Chapter 4 of David Bakhurst's book on Ilyenkov has a very illuminating
discussion
of these issues because he directly and seriously addresses Lenin whose
ideas
he characterizes as ambiguous. As a result of this ambiguity, writes DR, who
quite
different strands of Marxist interpretation grew up and that it was the
anti-positivist
side of the resulting ambiguity that Ileynkov adopted. I do not know if you
have this
text, Sasha.
I cannot type it all in by hand and LCHC is now pretty much closed until New
Years,
but will try to find time to relay a few key passages. If someone with the
book and
a scanner can help, that would be great.
mike
On 12/20/06, Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu> wrote:
>
> Sasha,
>
> I agree entirely that an interpretation of Marx will always be from one or
> another stance. It seems to me that there are large differences between
> Marx
> scholarship in the west and that in Russia. When you say, for example,
> that
> there is there is only one school of Marxist philosophy in Russia that
> strikes me as both a strength and a weakness. My knowledge of Marx is
> without a doubt far inferior to yours, but I hope that it has been
> richened
> by exploring a little how Marx was read by people like Lefebvre, Sartre,
> Merleau-Ponty, and read back into Hegel by Kojeve, Hyppolite, Lukacs, and
> others. I'm not trying to sound erudite; my point is that Marx's texts are
> ambiguous, plurivocal, and any attempt to determine the real Marx, or
> decide
> once and for all how Marx related to Hegel, for example, is an endless
> task.
> Marx's writings have been called "a breathtakingly luxuriant but tangled
> forest."
>
> For example, the interpretation that Marx had already 'inverted' Hegel has
> been much contested. To think that there is merely a rational kernel to
> Hegel is a matter of debate, to say the least. To call the 1844
> manuscripts
> preliminary in anything other than a literal sense is to repeat a claim
> that
> has been much challenged.
>
> But let me defend myself a little: Engels used the term "historical
> materialism," while Marx did not (though I think Kautsky coined it). Lenin
> wrote of "dialectical materialism" in Materialism and Empiricocriticism.
> Stalin is not worth defending, I agree. To paint HM as true and DM as
> false
> does not get me very far in trying to understand what Vygotsky was doing
> with these terms, with the texts they came from, and thus to see what can
> be
> teased out of the tangled forest of Vygotsky's own writings.
>
> For example, my question to Joao was based what seems to me evident
> (though
> I'm willing to be corrected): that Vygotsky himself drew a distinction
> between HM and DM, and on my reading he judges them both positively.
>
> Yes, Vygotsky considered himself to be a Marxist. But what that meant to
> him
> then, and what it means to us now, are not self-evident matters. Reading
> Vygotsky's texts here in the US in one way I am at a disadvantage because
> the culture and context are so different from his. But from another point
> of
> view this makes it possible to try to liberate a potential from his
> writing
> that might not otherwise be accessible. I am not a Marxist (in any direct
> sense) but I do want to develop his ideas. If you are correct that "if we
> want develop Vygotsky¹s ideas
> > and if we appreciate his conscious position we can do it only basing on
> > Marxist approach"
> then scholarship on Vygotsky in the west is in deep trouble!
>
> One last thing- you also suggest that:
> prevailing attitude towards LSV as to ideal example of Marxist
> > dialectical logic
>
> While I would say that this is actually a very rare attitude to Vygotsky
> in
> this country.
>
> Martin
>
> p.s. can I add that I attended your presentation at ISCAR in Sevilla and
> was
> very impressed by your intellectual project. It is a pleasure to be
> discussing these matters with you!
>
>
> On 12/20/06 9:47 PM, "Alexander Surmava" <monada@netvox.ru> wrote:
>
> > Hi Martin,
> >
> >
> >
> > I think that the interpretation of Marxist philosophy (dialectic) has to
> be
> > based on some definite cultural = scientific = philosophical tradition
> or
> > school of thought. Thus my approach is entirely based on Il¹enkov¹s
> school
> > of dialectic. This approache I share with all of his disciples among
> which I
> > have to mention Felix Mikhailov, Lev Naumenko, Vasiliy Davidov, Alexey
> > Novokhatko, Alexander Simakin, Sergey Mareev and some other philosophers
> and
> > psychologists.
