๐๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ถ๐ด๐ป ๐ข๐ฏ๐ท๐ฒ๐ธ๐ ๐ถ๐ ๐ฐ๐ผ-๐ต๐ผ๐๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ฎ ๐๐ฒ๐บ๐ถ๐ป๐ฎ๐ฟ ๐ถ๐ป ๐ฐ๐ผ๐น๐น๐ฎ๐ฏ๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐๐ถ๐๐ต ๐๐ฎ๐ฝ๐ถ๐๐ฎ๐น ๐๐ผ๐บ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐
๐ ๐ฎ๐ ๐ญ๐ฑ ๐ฎ๐ ๐ญ๐ญ๐ฎ๐บ ๐ฃ๐ฆ๐ง
๐๐ถ๐ป๐ธ ๐๐ผ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐๐ฒ๐บ๐ถ๐ป๐ฎ๐ฟ: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87694160613 ------ ๐ ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ ๐ถ๐๐บ: ๐ฆ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฐ๐ฒ ๐ผ๐ฟ ๐๐๐บ๐ฎ๐ป๐ถ๐๐บ | ๐ ๐ฆ๐ฒ๐บ๐ถ๐ป๐ฎ๐ฟ ๐๐ถ๐๐ต ๐ ๐ฎ๐๐๐ต๐ฒ๐ ๐ ๐ฐ๐ ๐ฎ๐ป๐๐ ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐๐ผ๐ป๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ฑ ๐๐ฎ๐บ๐ถ๐น๐๐ผ๐ป ๐ ๐ผ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐ฏ๐ ๐ ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ต๐ฎ๐ฒ๐น ๐. ๐๐ฟ๐ฑ๐ผ๐น๐ถ๐ป๐ฒ
Marxism: Science or Humanism? In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuryโthe โclassical Marxistโ periodโthe prevailing consensus amongst Marxist luminaries (Engels, Dietzgen, Lenin, etc.) was that it was indeed a science, comparable with the natural ones. The ossification of theoretical Marxism within the Second International (and, later, the USSR), however, soon gave rise to new intellectual currents. For Gyรถrgy Lukรกcs, Marxism is closer to the Hegelian Wissenschaft than a conventional science in so far as it โdoes not acknowledge the existence of independent sciencesโ but rather portrays โnothing but a single, unified--dialectical and historical--science of the evolution of society as a totality.โ And for Antonio Gramsci, Marxism is not a science but true in a socially pragmatic sense: by articulating the class consciousness of the proletariat, it summed up the truth of its time more effectively than any other theory. To these names we could add that of Louis Althusser, whoโin the 1960s and 70sโmounted an ambitious โthird wayโ defense of Marxismโs besieged scientific status by blending together French historical epistemology, structuralism, and Spinoza.
In this seminar, Matthew McManus and Conrad Hamilton will present papers arguing that Marxism is most effectively understood as a humanism or science respectively. For McManus, rather than being afraid of arguing for humanism from a normative standpoint, Marxists would benefit from assuming the burdens of moral judgment and asserting for the viability of their position relative to theoretical competitors. For Hamilton, by contrast, Marxism is a science in so far as itโas Roy Bhaskar points outโapplies a retroductive method in which a posteriori concepts are used to elucidate the structure of reality. Yet what renders Marxism distinct from other sciences is that it is the only one capable of bringing to light the structure and genesis of science itself.
๐ฅ๐ฒ๐น๐ฎ๐๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ถ๐ป๐ด๐:
Matthew McManus:
Some Remarks on Marxโs Philosophy and Philosophical Methodology
What Karl Marx Really Thought About Liberalism
What Liberalism Gets Right โ And Wrong
Matthew McManusโ๐ ๐๐๐ด๐ด๐ฒ๐๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป๐:
Irving Howe, โLiberalism and socialism, articles of conciliationโ Erich Fromm, The Sane Society Igor Shoikhedbrod, Revisiting Marx's Critique of Liberalism
Conrad Hamilton โ๐ ๐๐๐ด๐ด๐ฒ๐๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป๐:
Alfred Sohn-Rethel, Intellectual and Manual Labour โAlthusser and the Concept of the Spontaneous Philosophy of the Sciences,โ Pierre Macherey (trans. Robin MacKay) โRoy Bhaskarโs Critical Realism and the Social Science of Marxian Economics,โ Richard Westra
Participant Bios:
Matt McManus is a Visiting Assistant Professor of Politics at Whitman College. He is the author of The Rise of Post-Modern Conservatism and A Critical Legal Examination of Liberalism and Liberal Rights amongst other books. Matt is also a member of the Plastic Pills podcast.
Conrad Hamilton is a doctoral student at Paris 8 University, currently developing a thesis on the relationship between value and agency in the work of Karl Marx under the supervision of Catherine Malabou. He is a co-author of Myth and Mayhem: A Leftist Critique of Jordan Peterson.
Michael J. Ardoline recently completed his doctorate in philosophy at the University of Memphis. His current work argues for a grounding of mathematical truth in the necessity of difference, based on the metaphysics of Gilles Deleuze.
Comments