[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [xmca] LSV and Kant

Martin, Andy, or Larry,

Could you please re-post Martin's attachment on Kant (or send to me 
directly, at jrtudge@uncg.edu).


Jonathan Tudge
155 Stone

Mailing address:
248 Stone Building
Department of Human Development and Family Studies
PO Box 26170
The University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Greensboro, NC 27402-6170

phone (336) 256-0131
fax   (336) 334-5076


Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> 
Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
03/24/2010 10:58 PM
Please respond to
ablunden@mira.net; Please respond to
"eXtended Mind, Culture,        Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>

"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>

Re: [xmca] LSV and Kant

I hoped you picked up from my response Larry, that I thought 
Marxists were completely wrong to regard Kant-critique as 
over and done with. We should all try to read Kant and 
understand him. He is a very powerful thinker, and it is all 
too easy to repeat a few slogans, as orthodox Marxists have 
been wont to do. Critique of Kant is very rewarding. And 
Martin's book is a great place to start and get one's 
bearings on it.


Larry Purss wrote:
> Andy and Martin
> Thank you for your answers.
> Andy, thanks for your answechaper that Hegel covered the topic of Kant, 
> so others did not have to elaborate further.  However, when reading 
> Martin's attachment I believe rich insights are gained by reading these 
> ideas through a historical lens as capturing current debates that 
> continue today. My reading of Martin's chapters is that sociocultural 
> theory can be read as a response to Kant.
> Martin thanks for the new attachment on Kant. I appreciate  your 
> guidance in expanding my historical awareness of the geneology of ideas. 

> Martin, from your article it seems Kant's influence is still dominant 
> even to day as it frames so many debates that continue even today. I 
> learn so much about one side of a debate when people argue and critique 
> people who they view as villans. Critiquing Kant gives me new insights 
> on sociocultural theory ( DIALOGICALITY)
> So for that reason I'm going to read the posted article on Kant's 
> continuing dominance in how we frame our sociocultural theories as 
> reactions to Kant.
> Martin, one more quick question. Your elaboration of the notion of 
> intersubjective CONSTITUTION seems to be a critical way of elaborating 
> sociocultural positions in reaction to Kant. Has your framing of the 
> notion of constitution been debated on XMCA in previous years.
> If not, I hope others have downloaded your attachment and are introduced 

> to your ideas on the centrality of this notion for our understaning of 
> the human enterprise
> Larry
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net>
> Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 5:06 pm
> Subject: [xmca] LSV and Kant
> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>  > On LSV and Kant ... In the early 80s I remember asking a
>  > Marxist/professor type what Marx had had to say about Kant
>  > because everyone was saying bad things about Kantianism and
>  > I wanted to know more.  (In those days it never occurred to
>  > us to read Kant to know about Kant, or Feuerbach to know
>  > about Feuerbach!) He replied that Marx wrote nothing about
>  > Kant (and this is true, not a word!) because "everything
>  > that needed to be said about Kant had already been said by
>  > Hegel."
>  >
>  > That pretty much characterizes how Marxists have dealt with
>  > Kant. Ilyenkov's book (you know where to get that) concisely
>  > explains the Marxist critique of Kant, abstracted from
>  > Fichte/Schelling and Hegel, and my guess is that LSV who had
>  > read all the people leading up to Kant (Descartes, Spinoza,
>  > Locke, Hume, Rousseau), and people like Plekhanov and Lenin,
>  > would find that Ilyenkov accurately reflects his view.
>  >
>  > As it happens I have since discovered that Critique of Kant
>  > was not solely the privilege of Fichte, Schelling and Hegel
>  > (as suggested by Hegel and picked up by every Marxist since,
>  > including Ilyenkov), and Luria and LSV were big fans of
>  > Goethe, so it just maybe that LSV got part of his Kant
>  > critique from that quarter, possibly.
>  >
>  > What I recall reading in LSV is condemnation of the
>  > "unknowable thing-in-itself" and in Chapter 5 of "Crisis"
>  > you will find a criticism to the effect that Kant held that
>  > laws of Nature were "dictated" by reason. His famous 1925
>  > speech tells me that LSV had read Kant, as he makes a subtle
>  > point about Kant's conception of the subject which I don't
>  > recall other Marxists making, only Fichte.
>  >
>  > Does that help?
>  >
>  > Andy
>  >
>  > Martin Packer wrote:
>  > > On LSV's treatment of Kant, I have to duck. I don't have LSV's
>  > texts to hand to look for direct references. I know virtually
>  > nothing about the state of Kant studies in the USSR at that
>  > time. One could, however, make the sweeping generalization that
>  > all philosophy since then has been a response to Kant (I'm
>  > attaching an article that makes that point about a collection of
>  > 20th century scholars). And to drift away from your question
>  > temporarily, to me the most interesting readings of Kant see him
>  > as having captured (in his dualism between things as they are
>  > and as they appear; in his separation of thought, action, and
>  > judgment) the state of human being of a particular time and
>  > place, and they then respond by trying to revolves these splits
>  > either in theory, or in practice, or both. I'm going to go out
>  > on a limb and say that both Habermas and Foucault, despite their
>  > obvious differences, read Kant that way.
>  > > And that leads me to one of my few disappointments with LSV:
>  > that he was not able to criticize the society of his time. His
>  > essay "The Socialist Formation of Man" shows very well that he
>  > was certainly capable of this. His biography suggests he had
>  > every reason to do so. Obviously it was the state of society
>  > that itself made any criticism impossible, but it sure would
>  > have been fascinating to read!
>  > > Martin
>  > --
>  > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>  > -------
>  > Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
>  > Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov,
>  > Ilyenkov $20 ea
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > xmca mailing list
>  > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>  > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>  >

Andy Blunden http://www.erythrospress.com/
Classics in Activity Theory: Hegel, Leontyev, Meshcheryakov, 
Ilyenkov $20 ea

xmca mailing list

xmca mailing list