Dialectics

[Karl Marx's Camel]

Although I've read several articles on dialectics, I never seem to understand it. A lot of Marxists claim that dialectics is a very important aspect of Marxism. Some say dialectics is impossible to seperate from Marxism. I have no coherent idea about dialectics as of yet, but I would like to try one more time.

What is dialectics?

Is dialectics important?

How is it related to Marxism?

How will dialectics give me a feeling of understanding, regarding Marxism?

What is the purpose of dialectics?

Why should I learn about dialectics?

[T_SP]

Just check the link out in my sig: What the heck is Dialectics?

HTH
T_SP

[redstar2000]

On "Dialectics" -- The Heresy Posts (http://www.redstar2000papers.com/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1082735164&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Monty Cantsin]

All the dialectics are is non-static logic, classical logic that of Aristotles was static logic. So the dialectics hold that things are in Flux and constantly moving and changing eg. Molecules are constantly vibrating; one situation is born out of the last and so forth.

The fact is that most modern theories say chaos theory hold dialectics but without the language, because most theories don’t hold things as static and isolated entities.

I think that redstar2000 is just traumatised by Leninism and the positivist ‘Marxism’ of the second and third internationals that he has a visceral reaction when faced with anything surrounding the notion of dialectics.

[redstar2000]

I am no expert on chaos theory -- I've read a couple of popular explanations and that's about it.

But I can't recall any references to any of the so-called "laws" of "dialectics" in chaos theory.

What chaos theory seems to be "about" is the idea that tiny changes in initial conditions can lead to wildly differing (and unpredictable) outcomes.

And further, that chaos can even generate quasi-orderly structures ("strange attractors") that constrain outcomes within narrow limits for considerable periods of time before breaking down into chaos again.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I've never understood the apparant need by serious marxists today to suck Hegel's shriveled dick. I have yet to see evidence that dialectics has any greater utility than conventional rationality and logic.

[RedStarOverChina]

Engel's origin of the family is a great example of how dialectical materialism makes accurate judgement.

For example, Engels stated that the bond of marriage will be weaken as society and production progresses---which is exactly what we are seeing now.


With the principal of dialectical materialism, Marx and Engels had insightful predictions.
I believe that the method they employed was good, however there is no way they could have foresee enough of those incidental events, which eventually altered the fate of the world.

Mao Zedong also make many accurate predictions of political events employing while developing the principles of dialectical materialism.

[Monty Cantsin]

Chaos theory is dialectical because it doesn’t see things as static but ever-changing, it sees things as chaotic not because there isn’t physicals laws that drive objects to behave in such ways but more in the sense of Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle – i.e. we don’t really understand why this works like it does thus we can’t make certain predictions and what not.

Chaos theory from another angle say that of phycology holds that we can’t predict the future actions of a person because of the sheer amount of influences, for example if I’m walking down the street and you bump into me my reaction is going to be based on many things including my mood on the day, how I appraise you’re actions (do I think you meant too or not) and so forth…. Now my reaction is depending on a lot of different factors thus a phycologist wouldn’t be able to predict my actions with full certainty…unless I have low Serotonin levels then there’s a lot more chance I’d lash out.

Now what’s dialectical about this? Well it realises that things aren’t separate static things like Aristotle’s syllogism logic but a dynamic movement with the negation of the old through a process of sublation moving towards the ‘whole’ (the totality of all past particulars and moments accumulating into what is). This is not deterministic there’s no laws that I know of that explain were everything is going but it makes sense that what is today struggles and movements will form what is tomorrow’s totality and it will bear our marks.

[Sa'd al-Bari]

Not dialectics, but dialectical materialism is the basis of Marxist theory. It is the revolutionary philosophical theory through which Marxists have made their deductions. Marx picked up the dialectic from Hegel, but by combining it with materialism he rejected Hegel’s idealism.

The following have helped me the most in my understanding:

- Encyclopedia entries from Marxists.org
Dialectical Materialism (http://www.marxists.org/glossary/terms/d/i.htm#dialectical-materialism)
Dialectics (http://www.marxists.org/glossary/terms/d/i.htm#dialectics)

-Basic Writings
Dialectical and Historical Materialism by Joseph Stalin (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1938/09.htm) (outstanding work on the basics, regardless of your view on Stalin you should read this one)
Dialectical Materialism by Mao Zedong (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-6/mswv6_30.htm)
Examples of Dialectics (Abstract Compilation) by Mao Zedong (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-8/mswv8_48.htm)

[Monty Cantsin]

foget the stuff mentioned by Sa'd al-Bari as basic writings, look at the following-

Lenin's philosophical notebooks particularly the summary (http://marxists.anu.edu.au/archive/lenin/works/1914/cons-logic/summary.htm)

Abstracts from 'Hegel for Beginners' by Andy Blunden (http://marxists.anu.edu.au/reference/archive/hegel/index.htm)

look into Raya Dunayevskaya and C L R James, Louis Althusser and some frankfurt schoolers.

NoXion, i think understanding dialectics is key to understanding Marx, But that’s not essential to being a revolutionary just highly valuable. And I think dialectical logic wether or not you use the language is inherent in most forms of contemporary logic, I just think dialectical logic is more comprehensive.

[1949]

While everybody else is providing links, I thought I should provide some myself:

Mao--"On Contradiction": http://www.marx2mao.com/Mao/OC37.html

Mao--"On Practice": http://www.marx2mao.com/Mao/OP37.html

Mao--"Talk On Questions Of Philosophy" (this, I think, is the first place where Mao puts forward the thesis that "quantity transforming into quality" is just a special case of the unity of opposites, and that "negation of negation" doesn't actually exist): http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/...-9/mswv9_27.htm (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-9/mswv9_27.htm)

[Monty Cantsin]

is redstar2000 going to reply, I thought I was antagonising enough at the beginning so his posts would be filled with fighting words and his best thought arguments…