I asked:
>Now if any of you cleverclogs's can show me a single quote in which >Engels
>or Lenin or Trotsky claim that dialectical materialism is a >finished body
>of philosophical doctrine, or that their own >contributions to its first
>steps are more than just that, then we >might have a discussion.
And Russ quotes Engels:
>'the science of the general laws of motion, both of the external world and
>of human thought - two sets of laws which are identical in their substance
>but differ in their expression.'
>Engels _Essay on Feuerbach_
and asks:
>Can there be unfinished laws?
The question should be: "Can there be unfinished science?"
What about the laws of quantum mechanics?
Obviously Engels is talking about a science investigating these laws of
motion, the existence of which he assumes hypothetically. If we can't find
anything better, we can use them axiomatically, always in the knowledge
that they are still in the process of being studied and might therefore be
replaced by better formulated and more generally valid axioms.
Russ of course with his objections to Engels immediately throws Newton and
his laws of motion oot the windae, but that's obviously a small price to
pay for having a snicker at Engels and trying to erect an ugly great
concrete wall of derision and division right through the middle of the most
productive intellectual and practical partnership humanity has ever
produced.
If Russ is concerned about the ill-effects of the Stalinist version of
dialectical materialism -- which was a travesty -- then he should reflect
that for a Marxist being precedes thought and the Stalinist version of dm
arose from concrete social conditions in the new Soviet Union, not vice
versa.
Cheers,
Hugh
--- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
