if I should put this or similar items into my bibliography. This is a Marxist advocating the Popperian approach as a way of circumventing doctrinal rigidification. Can you think of other Marxists who have taken this road? ___ 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 ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http
[Marxism-Thaxis] Me on Popper (was Re: Vienna Circle ettc.)
http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2005w00/msg7.htm http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2005w00/msg00027.htm http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/marxism-thaxis/2002-May/017655.html Also see Ralph's Emergence Blog http://www.autodidactproject.org/my/emergence-blog-03.html _ Click for free information on obtaining a second mortgage. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3m32hNU44UUShLMDfXKfnrq9SnCmzrNCBbCUHocvfkJCybRH/ ___ 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
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Vienna Circle ettc.
I don't think it's in Ayer's book. I don't think it's available online in English, although I have seen it online in German and in Hebrew. Jim F. -- Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can't find an English translation on the web. But I could have sworn I've seen it in print somewhere else. Could it be in Ayer's anthology LOGICAL POSITIVISM? At 08:56 PM 3/31/2008, Jim Farmelant wrote: On Tue, 1 Apr 2008 02:36:44 +0100 rasherrs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Interesting! Are there available any English copies of The Scientific Conception of the World? Wissenschaftliche Weltauffassung. Der Wiener Kreis, 1929. English translation The Scientific Conception of the World. The Vienna Circle in Sarkar, Sahotra, ed., The Emergence of Logical Empiricism: from 1900 to the Vienna Circle, New York : Garland Publishing, 1996, pp. 321�340. Also can be found: Hahn, Hans, Rudolph Carnap, and Otto Neurath. The Scientific Conception of the World: the Vienna Circle. in Neurath, Otto. Empiricism and Sociology. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1973. 299-318. Also in Analytic Philosophy. Ed. Jordan J. Lindberg. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield, 2000. 147-158. People yakkity yak a streak and waste your time of day But Mister Ed will never speak unless he has something to say. ___ 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 _ Best Commodity Trading Platforms. Click Now! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3mJoKSLtkDqhUaSt9dE4ePzlcXkkaAYo8c4OyCqHZ6a5Vut7/ ___ 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
[Marxism-Thaxis] Fw: Please post to MARXISM-THAXIS
Please note: forwarded message attached _ Click to find deals on color printers and inks. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3mEGg293wXL9qCTCjmzhpjoukrApTUz5KN7ctU7dCwADxAYJ/ ___ 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
[Marxism-Thaxis] Rethinking Marxism
Dear Mr. Farmelant, I would like to post a message to your listserv, which I have included below; it includes information about the various events related to the 20th anniversary of our journal Rethinking Marxism (for further information, please visit the webpage at http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pdf/announcements/rrmx_anni.pdf) which I think will be useful for your members. With that in mind, I hope you deem it a suitable announcement to share with your list. If you have any queries at all, or requests for further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Kind regards, Sophia Blackwell Routledge, Taylor and Francis, 4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, OX14 4RN Phone: (+44) 020 7017 6571 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: (+44) 020 7017 6713 RETHINKING MARXISM 20th Anniversary Events 20th Anniversary Issue of Rethinking Marxism Volume 20, Issue 4 (October 2008) The special issue commemorating 20 years of Rethinking Marxisms publication will include contributions from Etienne Balibar, Stephen Resnick Richard Wolff, Kojin Karatani, J. K. Gibson-Graham, Antonio Negri, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak Benjamin Baer, Susan Jahoda Jesal Kapadia. The issue will also contain a special interview with the past and present editors, in which they discuss some of the ideas and issues shaping both the emergence and trajectory of the journal. Special sessions will be held at each of the following four conferences addressing the status of Marxism in contemporary politics, and the particular role of the journal Rethinking Marxism: Left Forum Cooper Union, New York City (14-16 March 2008) Rethinking Marxism and the Future of Global Struggles: Class Theory, Political Subjects, and Contemporary Capitalism. The sessions participants will be: David Harvey, Joseph Buttigieg, Richard Wolff, Maliha Safri, Graham Cassano, and David F. Ruccio Routledge and Rethinking Marxism will also sponsor a 20th anniversary reception at the conference. Surplus/Excess University of California-Riverside (4-5 April 2008) Exceedance: 20 Years of Rethinking Marxism, The sessions participants will be Jack Amariglio, Joseph Childers, Philip Kozel, Susan Jahoda, Erik Olsen, and David F. Ruccio Routledge and Rethinking Marxism will also sponsor a 20th anniversary reception at the conference. For more information: http://rethinkingmarxism.org/cms/node/1072 Cultural Studies Association (22-24 May 2008) Culture/Economy: 20 Years of Rethinking Marxism, The sessions participants will be: S. Charusheela, Susan Jahoda, Jesal Kapadia, Yahya Madra, Richard Wolff, Maliha Safri, and Joseph Childers. AESA Conference/Celebration (September 2008,TBA) The Association for Economic and Social Analysis will sponsor a conference in Amherst, MA celebrating 20 years of Rethinking Marxism. For more information visit: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pdf/announcements/rrmx_anni.pdf Informa plc (Informa) Registered Office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London, W1T 3JH. Registered in England and Wales - Number 3099067 _ Be your own boss. Click here for information on starting your own business. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3l5e2mxW7XDH1A0YcVmgLoa8fas0mA6w8T6N7Wml3ee1iTLL/ ___ 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
