Priest, Graham. 'Was Marx a Dialetheist?', Science and Society, 1991, 54,
468-75.
While I don't expect everyone to be held spellbound by this question, it is
illustrative of a recurring problem in intellectual history (and also in
popular intellectual culture, which is another story.
Terrific to see a piece on Caudwell I never read taken out of the
mothballs. (did you find this on the web, perchance?) More has appeared
since 1976, but I have apparently failed to document it comprehensively in
my bibliography:
http://www.autodidactproject.org/bib/caudwell.html
E.P.
of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and
the thinkers he inspired' marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] Graham Priest: Dialetheism Marx
Graham Priest: Dialetheism Marx
Ralph Dumain :
Priest, Graham. 'Was Marx a Dialetheist?', Science and Society, 1991, 54
I'm no Rousseau expert, but this doesn't sound right to me. The Rousseau quote
in itself seems to be a quintessentially dialectical statement: how is it that
a human being born a tabula rasa (socially if not genetically), who has the
potential to become anything, is then socialized in a
I am a little puzzled here. See below:
At 12:11 PM 9/16/2005 +1000, Ian Hunt wrote:
Dear Ralph,
Now I see your point - it was not clear before. (BTW In
Contradiction is earlier - the science and society article is based
on it but it does spell out more completely his argument). I agree
with
I don't understand this at all. In any case, I favor correspondence over
coherence theories of truth.
-Original Message-
From: A. Mani [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sep 15, 2005 5:45 PM
To: marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] Re: Marxism-Thaxis Digest, Vol 23, Issue
I don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about.
At 12:19 PM 9/17/2005 +0930, Ian Hunt wrote:
Dear Ralph,
Sorry you are puzzled - the problem could be email shorthand.
On your first response, Priest says that we can say true things about the
world in the form 'P-P' (eg 'The sky is
At 10:09 AM 9/18/2005 -0400, Charles Brown wrote:
I know that's right. Well, well, well.
You might want to take a look at that collection of articles, _Dialectical
Contradictions : Contemporary Marxist Discussions_. Somebody mentions, maybe
Lawler, the square root of negative one. There is an
Thanks, this is very very helpful. I'll add these links to my Soviet
philosophy page.
I see that this same individual has other pages devoted to other Soviet
figures--literary critics and forgotten political figures. Do you know why
he is interested in all this stuff?
As for you own
Interesting. My memory of all this stuff is very fuzzy. Stalin and his
henchman tended to lump certain philosophical and scientific tendencies
together as objects of a common attack. But there is also the question of
various scientific-philosophical alliances. There were competing trends in
(1) Have you in mind a different intervention against Lukacs from the one
everyone knows about? Deborin intervened against Lukacs and Korsch in 1923
or 1924, i.e. long before 1931.
(2) I find it odd to see Deborin as a link between Lenin and
Ilyenkov. Admittedly, I'm just going on vague
I haven't read the article itself, but re the quotes you adduce, I think this
is all wrong. That is, I don't think the author really gets Marx at all.
-Original Message-
From: Charles Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Oct 25, 2005 10:10 AM
To: 'Forum for the discussion of theoretical
is brought to a screeching halt.
(to be continued)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 02:36:37 -0400
Subject: [marxistphilosophy] Tailism and the Dialectic
Today (I'm pretending it's still Thursday) I received my copy of _Tailism
and the Dialectic
So why did you forward this ignorant shit to this list?
At 01:11 PM 11/15/2005 -0500, Charles Brown wrote:
In light of the many jokes we send to one another for a laugh, this is a
little different: This is not intended to be a joke, it's not funny,
it's intended to get you thinking.
At 03:09 PM 11/16/2005 -0500, Charles Brown wrote:
Entrapment within immediacy becomes firmer if
experiment is used as a 'category of knowledge of society and history'. for
the methodological precision of experiment gets lost, and the contemplative
attitude comes to the fore: i.e. political
to be a missing link in
more ways than one.