> >
> > According to this approach the basics of Marxist philosophy was
> elaborated
> > by Karl Marx and Fred Engels in the course of investigation of political
> > economy of capitalist society in ³Das Kapital² and in a few preliminary
> > works like ³Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844², ³The German
> > Ideology² and ³Theses on Feuerbach². Engels only aired his and Marx¹
> > collective opinion in his latest works like ³Anti-Dühring². We (I mean
> all
> > mentioned above alive or dead persons) have never heard that it was
> Engels
> > who ³extracted the rational kernel' from Hegel to invent it and DM²
> because
> > from one side the work of extraction of rational, materialist Kernel
> from
> > Hegel was done by both founders of materialist dialectic in 1844 and
> > developed in ³Das Kapital² and from the other side because the separate
> DM
> > is entirely false positivist misinterpretation of Marxist philosophy and
> > that Engels quite innocent in it.
> >
> > Even less we can accuse Lenin of inventing or elaborating of abstract DM
> > because it was Lenin who was the utmost enemy of all forms of
> positivism.
> >
> > On the contrary the Stalinist ideology was in fact the queer mixture of
> > primitive positivist ³DM² and irrational ideological ³HM².
> >
> > I want to repeat that this point of view is not my own peculiarity but
> > something banal for all Russian Marxists. (There is only one Marxist
> > philosophical school in Russia founded by Il¹enkov, so when I mention
> > ³Russian Marxists² I mean Il¹enkov¹s disciples.)
> >
> > Surely all this can be argued in detail but first of all we have to fix
> the
> > difference in our approaches, if such differences really exist.
> >
> > As for question of Joao about LSV¹s approach to this problem it is
> difficult
> > (and frankly to say rather senseless) to try to give some definite
> answer to
> > it because the ³problem² of establishing a ³difference between dialectic
> > materialism and historical materialism² is not a substantial theoretic
> but
> > entirely ideological question (in old Marxist meaning of the term
> ³ideology²
> > as a false form of consciousness). I can only repeat that basing on
> > developed Marxist dialectical approach so called DM and HM are one and
> the
> > same thing.
> >
> > Surely Vygotsky consider himself as a Marxist, he wanted to be a Marxist
> and
> > pretty much he was a Marxist. Moreover if we want develop Vygotsky¹s
> ideas
> > and if we appreciate his conscious position we can do it only basing on
> > Marxist approach.
> >
> > But we have sober estimate that the real logic of his investigations not
> > always remain Marxist. Thus for example Vygotsky¹s understanding of
> language
> > is considerably positivist. (This assertion can be easily demonstrated.)
> So
> > the prevailing attitude towards LSV as to ideal example of Marxist
> > dialectical logic is to put it mildly inadequate. Vygotsky wanted to
> build a
> > Marxist psychology and he did much more than anybody else to realize his
> > wish, but he had too little time to do it. Moreover he meets the other
> big
> > obstacle not enunciating of Marxist dialectic. The dialectical method
> of
> > Marx was realized by him in his main work ³Das Kapital², but neither
> Marx,
> > nor Engels has left us ³Logic² from capital letter. So Vygotsky had in
> the
> > same time investigate the nature of human consciousness and extract
> > dialectical methodology from ³Das Kapital². In fact the task was too
> titanic
> > for one even genius man. In this situation it is little wonder that he
> > failed in realizing both tasks (elaborating dialectical methodology and
> > developing a dialectical psychology) but it deserves admiration that in
> > spite of all difficulties LSV left us a great number of brilliant
> insights.
> >
> > The real perspective of developing of dialectical psychology was opened
> only
> > in the middle of the last century by works of a group of researchers
> like
> > Evald Il¹enkov, Alexander Mescheriakov, Alexey Leont¹ev and Nikolay
> > Bernstein.
> >
> > So the sooner we will left the uncritical apologetical attitude
> regarding
> > Vygotsky, the better chance we acquire to continue his lifework.