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Religion Marx
Feuerbach as many people here are probably aware was, despite or perhaps even because of his atheism, an important influence on 20th century theology. People like Karl Barth, Karl Rahner, Martin Buber, and Paul Tillich all wrote about and wrestled with Feuerbach's critique of Christianity and religion. On the secularist side of the fence, both Friedrich Nietzsche and Sigmund Freud were very much influenced by Feuerbach as well. It's a vulgar mistake to take Feuerbach as simply a transitional figure from Hegel to Marx. Jim F. -- CeJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Religion Marx This might be on the bibliographies, I haven't checked. At any rate, this ten page article looks to take an interesting approach. I don't have a copy though. This is the cheapest (USD 25.00) online price I could find for this article. But as I said, it would be tempting to work out an understanding of Marx not only up against Feuerbach but with some other contemporaries. So we get this paper on F, M and Bloch. A far different but interesting approach for me would be a reconciliation of socialism and Islamist movements, such as Hezbollah and the Sadrist Resistance in Iraq. The US and much of Europe under the tutelage of the hegemon have taken the world down a path to hell in this regard. CJ --- http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a713994384~db=all Religion and communism: Feuerbach, Marx and Bloch Author: Vincent Geoghegan DOI: 10.1080/1084877042000306352 Publication Frequency: 7 issues per year Published in: journal The European Legacy, Volume 9, Issue 5 October 2004 , pages 585 - 595 Subjects: European History; European Studies; Philosophy; Formats available: PDF (English) Purchase Article: US$25.00 - buy now buy now add to cart buy now [ show other buying options ] Abstract Whilst Marx made scattered positive remarks about the details of communist society, he also made important negative indications. Religion features in this negativity: his critique of religion is withering, there is no mention of religious life in communism, and he is emphatic that religion will play no role in such a society. For Marx, one of the tangible freedoms of communism was freedom from religion. The critique of religion is fundamentally inscribed in the very genesis of Marx's thought, and Feuerbach is crucial to understanding Marx's strictures on religion. Yet Feuerbach also figures in Ernst Bloch's very positive approach to religion, which argues that communism involves the freedom to be religious, in the sense of opening up oneself and society to the gold-bearing seams of the religious experience. This essay explores how such different conceptions of the relationship between religion and communism both draw sustenance from Feuerbach. - MLA style citation: Geoghegan, Vincent. Religion and communism: Feuerbach, Marx and Bloch The European Legacy 9.5 (2004). 25 Sep. 2007 http://www.informaworld.com/10.1080/1084877042000306352 ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Religion Marx
Marx Wartofsky's massive study, Feuerbach (Cambridge University Press,1977), would, I think be an exception to that rule. Jim F. -- Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Expositions of Marxism have tended to limit treating Feuerbach as a thinker in his own right, but not all scholars, Marxist and non-Marxist, have imposed such limitations. I don't know whether Marx or Kierkegaard even knew of one another's existence, so I don't know what is to be said on that score in terms of the development of either. The Engels piece is interesting in various respects. I would be tempted to find it unsatisfactory, but Engels does mention the importance of the inherited concept of sacrifice. I am not so impressed with the similarities between primitive Christianity and communism, though they might hold propaganda value for many. There are many equally as important factors to consider. Hermeneutics was originally Christian, and I think this includes Schleiermacher, a contemporary of Hegel. But hermeneutics got a big boost in an extra-religious context in the person of Dilthey,a key figure in the development of 19th century thought. At 05:16 PM 9/25/2007, CeJ wrote: One problem is Feuerbach often gets schematized as a stepping stone from Hegel to Marx in the 'progress' of the history of thought. It would tempting to deal with a host of other 19th century thinkers AND Marx. For some in European traditions, it might be interesting to re-visit Sartre, as a synthesis (put simplistically) of Marx and Kierkegaard. Not looking so much at 'Marxist approaches to religion' but simply religion and Marx at what is on the web, and I find the following of interest: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/subject/religion/index.htm http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/subject/religion/book-revelations.htm Still, in the Engels' piece I think we could say this is a Marxist approach to religion (to hermeneutics, which were, as far as I know, originally German Christian hermeneutics before the post-modern episteme gave us things like 'Wittgenstinian approaches to hermeneutics'). CJ ___ 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
