Re: The 'formalising' of dialectics.

On Jul 1, 8:28=A0am, dusty <trackdu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> I think rab is saying that it is incorrect to simply impose a
> =93codified=94 dialectical law to understand the unfolding of social
> development which has a unique complexity which must be understood
> through a process involving the attempt by man to change that reality
> through revolutionary practice.

The following analogy is inexact, but I think it can take us a small
distance in unraveling this matter about codification or
formalization. Consider that the calculus of Leibnitz and Newton must
be grasped to understand the transformations of matter, understood as
physical reality. The calculus has been well formalized and codified,
although not in the time of its founders, when it was thoroughly
explicated, but gaps in formalization remained. You cannot understand
physics, of course, by "appyling" calculus. Such an effort would
produce a numerology, not science. But the manner of application has
no bearing on the lucidity of exposition of the terms of the calculus
itself or its formalization.

srd