ChrisK

No probs!

Yes, I have just located that myself!

Must look out for it myself. Thanks!

I prefer ND since it is, as its name suggests, more natural. But it doesn't matter so long as you master several deductive systems.

Try Metalogic by Hunter, and then Intermediate Logic by Bostock.

Well, I think that books on the calculus that are available in the UK might not be in the USA.

The best one we have over here is probably this:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Core-Maths-A.../dp/0748755098

But it depends on how deep you want to go into this.

Good to be back. Thanks for holding the fort while I was away!

PART THREE: Even though I don't defend DM, its proponents will still claim that it is not a contemplative philosophy which prioritises thought over action (as does traditional or bourgeois philosophy) but is a philosophy of praxis. In that sense, they argue, it prioritises the ontological status of labour and is therefore proletarian (and scientific) in content. It does not call on "critique" as the main instrument in changing the world, like the Young Hegelians; it calls upon the role of revolutionary praxis. This is why I prefer to call it a theory, rather than a philosophy.

PART TWO: Meanwhile, the 'role' of philosophy in history is not uniform. In one era it may be used to reinforce the ruing class interest; in another, it may be used to undermine the ruling class. As with the scientific and rationalist revolutions, it may be allied to revolutionary purposes. In fact, what we tend to find in any epoch is a conflict between antagonistic theories of the world which represent underlying class conflict. The bourgeoisie used philosophy to undermine the religious ideology of feudalism, as you know. Who is to say that the proletariat do not also need their theory to undermine the rule of the bourgeoisie?

Are you trying to shift the goal posts by substituting 'theory' with 'philosophy'? The two terms are not interchangeable.

That aside, I'd argue that the special class which comes up with philosophy, is the Intelligentsia and this class is not unproblematically aligned to particular class interests, nor necessarily derived from the same class background. Otherwise, all intellectual work would serve the ruling class interest.

Ok, but what are the features of a theory which allow you to determine whether it is middle class, working class or, indeed, ruling class?