Re: Exchanges on Marxism and ecology

[David Bruce <dave_bruce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Charles Brown wrote:

 >>Engels projected the end of philosophy, all that would remain is formal
logic and dialectics. By Lenin's time, isn't philosophy embarrassing thinking ?

What Engels actually wrote was (Ludwig Feurbach and the end of classical
German philosophy"):

"For philosophy, which has been expelled from nature and history, there
remains only the realm of pure thought, so far as it is left: the theory of
the laws of the thought process itself, logic and dialectics."

. . . and this, of course, includes the great epistemological thinkers,
such as Kant, Descartes etc. Engels did not say "philosophy is dead" but
that philosophy no longer had an investigative role in the material
sciences. I can't fault that. Engels actually said elsewhere (I can't find
the original right now) that, in order to learn to think in concepts and
categories, it is necessary to study their evolution, referring
specifically to the history of philosophy.

It is worth noting that Marx and Engels often refer to "philosophy" when
they IMHO mean specifically the post-Hegelian milieu of their youth, most
famously in the eleventh of the "Theses on Feurbach". Their colleagues from
that time are often referred to as "the philosophers" - something it suits
a lot of folk to forget. Remember that the Theses were "notes hurriedly
scribbled down".

"The philosophers have only interpreted the world in their various ways:
the point however is to change it."

has nothing at all to do with the "death" of philosophy. It's not that Marx
does or does not accept that idea - it's about something else altogether -
his break from the "Young Hegelians". As the old saying goes, "What's that
got to do with the price of eggs?".

 >>What are the specific embarassments of *MEC* ?

For me, that Lenin knew little or nothing about the "realm of pure thought"
or "the theory of the laws of the thought process itself" (epistemology)
but insisted on writing about it. It certainly makes me blush, it's
philistine crap and unworthy of him.

 >>And who are the philosophers since Hegel or Feuerbach who have gotten
beyond them ?

Fair question. Marx for one. See also Engels' critique of Feurbach. As a
philosopher or at least as a historian of philosophy, Ilyenkov knocks spots
off most of the others for my money. Timpanaro, I agree. Some Marcuse, but
not much. Karl Korsch.  And so on. But they are mostly commentators rather
than original thinkers. It's not been a great time for profound innovation,
IMHO. The best minds have gone into the natural sciences or worked in
linguistic/analytic philosophy, with moves me not a jot.

Dave
===========================================
David Bruce, Woodside Cottage, Ryelands,
Strathaven, Lanarkshire,  ML10 6QF
Tel:+44(0)1357 440459 Fax:+44(0)1357 440464
===========================================