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] [marxistphilosophy] Religion Marx (1)
Another Marxist book on religion was by the social democrat, Michael Harrington, The Politics at God's Funeral: The Spiritual Crisis of Western Civilization (Baltimore: Penguin, 1985). ISBN 978-0140076899. Jim F. -- Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wise, Rick B. A. Religion Marx. Austin, TX: American Atheist Press, 1988. xv, 268 p. I must have purchased this book within a few years of its publication. I even remember Madelyn O'Hair talking about it and mentioning the dialectic on some video of some American Atheists Conference program or TV show if they had one. But I never even looked at it until a couple days ago, when I was suddenly seized with the impulse to ferret it out and look it over. I was curious not only for the analysis of Marx's view of religion but to check out what kind of a book American Atheist Press would publish on Marx, seeing as no American atheist or humanist association possesses the depth or breadth to analyze social structure and causality in a manner that would take into account Marx or Marxism. Wise claims his book is the first attempt to analyze the relation between religion and other aspects of Marx's thought. He says the analysis of the Marxian approach to religion has never got beyond two articles Lenin wrote on religion by 1909. I find this assertion mighty hard to swallow, but offhand I can only think of a few books on Marx and religion, one being Trevor Ling's book on religion in the West and India, which I read a few months ago. A search of the Library of Congress database by subject yielded only a few books in English. But I have to think I'm overlooking something. There are some glitches and some odd twists and turns in this book, but also much interesting content, scarce in English let alone atheist circles. One might being with the impression that there was something fundamentally wrong when the author sets out to examine the dialectical materialism of Marx, since Marx had nothing to do with the creation of what we know as dialectical materialism, though indeed his world view was dialectical and materialist. The author also sees no warrant for treating Marx distinct from Engels, as they both substantially agreed on everything and Engels acknowledged Marx as the master. However, these faulty starting points do not damage the book. Wise points out the conceptual discrepancies between Marx and Soviet Marxism throughout the book. He also organizes his presentation of Marx's development into thesis (Hegel), antithesis (Feuerbach), and synthesis (Marx's dialectical materialism), but this too does not damage the author's actual analysis. Wise draws on some curious sources. He draws on Soviet sources for Soviet Marxism, naturally, and other introductions to dialectical materialism, which does not confuse with Marx's thought. He also draws upon Christian socialists of an earlier era, whom no one thinks about today--Julius Hecker and John Macmurray, for example. Before we get to a treatment of Marx's own views, Wise presents something one does not often find in English, and even more rarely in atheist circles--a summary of the development of Hegelian thinking on religion between Hegel and Marx. Wise does rely heavily on Engels' characterizations of Hegel and begins with the dichotomy of method and system and the inversion metaphor. Nevertheless, the key issue under examination is the notion of world as the manifestitation of the Idea and the contradiction between Hegel's logicism and the empirical content of his view of historical development. Of greatest interest, though, is the simplicity and clarity of Wise's explication of Feuerbach, the weaknesses Marx found in him, and the development of Hegelian thought via Strauss, Bauer, Feuerbach, and Stirner. You don't get this often in philosophical works in English, with quotes as well, and not in atheist literature where this material most emphatically belongs. ___ 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
[Marxism-Thaxis] Test - Please ignore
Test - Please ignore ___ 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
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] cell phone
Yes. http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/cell411.asp Jim F. -- Charles Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is this an urban legend 7/2/2007 3:29 PM REMINDER9 days from today, all cell phone numbers are being released to telemarketing companies and you will start to receive sales calls. .YOU WILL BE CHARGED FOR THESE CALLS To prevent this, call the following number from your cell phone:888-382-1222. It is the National DO NOT CALL list. It will only take a minute of your time. It blocks your number for five (5) years. You must call from the cell phone number you want to have blocked. You cannot call from a different phone number. HELP OTHERS BY PASSING THIS ON TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS. It take about 20 seconds. ___ 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 ___ 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
[Marxism-Thaxis] The slow death of Social Democracy?
