[OPE-L:3640] Re: Dialogue on Hegel and Althusser

Paul Zarembka (zarembka@acsu.buffalo.edu)
Fri, 8 Nov 1996 21:52:20 -0800 (PST)

[ show plain text ]

Sometimes, Jerry, you ask for a lot. This is one of those times and I
have noticed that this list has drawn much more interest from issues
closer to economics propre (whatever that is) than the more
philosophical discourses. To respond to your suggestion would require
more energy than I have available at this time, particularly if I
will be drawn into defending my positions (as I should). So, I guess I'll
have to pass, but may enter if others start a ball rolling and I find a
need for intervention. Sorry. Paul Z.

On Fri, 8 Nov 1996, Gerald Levy wrote:

> II. A different format for dialogue
> ===============================
> Here's my suggestion (you can call it a "challenge" if you wish):
> Let our Hegelian-Marxists (or Marxists who believe that Hegel had a
> significant positive impact on Marx's method of analysis, irrespective of
> whether they call themselves "Hegelian-Marxists" or whatever) and let our
> Althusserian-Marxists (or Marxists that believe that the writings of
> Althusser are important for today's Marxists) explain -- *** without
> making any reference whatsoever to what Marx or Engels or Lenin etc. wrote
> *** what _specifically_ they view as the major (dare I say "essential"?)
> positive contributions of Hegelianism or Althusserianism are for
> interpreting social reality in general and capitalism in particular.
> I would also suggest that the Althusserians _not_ refer to Hegel since
> that would get us back into the trap of discussing what Hegel did or did
> not say (which, like interpreting Marx, can lead to an extended
> discussion that focuses on hermenutics). By the same token, I would
> suggest that the "Hegelians" not get into a debate about what Althusser
> wrote or didn't write.
> Call the above a "thought experiment." I don't recall ever listening to
> or reading such a "cross-paradigm" discussion. It might prove to be very
> interesting.
> The object of the experiment is to simply see if we can identify areas of
> agreement and disagreement regarding these different perspectives without