Message 04332 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT04312 Message: 4/9 L3 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [ox-en] thinking about logics



Hi

On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 22:22:15 [PHONE NUMBER REMOVED]
Stefan Meretz <stefan.meretz hbv.org> wrote:

On 2008-02-05 00:47, Michel Bauwens wrote:
I was wondering, so, you believe dialectical reasoning is still
valid, despite the critiques that have been levelled against it

Thanks for this question, Michel. And thanks, Stefan (Mz.), for your
answer: 

My general statement, Michel, is, that I am in the process of
learning dialectis directly from the source, namely G.F.W. Hegel
(letting you know, where I am). My experience is, that most followers
-- be they affirmative or critical -- did not get, what Hegel wants,
or they oversimplify his thinking, or both (if they read him at all).

In my experience, one can say exactly the same about almost every
'thinker' who is/was out there. But then: Who knows what Hegel really
wants? You? Annette? Does *he* know? (If you, dear anonymous reader of
this posting, answers to this last question that 'of course Hegel
knows Hegelianism best, who else would know' then I would prefer that
you do not read further. You either believe in the autonomous subject -
which is the first authority when it comes to its actions - or you
don't. One is just not easily convinced of the (post)structuralist
sceptisism concerning the subject.)

If you have links to critiques, I would appreciate any hints.
However, I would favor emancipatory approaches and not
backward-oriented ones. I am sure that there must be some postmodern
critiques. What I know is this, but it says not much: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#Criticism_of_dialectic

Maybe rather alternatives than critiques? Would that suffice? If you
are looking for the 'thinker' who outdoes your Hegel, engaging him
upfront (ie not 'backward oriented' as you write) then you will wait in
vain, because *your* Hegel enjoys immunity from both his followers and
critics anyway (you gave him immunity: all dissenters didn't really get
him). 

But I am sure that you are willing to consider that there are
*alternative* views of the world which are valid? Even though they are
not based on Hegel at all? That they are able to describe some
phenomena well, really well, on a fundamental level, maybe even
better than dialectics? No?

Two alternatives come to (my narrow) mind: First, there is Derrida's
Différance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diff%C3%A9rance). And then,
closer to (my) home, there is actor-network theory's direct refusal to
engage in any dualist construction of world
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor-network_theory),
stressing heterogeneous and multiple relations and associations instead.

Sorry, I know this kind of discussion seldom leads to anything else
than ever more meta-meta-meta fight-misunderstanding-grief-sorrow. But
you moved to the meta-level first, and I just try to show that this
cannot lead to more clarity. Quite the opposite. In Dmytris 'plain
logic' at least it is clear where he stands. He refuses to represent
general truth and is fighting for a *particular* stance (whether this
is an imaginary one, I cannot say and it does not matter). And as you
and I know, this is a valid critique of bourgeois ideology: to show that
it claims to talk for everybody (das Allgemeine), while it is just
pursuing its own (or even worse someone else's) particular interests.

One consequence of a critique of this kind of ideology is to
stubbornly strive for the 'real' apprehension of a general truth
(trying to save German idealism) - eg the 'real' understanding of 'the'
dialectic. I suspect you, Stefan Mz, are following this path. Then,
secondly, there is Dmytri's, the class fighter's perspective,
determined to fight this war, hopelessly outnumbered by the enemy
(but of course the more heroic: "Viel Feind viel Ehr") - or maybe this
kind of class fighter is not that keen on losing his fights either,
that may explain why he is using a lot of energy on fighting a very
marginal stream of thought (and practice) represented by Oekonux. And,
third, and not superior (rather just the expression of *my* specific
position in space and time) there is my preferred option to take this
fragmentation of truth seriously and to seek for concepts/worlds which
allow to think and practice a greater degree of complexity and
heterogeneity, than is possible in the world we have now. It seems to
me that actor-network theory's 'relational materialism' and Derridas
différance and - I am sure - a handful of other approaches (probably
even dialectics) are helpful in this respect. 

Best,

 Thomas

_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de



Thread: oxenT04312 Message: 4/9 L3 [In index]
Message 04332 [Homepage] [Navigation]