- "ian buick" <ibuick@b...> wrote: One of your statements could be
interpreted as portraying Marxism as a form of determinism....but this
was what Sartre wrote against in Search for a Method (and the
Critique.)....My second point concerns your assertion that Marxism
would argue that essence precedes existence....what about human
beings? Do the prior conditions (including "the totality of social
relations and the class struggle..")constitute an essence?...In my
opinion, Sartre was trying to rejuvenate Marxism;>>>>>>>>>
Thanks for the very interesting remarks. Well, I guess we're on the
terrain of "Marxology" - that is, the question of the philosophical
meaning of Marxism. Certainly Sartre in my opinion gives us in the
"Critique" the most detailed presentation of "Western" Marxism. This
is the position that derived from Luckacs' "History and Class
Consciousness" and other sources. It rejected philosophical
materialism, the notion of the objective dialectic of nature,
reflection theory of knowledge, the central importance of the Party,
and other key positions of the "orthodox" Marxism that was defended by
Engels and Lenin. I would argue that this "Leninist" Marxism is in
fact the legitimate Marxism, and that the "Western" variant is an
idealist and subjectivist perversion of the original position. Anyway,
yes, the Marxism I defend is - like all materialisms - a determinism,
but not of course along the lines of 18th century mechanical
materialism (and this is a point that Sartre never understood). If we
are not "determined" - if essence does not precede existence - how is
action possible? Either we can't act, or our action is rootless and
irrational. And of course "Western" Marxism never gave rise to a
lasting and meaningful political movement.
- Hi John, I think my statement in post number 7419 entitled
the 'unconcealed dimensions of Being' elaborates some of my views.
P.S. The Holy Days have been banished and replaced by the 'holidays'
--- In Sartre@yahoogroups.com, "eumenades" <eumenades@y...> wrote:
> Would you like to elaborate on your views about Sartre being wrong
> about God?
> I should mention I have been off the list for a long time and will
> have missed any recent discussions about this. (Nothing in Nov and
> Dec though.) I am genuinely interested in your opinion too and not
> just stuffy intellectual jousting (does need mentioning).
> Happy New Year to Joe and all,
> --- In Sartre@yahoogroups.com, "decker150" <decker150@y...> wrote:
> > IMO, Sartre was wrong.
> > Joe
> > >
> > > Sartre also wrote in B&N, "Dehors ce monde il-y-a rien." -
> > this world there is nothing.
> > >
> > > John