Thoughts on analytical Marxism?
It seems good cuz it uses no hegelian metaphysical bullshit, but uses methodological individualism instead of this which is cool. Like, it makes it easy to understand and logically invincible.
>revisionism
Why not?
Flood detected; Post discarded. how does the 'flood detected' work
>>2762646>Thoughts on analytical Marxism?its trash
> It seems good cuz it uses no hegelthats exactly why its trash
pretty much makes it communism without communism.
>>2762646>it uses no hegelian metaphysical bullshitneither does regular marxism
did you learn marxism from tweets or what
>>2763086What's dialectical materialism then
>>2763086>>2762871Go fuck each other
>analytical marxism
Bit redundant, innit? Marxism is inherently analytical
angloids were a mistake
>>2763103God bless I ain't one of 'em
>>2762646>hegelian metaphysical bullshit
<Marx fully rejects metaphysical and idealistic notions from Hegelian teachings but make use of his methodAlso analytical philosophy is much more metaphysical than Hegelian thought, where do you think static and objective truths come from in analytical philosophy?
They just swap God with Formal logic, but as we know Marxism never rejected formal logic and even Engels states that
>"Modern materialism is essentially dialectic, and no longer needs any philosophy standing above the other sciences. (…) That which still survives, independently, of all earlier philosophy is the science of thought and its laws — formal logic and dialectics. Everything else is subsumed in the positive science of nature and history." - Anti-Duhring >>2763139Have you ever read… well… at least a philosophy textbook? It seems like you just don't know the academic definition of metaphysics
>>2763197>Marxism never rejected formal logicOf course it never did that. Like, it didn't reject Reaganomics, Fascism and so on. Logic wasn't yet formalized when Marx was alive.
>>2763216>It seems like you just don't know the academic definition of metaphysicsin marxism metaphysics means "not dialectics". it means something like 'ideological/subjective(pejorative) ontology'", where dialectics is implicitly the objective and only alternative
>>2763085>philosophical word salad gibberishmaybe if you are illiterate
>>2763086>neither does regular marxismtrue, but by metaphysical bullshit this poster obviously means dialectics, or "woo woo". theyre using it as an opposition to physical reductionism/scientism stemlord fedora tipping to imply that analytical "marxism" gets rid of the the psuedoscientific woo baggage.
which basically just means theyre a retard that doesnt understand marxism because dialectics is its scientific core and not mystical gibberish at all
>>2763359>where dialectics is implicitly the objective and only alternative>theyre using it as an opposition to physical reductionism/scientismOne kind of scientism vs the straw man scientism
Neither OP or the replies actually give an example of "analytical Marxism" yet theyre still arguing about figments of their imagination
>>2763436its marxism without dialectics. its where you do dumb anglo philosophy and circle jerk about numbers and data while talking about how doing revolution is authoritarian and not true communism
>>2763439do you have an actual example?
>>2763441what do you mean by example
>>2763445an example of "Marxism without dialectics" which you clearly have passionate feelings about.
>>2763448yeah, the whole of analytical philosophy
>The school is associated with the "September Group", which included Jon Elster, John Roemer, Adam Przeworski and Erik Olin Wright.[2] This group initially also playfully called themselves No Bullshit Marxist.[3] Its theorists emphasize methodology and utilize analytical philosophy, and some of them favor rational choice theory, game theory and methodological individualism (the doctrine that all social phenomena can only be explained in terms of the actions and beliefs of individual subjects).
>nalytical Marxism can be defined as 'an attempt to reconstruct the philosophical and theoretical legacy of Marxism using the tools of contemporary analytical philosophy and empirical social science.' This intellectual current emerged in the late 1970s within the Anglo-American academic sphere and developed around key figures such as Gerald A. Cohen, John Roemer, Erik Olin Wright, Jon Elster, and Adam Przeworski. They emphasized logical rigor and empirical testability, rejecting vague concepts and metaphorical expressions. To this end, they actively incorporated the methods of analytical philosophy as well as contemporary social science approaches such as mathematical modeling, game theory, and micro-level choice theory. In the process, core theses of traditional Marxism such as the labor theory of value, historical inevitability, and the base-superstructure schema were significantly criticized, revised, or abandoned.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytical_Marxismthis describes marxism without dialectics, which is synonymous with marxism w/out marx
more:
>Elster's account was an exhaustive examination of Marx's texts in order to ascertain what could be salvaged out of Marxism employing the tools of rational choice theory and methodological individualism (which Elster defended as the only form of explanation appropriate to the social sciences). His conclusion was that – contra Cohen – no general theory of history as the development of the productive forces could be saved. Like Roemer, he also rejected the labour theory of value and, going further, virtually all of Marxian economics. The "dialectical" method is rejected as a form of Hegelian obscurantism. The theory of ideology and revolution continued to be useful to a certain degree, but only once they had been purged of their tendencies to holism and functionalism and established on the basis of an individualist methodology and a causal or intentional explanation.[13]
….
>Some critics argued that analytical Marxism proceeded from the wrong methodological and epistemological premises. While the analytical Marxists dismissed "dialectically oriented" Marxism as "bullshit",[30][31] others maintain that the distinctive character of Marxist philosophy is lost if it is understood "non-dialectically". The crucial feature of Marxist philosophy is that it is not a reflection in thought of the world, a crude materialism, but rather an intervention in the world concerned with human praxis. According to this view, analytical Marxism wrongly characterizes intellectual activity as occurring in isolation from the struggles constitutive of its social and political conjuncture, and at the same time does little to intervene in that conjuncture. For dialectical Marxists, analytical Marxism eviscerated Marxism, turning it from a systematic doctrine of revolutionary transformation into a set of discrete theses that stand or fall on the basis of their logical consistency and empirical validity.
etc
>>2763452>>2763450>wikiDuuuuude, are you fucking serious?
>>2763218I agree with notion that (formal) logic wasn't developed yet as it was after WWII, and also I should've add that even tho Marx and Engels never rejected formal logic at the time, they'd still resist relying on only mathematics or other static methodologies/scienes which is perfectly shown in Anti-Duhring and later Lenin presents in Empirio-Criticism.
My point was maybe misunderstood but I wanted to showcase that analytical school seems to reduct their scope into one branch of thought/science while Marxism has ability to constantly adapt to different scopes of analysis and even critique them from inside of their logic.
>Dialectics—as Hegel in his time explained—contains the element of relativism, of negation, of scepticism, but is not reducible to relativism. The materialist dialectics of Marx and Engels certainly does contain relativism, but is not reducible to relativism, that is, it recognises the relativity of all our knowledge, not in the sense of denying objective truth, but in the sense that the limits of approximation of our knowledge to this truth are historically conditional. - Lenin. Materialism and Empirio-Criticism >>2763482this is what happens when you gets your knowledge from memes, and haz
>>2763495What do you mean
>>2763482>>2763495>Duuuuude, are you fucking serious?are you? you keep asking stupid fucking questions that could be answered with a quick google
>>2763719Wiki is a cia lies source
Unique IPs: 10