Date: Sat, 30 Jul 1994 02:13:58 -0500 (CDT) From: Dave Hull <dphull-AT-falcon.cc.ukans.edu> Subject: Re: Dialectics & Materialism Michael, I dare say that my understanding of Marx is very superficial by the standards of many. However, this also means I have not reached the point of "not being able to see the forest for the trees" as have some. For me Marx seems relatively straight forward. I =D4f=A8believe the greatest difficulty with understanding Marx is in finding a good translation. How does one accomplish this? I wish I knew, but until then I will keep reading the translation I currently possess. Personally I have found that I gain incredible (in my simplistic opinion) insight into Marx and "competitive free markets" when I read things like James Gleick's _Chaos_ or Robert Ardrey's _The Territorial Imperative_ or _Peace Making Among the Primates_. The general course of action is, I start reading a book (fiction need not apply) completely unrelated to Marxism but soon the author is exlaining a particular hierarchy among primates that reflects human society, or Gleick speaks of the order in chaos and the chaos at the heart order and some facet of Marxism suddenly makes sense. I don't mind my respsonse or example being called "canned," because I feel there is some measure of truth in generalities (mileage may vary). And when I say "haves and havenots" I do mean materially and not just monetarily. Of course, I have to expand the definition of material to include such immaterial things as reputation, status, image etc... An affront to the ego of a gentleman who derives his self worth from his material possessions is less likely to draw a harsh response than would an affront to the very property (material possessions) which provides the individual with a feeling of self worth. While in the ghetto their are very few material possessions which give one a sense of self worth. Instead, boys in the hood derive self worth by instilling fear in others and this is done by responding swiftly and harshly to any affront to the ego, reputation, status, image etc of the one being challenged. After all, the reputation may be all that individual possesses or has worked for. Anyway, that is enough rambling for me, sorry to clutter everyone's mailbox but I couldn't help myself. dphull *all opinions expressed herein may not reflect *my final judgement on a given position ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005