TremulousTetra
prismatic universe
What do you think of Marx's and Engels explanation of, and use of, Dialectical Materialism?
Dialectical Materialism
- Thread starter TremulousTetra
- Start date
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Well, comrade, history show us that...
To be possibly pedantic, they never used the term dialectical materialism. That was Dietzgen. Later Plekhanov stitched together a philosophy of dialectical materialism out of Marx and Engels writings with reference to Hegel.
I no longer feel the need for dialectical materialism. I can translate its terms into more precise language if I need to. Dialectics of nature does littlle for me.
That said most of Marx and Engels philosophical commentary is excellent. Marx's preface to The Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy is excellent. The point about the mode of presentation is central. Marx looks at political economy afresh, without making it seem like the unfolding of some law of nature. Capital is thus a very self-conscious and philosophical set of volumes that continually set capital as a product of history. I don't find the more explicitly philosophical language in Grundrisse useful, though. It makes it sound clunkingly mechanical. (Similarly the mathematical manuscripts are bloody awful).
Engels was excellent especially as a philosopher of science (except all the laws of dialectics stuff).
I don't see Marx and Engels as particularly unique as philosophers. Banality is a good quality for a philosopher and Marx and Engels could be quite banal. The dazzling philosophical obsessions of the leading intellectuals of the day are a distraction and satire is the appropriate response (Holy Family, German Ideology, Anti-Duhring). Good sense and a view to see the world as it is in all its nuance is a fine counterbalance.
I no longer feel the need for dialectical materialism. I can translate its terms into more precise language if I need to. Dialectics of nature does littlle for me.
That said most of Marx and Engels philosophical commentary is excellent. Marx's preface to The Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy is excellent. The point about the mode of presentation is central. Marx looks at political economy afresh, without making it seem like the unfolding of some law of nature. Capital is thus a very self-conscious and philosophical set of volumes that continually set capital as a product of history. I don't find the more explicitly philosophical language in Grundrisse useful, though. It makes it sound clunkingly mechanical. (Similarly the mathematical manuscripts are bloody awful).
Engels was excellent especially as a philosopher of science (except all the laws of dialectics stuff).
I don't see Marx and Engels as particularly unique as philosophers. Banality is a good quality for a philosopher and Marx and Engels could be quite banal. The dazzling philosophical obsessions of the leading intellectuals of the day are a distraction and satire is the appropriate response (Holy Family, German Ideology, Anti-Duhring). Good sense and a view to see the world as it is in all its nuance is a fine counterbalance.
The dialectical materialism of Plekhanov and his Russian followers (Lenin et al) is more of a metaphilosophy than a philosophy. It traces out the to and fro of philosophical thought as part of the ideological superstructure of society. It could be a little bit wooden but it does the business. In contrast to more bourgeois modes of philosophy it clarifies the thought of political opponents and subjects them to ridicule. Which is sweet.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
It is in large part responsible for the massive success of the marxist left in the politics of our country in the past century.
I think as a theory it is open to a flaw in the manner to which it is practically applied e.g. Marxist reducing the superstructure to the economic base.
It does however contain some of the best aspects of Feuerbach and Hegel. Hegel’s dialectics benefited from being taken down from the realm of the spiritual.
Eh?
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Possibly the biggest question facing the working class today. I know one bloke in the crib team who has never really got to grips with Lukacs.
Well as a theory it focuses on two main elements the economic base and the superstructure but many proponents tend to reduce their arguments back down all the time to the economic base.
Maybe that's the fault of the proponents, but maybe the theory lends it'self too it.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Geni
I'm familiar with base and superstructure in Marxist thought, ta. It's these bits:
That provoke an "Eh"?
That provoke an "Eh"?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Poor boy he hasn't a clue
Ok sorry if that was patronising, I just meant that people who call themselves Marxist without understanding it are prone to economic reductionism. Maybe that's their fault, or maybe Marx's writing wasn't clear enough in it's explanation. That could be why he has to go on to then defend his theory against the charge.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
So you understand it right?
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
Is this dialectics that's going on here? Or is it just two middle aged men on the internet slagging each other off?
Better than most of the general public, probably not as well as most of the people who call themselves Marxist on this politics board.
You could say the same about Darwinism it's very similar what has happened to that with Spencer's survival of the fittest being attributed to him. Possibly you are right it's not much to do with the theory it'self.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
I'll take the French approach to this. Hein?
Athos
Well-Known Member
I think it's an irrelevance to most workers' everyday existences. The fact that the ability to engage with the idea depends upon an education in Hegelian thought, means that the vast majority of workers are excluded from doing so. This, coupled with the perceived importance of such theories in some left wing circles leads to the paradox of the isolation of workers from revolutionary movements, and the creation of a self-appointed elite, which is little short of the worst kind of vanguardism. It is wrong in principle, and dangerous in practice. If left wing thinkers had put half as much time and energy into engaging with the working class as they have into discussing dialectical materialism, then perhaps the left would have made some progress in the last 80 years.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
tosh (although I do agree that it is very far from being a central concern for the w-c)
Athos
Well-Known Member
Maybe "an educaton in Hegelian thought" was an overstatement, but at least an understanding of dialectics, and of a number of other fairly abstract philisophical pricniples which, in turn, depend upon a level of education denied to the average working man.
Blagsta
Minimum cage, maximum cage
What? The focus in Marx is class, the fundamental contradiction is between capital and labour. Maybe try reading some Marx?
TruXta
tired
However misguidedly he got there, I do think moon hit on the weak spot in Marxist thought (well most of what I'm familiar with anyway) - the fact that similar to other economic schools of thought there's a tendency to not want to/be able to spot non-economic reasons for social action. Or, if acknowledging that they exist, declare them a priori secondary or epiphenomenal. And then have the temerity to claim that capitalism reduces labour to commodities.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
I dont really think so, although I wouldnt really recomend anyone start on Hegel, or even on the Dialectics of Nature. But Engels' three central theses on the dialectic in there are all perfectly comprehensible to the 'average man', because they fit with how the world works. How water turns into steam (quantitative into qualitative changes), the contradictory nature of capitalism, how it both demands higher and lower pay for workers (unity and conflict of opposites), the evolution of stars and the cosmos (negation of the negation). The latter is a tad trickier to explain than the first two, I'll grant you.
Similar threads