TLS - July 11, 2007 Holiday reading for Gordon Brown Vernon Bogdanor Sheri Berman THE PRIMACY OF POLITICS Social democracy and the making of Europe's twentieth century 218pp. Cambridge University Press. £40; paperback £14.99 (US $65; paperback, $23.99). 978 0 521 81799 8 Gordon Brown has moved into Ten Downing Street after ten years of Labour government, the longest and most successful period of social- democratic rule in Britain's history. Yet he finds himself heir, not to a living and viable philosophy of government, but to a collection of ideological ruins. His success will depend on whether he can construct anything new out of these ruins, whether he can breathe new life into the dry bones, whether he can discover a new philosophy of government for the centre-left as fruitful as social democracy was in the past. In undertaking this enterprise, he will have much to learn from The Primacy of Politics by Sheri Berman; he would find it a great stimulus to thought, and even, on occasion to disagreement. It would, however, be difficult for him to disagree with the view that The Primacy of Politics is one of the most thought-provoking books on twentieth-century ideologies to appear for many years. Sheri Berman begins by asking why it is that the history of Europe since 1914 falls so neatly into two contrasting periods. Between the wars, the continent was marked by turbulence and crisis, but, for nearly sixty years, its western half has known political stability and high rates of economic growth. What caused this transformation? To this question, two answers have been given. The first suggests that it was a result of the triumph of democracy over its enemies, Stalinism, Fascism and National Socialism; the second claims that it was the philosophy of the market which had triumphed over socialism and communism. Historically, however, democracy and the market have been regarded as in conflict with each other. Liberals from Tocqueville to Hayek feared that the market could not survive the coming of democracy, for universal suffrage would give power to the unpropertied and ill-educated; Marxists in a sense confirmed their fears by predicting that the majority in a bourgeois democracy, the working class, would not tolerate capitalism but would overthrow it, by peaceful means if possible, by violent means if not. Yet, both liberals and Marxists came to be confounded when, in the post-war era, capitalism and the market came to be reconciled. How did this come about? That is what Sheri Berman seeks to explain in The Primacy of Politics. Her answer is that it was an undervalued ideology, social democracy, which formed the ideological basis of the post-war settlement and resolved the central challenge of modern politics: reconciling the competing needs of capitalism and democracy. Social democracy, Berman argues, offers, a genuine third way that preserves both. Historians, she believes, have not noticed this because they have overemphasized the role of the middle classes and liberal parties in achieving this synthesis; yet the key role was played, not by liberals, but by parties of the moderate revisionist Left and by the institutions of the Labour movement. Social democrat was originally a term applied to anyone from the Left who rejected the nineteeth-century liberal economy; it was applied to Karl Kautsky and H. M. Hyndman as well as to Eduard Bernstein and Anthony Crosland. Today, however, it forms but one element in the socialist spectrum, the revisionist element which began with the German social democrat, Eduard Bernstein, the hero of Berman's story. Revisionist social democracy was not, she believes, a mere half-way house between Marxism and liberalism, cobbled together from elements of incompatible traditions; nor were social democrats merely socialists without the courage of their convictions; nor should they be defined, as they were by Crosland, in terms of particular values such as equality. The essence of social democracy lies rather in a distinctive belief in the primacy of politics, and an appeal to social and communal solidarity through mass political organizations people's parties. These, however, are features that social democracy shares with its ideological enemies, Fascism and National Socialism. Social democracy and Fascism, so Berman believes, share a common genealogy, although, of course, social democracy is distinctive in being the only democratic movement of the three. The cover of The Primacy of Politics provocatively juxtaposes posters from the Swedish social democrats between the wars and the Nazis. Both promised work for all. For social democracy, like Fascism and National Socialism, arose out of the crisis of liberalism and Kautskyite Marxism at the end of the nineteenth century, philosophies which denied the primacy of politics and therefore seemed
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] The slow death of Social Democracy?
