The basic point here is that Engels' celebrated 'three laws' fall short
of Hegel's dialectic, corresponding, roughly, to the section of the
Science of Logic that precedes the section on The Notion, where Hegel is
dealing with the properties of dumb matter. But the dialectic is a
process of self-u
Indeed, Marx's method is the materialist dialectic. He uses the
dialectical method and his approach to the study of history is a
materialist one, hence materialist dialectics. The materialist conception
of history, or historical materialism, is founded on this notion. But this
is not what we are
At 12:24 05/08/99 -0400,
>Charles: The last time we discussed this I believe we found that Engels
used the phrase "materialist dialectics" in the book _Ludwig Feuerbach_.
Certainly "materialist dialectic"
"And this materialist dialectic, which for years has been our best working
tool and ou
>>> Sam Pawlett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 08/03/99 12:34AM >>>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Precisely what is the nature of dialectical materialism? I have seen
> descriptions of it as a method, theory, doctrine and philosophy.
Well, yeah, it depends on who you ask and who you read. Marx himself
ne
>
> --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
>>> Chris Burford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 08/04/99 05:45PM >>>Dialectical Materialism
>and Modern Science by Kenneth Cameron
(International Publishers New York 1995) is an interesting modern attempt
to uphold dialectical materialism in a non dogmatic way.
The basis for my position is simple.
I regard historical materialism as a scientific method. Until Marx,
historiography had no objective foundation or scientific method. Marx put
the analysis of history on a sound ontological and methodological basis:
the materialist conception of history. The
I largely agree with John's explanation.
At 16:21 04/08/99 GMT, you wrote:
>Jeremy wrote:
>> Precisely what is the nature of dialectical materialism? I have seen
>> descriptions of it as a method, theory, doctrine and philosophy.
>
>All of those desciptions are correct. Dialectical materialism
At 11:44 04/08/99 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Gramsci did not oppose the dialectical method. Gramsci is consistent with
>Marx in arguing that historical materialism is scientific historiography.
>Gramsci's work is the closest I have found to a continuation of Marx's
>project. The Soviet philosopher is th
Jim Heartfield on the excuse of criticising diamat, diverts the question of
dialectical materialism into one of historial materialism:
>Marx described the core assumptions of *historical* materialism (which,
>considering the vulgarisation of dialectical materialism in the hands of
>the Soviet
Gramsci did not oppose the dialectical method. Gramsci is consistent with
Marx in arguing that historical materialism is scientific historiography.
Gramsci's work is the closest I have found to a continuation of Marx's
project. The Soviet philosopher is the most removed from Marxian premises
and
Jeremy wrote:
> Precisely what is the nature of dialectical materialism? I have seen
> descriptions of it as a method, theory, doctrine and philosophy.
All of those desciptions are correct. Dialectical materialism (diamat
as they called it in the USSR) is a philosophy with a theory of the
natural
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
>Precisely what is the nature of dialectical materialism? I have seen
>descriptions of it as a method, theory, doctrine and philosophy.
Marx described the core assumptions of *historical* materialism (which,
considering the vulgarisation of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Precisely what is the nature of dialectical materialism? I have seen
> descriptions of it as a method, theory, doctrine and philosophy.
Well, yeah, it depends on who you ask and who you read. Marx himself
never used the term though Engels I believe did. I take it to
Precisely what is the nature of dialectical materialism? I have seen
descriptions of it as a method, theory, doctrine and philosophy.
Jeremy Yu
--- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
14 matches
Mail list logo
