[Xmca-l] Re: Fwd: Re: What is science?: Where to start doctoral students?
Andy Blunden
andyb@marxists.org
Mon Nov 5 00:31:32 PST 2018
Yes, CLR James brings a very unique reading to Hegel's
Logic. I have transcribed only excerpts from it:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/james-clr/works/dialecti/index.htm
Andy
------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Blunden
http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
On 5/11/2018 7:14 PM, WEBSTER, DAVID S. wrote:
>
> Along with Dunayevskaya we must put C L R James’s Notes on
> Dialectics: Hegel Marx Lenin. James and Dunayevskaya were
> of course the mainstay of the ‘Johnston Forest’
> Tendency(?) They broke from Trotsky in support of the
> State Capitalist v Workers State understanding of the
> USSR. Notes on Dialectics is in part a commentary on Lenin
> on Hegel
>
>
>
> *From:*xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> *On Behalf Of *Andy Blunden
> *Sent:* 04 November 2018 02:02
> *To:* xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu
> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Fwd: Re: What is science?: Where
> to start doctoral students?
>
>
>
> Yes, Martin, Marx and Hegel can both be counted as
> Aristotleans, though self-evidently only "in a certain
> way." Hegel was so much an admirer of Aristotle that
> Aristotle is the only great philosopher who is not pinned
> at a certain finite point in the "unfolding of the Idea"
> in Hegel's History of Philosophy, and at the completion of
> the Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences, when it
> comes full circle to a fully reconstructed Being, Hegel
> merely quotes a passage from Aristotle in the original
> Greek, without translation!
>
> The restoration of Hegel to his proper place in Marxism
> was begun by Lenin in 1914:
>
> “It is impossible completely to understand
> Marx's /Capital/, and especially its first chapter,
> without having thoroughly studied and understood
> the /whole/ of Hegel's /Logic/. Consequently, half a
> century later none of the Marxists understood Marx!!
> <https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/cons-logic/ch03.htm#LCW38_180a>”
> https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/cons-logic/ch03.htm#LCW38_180a
>
> and continued via Korsch and Lukacs, the early Frankfurt
> School and Dunayevskaya. It was given a particular boost
> with the emergence of "Marxist Humanism" (in opposition to
> Althusser's structuralism and the East European Stalinist
> bureaucracies) from Eastern Europe in the 1960s.
>
> The origins of Marx's philosophical (not political) views
> in Hegel is now a commonplace which only the blind do not
> see (if they bother to look).
>
> Andy
>
> Andy Blunden
> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
>
> On 4/11/2018 3:01 AM, Martin Packer wrote:
>
> Andy, thinking about your question I went aGooglin’
> and discovered that Carol Gould’s book is available
> online:
>
>
>
> Gould, C. C. (1978). /Marx’s social ontology:
> Individuality and community in Marx’s theory of social
> relations/. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
>
>
>
> <https://philarchive.org/archive/GOUMSO-3>
>
>
>
> I hadn’t noticed when first reading this book that
> Gould credits Marx Wartofsky for his help developing
> the theoretical framework. The book defends five
> theses; she summarizes the first two as follows:
>
> My first thesis is that Marx uses Hegel's dialectical
> logic both as a method of inquiry and as a logic of
> history. That is, not only is Marx's analysis ordered
> in accordance with a Hegelian dialectic, but the
> actual dcvelopment of historical stages itself is seen
> to have such a dialectical form.!Thus, on the one
> hand, Marx derives the specific structure and
> development of social forms from the concepts of these
> forms, but, on the other hand, he sees this derivation
> as possible because the concepts are themselves
> abstracted from the concrete social developmenL,
>
> My second thesis is that in construing Hegel's logic
> of concepts also as a logic of social reality, Marx
> becomes an Aristotelian. He holds that it is real,
> concretely existing individuals who constitute this
> social reality by their activity.
>
> Martin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Nov 2, 2018, at 10:17 PM, Andy Blunden
> <andyb@marxists.org <mailto:andyb@marxists.org>>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> I think it would be more true to say that in
> Marx's day "Ontology" was only used in the
> non-countable form; the countable (i.e. plural)
> form of "Ontology" is a product I think of the
> second half of the 20th Century. Martin? can you
> pinpoint it? I think that Marx agreed with Hegel's
> reduction of Ontology to Logic, though he also had
> differences over Hegel's formulation of it - the
> famous "Method of Political Economy" passage which
> CHAT people like to quote, explains it. Hegel's
> "Ontology" (/Die Lehre vom Sein/) is usually
> translated into English as "The Doctrine of
> Being." Hegel's reduction of Ontology to Logic is
> explained in the Preface to the /Phenomenology/,
> already mentioned, and implemented in the first
> book of the Logic.
>
> Andy
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Andy Blunden
> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
>
> On 3/11/2018 3:28 AM, Greg Thompson wrote:
>
> I sent the following message off-line to Beth.
> I'll send it here without the attachments just
> in case someone is watching...
>
> They should be publicly accessible.
>
> (and funny that Wagner also happened across
> the same book that I did, behold the power of
> Google!).
>
>
>
> Wagner, simple story with ontology, in
> anthropology at least, is that it has been
> pluralized so that people now speak of
> different ontologies. Science is just one of
> them. In many ways this is anti-Marxist since
> Marx imagined just one ontology (and science
> was going to get to the bottom of it!), but
> I'd like to think that this move isn't
> entirely irreconcilable with all readings of Marx.
