Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [hegel-marx] Hegel's Influence on Soviet dialectical categories

Expand Messages
  • William Yate
    Your book looks fascinating Mark, just the sort of thing I ve been looking for! I was crestfallen when I looked on amazon and found it was $130. But this is
    Message 1 of 71 , Nov 28, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Your book looks fascinating Mark, just the sort of thing I've been looking for! I was crestfallen when I looked on amazon and found it was $130. But this is right up my alley and I will certainly find some way to read it. Glad you mentioned it!

      Will


      On Nov 27, 2012, at 9:30 AM, mark meaney wrote:

      > With one notable exception, of course, i.e., my Capital as Organic Unity: the Role of Hegel's Science of Logic in Marx's Grundrisse. Alas, still it seems, an unrecognized contribution.
      >
      > ________________________________
      > From: Andy Blunden <ablunden@...>
      > To: hegel-marx@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 6:26 PM
      > Subject: Re: [hegel-marx] Hegel's Influence on Soviet dialectical categories
      >
      > Well, I agree with you in your characterisation of literature on this
      > question. Either empty generalities or outright errors.
      > See http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/help/foreword.pdf
      > and do a search for "Marx " and most of the issues are dealt with there.
      >
      > Andy
      >
      > William Yate wrote:
      > > I wasn't making a criticism of you or your explanation with my "broadest possible generality" comment; I was just saying that every book or article I come across that comments on Marx and Hegel says "Marx was more interested in the Logic than the Phenomenology," full stop, and never explains why or how.
      > >
      > > If it's the broader methodological approach that Marx and Hegel share, then yes, I can see that. But then it makes no sense to single out the Logic rather than any other mature Hegel writings.
      > >
      > > Will
      > >
      > >
      > > On Nov 26, 2012, at 5:57 PM, Andy Blunden wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > >> I don't accept at all that we "remain on the level of the broadest
      > >> possible generality." Marx is pretty specific in the preface to the
      > >> First German edition. And section 3 of Chapter 1! I know the roughtheory
      > >> blogger, and she's a smart lady, but why do we have to go to obscure
      > >> issues like Hegel's critique of force? I don't think it is a question of
      > >> making comparisons or parallels, it is a question of the whole approach,
      > >> not an obscure or accidental comparison or "influence". And Capital is
      > >> so close to the Philosophy of Right! Hegel uses "private property" and
      > >> Marx uses "exchange of commodities." That is hardly "on the level of the
      > >> broadest generality"!
      > >>
      > >> Andy
      > >>
      > >> William Yate wrote:
      > >>
      > >>> Thanks Andy. But actually I think that holds just as true for the PhG (I thought of the commodity as a parallel of the 'this' of Sense-Certainty, and at least one blogger sees a parallel between Marx's value and Hegel's force: http://roughtheory.org/2007/12/20/the-man-behind-the-curtain/), and, as you say, for the Philosophy of Right too.
      > >>>
      > >>> It's the influence of the Logic specifically that I wonder about. Every book on Marx stresses that he was a Logic rather than a Phenomenology man, Lenin has that famous quote about not being able to understand Marx without knowing the Logic inside-out, etc. And yet all these claims for the significance of the Logic remain on the level of the broadest possible generality.
      > >>>
      > >>> Will
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>> On Nov 26, 2012, at 5:25 PM, Andy Blunden wrote:
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>> In Capital, Marx posits the commodity relation as an abstract concept of
      > >>>> bourgeois society and then "unfolds" the entire nature of bourgeois
      > >>>> society by investigation of that concept. This is just what Hegel does,
      > >>>> for example, in Philosophy of Right, and is the method advocated in the
      > >>>> Logic.
      > >>>>
      > >>>> Andy
      > >>>>
      > >>>> William Yate wrote:
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>>> I'm about halfway into my first-ever reading of Capital, Vol. 1, and I keep hearing about the influence on it of Hegel's Logic rather than the Phenomenology, but I'm not sure I see it. Would anyone care to flesh this out a little or draw some more specific parallels? Thanks!
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> Best,
      > >>>>> Will
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> On Nov 26, 2012, at 4:55 PM, Andy Blunden wrote:
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>>> Heiss, maybe the book you cite explains more, but these look like a
      > >>>>>> pretty random selection of categories, not specific to Hegel. Looks like
      > >>>>>> something from a kind of textbook on philosophy.
      > >>>>>> I believe you are right in that the Science of Logic is more relevant to
      > >>>>>> understanding the use of Hegel both by Soviet writers and Marx and
      > >>>>>> Engels. Marx does not tend to comment directly on the Logic, but he made
      > >>>>>> extensive use of it in his work on Capital.
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>> Andy
      > >>>>>> ----------------
      > >>>>>> heiss93 wrote:
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>>> The Hegelian influence on Soviet dialectics is most directly
      > >>>>>>> acknowledge in the famous "three laws" by way of Engels. The less
