Dialectics of nature

Adam Rose adam at pmel.com
Tue Sep 10 06:37:53 MDT 1996

I wrote:
> ii) Gary, I know you should not judge people by their friends. But if I
> judged Bakshar by his friends, I'd say he was an academic wanker, with
> no connection to the real world at all.
> Why should I change my mind on this ?

Hans writes:
> Bhaskar is very difficult to read; is he worth our efforts?
> The answer is definitely yes, because it is impossible for ordinary
> mortals to understand Marx's *Capital* without Bhaskar.  Bhaskar is
> developing, not from an exegesis of Marx, but from first principles,
> and firmly anchored in modern philosophical debates, those
> methodological underpinnings, to which Marx in the course of his work
> became more and more committed.  Marx had to resort to Hegel because
> Hegel was the closest thing to Bhaskar's critical realism available at
> the time.  Bhaskar claims that his book "Dialectic" is the book about
> what is rational about Hegel's method which Marx never wrote, and in
> my view Bhaskar is right.  There is a spoon list "bhaskar" which among
> other things does a slow reading of Bhaskar's works.  Send a message
> to majordomo at lists.village.Virginia.EDU with the text

Later, Russel Pearson writes:
> Come on, reveal all, who are his friends?

Read your mail, Russel.


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

More information about the Marxism mailing list