Dear Readers,
The following is an excerpt from my recent web dialogue regarding the definition of -- "Marx's" -- "Dialectic Materialism".
Enjoy, and HAPPY NEW YEAR!
Regards,
Miguel
Q: [ https://www.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/comments/5k34j8/eli5_of_marxs_dialectic_materialism/?utm_content=title&utm_medium=front&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=Socialism_101 ]:
"... of Marx's Dialectic Materialism?"
R: “Dialectic Materialism” is not a term that Marx ever used, and, hence, is not really “Marx’s”.
Marx did clearly hold that dialectic -- the irruption of an “other”,
by “aufheben” processes of self-negation, form out of a prior class or
category, and, later, the re-combination of those prior two in a way
that resolves their initial opposition -- characterizes the totality of
physical Nature, including pre-human Nature, and contemporary exo-human
Nature, as well as human Nature.
See, for example Marx, Capital., Volume I, Part I, Commodities and Money, Chapter III., Money, or the Circulation of Commodities, Section 2., The Medium of Circulation, [sub-section] a., The Metamorphosis of Commodities, 1st paragraph.
Regarding “Materialism”, Marx was openly critical of both French “Mechanical Materialism”, and other forms of abstract “Matter”-ism, as well as of Hegelian and other abstract “Idealisms”.
Marx’s world view was a kind of dialectical synthesis, negating the fetishisms, mystifications, and subject/object inversions of BOTH preceding “Matter-isms” and preceding “Idea-isms”.
Marx’s dialectical synthesis might best be termed ‘psychohistorical materialism’.
That is because Marx’s writings evince a keen awareness, and focus, on the historically causative role of the human, intersubjective, collective-psychological, including ideological forces involved in humans making history together.
For example, Marx’s critical concept of [capital-]VALUE is not a PHYSICAL substance, but a SOCIAL substance, grounded in the collective human view holding objects of value, the physical objects onto which humans collectively project and enforce VALUE.
For more about this view of Marx’s theory, see www.dialectics.org.
See, for example Marx, Capital., Volume I, Part I, Commodities and Money, Chapter III., Money, or the Circulation of Commodities, Section 2., The Medium of Circulation, [sub-section] a., The Metamorphosis of Commodities, 1st paragraph.
Regarding “Materialism”, Marx was openly critical of both French “Mechanical Materialism”, and other forms of abstract “Matter”-ism, as well as of Hegelian and other abstract “Idealisms”.
Marx’s world view was a kind of dialectical synthesis, negating the fetishisms, mystifications, and subject/object inversions of BOTH preceding “Matter-isms” and preceding “Idea-isms”.
Marx’s dialectical synthesis might best be termed ‘psychohistorical materialism’.
That is because Marx’s writings evince a keen awareness, and focus, on the historically causative role of the human, intersubjective, collective-psychological, including ideological forces involved in humans making history together.
For example, Marx’s critical concept of [capital-]VALUE is not a PHYSICAL substance, but a SOCIAL substance, grounded in the collective human view holding objects of value, the physical objects onto which humans collectively project and enforce VALUE.
For more about this view of Marx’s theory, see www.dialectics.org.
No comments:
Post a Comment