      > >>>>>>> known part of Soviet philosophy is the categories of dialectics. I'm
      > >>>>>>> ignorant of the history of the categories in Soviet thought. I know
      > >>>>>>> that they do not appear in any English-translations of Stalin-era
      > >>>>>>> textbooks. However an English translation of Mao's 1938 lectures on
      > >>>>>>> Dialectical Materialism, which is based on Soviet textbooks, does
      > >>>>>>> refer to the categories. So it in an interesting historical question
      > >>>>>>> on when the categories first appeared in Soviet philosophy. I do not
      > >>>>>>> believe they were originally present in Engels or Plekhanov.
      > >>>>>>>
      > >>>>>>> The categories from the 1978 Soviet Philosophy textbook refer to the
      > >>>>>>> following categories:
      > >>>>>>>
      > >>>>>>> 4. The Individual, the Particular and the Universal
      > >>>>>>> 5. Cause and Effect
      > >>>>>>> 6. Necessity and Accident (Chance)
      > >>>>>>> 7. Law
      > >>>>>>> 8. Content and Form
      > >>>>>>> 9. Essence and Phenomenon
      > >>>>>>> 10. Possibility and Reality
      > >>>>>>>
      > >>>>>>> http://leninist.biz/en/1978/MLP519/
      > >>>>>>>
      > >>>>>>> These seem to me to show the direct influence of Hegel's logical
      > >>>>>>> categories. I have read that during the thaw of the early 1960s, there
      > >>>>>>> were even attempts to import the categories of Hegelian philosophy
      > >>>>>>> wholesale.
      > >>>>>>>
      > >>>>>>> AFAIK Marx and Engels never directly explored the categories of
      > >>>>>>> Hegel's logic and referred to his system only negatively. However
      > >>>>>>> since Marxists rejected the Hegelian view of history, it would seem
      > >>>>>>> that Science of Logic would be of more direct relevance than the more
      > >>>>>>> cherished Phenomenology of Spirit.
      > >>>>>>>
      > >>>>>>>
      > >>>>>>>
      > >>>>>>>
      > >>>>>>>
      > >>>>>> --
      > >>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
      > >>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
      > >>>>>> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
      > >>>>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
      > >>>>>> http://ucsd.academia.edu/AndyBlunden
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>> ------------------------------------
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>> Homepage: http://hegel.net/
      > >>>>>> Hegel mailing lists: http://Hegel.net/en/ml.htm
      > >>>>>> Listowners Homepage: http://kai.in/
      > >>>>>> Group policy:
      > >>>>>> slightly moderated, only plain Text (no HTML/RTF), no attachments,
      > >>>>>> only Hegel related mails, scientific level intended.
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>> Particpants are expected to show a respectfull and scientific attitude both to Hegel AND MArx as well as to each other. The usual "netiquette" as well as scientific standards apply.
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>> The copyright policy for mails sent to this list is same as for Hegel.Net, that is the copyright of the mails belongs to the author and hegel.net. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify the mails of this list under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version, published by the Free Software Foundation. The mails are also licensed under a Creative Commons License and under the Creative Commons Developing Nations license (see footer of http://hegel.net/en/e0.htm ).Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>>>
      > >>>>> ------------------------------------
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> Homepage: http://hegel.net/
      > >>>>> Hegel mailing lists: http://Hegel.net/en/ml.htm
      > >>>>> Listowners Homepage: http://kai.in/
      > >>>>> Group policy:
      > >>>>> slightly moderated, only plain Text (no HTML/RTF), no attachments,
      > >>>>> only Hegel related mails, scientific level intended.
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> Particpants are expected to show a respectfull and scientific attitude both to Hegel AND MArx as well as to each other. The usual "netiquette" as well as scientific standards apply.
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>> The copyright policy for mails sent to this list is same as for Hegel.Net, that is the copyright of the mails belongs to the author and hegel.net. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify the mails of this list under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version, published by the Free Software Foundation. The mails are also licensed under a Creative Commons License and under the Creative Commons Developing Nations license (see footer of http://hegel.net/en/e0.htm ).Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>>
      > >>>>>
      > >>>> --
      > >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
      > >>>> *Andy Blunden*
      > >>>> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
      > >>>> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
      > >>>> http://ucsd.academia.edu/AndyBlunden
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>> ------------------------------------
      > >>>>
      > >>>> Homepage: http://hegel.net/
      > >>>> Hegel mailing lists: http://Hegel.net/en/ml.htm
      > >>>> Listowners Homepage: http://kai.in/
      > >>>> Group policy:
      > >>>> slightly moderated, only plain Text (no HTML/RTF), no attachments,
      > >>>> only Hegel related mails, scientific level intended.
      > >>>>
      > >>>> Particpants are expected to show a respectfull and scientific attitude both to Hegel AND MArx as well as to each other. The usual "netiquette" as well as scientific standards apply.
      > >>>>
