Philosophy in Pubs 2017 conference, Liverpool, June 2-4

I find it hard to believe, L Bird upsetting someone, is this the same polite, charming, modest and entertaining L Bird that we have witnessed on this forum, surely not.Your son must have had an interesting childhood though? I have a mental picture of him quietly eating a packet of Monster Munch whilst you and his physics teacher are kicking lumps out of each other in the playground, during his year 9 Parents' Evening.

And who would want to 'fundamentally separate', and why.I can tell you the answers, now:An 'elite', and 'for power'.

Even to the extent, I take it that they become the unity of opposites?

I don't recall Engels using the phrase 'unity of opposites' and I don't subscribe to it in any shape or form.  For it logically means a Humpty-Dumpty situation where anything goes and all reasoning and critical thinking is abandoned and replaced with irrationality and dogmatism.  But surely your #10 does indeed subscribe to such a situation:jondwhite wrote:  Quote: In 1973 Geertz stated ‘I have a social philosophy, you have political opinions, he has an ideology’.   "Of course, the Democratic Communist answer to that academic statement is:'We have a social philosophy, we have political opinions, we have an ideology'.And we can change around 'philosophies', 'opinions' and 'ideologies', and assign to each whatever status we democratically decide.We can change 'philosophy' to 'opinion', and 'ideology' to 'philosophy'. And then change them again, to suit our purposes, needs and interests.All philosophy, opinion and ideology are socio-historic products. In a Democratic Communist society, we can change them."Agreed we can if we so wish change them by assigning them different labels.  For what's in a name so long has the contents remain true. However, when this change in labels also means an intentional change in meanings this also includes an acceptance of the ideological weighted unity of opposites.Which begs the qualification does LBird also subscribe to a change in meaning even if it means abandoning reasoning? Edit:DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM, a misused concept which grew in popularity with those who defend the tortuous policies of capitalist Russia and other State capitalist countries, acquired the mystical characters of reconciling all points of view even the most contradictory.So far as concerns its use in socialist propaganda, dialectical materialism made its appearance when Marx borrowed from Hegel the dialectical or evolutionary method of examining Man, his history and his works. But Marx reversed Hegel's method of approach to the world. To Hegel, the world was a reflection of the thought processes in man's head. He was an Idealist. To Marx, thought process was a reflection of an actual world process. He was a materialist. Hegel built his philosophical system at a time when the old, static world of feudalism was being rent by the birth of capitalism, and accepted ways and ideas were being buried into a tormented melting pot. The newly-born world was problematical, and struggling into shape. Nothing was settled. All was changing.But whereas Hegelianism was impregnated with the idea of universal change (even though upside down) the confused, contradictory and changing policies of Soviet Russia bewilder its adherents and drive them back into a different and bastardised Hegelianism with leadership as the absolute concept. Is there a contradiction between principles and policy? No matter! An understanding of dialectics will show that everything is all right in this best of all possible Russian worlds. If the Russian workers are "free" to control their own destiny but must obey the dictates of the Stalin or Brezhnev oligarchies; if the capitalist class is the enemy and yet Russia concludes alliances with them; if imperialism is a capitalist method of fleecing and yet the "Workers' Republic" fights for markets and spheres of influence, don't worry! Dialectics explains and solves these contradictions. The more incomprehensible dialectics appears to the ordinary worker, the firmer the bonds of leadership are riveted upon him and the higher the self-appointed interpreters climb.https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/pamphlets/historical-materialism