Re: The 'formalising' of dialectics.

On Jul 2, 3:31=A0am, stephen <srdiam...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Jul 1, 8:28=A0am, dusty <trackdu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > It is im****tant to keep in mind that dialectics are not a human
> > construct but actually inhere in matter and in higher forms of its
> > organisation including society and its development. Hence a true
> > understanding of these requires a mastery of the former.
>
> Could you provide an honest answer to this question: Do YOU claim a
> *mastery* of dialectics?

No =96 it would be truer to say that I am "dialectically challenged".
Nevertheless I am aware that the seminal text of Marxism, Capital
would have been impossible without it and that it is the core of
scientific socialism (versus that of pre and post-Marxian socialism).
And that it ill behoves us to belittle the core philosophy of Marxism,
the thread of which runs through all the works of Trotsky - he uses it
to unfold the process of social development - an in that process the
dialectic is uncovered.

> Given the state of the texts, very few if any Marxists today could
> claim such mastery, because it requires a thorough grounding in Hegel,
> which in turn requires a deep understanding of Kant. Few with the
> patience to require such understanding of doctrines in philosophy's
> history have had the time, energy, or inclination to master the laws
> governing "matter and in higher forms of its organization including
> society and its development."
> srd

No argument. It's no doubt a relative question - people get by with
less than perfection.