Marxist critiques of pomo

[James Farmelant]

I think it can be argued that philosophically, the debate over
the relations between Marxism and pomo revolve around the
possibility of developing  a critical realism which 
acknowledges the existence of an external physical reality and
which defines truth as the correspondence of our ideas to external
reality but which also recognizes that our cognition of external
reality is always mediated through our ideas and theories about
the world.  Therefore, while it doesn't make too much sense to
talk about the "social construction of reality" as such it is perfectly
legitimate to talk about the social construction of our knowledge
of the world since our cognitive practices like science are always
social practices.  Roy Bhaskar for instance has argued that
for Marx, two epistemological themes predominated:

(a) an emphasis on objectivity including the objectively

 real nature of social reality and

(b) an emphasis on the role of praxis in human cognition
which leads to a recognition of the socially mediated and
socially constructed character of our knowledge of the world.

In Bhaskar's view to ignore either theme is likely to lead
us astray.  Unfortunately though, much of Bhaskar's
own writing on Marxist philosophy tends to be impenetrable.
However, in any case the problem with much pomo writing
lies in the tendency to emphasize (b) at the expence of
(a).  It could be that Sokal perhaps falls into the opposite
error but clearly the reason why his original hoaxing
of _Social Text_ resonated as much as it did because
it exposed the absurdities that many pomos fall into
because of their denial or ignoring of (a).

If there is anything that I find Sokal weak on, it is that he
(by his own admission) is not sufficiently well versed in
the literature of the philosophy of science.  I think that his
instincts in favor of a scientific realism are sound but such
a realism must be reconciled with the Marxian observation
that our cognition of the world is always socially mediated.
And to do that requires a sophisticated grasp of the philosophy
of science.

			Jim Farmelant
>
On Tue, 08 Dec 1998 14:50:46 -0500 Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> writes:
>Les Schaffer asked me about what Perry Anderson has written on the 
>subject.
>This reading list answers that and elaborates a little bit.
>
>1) Perry Anderson
>"Origins of Postmodernity"-- I have only read the first chapter but it
>seems pretty damned good.
>
>"Considerations of Western Marxism"-- Discusses how academic
>interpretations of Gramsci, Lukacs and Althusser are meant to dilute 
>class
>struggle.
>
>"In the Tracks of Historical Materialism"-- Critique of pomo influence 
>on
>Marxism, with particular attention to Laclau-Mouffe
>
>
>2) Alex Callinicos
>"Against Postmodernism: A Marxist Critique" (Whatever you want to say 
>about
>Tony Cliff's group, the fact that both Callicos and John Rees stick 
>with it
>is a feather in his cap.)
>
>
>3) Christopher Norris
>"Uncritical Theory: Postmodernism, Intellectuals and the Gulf War"--
>Explores the significance of Baudrilllard's blanket statement that a 
>real
>war would not take place, because television had become a hypermedia
>equivalent.
>
>
>4) Terry Eagleton
>"Illusions of Postmodernity"
>
>Louis Proyect
>
>(http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/marxism.html)
>

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]