Vernon Bogdanor argued that: -- Social democrat was originally a term applied to anyone from the Left who rejected the nineteeth-century liberal economy; it was applied to Karl Kautsky and H. M. Hyndman as well as to Eduard Bernstein and Anthony Crosland. Today, however, it forms but one element in the socialist spectrum, the revisionist element which began with the German social democrat, Eduard Bernstein, the hero of Berman's story. Revisionist social democracy was not, she believes, a mere half-way house between Marxism and liberalism, cobbled together from elements of incompatible traditions; nor were social democrats merely socialists without the courage of their convictions; nor should they be defined, as they were by Crosland, in terms of particular values such as equality. The essence of social democracy lies rather in a distinctive belief in the primacy of politics, and an appeal to social and communal solidarity through mass political organizations people's parties. These, however, are features that social democracy shares with its ideological enemies, Fascism and National Socialism. Social democracy and Fascism, so Berman believes, share a common genealogy, although, of course, social democracy is distinctive in being the only democratic movement of the three. The cover of The Primacy of Politics provocatively juxtaposes posters from the Swedish social democrats between the wars and the Nazis. Both promised work for all. For social democracy, like Fascism and National Socialism, arose out of the crisis of liberalism and Kautskyite Marxism at the end of the nineteenth century, philosophies which denied the primacy of politics and therefore seemed to countenance quietism, an approach which proved disastrous during the Depression. Thus, although, in both Germany and Italy, the socialists were the strongest political party after the First World War, they proved unable to defend democratic institutions. Moreover, social democracy found itself in retreat in the inter-war years everywhere in Europe except for Scandinavia, because it failed to appreciate the force of patriotism. The doctrine that the worker had no fatherland might, Bernstein conceded, have been true for the German worker of the 1840s deprived of rights and excluded from public life, but by the beginning of the twentieth century, by which time he had voting rights and rights to social security, it had lost much of its truth; and it was given the coup de grâce in 1914 when the German SPD voted for war credits and the Second International disintegrated. On August 2, 1914, declared Adrien Marquet, the French neosocialist who later identified himself with Fascism, the notion of class collapsed before the concept of the Nation. -- In the case of Germany, the Nazis were able to successfully implement social democratic economic and social policies that the German business community would have accepted, if an SPD-lead government had attempted to implement. And the reason for that IMO, is that the Nazis had also taken care to smash the trade unions, thereby alleviating any fears on the part of big business in Germany, that such policies would lead to excessive (from their standpoint) wage hikes. The Nazis were able to, in effect, offer social democracy without Social Democrats. And the business community was willing to put up with this. ___ 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
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Emailing: attachment
The German business community was willing to accept from the Nazi regime economic policies that they never would have accepted from an SPD government. When the SPD was in power, their policies were much more cautious than the ones that the Nazis would follow later on. Jim F. -- Charles Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -- In the case of Germany, the Nazis were able to successfully implement social democratic economic and social policies that the German business community would have accepted, ^ Would or would not have accepted if an SPD-lead government had attempted to implement. And the reason for that IMO, is that the Nazis had also taken care to smash the trade unions, thereby alleviating any fears on the part of big business in Germany, that such policies would lead to excessive (from their standpoint) wage hikes. The Nazis were able to, in effect, offer social democracy without Social Democrats. And the business community was willing to put up with this. ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] footnote on Darwin
I believe that in the passage quoted from Marx's letter of Lassalle, Marx wrote not only is he the first to strike a fatal blow to 'teleology'in natural science, NOT 'theology'. In other words Marx was noting that Darwin had shown it possible to provide causal explanations for the apparently designed nature of biological organisms as opposed to teleological explanations. That was certainly a blow to natural theology which had long relied upon the argument from design to establish the existence of God. But it also marked the beginning of the assimilation of natural history (i.e. biology) into the natural sciences, where supernaturalist explanations, including teleological explanations, were barred. -- Charles Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: CeJ jannuzi I didn't use the main thread title on West and Marxism. -- In a speech over Marx's grave, Engels (1883) pointed out the relations between Marx and Darwin in the following terms: 'Just as Darwin discovered the law of development of organic nature, so Marx discovered the law of development of human history.' (G. Politzer in his 'Elementary Principles of Philosophy' cites the source as PS Foner, ed., 'When Karl Marx Died, Comments in 1883'). Politzer continues: In 1860, Marx had already written in a letter to Engels with regard to Darwin's principal work, 'On the Origin of the Species (1859)', which had just been published: 'Although developed clumsily in the English manner, this book contains, from the point of view of natural science, the foundation which conforms to our point of view.' ^ CB: Yes, this is precisely the comment I was referring