In the evet of WW I Lenin went and studied Hegel's logic.
Marx has to be studied with his sources: philosophical, political economic,
political and so on.
Historical approach that Marx higly valued applies laso to the study of
Marx.
Dogan Göcmen
(http://dogangocmen.wordpress.com/)
Author of Th
Rakesh wrote "Marx explains himself well enough that
further study of Hegel's logic would shed no light at all on what he is
saying."
While I strongly disagree with this ultra-pragmatist way of putting things,
(Marx spoke highly of Hegel, yeah yeah recognizing his bourgeois
limitations
I don't see how I could misrepresent since I didn't read, much less
reply to your post.
But since I befuddled you isn't /materialisme aleatoire/ a
fundamental rejection of dialectical materialism? Wasn't a common theme
of Althusser's works the attempt to rid Marxism of the idealism that
cr
No, you misrepresent what I said (again).
The original statement was that Marx stands alone and that people
shouldn't have to read Hegel to understand Marx. My argument is that
people may well get a great deal out of reading Hegel...or
Gramsci...or Althusser.
Your have once more befuddled me wit
Many Marxist thinkers don't deal with dialectics, namely Gramsci with his
philosophy of Praxis and Althusser's writings on contradictions in *For Marx
*.
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@
Mark,
The claim is that one can only understand Marx if one has mastered the
whole of Hegel's logic, not that a mastery of Hegel's logic may allow a
few individuals to better appreciate Marx's Capital. Lenin's claim
strikes me as false; so does Dunayevskaya's claims about the Hegelian
absolut
To be frank, this really sounds like an invitation to a silly
discussion. The simple fact is that people are different. And lhow
they approach things may change.
Marx or Hegel or any other writer may connect with different
individuals. And they will often do so differently lfor different
people
To be sure, Marx coquettes with Hegel in his analysis of the value form
as a unity of opposities, but Marx explains himself well enough that
further study of Hegel's logic would shed no light at all on what he is
saying. Just read Marx. Carefully.
For example:
http://tiny.cc/GsfFk
Commoditie
