marxist sociology

Charles Brown CharlesB at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us
Thu Feb 21 07:02:12 PST 2002


Justin: Charles (below) says that Marxist philosophers would know about Kant. But that's not what I said they wouldn't know; I said they would know about the neo-Kantians of the late 19th century, something that almost no one except specialized scholars of the history of German philosophy would know.

^^^^^^

CB: Why you don't think that some Marxist and Soviet philosophers would be doing specialized scholarship on the history of German philosophy, I don't know. Lenin specifically called for Soviet philosophers to study the whole history of philosophy (I'll find the quote if I must). If I have to , I might be able to find in one of my books an actual Soviet, Marxist philosopher explicitly discussing one of the people you consider a late 19th Century neo-Kantian.

For starters, here's Lenin

"So far we have examined empirio-criticism taken by itself. We must now examine it in its historical development and in its connection and relation with other philosophical trends. First comes the question of the relation of Mach and Avenarius to Kant.

1.The Criticism of Kantianism from the Left and From the Right

Both Mach and Avenarius began their philosophical careers in the 'seventies, when the fashionable cry in German professorial circles was "Back to Kant". And, indeed, both founders of empirio-criticism in their philosophical development started from Kant. "


>From _Materialism and Empirio-Criticism_ Chapter Four The Philosophical Idealists As Comrades-In-Arms And Successors Of Empirio-Criticism

CB: Lenin seems to be fully aware of late 19th Century "Back to Kantism" . That would seem to be neo-Kantianism. Are you saying that Soviet philosophers were not aware of this discussion in Lenin's book ? I doubt it.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list