[OPE-L:4322] Re: Steve on the worthlessness of labor as the source of surplus value

From: Andrew_Kliman (Andrew_Kliman@email.msn.com)
Date: Fri Oct 27 2000 - 05:52:53 EDT

Alejandro wrote in OPE-L 4314

: It might happen that his relation with Hegel was precisely this: he was
: attemping to get logic back to his function of "mere" *tool* which
: had being lost in Hegel's hands. (Chris Arthur... Andrew Kliman,
: please!)

FWIW -- I'm not a philosopher -- I think the nature of "logic" underwent
a change in Hegel's hands, such that logic is NOT any longer a mere tool.
It is no longer subjective, but objective-subjective.  Events and ideas
have *their own* logic, though thought is needed to reveal that logic to
us.  And I think Marx's notion of it basically *follows* Hegel's.  In the
Postface to the 2d German ed. of Capital, Marx talks of the presentation
capturing the real movement, the life of the subject matter.  He else
regularly talks of uncovering the inner connections of things.

Where I agree with you is that Marx was generally not deducing results
from premises in the linear maneer of the axiomatic method.  His goal was
to have the life of the subject matter reflected in the ideas.  Achieving
that would substantiate the categories and starting point.  This seems to
me also to be Hegelian.  Prior to Hume, and then Kant, the belief that
the categories of the mind are vehicles of truth wasn't called into
question.  E.g., Descartes thought he had a secure starting point for
knowledge.  But Hume and Kant shook all that up.  Hegel focused on this,
and came up with the solution that the results substantiate the premises.

Andrew Kliman

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 00:00:12 EST