      > >>>> The copyright policy for mails sent to this list is same as for Hegel.Net, that is the copyright of the mails belongs to the author and hegel.net. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify the mails of this list under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version, published by the Free Software Foundation. The mails are also licensed under a Creative Commons License and under the Creative Commons Developing Nations license (see footer of http://hegel.net/en/e0.htm ).Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>>
      > >>>
      > >>> ------------------------------------
      > >>>
      > >>> Homepage: http://hegel.net/
      > >>> Hegel mailing lists: http://Hegel.net/en/ml.htm
      > >>> Listowners Homepage: http://kai.in/
      > >>> Group policy:
      > >>> slightly moderated, only plain Text (no HTML/RTF), no attachments,
      > >>> only Hegel related mails, scientific level intended.
      > >>>
      > >>> Particpants are expected to show a respectfull and scientific attitude both to Hegel AND MArx as well as to each other. The usual "netiquette" as well as scientific standards apply.
      > >>>
      > >>> The copyright policy for mails sent to this list is same as for Hegel.Net, that is the copyright of the mails belongs to the author and hegel.net. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify the mails of this list under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version, published by the Free Software Foundation. The mails are also licensed under a Creative Commons License and under the Creative Commons Developing Nations license (see footer of http://hegel.net/en/e0.htm ).Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >> --
      > >> ----------------------------------------------------------
      > >> *Andy Blunden*
      > >> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
      > >> Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
      > >> http://ucsd.academia.edu/AndyBlunden
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >> ------------------------------------
      > >>
      > >> Homepage: http://hegel.net/
      > >> Hegel mailing lists: http://Hegel.net/en/ml.htm
      > >> Listowners Homepage: http://kai.in/
      > >> Group policy:
      > >> slightly moderated, only plain Text (no HTML/RTF), no attachments,
      > >> only Hegel related mails, scientific level intended.
      > >>
      > >> Particpants are expected to show a respectfull and scientific attitude both to Hegel AND MArx as well as to each other. The usual "netiquette" as well as scientific standards apply.
      > >>
      > >> The copyright policy for mails sent to this list is same as for Hegel.Net, that is the copyright of the mails belongs to the author and hegel.net. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify the mails of this list under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version, published by the Free Software Foundation. The mails are also licensed under a Creative Commons License and under the Creative Commons Developing Nations license (see footer of http://hegel.net/en/e0.htm ).Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------------------------------
      > >
      > > Homepage: http://hegel.net/
      > > Hegel mailing lists: http://Hegel.net/en/ml.htm
      > > Listowners Homepage: http://kai.in/
      > > Group policy:
      > > slightly moderated, only plain Text (no HTML/RTF), no attachments,
      > > only Hegel related mails, scientific level intended.
      > >
      > > Particpants are expected to show a respectfull and scientific attitude both to Hegel AND MArx as well as to each other. The usual "netiquette" as well as scientific standards apply.
      > >
      > > The copyright policy for mails sent to this list is same as for Hegel.Net, that is the copyright of the mails belongs to the author and hegel.net. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify the mails of this list under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version, published by the Free Software Foundation. The mails are also licensed under a Creative Commons License and under the Creative Commons Developing Nations license (see footer of http://hegel.net/en/e0.htm ).Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      > --
      > ----------------------------------------------------------
      > *Andy Blunden*
      > Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
      > Book: http://www.brill.nl/concepts
      > http://ucsd.academia.edu/AndyBlunden
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Homepage: http://hegel.net/
      > Hegel mailing lists: http://Hegel.net/en/ml.htm
      > Listowners Homepage: http://kai.in/
      > Group policy:
      > slightly moderated, only plain Text (no HTML/RTF), no attachments,
      > only Hegel related mails, scientific level intended.
      >
      > Particpants are expected to show a respectfull and scientific attitude both to Hegel AND MArx as well as to each other. The usual "netiquette" as well as scientific standards apply.
      >
      > The copyright policy for mails sent to this list is same as for Hegel.Net, that is the copyright of the mails belongs to the author and hegel.net. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify the mails of this list under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version, published by the Free Software Foundation. The mails are also licensed under a Creative Commons License and under the Creative Commons Developing Nations license (see footer of http://hegel.net/en/e0.htm ).Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Ulrich Barth
      Oh, I beg your pardon for my misunderstanding! Von meinem iPhone gesendet ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Message 71 of 71 , Nov 29, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Oh, I beg your pardon for my misunderstanding!

