On Fri, 28 Dec 2001 19:44:11 +0000 "Justin Schwartz" <jkschw at hotmail.com>
writes:
>
>
> The pragmatic/Marxian idea that practice is the test of truth is
> based in
> the idea that if you track accurately track the way the world is,
> carve it
> at the joints, as it were, you are more likely to get what you want.
> Point
> (c) raises a problem for Marxism in that light, because Marx's
> theory of
> ideology is based on the idea that false theories are more likely to
> get you
> want you want in some cases. Thus the bourgeoisie is more likely to
> stay in
> power if it obscures the reality of exploitation.
I think that Marx's point concerning the role of ideology is that certain false theories (like neoclassical economics) help the bourgeosie stay in power because they help to obscure the reality of exploitation in the eyes of the non-bourgeois strata. That still leaves open the question of whether the bourgeosie themselves really benefit from their being deceived by their own ideologies. That is do the bourgeoisie really benefit, if they are able to deceive themselves concerning the reality of exploitation, the existence of class divisions & antagonisms etc.? On the one hand such self-deception may well be necessary from a psychological point of view, if people are to benefit from exploitation in good conscience. On the other hand, such self-deception may well blind them to the development of class antagonims, and hence to threats to their own power.
A partial answer to these questions, may perhaps be found in the fact that over the years, so much of bourgeois social science has sought to assimilate the insights of Marxist analysis. This suggests that at least some bourgeoisie think that they cannot continue ruling without a clearer eyed view of the world, even if that comes from sworn enemies of their class.
>Hence neoclassical
>
> economics. The question is, then, why isn't historical materialism
> like
> that? That is, a false theory more likely to get workers what they
> want,
> say, by giving them an unrealistic expectation of success in
> bringing about
> socialism that is higher than it would be if they believed the
> truth?
Well, I am sure that Justin is familiar with Georges Sorel, who did think that the working class could not hope to triumph without the aid of useful myths like that of the "general strike" which was popular with the anarcho-syndicalists of his day. In this, Sorel was very much influenced by Henri Bergson and Nietzsche. And he took the Marxists of the Second International to task for thinking that reliance upon scientific theories (or proably what he would have characterized as scientistic theories) like historical materialism would be sufficient for enabling the working class to prevail.
Jim F.
>
> jks
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device:
> http://mobile.msn.com
>
________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.