I've never heard that, but I think it's absurd either way. Their position in relation to the means of production determines their class. Also, why would we not want to continue to advance knowledge?
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Results 1 to 4 of 4
Communism and The "Intelligentsia"
Hello fellow comrades. I've recently asked a question in one of the stickies, but it seems to not receive much attention. So, I'm asking it here; my apologies if this is an inappropriate thing to do.
I've heard something about Communism (Marx's philosophy in particular) that strikes me as odd. I can't find anything that confirms or denies it though. Is it true that Marx was against research after revolution, insisting that people like physicists yielded no tangible results from their work? Is Communism opposed to research?
From what I've read, Marx considered research scientists bourgeoisie, and Lenin called them the "Intelligentsia", a group of intellectual "elites"... so, is all of this true? Is it an inherent property of Communism that disallows research? Is it just personal distaste? Or none of the above?
Sent from my SM-G903W using Tapatalk
I've never heard that, but I think it's absurd either way. Their position in relation to the means of production determines their class. Also, why would we not want to continue to advance knowledge?
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
__
Economic Left/Right: -10.00
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.67
http://www.politicalcompass.org
Too long have the workers of the world waited for some Moses to lead them out of bondage. He has not come he never will come. I would not lead you out if I could for if you could be led out, you could be led back again. -Eugene V. Debs
That's a good question! It's kind of why I asked. I think the idea is that researchers only do "brain work", and don't directly contribute to production and what not. I'm glad, however, that this does not seem to be the general consensus.
Sent from my SM-G903W using Tapatalk
Lenin was certainly against "intelligentsia", but this does not mean he was against research. Commune and division of mental and physical labour simply do not mix. Both Lenin and Marx were probably against people who believe that their "contribution" to production should be strictly theoretical and physical labour is beyond their "dignity". In fact, according to marxist worldview, theory separated from practice is inherently reactionary, it is pseudoscientific. Nothing is more important than practice in marxism, it is the only thinkable criterion of truth (in fact practice is truth). Therefore true science is something that is practiced, not theorized about.
The danger with people who identify as mental labourers is that they become separated from practice of research and begin empty speculation - "model building", where "beauty" and "appeal" of model determines the content of their scientific practice, not vice versa. They no longer research the material world to understand it, they look for confirmation for their theoretical models.
So I think this criticism towards theoretical science is natural part of marxism, but this does not mean opposition to research. In fact, the criticism is that bourgeois scientists do not research enough,tthat they love their theoretical models more than scientific research.
