DESPAIN at econ.sbs.utah.edu
Wed Feb 22 11:25:13 MST 1995
Dumain says that I mention identity and idealism as the kernel
problems (or perhaps mystical shell). I agree very much with
Bhaskar (1993, 1994) on his point that this is actually a horrible
analogy to attept to determine what Marx was up to. I also agree
with Dumain that turning Hegel on his head is also misleding to
Marx's intention here. This also goes hand and hand with the simple
distinction between idealism and materialism.
I will have to work through Wood, but as Dumain and Chodos
further define self-transparency, it seems that both Hegel and Marx
suffer from an over-faith of, and credit to the degree we as humans
can understand not only ourselves, but the objective world itself.
But, I agree with both Hegel and Marx when they imply that a
philosophy of science has the potential for revealing more of both.
Moreover, I agree with Dumain that this differentiation is a poor
determinate to separte the views and especially the dialectics of
Hegel and Marx.
Chodos also has interesting comments on Bhaskar connecting with Wood.
But, I think that it is because we live in an open system (if we
accept this notion) that demands from us that we attempt to
understand and direct our actions and intentions. And
it is very difficult for me to understand why humanistic intentions
and human emancipation must be termed "radical."
University of Utah
despain at econ.sbs.utah.edu
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism