[Marxism-Thaxis] Third level of materialism

2009-01-20 Thread Charles Brown
Third level of materialism



Third level of materialism 

Let me suggest a third level
 of materialist determination,
 derived from the struggle 
between the Marxists and the 
structuralists/post-moderns, 
et. al. 

The superstructure is 
_determined_ when it is changed. 
It is changed only rarely, 
in revolutions. Revolutions
 are rare, by definition; in 
"punctuations". Most of the 
time of history, society is
 in convention or "equilibrium",
 not revolution. In conventional 
times, it is the superstructure 
of ideas that determines 
individual people's conduct. 
There is determination by
 ideas, ideology. Thought 
the _system_ of ideas, "cultural 
grammar"
determines the actions by 
individual "beings". 

Only when practice of ideas 
comes into such crisis as to
 create a system changing 
contradiction in the system of
 ideas ( the cultural "grammar" 
in Levi-Straussian structural 
anthropology) does a
 revolution arise. 

This system and convention
 changing crisis and contradiction
 between practice and ideas systems
 is what Marx describes in his 
famous passage below (as
well as in miniature in the 
Theses on Feuerbach , mostly
succinctly the 2nd Thesis.)


"At a certain stage of their 
development, the material productive 
forces of society come in conflict 
with the existing relations of 
production, or - what is but a 
legal expression for the same thing 
- with the property relations 
within which they have been at 
work hitherto. From forms of 
development of the productive
 forces these relations turn into 
their fetters. 

Then begins an epoch of social 
revolution. With the change of
 the economic foundation the
 entire immense superstructure
 is more or less rapidly transformed.
 In considering such transformations
 a distinction should always be 
made between the material 
transformation of the economic 
conditions of production, which 
can be determined with the precision
 of natural science, and the legal, 
political, religious, aesthetic or 
philosophic - in short, ideological
 forms in which men become 
conscious of this conflict and fight
 it out. Just as our opinion of an 
individual is not based on what he 
thinks of himself, so can we not
 judge such a period of transformation
 by its own consciousness; on the
 contrary, this consciousness must
 be explained rather from the 
contradictions of material life, 
from the existing conflict between
 the social productive forces and 
the relations of production. " 

Preface of A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy 


http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface-abs.htm
 









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


[Marxism-Thaxis] Third level of materialism

2009-01-19 Thread Charles Brown


Third level of materialism 

Let me suggest a third level of materialist determination, derived from the 
struggle between the Marxists and the structuralists/post-moderns, et. al. 

The superstructure is _determined_ when it is changed. It is changed only 
rarely, in revolutions. Revolutions are rare, by definition; in "punctuations". 
Most of the time of history, society is in convention or "equilibrium", not 
revolution. In conventional times, it is the superstructure of ideas that 
determines individual peoples' conduct. There is determination by ideas, 
ideology. Thought determines the actions by "beings". 

Only when practice of ideas comes into such crisis as to create a system 
changing contradiction in the system of ideas ( the cultural "grammar" in 
Levi-Straussian structural anthropology) does a revolution arise. 

This system and convention changing crisis and contradiction between practice 
and ideas is what Marx describes in his famous passage below. 


"At a certain stage of their development, the material productive forces of 
society come in conflict with the existing relations of production, or - what 
is but a legal expression for the same thing - with the property relations 
within which they have been at work hitherto. From forms of development of the 
productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. 

Then begins an epoch of social revolution. With the change of the economic 
foundation the entire immense superstructure is more or less rapidly 
transformed. In considering such transformations a distinction should always be 
made between the material transformation of the economic conditions of 
production, which can be determined with the precision of natural science, and 
the legal, political, religious, aesthetic or philosophic - in short, 
ideological forms in which men become conscious of this conflict and fight it 
out. Just as our opinion of an individual is not based on what he thinks of 
himself, so can we not judge such a period of transformation by its own 
consciousness; on the contrary, this consciousness must be explained rather 
from the contradictions of material life, from the existing conflict between 
the social productive forces and the relations of production. " 

Preface of A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy 


http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface-abs.htm
 






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


[Marxism-Thaxis] Third level of materialism

2008-05-30 Thread Charles Brown
On Materialism ( speaking of Mao), there are two levels of the relationship 
between thought and being: "economics" and "physics". While society remains in 
the Realm of Necessity , ruling classes control masses by conditioning 
fulfillment of the _material_needs of the exploited classes on the exploited 
classes ' producing surpluses for the ruling , exploiting classes. The 
materialism (determinism by the material) at this level derives from the 
coercive use of conditional provision of material needs.  In all societies, 
including those in the Realm of Freedom ( socialist, communist future and 
ancient) , all people must , of course, "obey" the laws of physics, chemistry, 
biology, physiology, objective reality etc. "physics",  in the general sense.

How do Foucault, Butler, and other Post-moderns differ with these materialist 
principles ?

^^^
Let me suggest a third level of materialist determination, derived from the 
dialectic between the Marxists and the structuralists/post-moderns, et. al.

The superstructure is _determined_ when it is changed.  It is changed only 
rarely, in revolutions. Revolutions are rare, by definition; in "punctuations". 
Most of the time of history, society is in convention or "equilibrium", not 
revolution. In conventional times, it is the superstructure of ideas that 
determines individual peoples' conduct. There is determination by ideas, 
ideology. Thought determines the actions by "beings".  

Only when practice of ideas comes into such crisis as to create a system 
changing contradiction in the system of ideas ( the cultural "grammar" in 
Levi-Straussian structural anthropology) does a revolution arise. 

This system and convention changing crisis and contradiction between practice 
and ideas is what Marx describes in his famous passage below.


"At a certain stage of their development, the material productive forces of 
society come in conflict with the existing relations of production, or — what 
is but a legal expression for the same thing — with the property relations 
within which they have been at work hitherto. From forms of development of the 
productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. 

Then begins an epoch of social revolution. With the change of the economic 
foundation the entire immense superstructure is more or less rapidly 
transformed. In considering such transformations a distinction should always be 
made between the material transformation of the economic conditions of 
production, which can be determined with the precision of natural science, and 
the legal, political, religious, aesthetic or philosophic — in short, 
ideological forms in which men become conscious of this conflict and fight it 
out. Just as our opinion of an individual is not based on what he thinks of 
himself, so can we not judge of such a period of transformation by its own 
consciousness; on the contrary, this consciousness must be explained rather 
from the contradictions of material life, from the existing conflict between 
the social productive forces and the relations of production. "

Preface of A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy 


http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/preface-abs.htm



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