>
>
>
> -greg
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: *Greg Thompson*
> <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>>
> Date: Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 2:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: What is science?:
> Where to start doctoral students?
> To: Beth Ferholt <bferholt@gmail.com
> <mailto:bferholt@gmail.com>>
>
>
>
> Beth,
>
>
>
> This may be more than you bargained for but
> Latour has been doing some interesting
> thinking/writing on this issue, reported
> secondarily here:
>
> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/magazine/bruno-latour-post-truth-philosopher-science.html
>
>
>
> I have also attached his essay Why has
> critique run out of steam? (as well as the
> intro from Pandora's Hope "Do you believe in
> reality?") which was an early articulation of
> this particular (re)articulation of his position.
>
>
>
> Goodwin's Professional Vision also comes to
> mind (also attached).
>
>
>
> And for kicks, I just googled your question
> and found this book that really seems to be a
> very smart approach:
>
> https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=s13tBAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=what+is+science%3F&ots=hG7y6xF0gy&sig=DNMs__6vnoZUvXbOelWC8DcL4ns#v=onepage&q=what%20is%20science%3F&f=false
>
>
>
> I was thinking of "rigorous storytelling" as
> one answer to your question. I googled and
> found that I've already been outdone - Susan
> Porter has "triple-rigorous storytelling"
> based on her work with food justice. Might be
> of interest depending on your students' projects:
>
> https://www.foodsystemsjournal.org/index.php/fsj/article/view/fd-triple
>
>
>
> Best of luck!
>
> -greg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 9:33 AM Beth Ferholt
> <bferholt@gmail.com
> <mailto:bferholt@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Great. Kuhn and Thinking and Speech are
> two of the few things on my list already
> and I’ll start reading the other two,
> sensible or no, now! Thanks so much, Beth
>
> On Thursday, November 1, 2018, Andy
> Blunden <andyb@marxists.org
> <mailto:andyb@marxists.org>> wrote:
>
> Beth, much as a part of me would like
> to recommend the Preface to Hegel's
> Phenomenology, being sensible I would
> still recommend:
>
> 1. The first chapter of Thinking and
> Speech
> https://www.marxists.org/archive/vygotsky/works/words/ch01.htm
> 2. Marx's Method of Political Economy
> https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1857/grundrisse/ch01.htm#loc3
> 3. And they should read Thomas Kuhn's
> Structure of Scientific Revolutions
> https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/us/kuhn.htm
>
> Who knows? You might be fostering an
> original thinker?
> Andy
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Andy Blunden
> http://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm
>
>
> On 1/11/2018 11:43 PM, Beth Ferholt wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 10:09 AM
> Beth Ferholt <bferholt@gmail.com
> <mailto:bferholt@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I'm starting to
> take the role of
> advisor on
> doctoral
> dissertations and
> wonder how best to
> begin to discuss
> "what is science?"
> with students who
> will need to
> respond concisely
> when asked about
> the rigor and
> reliability of
> their formative
> intervention,
> narrative and/or
> autobiographical
> studies.
>
>
>
> I'm looking for an
> overview or paper
> that does more
> than argue the
> value of one
> approach --
> something to start
> them off thinking
> about the issues,
> not immerse them
> in one perspective
> quite yet.
>
>
>
> If not an overview
> then maybe a paper
> that
> contextualizes
> "rigor" and
> "reliability".
>
>
>
> Obviously this is
> an endless topic
> but do some people
> reading XMCA have
> some favorite
> papers that they
> give to their
> advisees or use
> when they teach a
> methods class?
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> Beth
> --
>
> Beth Ferholt
> Associate
> Professor, Department
> of Early Childhood
> and Art Education;
>
> Affiliated
> Faculty, CUNY
> Graduate Center
>
> Brooklyn College,
> City University of
> New York
> 2900 Bedford
> Avenue
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=2900+Bedford+Avenue+Brooklyn,+NY+11210&entry=gmail&source=g>
> Brooklyn, NY 11210
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=2900+Bedford+Avenue+Brooklyn,+NY+11210&entry=gmail&source=g>-2889
>
> Email:
> bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu
> <mailto:bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu>
> Phone: (718) 951-5205
> Fax: (718) 951-4816
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Beth Ferholt
> Associate Professor, Department of Early
> Childhood and Art Education;
>
> Affiliated Faculty, CUNY Graduate Center
>
> Brooklyn College, City University of New York
> 2900 Bedford Avenue
> Brooklyn, NY 11210-2889
>
> Email: bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu
> <mailto:bferholt@brooklyn.cuny.edu>
> Phone: (718) 951-5205
> Fax: (718) 951-4816
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
>
> Assistant Professor
>
> Department of Anthropology
>
> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
>
> Brigham Young University
>
> Provo, UT 84602
>
> WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu
> <http://greg.a.thompson.byu.edu/>
> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
>
> Assistant Professor
>
> Department of Anthropology
>
> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
>
> Brigham Young University
>
> Provo, UT 84602
>
> WEBSITE: greg.a.thompson.byu.edu
> <http://greg.a.thompson.byu.edu/>
> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20181105/6258a359/attachment.html
More information about the xmca-l
mailing list