Bhaskar and dialectics

Ralph Dumain rdumain at igc2.igc.apc.org
Tue Feb 21 11:30:11 MST 1995


Sciabarra's and Chodos' contributions are excellent.  As for Lulu
of the Lotus-Eaters, his claims about MY being puerile are, to put
it politely, self-refuting.

I thought Allen Wood's "Hegel and Marxism" in "The Cambridge
Companion to Hegel" (I like to call it THE COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARY
COMPANION TO HEGEL) was just awful.  The very citations from Wood
himself provide ample evidence of this.  The a priori dismissal of
dialectics, even worse, method, is unconscionable, the mere
juxtaposition of similarities and differences between Hegel and
Marx is shallow, and above all, the discussion of transparency
according to Marx and Marxism is weak, sketchy, and superficial.
One cannot simply contrast Hegel's owl of Minerva to a vague
assertion that Marx believed full transparency of social relations
would be possible.  (What is the evidence for this?  I don't know
anybody who believes this.  I for one don't think human relations
could be fully transparent until about 200 years into the higher
stage of communism.)  To make the differences between Hegel and
Marx hinge on transparency -- shameful!


     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------



More information about the Marxism mailing list