Oleachea in action, http://www.kkc.net/peru/n1.htm http://www.kkc.net/peru/n1a.gif "...one nasty fucker in usenet flame wars."
[PEN-L:5829] Re: The Flaming Path (heh, Lance do you object to the term, "Shining Path, " too? "And has not Chairman Gonzalo himself called upon the masses to celebrate the 'Day of Heroism' (a day of death not birth, a 'shining trench of combat'),in APPARENT contradiction to his speech cited by Mr. Olaechea above, and which is in DIRECT contradiction to Mr. Olaechea's 'universal' derivation (condemning the commemoration of deaths of revolutionary leaders) from the same speech - a derivation or 'philosopical category' seemingly valid for all times and all places regardless of the actual situation prevailing on the ground.") http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/pen-l/1996m08.d/msg00100.htm
L-I: Dance of Mr Olaechea & Co Maoist Documentation Project leninist-international (Yoshie, Macdonald Stainsby list) Fri, 31 Jul 1998 00:27:46 +0000 DANCE OF THE "1.5 BOLSHEVIKS": THE POVERTY OF M. OLAECHEA'S "PHILOSOPHICAL CATEGORIES" http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/leninist-international/1998-July/000625.html
>From owner-marxism-thaxis Fri Jan 24 01:34:14 1997
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 22:25:37 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199701240625.WAA22839 at igc2.igc.apc.org>
From: Ralph Dumain <rdumain at igc.apc.org>
Subject: M-TH: DIALECTICS OF NATURE & SCIENTIFC THEORY -- RETORT
My beloved Lisa would roll over in her grave to see that the marxism-and-sciences list she started could not do better than to get beyond dimwitted crackpot little shits like Chatterjee and Oleachea. Lisa, you see, in attempting to come to grips with Engels's three dialectical laws, was inclined to interpret them as putative laws of nature, and so inferred that Engels was claiming that these dialectical laws could be utilized directly to advance empirical science. She was troubled by that notion, and so she got stuck on that sticking point, because nobody surfaced to explain to her that this is the wrong approach since no matters of empirical fact can ever be deduced from general philosophical categories. At best general philosophical categories and ontological principles can be used to organize our thinking about an already developed subject matter. However, the three so-called dialectical laws are not directly parts of scientific theories dealing with empirical matters; they are at a level of abstraction above the theoretical terms of scientific theory, and they cannot be treated as laws of nature in the manner of Newton's three laws of motion, for example.
Too bad the logical ambiguities and tentative formulations of Engels have hardened into rote doctrine to be thoughtlessly propagated by Stalinist excrement like S. Chatterjee and Adolfo Oleachea. For the alleged dialectical laws that unify nature, society, and thought should not be used as leaveners that flatten out all distinctions, especially between subjective and objective dialectics. At various times over the past two years I have tried to clarify the problems in the attribution of contradictions to natural processes, and have tried to demonstrate that objective contradictions in natural processes can only be spoken of when all contradictions have been as far as possible removed from thought and we are left with a situation in which reality can only be apprehended by contradictory yet complementary categories, and then we can call reality itself contradictory because the categories used to describe it and which accurately reflect it are contradictory. And yet I still have to read childish Stalinist bullshit. Godena, your nuts should be snipped for allowing this.
--- from list marxism-thaxis at lists.village.virginia.edu --- -- Michael Pugliese