to. By the way, I believe the clumsy English manner may be that Darwin didn't recognize the Hegelian leaps or quantum leaps. That is Darwin doesn't talk Hegelese. Darwin always emphasizes the gradualness of the changes, i.e. he was an evolutionist , not a revolutionist , revolutions being the leaps, when new species arise. However, Darwin did note that there were gaps in the fossil record without intermediate species between existing species. The Gould-Eldrige punctuated equilibrium thesis puts the leaps into the Darwinian thesis. The punctuations are the leaps in the otherwise slow change. Punctations are things like mass extinctions followed by re-speciation. There is a lot of debate and discussion on this in earlier Thaxis threads, around 1999, 2000 or so. I'll see if I can find the threads, later as I have to go now. ^^^ He makes similar remarks in a letter to Lassalle, 'Darwin's work is considerable and suits me as a foundation, from the point of view of natural science, for class struggle in historyDespite all his faults, not only is he the first to strike a fatal blow to 'theology' in natural science, but he empirically establishes the rational meaning of the latter' See also Engels' 'Evolution of Socialism'. CJ ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] A note on positivism
Actually, a lot of critics of Marxism have branded Marx as a positivist. They of course were using the word as a perjorative. There have been Marxists who were explicitly positivists. The Bolshevik, Alexander Bogdanov and his allies were avowed disciples of Ernst Mach and Richard Avenarius, who were important influences on 20th century neo-positivism. Otto Neurath was both a logical empiricist and a Marxist. BTW the sociologist, Tom Bottomore, placed great emphasis on the Saint-Simonian influence on Marx. Jim F. -- CeJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Haven't had time to follow up on all the places the discussion went to; this is more a supplement of what JF posted about positivism. I found it a good review from a 'philosophy of sociology' perspective. Link and excerpt follows. CJ --- http://www.bangladeshsociology.org/CV%20of%20Nazrul%20-%20Pub%20-%20Positivism.htm Early Sociological and Marxist Positivism· excerpt: Perhaps it amounts to heresy to call Karl Marx a positivist. By the same token, with the exception of a few like Comte or Mach, no one ever claimed to be a Positivist, though Mill, Spencer, Durkheim Trade, Wundt or Lundberg were all as positivists. This paper also does not make Marx into a positivist; it only attempts to point to the similarities between the Marxist methodology and those of the early sociologists, like Comte and Spencer, who were positivists. No attempt is made here to denounce the dialectical basis of Marx's methodology. Nor is positivism posed against dialectics as is done by a number of German sociologists (see Adorno et. al. 1976 and Gellner 1985). This essay is not even directed at exploring the merits or demirits of positivism vis a vis dialectics, nor even to salvage positivism by anchoring it in the works of Marx. It is, however, expected here that a demonstration of parallelism between Marxist methodology and early sociology will go a long way to bridge the ever widening gap between Marxist science of society and modern sociology and can be immensely beneficial to the latter. Over the period of one and a half centuries positivism has acquired various meanings and seen numerous shifts in the emphasis of its contents. Though its origin is intertwined with that of sociology and had the social sciences as its focus, much of the later development of positivism is attributed to the natural scientists and philosophers of science in general. The derogatory connotation associated with positivism may be imputed to the easy passage it provides towards empiricism or scienticism, which have always remained only a step beyond. Left within its bounds, positivism provides a strong foundation on which the social sciences, and sociology in particular, or at least the main stream of it, continue to build themselves. Because of its chequered history, a unitary definition or even a simple explanation of positivism is difficult to attempt. According to Keat and Urry (1978) the main arguments of positivism are as follows. For the positivist, they say, science is an attempt to gain predictive and explanatory knowledge of the external world (1978: 4). Toward this end the positivist constructs theories, or highly generalized statements (laws) expressing the regular relationships that are found in the external world discovered through systematic observation and experimentations. To explain or to predict something is to show that it is an instance of these regularities. Statements expressing these regularities cannot be known by a priori means, nor are their truth a matter of logical necessity, it is only contingently so. All such statements must therefore be objectively tested through observation and experiments, which are the only source of sure and certain empirical knowledge. Science does not go 'behind' or 'beyond' the phenomena revealed to us through sensory experience to attain knowledge of the unobservable, essence or mechanisms that somehow necessitate these phenomena. For the positivist there is no necessary connections in nature, there are only regularities, meaning succession of phenomena, which are systematically presented in terms of universal laws of scientific theory. The region beyond this is the realm of metaphysics. (Keat and Urry 1978: 4-5). The positivist, thus, looks for regularities in the external world, presented in the form of sensory data. These are built into universal laws verified through observation and experimentations. No metaphysical speculation or search for the essence of phenomena is entertained. Such philosophical orientations and methodological requirements obviously relate to the domain of the natural sciences. But sociology, or part of it, has sought to emulate these standards since its inception. Thus the natural sciences became the model for sociology. Giddens (1978) identifies this positivistic attitude in sociology as comprising of the position (a) that the methodological procedures of natural science may
