Re: AM and dialectics

["Chris M. Sciabarra" <sciabrrc@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 19 Jan 1996, lucinda wrote:

> This is not the clearest statement, and Marx did of course establish an
> alternate base for dialectics. But the point remains that Aristotelian
> forms of analytic reasoning seem to require clearly defined concrete entities
> which are mutually exclusive. This to my mind leads to radical disjunctures
> between levels of analysis (even though there may be continuity defined by
> the analytic model itself).

        While I agree that analytic reasoning can sometimes create a
disjointed picture of the whole, please remember two things:  1.  there
is nothing wrong with abstraction and use of analytic methods as long as
their connection to the wider totality is made (hence, we can be wildly
experimental in our use of methods within social science, as long as they
are not held mutually exclusive or exhaustive); 2.  Aristotle was NOT the
analytic thinker that so many people claim he was.  He wasn't depraved
like most moderns.  Take a look here, at what Hegel has to say in his
LECTURES ON THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY:
        "Aristotle . . . was one of the richest and deepest of all the
scientific geniuses that have as yet appeared -- a man whose like no
later age has ever yet produced.  [He] extended his attention to the
whole circle of human conceptions. . .One reason for treating Aristotle
in detail rests in the fact that no philosopher has had so much wrong
done him by the thoughtless traditions which have been received
respecting his philosophy, and which are still the order of the day...
For to him views are ascribed diametrically opposite to his philosophy.
... Aristotle has a quality, altogether his own, of being throughout
intensely speculative in his manner . . . He has the world of appearance
before himself complete and in entirety, and sets nothing aside, however
common it may appear.  ... because he looks at all sides of the universe,
takes up all those units... because he takes all the moments that are
contained within the conception to be, so to speak, united, he does not
omit determinations; he does not hold now to one determination and then
to another, but takes them as all in one ... "

        So, it is clear from Hegel's view, that not even the master
dialectician can deny Aristotle's avoidance of reification.  Perhaps this
is why Marx, Engels, and Lenin saw Aristotle as the father of dialectical
inquiry, following Hegel's lead.

                                - Chris
==================================================
Dr. Chris M. Sciabarra
Visiting Scholar, NYU Department of Politics
INTERNET:  sciabrrc@xxxxxxxxxxx
==================================================


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------