        Von meinem iPhone gesendet

        Am 29.11.2012 um 13:02 schrieb "Tahir Wood" <twood@...>:

        > No this is Will, not me!
        > T
        >
        > >>> Ulrich Barth <ulrich.barth@...> 11/29/2012 12:58 pm >>>
        > Hi Tahir,
        >
        > I think this mail to Will is yours.
        > > The only thing I can think that I may be missing is that I am still,
        > > despite Chris's reminder, conflating surplus-value and profit. But
        > > surely profit is fluid if surplus-value is?
        > >
        >
        > Von meinem iPhone gesendet
        >
        > Am 29.11.2012 um 08:43 schrieb "Tahir Wood" <twood@...>:
        >
        > >
        > >
        > > >>> William Yate <willyate@...> 11/28/2012 12:40 pm >>>
        > > Surplus-value is just the swag the board of directors divvies up
        > > amongst themselves after they set fire to their Bangladeshi workers.
        > > It's unearned money—and perhaps "unearned" is normative, but
        > > "normative" doesn't mean "incalculable."
        > >
        > > The only thing I can think that I may be missing is that I am still,
        > > despite Chris's reminder, conflating surplus-value and profit. But
        > > surely profit is fluid if surplus-value is?
        > >
        > > Will, you are not just conflating surplus value with profit, in your
        > > above comments you are positively equating them. Your 'definition'
        > there
        > > of surplus value is actually a definition of profit. Obviously if
        > you
        > > keep on maintaining this then the discussion is a waste of time.
        > Surplus
        > > value is not profit, it is an explanation of how profit is possible.
        > > Actual profit has a number of determinants, some of them very complex
        > in
        > > their own right. Consider this (which you haven't done yet):
        > Capitalists
        > > are not one big club who share out the profits that they have
        > jointly
        > > made by jointly exploiting the working class. They compete with one
        > > another. They try to force one another out of business. They engage
        > in
        > > dodgy accounting practices. Some of them try to compete by working
        > > obsolete machinery until it breaks while others are always investing
        > in
        > > new technology to try to bring down prices. In some cases profit is
        > a
        > > function of processing speed. And then there is supply and demand,
        > etc.
        > > etc. All of these are factors in the pursuit of profits. They have
        > only
        > > an oblique relation to the notion of surplus value.
        > >
        > > Surplus value is an explanation of how it is that profit is
        > possible.
        > > It is thus a kind of real abstraction (or abstract real). It is not
        > some
        > > quantity of stuff.
        > >
        > > Tahir
        > >
        > >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.