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Cornel West Marxism (1)
Ralph wrote concerning West: Furthermore, the language he falls back at crucial junctures on smacks of pragmatism, and his focusing on anti-foundationalism occasionally skews his analysis in the same direction. As I am sure that Ralph is well aware, Cornel West has long been an admirer of the young Sidney Hook's attempt to read Marx in light of Deweyian pragmatism, which in Hook's case meant taking Lukacs's and Korsch's readings of Marx and reinterpreting them in light of Dewey. In West's case, he reads Marx in light of Rorty, and so manifests both the strengths and weaknesses of his mentor. Jim F. -- Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As much as I hate to admit it, I'm finding Cornel West's THE ETHICAL DIMENSIONS OF MARXIST THOUGHT a worthwhile read. A critique of this ___ 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
[Marxism-Thaxis] Angry atheists are hot authors (AP)
Angry atheists are hot authors By RACHEL ZOLL, AP Religion Writer Thu May 24, 2:16 PM ET The time for polite debate is over. Militant, atheist writers are making an all-out assault on religious faith and reaching the top of the best-seller list, a sign of widespread resentment over the influence of religion in the world among nonbelievers. Christopher Hitchens' book, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, has sold briskly ever since it was published last month, and his debates with clergy are drawing crowds at every stop. Sam Harris was a little-known graduate student until he wrote the phenomenally successful The End of Faith and its follow-up, Letter to a Christian Nation. Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion and Daniel Dennett's Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon struck similar themes and sold. There is something like a change in the Zeitgeist, Hitchens said, noting that sales of his latest book far outnumber those for his earlier work that had challenged faith. There are a lot of people, in this country in particular, who are fed up with endless lectures by bogus clerics and endless bullying. Richard Mouw, president of Fuller Theological Seminary, a prominent evangelical school in Pasadena, Calif., said the books' success reflect a new vehemence in the atheist critique. I don't believe in conspiracy theories, Mouw said, but it's almost like they all had a meeting and said, 'Let's counterattack.' The war metaphor is apt. The writers see themselves in a battle for reason in a world crippled by superstition. In their view, Muslim extremists, Jewish settlers and Christian right activists are from the same mold, using fairy tales posing as divine scripture to justify their lust for power. Bad behavior in the name of religion is behind some of the most dangerous global conflicts and the terrorist attacks in the U.S., London and Madrid, the atheists say. As Hitchens puts it: Religion kills. The Rev. Douglas Wilson, senior fellow in theology at New Saint Andrews College, a Christian school in Moscow, Idaho, sees the books as a sign of secular panic. He says nonbelievers are finally realizing that, contrary to what they were taught in college, faith is not dead. Signs of believers' political and cultural might abound. Religious challenges to teaching evolution are still having an impact, 80 years after the infamous Scopes Monkey trial. The dramatic growth in homeschooling and private Christian schools is raising questions about the future of public education. Religious leaders have succeeded in putting some limits on stem-cell research. And the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding a national ban on a procedure critics call partial-birth abortion the first federal curbs on an abortion procedure in a generation came after decades of religious lobbying for conservative justices. It sort of dawned on the secular establishment that they might lose here, said Wilson, who is debating Hitchens on christianitytoday.com and has written the book Letter from a Christian Citizen in response to Harris. All of this is happening precisely because there's a significant force that they have to deal with. Indeed, believers far outnumber nonbelievers in America. In an 2005 AP-Ipsos poll on religion, only 2 percent of U.S. respondents said they did not believe in God. Other surveys concluded that 14 percent of Americans consider themselves secular, a term that can include believers who say they have no religion. Some say liberal outrage over the policies of President Bush is partly fueling sales, even though Hitchens famously supported the invasion of Iraq. To those Americans, the nation's born-again president is the No. 1 representative of the religious right activists who helped put him in office. Critics see Bush's Christian faith behind some of his worst decisions and his stubborn defense of the war in Iraq. There is this general sense that evangelicals have really gained a lot of power in the United States and the Bush administration seems to represent that in some significant ways, said Christian Smith, a sociologist of religion at the University of Notre Dame. A certain group of people sees it that way and that's really disturbing. Mouw said conservative Christians are partly to blame for the backlash. The rhetoric of some evangelical leaders has been so strident, they have invited the rebuke, the seminary president said. We have done a terrible job of presenting our perspective as a plausible world view that has implications for public life and for education, presenting that in a way that is sensitive to the concerns of people who may disagree, he said. Whatever may be wrong with Christopher Hitchens attacks on religious leaders, we have certainly already matched it in our attacks. Given the popularity of the anti-religion books so far, publishers are expected to roll out even more in the future. Lynn Garrett, senior religion editor for Publishers Weekly, says
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Nappy-headed Hos of the World Unite!
