[Xmca-l] Re: Engels on Laws of evolution and laws of history
Andy Blunden
ablunden@mira.net
Sat Jan 17 19:15:26 PST 2015
It's a very contentious area, Bill.
Marx referred to the *tendency* of the rate of profit to fall, not a
law, and that was a deliberate choice of words.
And yes, that message from my old friend Davie is pointing to the
dangers inherent in the idea of "laws of history."
Andy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
Bill Kerr wrote:
> Andy wrote:
> Hegel never talked of "laws of history", regarding them as belonging
> to "appearance" and he was in agreement with Kant on that point.
> Marx never talked of "laws of history" either, talking only of what
> has happened in the past and the possibilities pregnant in the present.
> Stalin did talk about "laws of history". In "Dialectical and
> Historical Materialism" (1938) he talks repeatedly about "laws of
> history" and what's more the Party knows them, so watch out, and he is
> always citing Marx and Hegel to prove his point
>
> hi Andy,
> As you would know Marx's /Capital/ has numerous references to the laws
> of capitalism. This could be interpreted as historical law I think.
> eg. I would see the marxist claim that under capitalism the gap b/w
> rich and poor continues to increase as verified by history. Other
> claims are more contentious, eg. the falling rate of profit, but could
> also be see as a claim by marx about historical laws.
>
> I thought an essay I looked at the marxist archive about Freedom and
> Necessity threw light on perhaps what you were trying to say:
> https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/txt/davie07.htm, eg.
> "Unfortunately, the 'Marxist' tradition within the Second
> International was to revive Hegel's notion. The practice of the
> International was to submit to 'historical necessity' - 'scientific'
> laws that determined the movement of society - which would of their
> own accord pave the way for socialism. This was the opposite of Marx's
> approach, who argued that the fact that social relations could be
> analysed scientifically, as governed by laws that acted independently
> of humanity, was itself precisely the state of affairs that needed to
> be overcome through socialist revolution"
>
> ie. there are historical laws, the point is more what to do about
> them, to overthrow capitalism, might move us to a society where there
> is more freedom and less law.
>
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 8:49 AM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net
> <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
>
> "Speak to history" could mean anything to me, Jessica. There are
> two very definite statements being made here which have been mixed
> up in translation. I'd now like to figure out when the meaning got
> changed. I am assuming that the English translation on p. 517 of
> v. 25 of MECW is a good translation of the original German,
> because this version is very reliable. It says:
> "The eternal laws of nature also become transformed more and more
> into historical ones" going on as David Ke noted to talk simply
> about the *variability* of all "laws of nature" as opposed to
> *eternal laws of nature.* That's all.- nothing about human history
> or it's supposed "laws".
> Hegel never talked of "laws of history", regarding them as
> belonging to "appearance" and he was in agreement with Kant on
> that point.
> Marx never talked of "laws of history" either, talking only of
> what has happened in the past and the possibilities pregnant in
> the present.
> Stalin did talk about "laws of history". In "Dialectical and
> Historical Materialism" (1938) he talks repeatedly about "laws of
> history" and what's more the Party knows them, so watch out, and
> he is always citing Marx and Hegel to prove his point.
> So we have in the English translation of "History of the
> Development of the Higher Mental Functions" the epigram: "More and
> more eternal laws of nature are turning into laws of history. - F.
> Engels" and the editors tell us in a footnote that this comes from
> the "Russian Marx-Engels CW, v. 20, p. 553," which actually says:
>
> /Вечные законы природы /также превращаются все более и более в
> исторические законы.
>
> for which MicroSoft translator gives me: "/Eternal laws of nature/
> also are converted ever more and more into historical laws," which
> to me is *ambiguous*. What are "historical laws"? Are they
> changeable laws or laws of change?
>
> David Ke: what does the epigram say in the Russian edition of HDHMF?
> Mike C or Natalia G: can you make an unambiguous translation of
> that Russian from the Russian MECW?
>
> My interest is only this: did the translators of LSV's Collected
> works mess up the translation of the epigram, or did Vygotsky read
> a distorted translation in his copy of "Dialectics of Nature" in
> Russian translation?
>
> Andy
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
> <http://home.pacific.net.au/%7Eandy/>
>
>
> Kindred, Jessica Dr. wrote:
>
> Does it mean thaqt nothing remains constant, or that
> everything depends on conditions... which does surely speak to
> history.
> ________________________________________
> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> [xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
> <mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>] on behalf of Andy
> Blunden [ablunden@mira.net <mailto:ablunden@mira.net>]
> Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2015 8:37 AM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Laws of evolution and laws of history
>
> And I found the Engels he was quoting, in the Russian translation:
>
> /Вечные законы природы /также превращаются все более и более в
> исторические законы.
>
> The English translation says:
>
> The eternal laws of nature also become transformed more
> and more
> into historical ones.
>
> but then it goes on to say:
>
> That water is fluid from 0°-100° C. is an eternal law of
> nature, but
> for it to be valid, there must be (1) water, (2) the given
> temperature, (3) normal pressure.
>
> So this does NOT mean what it appeared to mean. Engels simply
> means
> "nothing remains constant" It is not saying anything about
> "laws of
> history"!!
>
> Andy
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
> <http://home.pacific.net.au/%7Eandy/>
>
>
> mike cole wrote:
>
>
> Thanks David -- That is certainly where I must have
> encountered the phrase
> often enough for it to stick in my mind. And thanks to
> Jessica and Andy we
> see versions of the idea in many places.
>
> Double the pleasure.
> mike
>
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 11:36 PM, David Kellogg
> <dkellogg60@gmail.com <mailto:dkellogg60@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Mike--
>
> See Vol. Four of the Collected Works in English: the
> quote you refer to is
> the epigraph to HDHMF. It's from Dialectics of Nature,
> and Vygotsky keeps
> coming back to it again and again, throughout the
> whole text of HDHMF,
> which is one reason why I am assuming (against what
> Anton Yasnitsky has
> written) that HDHMF is a whole book, one of the very
> few that Vygotsky
> completedly completed (and also his longest work).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
More information about the xmca-l
mailing list