Re: Truth?

["Ricardo Duchesne" <RDUCHESN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Date sent:      Wed, 8 Oct 1997 13:57:56 -0700 (PDT)
> Send reply to:  burgess@xxxxxxxxxxx
> From:           Bill Burgess <burgess@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To:             zarembka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Copies to:      pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Bill Burguess writes:


> An example of how attention to Hegel helps is Mike Lebowitz's
> _Beyond Capital_, which is a very convincing and important
> demonstration of how many understandings of Marx's project are so
> one-sided, and the need to develop the 'political economy of workers'
> that Marx had projected as part of _Capital_ but was not able to get to.
> Lebowitz also refers to 1914 Lenin, and the latter's aphorism to the
> effect that as a result of not reading Hegel's _Science of Logic_
> 'Marxism' had not understood Marx for the previous 50 years. James
> Devine has frequently recommended this book on Pen-L and it really is
> unfortunate how little attention it has received.
>

My problem with this is that adding "sides" to an argument does not
constitute by itself a dialectical approach. Marxist have the wrong
habit of thinking that if they connects "x" to "y",  then they are
dialectical. Moreover, how many sides does one incorporate before
denconstructing the essential core of marxism?

ricardo