[1635 words]
© Ralph Dumain 2005
___
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
Issue 89 of INTERNATIONAL SOCIALISM JOURNAL Winter 2000
A comment on Tailism and the Dialectic
MARK O'BRIEN
http://pubs.socialistreviewindex.org.uk/isj89/obrien.htm
Issue 86 of INTERNATIONAL SOCIALISM JOURNAL Spring 2000
In defence of Marxism
A review of Georg Lukács, A Defence of 'History and
This schizophrenia is a big problem for India; it may even be worse there than
here. I amscheduled to review Meera Nanda's latest book, THE WRONGS OF THE
RELIGIOUS RIGHT, in which she documents this schizophrenia in one of her
essays. In another she compares secularism in India and the USA.
conception of social science, let alone historical materialism, and at the end
of the day, they are intellectually bankrupt even though they stand for some of
the good things.
-Original Message-
From: Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Nov 17, 2005 4:19 PM
To: Forum for the discussion
by Karl Marx and
the thinkers he inspired' marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] Tailism and the Dialectic
CB: I apologize for smart remarks last. :)
(3)Ralph Dumain rdumain _
RD: You did indeeed catch me in one goof: I got mixed up in using 'subject'
and 'object
://www.autodidactproject.org/guidlebn.html
See the entries indented under:
2003 Reading Review by Ralph Dumain
I borrow a lot from other people, but I also believe I'm doing something
original.
I was going to do a published dialogue with Loren Goldner on science, never
found the time to complete it. We became
I don't have the patience to trace all these links. I have several of
Cornforth's books, esp. those on pragmatism and positivism, and the book on
Popper. I don't have and can't find a cheap copy of MARXISM AND THE
LINGUISTIC PHILOSOPHY. I'm accepting donations. That fellow in Eastern
I have begun a running commentary on my marxistphilosophy list on this book:
Reisch, George. How the Cold War Transformed Philosophy of Science.
Cambridge University Press, April 2005.
It's amazing that there is nothing by Maurice Cornforth on the web. In
conjunction with the above-mentioned
There is an earlier posting of an extensive article on Du Bois' intellectual
background--you were the one who posted it, maybe? This is very useful info.
There is a lot more info on this sort of thing published, since, circa 1990,
including considerations of DuBois; relation to Hegel.
Just a
Don't you think James's anti-imperialism was animated by his anti-modernism?
You know, small is beautiful and all that? Interesting irony.
Eastman of course was adamantly opposed to dialectical materialism, Hegel, etc.
But he was not terribly theoretically or philosophically sophisticated,
A. P. LERNER succeeds in criticizing the kind of crap that passes for
dialectics of nature in the Marxist literature. A study of the arguments of
Marxist scientists in the 1930s would be historically profitable, if one has
the patience to review the literature. I have quite a bit of it
Haldane himself isn't a masterpiece of clear exposition here. Modern science
put becoming on the agenda, and that, together with the fact of the social
revolution of modernity (capitalism), necessitated a change in the concerns of
ontology. Scientific theories de facto knocked the traditional
@lists.econ.utah.edu
Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Logical Empiricism (reformatted)
On Fri, 9 Dec 2005 18:01:01 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Ralph Dumain
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
JKS expressed himself rather badly for a professional philosopher,
esp. quoting Rorty, but Charles isn't making this any easier.
Well Justin
Philosophy, which once seemed obsolete, lives on because the moment to
realize it was missed.
-- Theodor W. Adorno, NEGATIVE DIALECTICS, translated by E.B. Ashton
(New York: The Seabury Press, 1973), p. 3.
Adorno's statement is packed with bitter irony. Adorno pursues the logic
of Marx in his
The emancipation of the German is the emancipation of man. The head of
this emancipation is philosophy, its heart the proletariat. Philosophy
cannot realize itself without the transcendence [Aufhebung] of the
proletariat, and the proletariat cannot transcend itself without the
realization
At 07:10 AM 12/10/2005 -0800, andie nachgeborenen wrote:
So far as this goes I don't have much disagreement if
any. Marx thought that his turn away from Hegelian
philosophy. which he regardrd as the pinnacle of
philosophy up to that point, was the natural next
step, Hegelian philosophy having
Some of you may remember V.J. McGill as a Marxist philosopher of the '30s
and '40s, inter alia an editor of PHILOSOPHY FOR THE FUTURE. I've come
across an article of his, haven't read it yet:
Concerning the Laws of Contradiction and Excluded Middle
This is meaningless verbiage. Yes, Pryor is a historically important, in a
sense, even pivotal cultural figure in American history. But this is pure
hype and bullshit and has no analytical content. Are you a fucking moron?
