Re: [Marxism] The Big Bang Theory

[steve houston <stevehouston3000@xxxxxxxxx>]

This discussion can't be seriously coming from serious Marxists.  What does 
Hegel have to say?  Marx puts Hegel on his feet, remember, not contradicts him. 
 What does it mean for Hegel to hark back to the Eleatics?  Why does Hegel 
invoke Spinoza, for the most part, as an ally?  What does Hegel say about 
absolute Being and absolute Nothingness?

If it was only a question of physical materialsm -- physicalism for lack of a better term -- instead of a dialectical relationship (Ie Becoming) then maybe this conversation about Big Bang Theory, the origin of the universe, teleology, etc etc wouldn't be such a farce. 
 

C'mon..by definition there can't be two UNIverses.  If we find out its bigger 
or vaster than we thought, then its a bigger, vaster place (or maybe some more 
existential concept than place) than we thought.  Its not TWO universes 
"colliding" with each other or whatever other kook science some Trekkie dreams 
up. 

Maybe you think that's semantics but if so, then philosophy didn't die with 
Hegel after all.  And, yes, I mean that in a bad way.



      
________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu