DJP
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Rosa Lichtenstein wrote:So, I re-iterate what I said earlier: Das Kapital is a Hegel-free zone.Karl Marx in Capital Volume 1 wrote:The guilds of the middle ages therefore tried to prevent by force the transformation of the master of a trade into a capitalist, by limiting the number of labourers that could be employed by one master within a very small maximum. The possessor of money or commodities actually turns into a capitalist in such cases only where the minimum sum advanced for production greatly exceeds the maximum of the middle ages. Here, as in natural science, is shown the correctness of the law discovered by Hegel (in his “Logic”), that merely quantitative differences beyond a certain point pass into qualitative changes.https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch11.htm
Doh!
Rosa Lichtenstein wrote:. So, Marx's engagement with Hegel taught him to ignore Hegel completely.That appears to be false
Karl Marx wrote:What was of great use to me as regards method of treatment was Hegel’s Logic at which I had taken another look by mere accident, Freiligrath having found and made me a present of several volumes of Hegel, originally the property of Bakunin. If ever the time comes when such work is again possible, I should very much like to write 2 or 3 sheets making accessible to the common reader the rational aspect of the method which Hegel not only discovered but also mystified.http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1858/letters/58_01_16.htmIf one thing can be seen from these quotes it's that Marx himself thought that we needed the dialectic.That said there's dialectics and there's dialectics. I'm definitely not a fan of Hegelian gobbledygook either.
Vin Maratty wrote:Perhaps designated areas for each branch. This may result in input from members unable to attend meetings and their opinions could be taken into account at the next ‘physical’ branch meeting.See http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/groupsThough the take up has not been great…
Yes that has been the plan all along. Just need to put more time aside to work on the website again…
gnome wrote:Brand mentions revolution without specifying what he means. He also talks of not voting, increasing taxation and much else besides. "Everybody's (sic) talking about it" simply because he's a self-seeking publicist and 'celebrity' whose words and actions are guaranteed to be seized upon by a fickle and gullible public. Unlike Ken Loach, Brand's a fly-by-night and we should distance ourselves from him; that's the lesson.Hear, hear!Brand's commentary is full of so many vagarities that pretty much anything can be read into them.If criticism of capitalism is back on the agenda, and it seems it is, it is not because of the actions of pop stars or celebrities but because it strikes a chord with the realities of daily existence, and if the New Statesman chose the clown Brand to speak on the serious subject of social transformation it is not because he is some champion of the field but because they know he has a following and will sell papers.It serves the establishment very well that this issue is put into the mouths of such clowns.
Rosa Lichtenstein wrote:(to take your example: in neuroscience and cognitive science, Cartesisn ideas are still dominant).Triple LOL. You'll be hard pressed to find any serious "substance dualists" these days, you're at least 50 years behind the times!
Rosa Lichtenstein wrote:Why is "Philosophy is useless" philosphical? You negelected to demonstrate this point.And even if it were, why is "Philosophy useless" self-negating? Something could still be true but remain useless; for example: The 456,667th mouse born in Japan since 1734 is brown. That could be true. But is it any use? It might be some use, but it doesn't have to be (which is all I need). And it could be false, and still useless. Either way, it could be useless while also being either true or false.LOL. You're doing philosophy again. I thought that stuff was useless and 100% nonsense.
ALB wrote:I see you have to be (or are supposed to be) a student to join in, but have we any members who are students of economics? Probably not, as economics these days seems to be a branch of business studies. Not like in the olden days (i.e. the 1980s and before).Yes I'm an undergrad PPE student. I'll check it out..
Rosa Lichtenstein wrote:So, no, we don't need a philosophical theory (or, indeed, DM); HM (a scientific theory) is quite enough.Historical Materialism is dialectical in that it refers to change and dynamic processes.I don't think the distintion between philosophical and scientific theories is a clear cut as you would wish it to be. For example there is a vast amount of cross-over in neuroscience and philosophy of mind.
What "Rosa", rather amusingly doesn't seem to notice is that "philosophy is a useless discipline" is itself a philosophical statement and a self-negating one at that. But don't take my word for it, everything I say is false.
admice wrote:I assume you mean CLASS consciousness?Yes that and more to. How people see themselves and their place in the world.
FWIW here's a short extract from an SPGB pamphlet on dialectical materialismhttp://theoryandpractice.org.uk/library/dialectical-materialism-spgb-1974
Clearly we are all products of capitalist society, but from that it doesn't follow that we all end up thinking the same thing. Therefore what we think is not under the control of the property owning minority as LBird has tried to claim. If it where how would we be having this discussion in the first place?Consciousness is shaped by the contradictory and opaque nature of production relations it is through the dynamic interplay of these antagonistic relations that consciousness develops.
gnome wrote:Your commitment and contribution are not in doubt. What some of us can't understand is why you are the only one doing all of this when there are seven bods on the IC, some with seemingly impeccable credentials…Because when it comes to Drupal configuration and problem shooting I'm the only one that knows how to do it. Some members may have in depth knowledge of other areas of computer science but not Drupal specifically.Other members do assist with the uploaded of new articles etc, as you do, but the mechanics part of it does require a certain amount of specialist knowledge, hence the decision to approach a professional developer…