At 07:24 PM 12/11/2005 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But wait! Either I'm not remembering my own post correctly or you're mixing up
my arguments.
BTW, Engels says something even more forceful:
The real unity of the world consists in its materiality, and this is proved
not by a few juggled phrases, but by a long and wearisome development of
I'm rather pressed for time now, so just a few sentences. But as coincidence
would have it, Riesch's HOW THE COLD WAR TRANSFORMED PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
provides excellent historical examples of the problem at hand. It was not the
case that all Marxists or even all Communist Party
Again, briefly. See below. When I have time to write about the Reisch book,
I'll have more to say.
-Original Message-
From: Charles Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Dec 12, 2005 3:05 PM
To: 'Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and
the thinkers he
The Philosopher and the Politician
By Georg Lukacs
It is rare for one person to be at the same time theoretician and
politician. In Marx's opinion, ideology is needed, first, to make social
conflicts conscious, and, second, to serve in the struggle for their
resolution. With minor
Issue 89 of INTERNATIONAL SOCIALISM JOURNAL Published Winter 2000 Copyright
© International Socialism
A comment on Tailism and the Dialectic
MARK O'BRIEN
http://pubs.socialistreviewindex.org.uk/isj89/obrien.htm
This is the best review I've seen to date.
I haven't registered as a user of NYT, so I haven't seen the review
yet. How did Conner get a review in the Times? Isn't he a Trot? I
shudder to think what I'm in for. The very title of the book sounds stupid.
At 02:47 PM 12/18/2005 -0500, Jim Farmelant wrote:
Read Jonathon's NY Times
I've not seen an indication in Reisch that Frank ever revised his view, and
he lived past the McCarthy era, I believe. Perhaps he merely forgot about
what he had written. But yeah, this would account for his superficial
engagement with the most superficial of Stalinist philosophy. Obviously,
Actually, I didn't know this about Neurath. It's not a good sign. I also
need to know more about Neurath's relation to Austrian socialist
politics. There are only a few lines in RED VIENNA, suggesting these
people were too much anal retentive control freaks even for Neurath.
I'm editing
A third chapter of Frank's MODERN SCIENCE AND ITS PHILOSOPHY is now on my
web site:
CHAPTER 5: is there a trend today toward idealism in physics?
http://www.autodidactproject.org/other/frank-MSP/frank05.html
Here there is a detailed critique of the idealist mystification of physics,
among
As to extrascientific orientations that may have affected Heisenberg, Paul
Forman had a rather bold thesis:
Paul Forman. Weimar Culture, Causality and Quantum Theory, 1918-1927:
Adaptation by German Physicists and Mathematicians to a Hostile
Intellectual Environment, published in Historical
Ooops, one of my sentences is rather awkward
At 08:24 AM 1/8/2006 -0500, Ralph Dumain wrote:
As Frank documents in his book, Heisenberg shared the same reactionary
idealist views as other prominent physicists such as James Jeans and
Arthur Eddington.
Heisenberg never quite claimed
I don't know what to make of this weird stuff:
Whig History of Science
http://www.ivorcatt.com/3802.htm
As far as I can tell, Forman still has a position at the Smithsonian:
http://americanhistory2.si.edu/about/staff.cfm?key=12staffkey=320
I have a deep suspicion of all sociology of science.
My suspicions are becoming confirmed:
In postmodernity the two cultures are one -- and many
Paul Forman
http://www.stanford.edu/dept/HPST/FormanThinkPiece.html
To me, this is yet another symptom of the disintegrating research programme
of bourgeois liberalism. In fact, the war between the
The confused leading the confused . . . how sad.
First!--see:
Marx Engels on the Science of History
http://www.autodidactproject.org/quote/marxsci2.html
Neither Marx nor Engels were social constructionists, nor was their
'sociology' so shallow as the undialectical sociology of science that
By riffraff I meant the Soviet philosophers and theoreticians who followed
Lenin, not only the less supple thinkers of Lenin's generation (including
the ex-Menshevik Deborin), but especially the younger breed that supplanted
their elders as Stalinism was consolidated.