> >
> > Sasha
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
> On
> > Behalf Of Martin Packer
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 7:59 PM
> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > Subject: Re: [xmca] question
> >
> >
> >
> > Joao,
> >
> >
> >
> > Your project sounds interesting. I think you're pointing to something of
> a
> >
> > contradiction that I feel is in the Crisis, and perhaps elsewhere. On
> the
> >
> > one hand V does speak of the problem of using either historical
> materialism
> >
> > or dialectical materialism for his "general psychology," a truly Marxist
> >
> > psychology. The former was appropriate for Marx's sociology, a study of
> >
> > society, but he's doing something different. The latter is too abstract.
> On
> >
> > the other hand, the history that he tells of the discipline of
> psychology is
> >
> > one in which there is an objective logic, operating behind the backs of
> >
> > individual psychologists ("like a coiled string"), the laws of this
> logic
> >
> > can be grasped through "scientific analysis," there are underlying
> inherent
> >
> > contradictions, a revolutionary moment (the "crisis") has arrived as a
> >
> > result of the pressure of practical concerns, and a future can be
> envisioned
> >
> > where, in the form of the new general psychology, qualitatively
> different
> >
> > from what has come before, time has ended. In short, this history has a
> form
> >
> > that sounds (to the best of my limited knowledge) very much like that
> >
> > dialectical materialism.
> >
> >
> >
> > What do you think? (Sorry not to be able to write in Portugese)
> >
> >
> >
> > Martin
> >
> >
> >
> > On 12/19/06 11:07 AM, "Joao Martins" <jbmartin@sercomtel.com.br> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> Martins and others... the title of my project is " The psychology of
> >
> >> Vygotsky: mapping concepts, tracing courses ". He has as objective maps
> > the
> >
> >> concepts, the units of analysis used by Vygotsky to consolidate your
> >
> >> proposals for the psychology.
> >
> >> I will be analyzing your books: Psychology of the Art and Pedagogic
> >
> >> Psychology and the texts that appeared in your Chosen Works.
> >
> >> In a first moment we can notice that Vyg. uses of the dialetic
> materialism
> >
> >> to make the analyses about the superior psychological functions, or
> even
> > to
> >
> >> analyze the psychology of your time - in the text Crisis of the
> Psychology
> >
> >> that is clear.
> >
> >> But he speaks that the problem is to use the historical materialism to
> > make
> >
> >> such analyses. I think that he sees in the historical materialism a
> form
> > of
> >
> >> approaching the psychological phenomena, approaching of a certain
> > sociology
> >
> >> of the human relationships...
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Do you understand?
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Joao Martins
> >
> >> ____________________
> >
> >> Joáo Batista Martins
> >
> >> R. Pref. Hugo Cabral, 1062 - apto. 142
> >
> >> Londrina - PR - CEP 86020-111
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Home page http//www.geocities.com/Athens/Aegean/5389
> >
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >
> >> From: "Martin Packer" <packer@duq.edu>
> >
> >> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> >
> >> Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 12:21 PM
> >
> >> Subject: Re: [xmca] question
> >
> >>
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Joao,
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Would you like to tell us more about your project?
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Martin
> >
> >>
> >
> >>
> >
> >> On 12/18/06 11:38 AM, "Joao Martins" <jbmartin@sercomtel.com.br> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >
> >>> Dear friends, I am making a project on vygotsky and I would like to
> know
> >
> >> if
> >
> >>> Vygotsky establish a difference between dialetic materialism and
> >
> >> historical
> >
> >>> materialism?
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> Joao Martins
> >
> >>> ____________________
> >
> >>> Joáo Batista Martins
> >
> >>> R. Pref. Hugo Cabral, 1062 - apto. 142
> >
> >>> Londrina - PR - CEP 86020-111
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >
> >>> xmca mailing list
> >
> >>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >
> >>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
> >>
> >
> >>
> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >
> >> xmca mailing list
> >
> >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >
> >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
> >>
> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >
> >> xmca mailing list
> >
> >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >
> >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > xmca mailing list
> >
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> >
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 03 2007 - 07:06:19 PST