[OPE-L:2688] Re: Re: Proof from Marx that Hegel is NOT required to understand him?

From: Paul Zarembka (zarembka@acsu.buffalo.edu)
Date: Mon Apr 03 2000 - 08:19:37 EDT

[ show plain text ]

Thanks, Fred. And can you fax me the translated table at 716-645-2127 (or
I'll give you a mailing address).

I will deal later with other aspects of Fred posting but the below I can
do quickly: The 1879 article is nothing other than the translation of
*Anti-Duhring* which Plekhanov (p.800) refers to and in which Sieber
foreword says he doesn't dialectics and was part of my demonstration that
of Sieber disconnection from Hegel and dialectics

Also, I don't consider the issue of Sieber a "smoking gun".


******************** http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka

"Fred B. Moseley" <fmoseley@mtholyoke.edu> said, on 04/03/00 at 12:41 AM:

>One of the front-pieces of Sieber's book that I had translated was a list
>of his publications (two pages). On this list appears an 1879 article
>entitled "Dialectics in its Application to Science" ! So it appears that
>Sieber himself must have thought that dialectics was important and
>learned some more about it after the first edition of his book. This new
>understanding would presumably have led Sieber to discuss dialectics in
>the second edition of his book in 1885. So it will be very interesting
>indeed to see what is in this second edition! And how it may differ from
>the first edition, which Marx read and was commenting on in his Postface.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 30 2000 - 19:59:42 EDT