Re: [OPE-L] rosa luxemburg

From: Dogan Goecmen (Dogangoecmen@AOL.COM)
Date: Wed Apr 04 2007 - 15:40:13 EDT

Hi  Dogan:

You cited Luxemburg in her paper "Back to Adam Smith" [Zuruck  auf Adam
Smith] as claiming that *impartiality* is fundamental to the  scientific
method and that the 'methodological principle' of  impartiality
is related to the 'ethical principle of honesty' (bottom of  page 3).

Did she claim, though, that the theory advanced by Marx,  Engels, and
Marxists --  including herself --  was based on this  'methodological
principle' of impartiality?
Jerry, Luxemburg (and in mays Marx and Engels) makes this point. According  
to her the view of working classes is the onlyview in capitalism that can  
provide an impartial view of issues in question because they can combine their  
particular interest with the general interests of humanity.

Isn't there necessarily a (for lack of a better term) tension  between a
theory which claims to be impartial and at the same time is said  to
represent a particular revolutionary and class perspective? Isn't  a
'partisan impartial scientist' an oxymoron?

In solidarity,  Jerry


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 30 2007 - 00:00:16 EDT