The records of Haldane
A fourth chapter of Frank's MODERN SCIENCE AND ITS PHILOSOPHY is now on my
web site:
CHAPTER 8: philosophic misinterpretations of the quantum theory
http://www.autodidactproject.org/other/frank-MSP/frank08.html
As I mentioned before, Chapter 8 deals with the mystification of quantum
theory,
I re-read this material in recent months. I cited from this and other
works on my web page containing comparable remarks:
Marx Engels on Skepticism Praxis:
Selected Quotations
http://www.autodidactproject.org/quote/marx-skeptic.html
Most of these passages are very well-known, but check out
This chapter and others does indeed confirm Frank's interest in a united
front against the common right-wing enemy.
As I did not digitize the chapters in their original order, one may get a
different impression: i.e., Frank's objections to Soviet philosophy and
dialectical materialism only
Engels' characterization of 'shamefaced' belongs generically to a tendency,
most pronounced among English empiricists, to shrink from the ultimate
conclusions to be drawn from the direction set in motion, as Engels
delineates in recently discussed writings. Materialism' in this context
can
At 02:43 PM 1/10/2006 -0800, andie nachgeborenen wrote:
Problems, then: What's material mean? Physical, what
physics, biology, etc. say there is?
What if, as seems to be the case, our best science
tells us that important features of the world are
mind-dependent in a deep way -- that is where
This is truly remarkable puzzlement for a professional philosopher.
At 08:22 AM 1/11/2006 -0800, andie nachgeborenen wrote:
Well, spirit and nature are not transparent terms
either, not is primacy, so it's not much help to say
that idealists make spirit primary to nature and
materialists vice
Edgar Allan Poe wrote philosophical satires about Cant, Aries Tottle,
deduction, induction, and other topics. But seriously, folks, we need to
disaggregate a general discussion of the characteristics of materialism
from the specific case of Kant. I barely have time to read through fresh
The recent court decision sharply rejecting any legitimacy for the teaching
of creationism (now retooled as 'intelligent design') in the science
curriculum raises the question of the possible place of philosophy of
science in general education. Coincidentally, I've been plowing through
I've added the bibliography of the original publication of the essays
contained in Frank's MODERN SCIENCE AND ITS BIBLIOGRAPHY to my contents page:
http://www.autodidactproject.org/other/frank-MSP/frank00.html#bib
Most of them were originally published in the 1930s or 1940s. I'm thinking
of
the seen.
(Ralph Dumain, originally composed 2 February 1994)
___
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
One might also criticize MLK's Hegel scholarship, which is available
online. Quotations are not meant to be taken as gospel, but rather
starting points for further investigation, or at the very least curiosa of
intellectual and social history. How many people even know about these
statements
I've been out of the loop, but a friend told me how good this was a week or
two ago, and I only bought it Saturday night. I've missed an album or two
you named, but I still think INNERVISIONS is the most inspired.
At 01:36 AM 1/16/2006 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm also listening to
You guys obviously have a history I know nothing of, but I'm hoping this is
the last I'll see of this form of discourse, emoticon notwithstanding.
At 05:45 PM 1/16/2006 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now what nigga. :-)
Waistline
PS. For on lookers, pardon our form of discourse.
Encyclopedia entries like these can always be improved upon. There is one
paragraph in this one which puzzles me. See below. Examples would have
helped. Of course there have been philosophers interested in dialectical
materialism as an ontology independent of its political marxist
This Wikipedia article is quite remarkable, I think at first glance. It's
the sort of material suitable for Marx Myths and Legends, to which it
links. Especially noteworthy are the sections Disclaimers
and Historical materialism as doctrine.
I'm sure there are many more marxist and
is this all about? He gave me the creeps.
Not as creepy as that slick black neocon John McWhorter, but creepy
nonetheless. What is the Manhattan Institute, anyway?
At 06:40 PM 1/17/2006 -0500, Jim Farmelant wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 11:21:31 -0500 Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I
At 05:52 PM 1/18/2006 +, Phil Walden wrote:
One important idea of Bhaskar's was about what he called the
intransitive and transitive dimensions of reality. This was akin to
Althusser's idea of the real object and the thought object, but
Bhaskar's version is better in my view because it is
At 11:12 PM 1/18/2006 +, Phil Walden wrote:
PW: Bhaskar defines the epistemic fallacy as the analysis or definition
of statements about being in terms of statements about our knowledge (of
being). For example, if somebody says that capitalism must give way to
socialism because
Going through old emails, not remembering which I've responded
to. Comments below.
