this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2024
745 points (99.2% liked)
196
18328 readers
204 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
i don't think engels truly believes that moritz doesn't understand the mutually independent relationship of culture and the means of production, it sounds like engles just doesn't approve of moritz's philosophical priorities.
"I am sorry for the man who can write such a thing. And if this man has not yet discovered..."
is a leisurely needling of a disagreeable perspective rather than some certainty that moritz doesn't grasp the relationship between the base and its super structure.
I think it's more a consequence of this being an out of context snippet.
he contextualizes his thoughts well over several paragraphs, providing specific reasons and suppositions for his arguments.
What other context could be provided that would somehow make it clear engles truly doesn't believe that another scholar is missing a fundamental logical connection?
It's specifically a conversation surrounding misunderstandings of Dialectical Materialism, the example given being one such example.
are you a philosophy major or professional yourself? you seem very knowledgeable on the subject.
Nah, I'm just a Communist, I've read a good deal of Marx and the gang.
only in so far as engels is unwilling to consider alternate perspectives.
as I supposed earlier, his criticism sounds more like he's trying to academically armbar moritz's interpretation rather than suggest moritz doesn't actually understand the base and superprojection relationship.
he just understands it and discusses it in a way engels doesn't approve of.
that's how engels is coming off, anyway.
That's a fair interpretation, but it's also worth noting that Materialism in its Dialectical form was very new, ie created by Marx. There was a ton of misunderstanding surrounding his theories (which remains today).
ha, nothing truer these days.