Historical Materialism vs. Idealism

[Post-Something]

I had my first tutorial for Sociology today. Very interesting. The people in my class are complete idiots. My teacher is a social conservative. I had to be partnered up with him since I came to class late. He kept asking me about my political leanings since I was also doing Politics etc, so I told him I was a Marxist. Then he asked to have a debate with me in front of the class next week and defend Marx. I agreed, and then after class I asked him exactly why he opposed Marxs' theories; he said it was Historical Materialism that he didn't agree with, and that he was a Hegelian. So I need to know what are the general arguments that come up, and how I can prove that materialism is the best system.

Thanks in advance.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Criticising Hegel is not easy. It depends on how complicated you want this to be, and how sophisticated a Hegelian your teacher is.

The main difficulty is that in attacking Hegel's system you are merely helping to confirm it, for such attacks are programmed into the system itself.

I have summarised a few of the main defects with his system here (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/Outline_of_errors_Hegel_committed_01.htm), but I am not sure that they are the sort of thing you are after.

I'll give it some thought and see what I can come up with.

[Post-Something]

He's been studying sociology for 9 years apparently, but this guy doesn't sound that well hearsed in Idealism. I don't think he could debate at anywhere near the level you do, so I just want the basic groundwork of what the arguments are. I mean, this guy even explained Marx's analysis as: the gradual change of IDEAS over time. It may have slipped from him, but nonetheless. Anyway, I'm going to try to digest the link you gave me, but I can't promise I'll understand it.

[Hit The North]

Personally I think you should avoid getting dragged into a philosophical critique of Hegel and concentrate on giving a good outline of historical materialism, emphasising its worldly, empirical and common sense approach to studying human society.

Given that it is a sociology class you should emphasise the importance Marx places on the empirically observable social relations which exist between people as the best way of understanding society. Clearly argue that Historical Materialism offers a research project useful to sociologists. What does Hegel offer except philosophical abstraction?

There's a good study guide available on the Marxist Internet Archive which you should utilise, with good selections from The German Ideology where Marx and Engels slaughter the "innocent and childlike illusions" of German idealist philosophy.

[/URL][URL]http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/subject/hist-mat/index.htm (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/guide.htm)

Be simple and direct. If your class mates really are idiots then your tutor will only baffle them if he attempts to outline the Hegelian system.

Good luck, comrade!

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

I think BTB is right here.

But, if you do want any 'philosophical' arguments, let me know.

[Lord Hargreaves]

Your teacher is almost certainly not a Hegelian even though he says he is - I don't think anyone really accepts Hegel's system. He probably means he is influenced by, or simply that he likes, Hegel's writings on the state and civil society. Thus your response is best geared against Hegel's opinions in these areas, or, as I would see it, is best geared to explain how Marx revolutionised Hegel's essentially correct insights in political philosophy

So as you can see, the "historical materialism versus Idealism" dichotomy is largely one that does not exist. Most of the time Idealism refers to the epistemological, metaphysical or otherwise existential assumptions made by prominent German Rationalists in the 18th and 19th century, while materialism as Marx used it refers to a view of historical and societal development. Yes, sometimes by idealism we mean "ideas are independent from material circumstances and are the primary moving force in history" and sometimes by materialism we mean "there exists physical matter independent of your awareness of it", but very rarely are these things meant. There is literally no need to attack Idealism in your argument for materialism, if both terms are used in the proper ways.


Clearly argue that Historical Materialism offers a research project useful to sociologists.

Exactly

[Invader Zim]

Perhaps you should ask your tutor why he thinks it is necessary to 'debate' the merits of histoircal materialism with a fresher. Am I correct in assuming that your tutor is a post-graduate student, probably doing a PhD? Why, instead of tutoring you and getting on with his own thesis, is engaging in what is likely going to be a purile attempt to humiliate the marxist?

[Lenin's Law]

Also mentioned that Hegel lived in a completely different, pre-1840s epoch, while Marx/Engels managed to observe closely the ascendancy of capitalism over the world stage. Going back to early 19th century German idealism can thus only serve reactionary ends. Hegel is difficult because he is an idealist-philosopher examining ideas purely from the abstract; while kernels of wisdom can be gained from this in no way is it a guide to truly understanding the world around us in a concrete, meaningful way.

This quote from Marx might be useful to your work:



“Philosophical work does not consist in embodying thinking in political definitions, but in evaporating the existing definitions into abstract thoughts. Not the logic of the matter, but the matter of logic is the philosophical element. The logic does not serve to prove the state, but the state to prove the logic”