Over on Marxmail, Shane Mage suggested that a probably decisive aspect for CBS was that Don Imus's remarks exposed the network to possible litigation. You simply cannot call people whores on the public airwaves and not expect to be sued for libel. If litigation should occur, CBS and Imus can expect to be paying out millions of dollars in damages. That and the prospect of organized boycotts of network sponsors, I think, made this a rather easy business decision for the powers that be at CBS and MSNBC. Jim F. -- Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This story has been approached from a number of different angles. While Ehrenreich's approach is a legitimate one, there is a slightly different conclusion to be drawn from her argument. I don't buy the reappropriation of language line. It's probably true that a lot of stupid white people have borrowed a slang they don't really understand. (I see young white boys in the subway chanting I'm a n***a while listening to rappers on their ipods.) That was my initial impression of Imus' remarks. But if they were in fact back-handed compliments, they were still insulting, and would have been insulting no matter who uttered them. If Imus wanted to lust over black girls, which he certainly has the right to do, better he should have gotten himself in trouble by making a rather different set of remarks than picking up on a demeaning stereotype to do so. One can certainly lust over classy young ladies as I did at the Kennedy Center while all this was going on. There's an issue of respect. The problem, however, is not merely in the imitation, but in the original. This whole language, which nobody will ever convince me means anything but low self-esteem, needs to be proscribed. If this were a one-off, I'd say fugeddaboudit. But apparently this fellow has a track record, so good riddance. But the hypocrisy of the media and all of the players involved ought to be highlighted, including the monetary interdependency of all the politicians and media people mixed up in this. At 01:24 PM 4/16/2007 -0400, Charles Brown wrote: This article can be found on the web at http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070423/ehrenreich Nappy-headed Hos of the World Unite! by BARBARA EHRENREICH [posted online on April 13, 2007] ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] God is Nietszche - dead
For Carnap, see The Elimination of Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language. In: A. J. Ayer, ed., Logical Positivism. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, pp. 60-81. Translation of Carnap 1931. I don't think that's avaliable online. Jim F. -- Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from mx27.lax.untd.com (mx27.lax.untd.com [10.130.24.87]) by maildeliver11.lax.untd.com with SMTP id AABCQUE4WA38XWK2 for [EMAIL PROTECTED] (sender [EMAIL PROTECTED]); Sun, 20 Aug 2006 18:58:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.econ.utah.edu (lists.econ.utah.edu [155.97.81.150]) by mx27.lax.untd.com with SMTP id AABCQUE4WAYAHTYJ for [EMAIL PROTECTED] (sender [EMAIL PROTECTED]); Sun, 20 Aug 2006 18:58:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.econ.utah.edu) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1GEz26-0003B7-8R; Sun, 20 Aug 2006 19:56:54 -0600 Received: from pop05.mail.atl.earthlink.net ([207.69.200.58]) by lists.econ.utah.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1GEz24-0003B2-55 for marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sun, 20 Aug 2006 19:56:52 -0600 Received: from dialup-4.249.111.199.dial1.washington2.level3.net ([4.249.111.199] helo=clr-de11k3zglhh.igc.org) by pop05.mail.atl.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1GEz3k-0002yk-00 for marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu; Sun, 20 Aug 2006 21:58:37 -0400 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 22:02:57 -0400 To: marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu From: Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] God is Nietszche - dead In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and the thinkers he inspired marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu List-Id: Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and the thinkers he inspired marxism-thaxis.lists.econ.utah.edu List-Unsubscribe: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis, This is all a load of shit, but first, I could use some specific references for Carnap's evaluation of Nietszsche. I've seen stray references to Nietzsche, but no sustained commentary. BTW, I don't think Trotsky's 1900 essay on Nietzsche was translated into English, unless it's happened over the past decade. I'd like to take a look at it. At 09:49 PM 8/20/2006 -0400, Jim Farmelant wrote: Thus concerning Nietzsche, it is interesting to note that while the logical positivist, Rudolf Carnap let loose on Heidegger in The Elimination of Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language, he had nothing but praise for Nietzsche. There, Carnap discerned similarities between Nietzsche's critique of metaphysics as found in say Human, All too Human and his own. He seems to have regarded Nietzsche as a metaphyscian who had the good sense to avoid the errors for which he reproached other metaphysicians. He admired the empirical content of Nietzsche's work, including especially its historical analyses of specific artistic phenomena, or a historical-psychological analysis of morals. And he praised Nietzsche for having chosen the medium of poetry in such works as Thus Spake Zarathustra for presenting his ideas rather attempting to present them in a theoretical treatise. The fact that Carnap found much to praise in the work of Nietzsche is significant since in The Elimination of Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language, Carnap went on the attack against Heidegger, whose metaphysical statements, Carnap dismissed as meaningless. Apparently for Carnap, part of Nietzsche's greatness was the fact that he used poetic means for expressing himself. This fit in with Carnap's view that metaphysics fails because it makes meaningless statements. For Carnap, language had a variety of functions to perform. One of those is the making cognitively meaningful statements. Other functions include the making of what Carnap described as emotive statements. Such language can express Lebensgefühl. Metaphysics attempts to express Lebensgefühl too but fails because it can only issue meaningless statements. The appropriate means for expressing Lebensgefühl is art rather than metaphysics, and Nietzsche was praised by Carnap for realizing that. For Carnap, Nietzsche was the metaphysician who had the greatest artistic talent. ___ 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 ___ Marxism-Thaxis