At 04:02 PM 1/11/2006 -0500, Charles Brown wrote:
..
Lenin:
The Machians contemptuously shrug their shoulders at the antiquated views
of the dogmatists, the materialists, who still cling to the
This is all good, with the addition of another quote from Lenin, that
specifies that the reality outside our mind is given by sensation (the
common ground of materialism and empiricism), not by a supersensible
Platonic realm generating the imperfect material world. This is the
differentiating
I think this is quite an eloquent statement of where Feuerbach went wrong,
and congruent with M E's criticism of Feuerbach in the 1840s.
At 10:37 AM 1/14/2006 -0500, Charles Brown wrote:
Feuerbach
feuerbach
At 10:48 AM 1/14/2006 -0500, Charles Brown wrote:
Engels gives an further explication of Hegelianism here.
Frederick Engels
Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy
Part 4: Marx
marx
Just a few remarks, below.
At 09:55 AM 1/14/2006 -0500, Charles Brown wrote:
___
SJG Archive
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/
SJG Archive
Activism, Scientists and Sociobiology
by David L. Hull
..
The
prefer to repeat
what Marx and Engle's said about Feuerbach. But if we read his poshomous
published papers he goes a long way towards Marx - after having read the
first volume of Capital.
In an email dated Wed, 25 1 2006 4:52:35 pm GMT, Ralph Dumain
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think
of Ideology.)
--- Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Internalism and externalism are standard concepts in
the sociology of
science. Perhaps andie could point us to key
reference works. I don't
think I have the wherewithal right now. I'm
checking wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org
Thanks for the elaboration. If I'm not mistaken, there's an ongoing debate
on this book on the air pump on a Romanticist listserv. I haven't read the
book, but from what I've read of its thesis, it looks very dubious to me.
At 10:20 AM 1/26/2006 -0800, andie nachgeborenen wrote:
An
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 18:32:00 -0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FW: [NASSR-L] Air Pump
I've not read the book in question, but if its thesis is as stated here,
then it is dubious indeed. The more general point of SS as described by
Levitt
_Coleridge and German Idealism_ is very good. I haven't read
the other two books you asked about. It seems like Donald Reiman
recently mentioned a book of his own on the subject.
Ralph Dumain wrote:
The question is, though: how are Romanticists going to handle these
problems when they bring
Read THE POLITICS OF MODERNISM by Raymond Williams.
At 11:04 AM 1/27/2006 -0500, Charles Brown wrote:
I don't have an extensive analysis or thought through fully the relationship
between Romantic aesthetics and politics, but it often occurs to me that,
especially in the modern era, artists,
Phillip Frank's 52-page introduction to his book MODERN SCIENCE AND ITS
PHILOSOPHY (1949) is now on my web site:
Introduction - Historical Background
http://www.autodidactproject.org/other/frank-MSP/frank001.html
Frank gives a historical overview of key moments in the philosophy of
science of
Higher Superstition Revisited: an interview with Norman Levitt
http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/articleprint.php?num=7
Not much content, but no smoking guns either. Levitt says nothing about
the 'academic left' here. Though I've used that phrase myself for certain
purposes, I don't
From: rosa lichtenstein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 23:12:09 -
Comrade,
Thank you for posting so much useful material at your site.
You might like to visit my site, where you will find I challenge
traditional Marxist Philosophy, but not
New on my web site:
Science and Evaluation by Maurice Cornforth
http://www.autodidactproject.org/other/cornforth2.html
SOURCE: Cornforth, Maurice. Communism and Human Values (New York:
International Publishers, 1972), Chapter 8, pp. 41-47.
MC, 1971:
This essay on Communism and Human Values
I've seen Michael Shermer on PBS and encountered his name in some other
arenas. I don't think he is terribly intelligent, though he does play some
role in promoting secular humanist ideas. Here's an example of my dislike
of sociobiological explanations of human belief systems, esp. those
I received this query, which I am unable to answer:
I'd be grateful if you'd point me to info/material about any
work/stance/position/activitity/writings of John Dewey (and the
pragmatists in general) on the 'Negro question' and civil rights in
general (in the US of course).
Can anyone help?
