THE PHILOSOPHY AND PRACTICE IN MARX
The method of natural science is a method that is based on the forgery, but what distinguishes this method from the social sciences is in fact the subject matter : an "event" which has no history, or having a story repeated all whenever we want. With the sociological and political science, however, you can not make predictions for the future. The reason for this is the object of these sciences: an "event" will not play, that is not repeated in the same conditions. Fortunately, economics, sociology and political science have their own way of approaching their subject: This is to do without the social and historical whole and consider each part of the event in order to formulate laws correct that relate to past events. The problem with science is that these laws are often made well explain a part of the event, but if extended to all betray a series of social contradictions, because they come into conflict with other laws are able to better justify those parts of the object in a single law would extend its influence. In 'Marx's work there are some principles sociological (between all the concept of alienation, which is a scientific truth of a historical and sociological, to ascertain compliance with the conditions of life of the worker of the nineteenth century) that may present a strong critique and that with some upgrades remain valid. The failure of Marxism (not Marx) was to mix the philosophical concept-Hegelian totality with the individual scientific laws proposed by Marx, resulting in a metaphysical positivist can be neither a science nor a philosophy. In that how this was possible? Believing that the scientific results obtained by Marx did not explain only part (es.A) of the social totality, but to explain the social totality (A + B). In this way it was possible
a) particular laws give absolute Marxist philosophical and metaphysical reference to the concept of social totality (just like when positivism absolutizes scientific laws based on a metaphysical concept of experience), to produce a worldview fundamentally anti-humanist.
b) Given the social totality = A + B, a law which explains Marx from Marxism B is considered valid for the social whole A + B (which is an idealistic notion), thus preventing the production of a new law really science capable of explaining well A.
I am convinced that there is no scientific method to sociological able to study the social totality A + B. This, I believe, was the idea of \u200b\u200bMarx. The failure of Marxism is not due to Marx, but in my view the rejection of idealism and humanism (which is replaced with a new metaphysics of mold essentially positivist) by his successors. I believe that ignorance about the philosophical issues has been one of the elements that enabled this mess pseudoscientific. Many Communists consistently anti-humanists have to consider the philosophy and therefore the truth as an ideology, or as a political tool. I am fundamentally opposed to this instrumental approach, which also recalls the philosophies of net bourgeois press!
Marx, after reading it, I do not think a single scientist, but also a true philosopher. In the wake of Hegel, he realizes that the social whole can not be scientifically studied, through its grasp of particular laws. The whole is in itself a philosophical concept. Marx begins with a metaphysical, metaphysics this is called idealism. Marx was an idealist philosopher, but this is in addition to being a humanist. Humanism is the spring that pushes Marx in economic science to seek solutions to problems of the proletariat, could not find solutions to philosophical idealism.
"Philosophers have interpreted the world, now we have to change": the first part of the sentence constitutes acceptance of the idealist philosophy of Marx, the second is his desire to act on the basis of acceptance of idealism . What does it mean to accept the philosophical idealism of Marx? We discover that there is a social totality, can not be explained in full (A + B) by the methods of science. The individual acts (the ones that explain to those that explain and B) can not be merged into a unitary explanation (a higher law) because the object of sociological science is different from the physical sciences, where all laws are consistent with each other due to the repeatability of the experiment. Acceptance of the story by the science of sociology, she is forced to give up grasping the social totality. The philosophical idealism is the discovery of the social totality. Humanism is adhering to the desire to transform the whole society. The economic work of Marx is the path he has chosen to Marx tarsformarla: analyzing games. There are several ways in which men can transform the whole society, but what makes a man capable of turning the story are:
a) a political-philosophical interpretation does not deny the contradictions (eg Hegelian idealism)
b) a motivation to act on the philosophy that accepts (human)
c) A practice.
a) is due to b), which is due to c).
0 comments:
Post a Comment