DJP
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I think "death" is going to far but for several years now there has been a shift away from web forums and towards social media sites. It's a technology thing. Things like usenet and email lists used to be popular in the beginning of the internet but things move on…
Père Duchêne wrote:I agree re: prefacesSo how does an on-line reading group work? We read a section and post comments/questions ?Yes that's pretty much it. You're suggested timetable seems good to me.
jondwhite wrote:Thanks for your reply, its the 'unity' aspect I'm interested in establishing.But unity with whom and for what purpose?You don't even have to scratch below the surface to find that most of these 'left unity' people are not communists or socialists.Leftists are as much a part of the problem as those on the right.
The prefaces are too important to ignore, though perhaps they should be read after the main chapters.
stuartw2112 wrote:Or they might just call you "reformist", depending what strand of the left they're from. There! See how you like it!Ow, that hurt!
stuartw2112 wrote:Not even calling them "pro-capitalist" would put them off liking you.Oh well there's for trying
jondwhite wrote:Would Left Unity throw its full resources behind backing SPGB candidates?Why on earth would you think they would want to, and why on earth do you think we would be able to accept 'help' from a pro-capitalist party?
With the exception of moderator and other admin roles, no. 'Sockpuppeting' is definately not allowed.
LBird wrote:I know that you'll pay lip service to the Theses, and then insist that the 'material' is the basis. It isn't. Thought is real, too.There is nothing in 'materialism' that forces one having to say that 'thought isn't real' or 'the mental does not exist or have a causal role in the world'.Idealism isn't a form of 'realism'.This talk of idealism-materialism really doesn't make sense.Marx took the dialectic from Hegels idealist thought and applied it to a materialist framweork.Marx was a materialist, though not of the 'crude' kind… If you are going to try to claim that Marx was something else what is it? The only other options you have are dualist or idealist, there's plenty in his work that shows he was neither..
LBird wrote:"it is worth pointing out that class ideology can only be a materialist and idealist position";or, better still:"it is worth pointing out that class ideology can only be a realist position".You're really garbling things up here. No wonder this discussion goes round in circles.
The Basics of Philosophy wrote:Idealism is the metaphysical and epistemological doctrine that ideas or thoughts make up fundamental reality. Essentially, it is any philosophy which argues that the only thing actually knowable is consciousness (or the contents of consciousness), whereas we never can be sure that matter or anything in the outside world really exists. Thus, the only real things are mental entities, not physical things (which exist only in the sense that they are perceived).Idealism is a form of Monism (as opposed to Dualism or Pluralism), and stands in direct contrast to other Monist beliefs such as Physicalism and Materialism (which hold that the only thing that can be truly proven to exist is physical matter). It is also contrasted with Realism (which holds that things have an absolute existence prior to, and independent of, our knowledge or perceptions).http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_idealism.htmlLBird wrote:I tell you and ALB that the earth does go round the sun!And you both, stunned, exclaim: "The Truth… He is the messiah!" After that, putty in my hands… heh, heh, heh….Ah, I see. Like in The Life of Brian?
LBird wrote:Since I think that science produces 'knowledge', and I believe that 'knowledge is power', then I think that all 'knowledge production' within a Communist society should be under the democratic control of that society.OK. But HOW does knowledge manifest itself as power?
LBird wrote:I'll say it once again, comrades, if we don't collectively and democratically control the production of scientific knowledge, then that process of production will remain in the hands of a minority, who will thus have power over society.But in a society of common ownership and democratic control WHO are 'the scientists' and HOW do they exert minority control?
twc wrote:Can you show us how anyone can explain anything non-deterministically. You won't find the answer in the Amazon bestseller philosophy list. Just carry out a simple exercise yourself to see if you can explain anything — explain anything at all — non-deterministically.LOL. The whole of quantum physics runs on probalistic models (i.e is not deterministic) I would have thought that explains quite a lot..
The point is..
Hardy wrote:[…] that whilst it is the economic conditions which ultimately condition historical development, it should not be overlooked that all the derivative factors, political, juridical, philosophical, religious and artistic, not only interact with each other but also “react upon the economic basis”.