Jim Rovira's argument here is completely incoherent, unless his objections
to S. Willett's post, which I'll address separately. A few points to
straighten out this mess:
(1) I don't know who Daniel McDermott is. There's a philosopher Daniel
Dennett, who indeed supports atheism and Darwinism
I would prefer that someone with ready access to an academic library and
cheap photocopying find this article for us.
At 11:26 AM 2/20/2006 -0500, Jim Farmelant wrote:
Perhaps Ralph could find for us, Blumberg's article,
Sciene and Dialectics: A Preface to a Re-examination,
Science Society
Nope, I can't do this. maybe somebody with money or academic library
privileges. What, am I everyone's work horse?
At 11:38 AM 2/20/2006 -0500, Jim Farmelant wrote:
As long as we are on this subject, perhaps Ralph
can make available to us a couple of other articles
including William
When I was first apprised of this web site, I read a few chapters, but did
not make it to the text quoted My initial impression was that the author
was a victim of an extremely sectarian milieu and had to go through quite
an ordeal digging herself out of it. The marks of this sectarianism are
I don't know how you construct your web pages, but I am unable to fully
access this page using Internet Explorer. My computer keeps freezing
up. After numerous attempts I have been able to get to the beginning of
note 18. Yet I can access presumably much larger size files on other
sites. I
Actually, the argument is framed in an entirely sectarian context, based on
the experience of Trotskyism. Some examples from your home page:
(1)
Dialectical Materialism (DM) has been the official philosophy of active
revolutionary socialists for over a hundred years. During that time, the
Given time constraints, I can only look in designated places for specific
pieces of information, esp. as I am not a comrade.
The introduction to the argument however is revealing of several aspects of
your orientation:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/page%2001.htm
(1) exposure to
This is all quite so. Marx's knowledge of developments in the calculus was
also behind the times, but Van Heijenoort absolves Marx of narrow-minded
dogmatism.
I still need to acquire a copy of that obscure bulletin containing Van H's
arguments against Novack. For some reason, I can't find a
on
the subject, though he notes Trotsky's general dogmatism. The rest is silence.
At 04:34 PM 3/1/2006 -0500, Jim Farmelant wrote:
On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 16:01:24 -0500 Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is all quite so. Marx's knowledge of developments in the
calculus was
also behind the times
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/page%2003_01.htm
Oddly enough, however, we find a DM-classicist like Lenin arguing along
familiar lines, for all the world sounding like a born-again Realist with
added Hegelian spin:
Thought proceeding from the concrete to the abstract -- provided it is
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/page%2003_01.htm
The argument continues with a discussion of logic and language inspired by
analytical philosophy. You will have to study this for yourself. The
conclusion is:
However, this seemingly small adjustment to language had profound
be found on my web site, beginning with:
THE DIALECTICAL METHOD AS APPLIED TO THE PROBLEM
OF MEANING
http://www.autodidactproject.org/other/markovic3.html
At 10:46 AM 3/2/2006 -0500, Jim Farmelant wrote:
On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 10:25:22 -0500 Ralph Dumain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Since Rosa
Part 2 of Rosa's treatise on abstraction:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/page%2003_02.htm
The continuation of the argument involves the problem of universals, the
difficulties of rationalism and empiricism, and German idealism as an
illegitimate attempt to overcome all these difficulties,
We argued about this before and reached an impasse. You read Van
Heijenoort's piece as well and disagreed with him. The imaginary numbers
as negation of the negation is utter nonsense to me, but you
disagreed. I'm not sure what else I can say.
I'm not up on philosophy of mathematics, but
On 25 August 2005 (on what would have been Lisa's birthday) I posted a list
of sites with a variety of texts on Marxist philosophy and theory. I still
need to catalog repositories of theoretical Marxist texts in English.
At the time, I omitted the following categories:
(1) specific thinkers,
Now on my web site:
Marxism and the Linguistic Philosophy
by
Maurice Cornforth
III Marxism
2 THE LAWS OF THOUGHT
http://www.autodidactproject.org/other/cornforth3/MLP3-2.html
This is so much more sensible than the usual presentations of diamat,
including Cornforth's own. Granted the need for
The problem here is that ideology has a variety of competing meanings
within and without the marxist tradition. It's a long and complex
history. See my ideology study guide:
http://www.autodidactproject.org/guidideo.html
Raymond Guess, for example, divides the differing meanings of the term
101 - 200 of 765 matches
Mail list logo
