Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 13:02:11 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: BHA: Re: Diffraction Post one



Since I am thinking of teaching a course on Marx's
methodology, here are some study questions based on the
current reading, with my tentative answers.  Although I
formulated my answers as if I were certain about them, I am
very open to your comments and corrections.


Q1: What is the meaning of the word "diffraction" here?

A: RB is using the metaphor of a white light beam which is
diffracted by a prism into many different colors.  In the
same way, dialectic, which can on the one hand be defined in
a unitary way, will be dissected into many different
concepts.  RB gives a unitary definition of dialectic on
p. 3: one speaks of dialectic whenever the "generation,
interpretation and clash of opposites" leads to something
"fuller or more adequate."  RB talks about the diffraction
of dialectic (singular) into dialectics (plural, see p. 86,
1st paragraph) because dialectic can be ontological or
epistemological, the opposites can be internally related or
not, the sublation can be preservative or not, etc.  RB's
method is: he starts out with a formal definition of
dialectic, then he diffracts it, then the re-totalizes the
concept of dialectic in order to arrive at a real defintion
of dialectic.


Q2. What is the difference between the formal definition
of dialectic, the real definition of dialectic, and the
alethia of dialectic?

A. A formal definition was given in the answer to question
1, the real definition is: the absenting of absence.  The
alethia of dialectic is the absenting of the obstacles to
the absenting of absences.  The formal definition is the
surface definition, it is a definition based on how the
process manifests itself: again and again one observes that
contradictions interpenetrate and lead to a higher entity.
The real definition identifies the generative mechanisms at
work: the world consists primarily of absences.  What do
absences do?  They absent themselves of course.  I am still
not clear about the alethia of dialectics.


Q3.  Where in Marx can one find what RB calls the esoteric
critique of Hegel's principle of identicy, i.e., the
argument that Hegelian objective idealism is the twin
of subjective empiricism?

A.  Don't know, I would be grateful for a reference
to a passage in Marx which can be interpreted in this way.


Hans.


     --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---