I don't think Marx had any metaphysics whatsoever, materialist or not. He wasn't really interested in that stuff. Marx's materialism amounts (roughly) to the assertion that what people believe is determined by their material circumstances, with has nothing to do with metaphysics or the deeper nature of reality or the ontological relationship between mind and matter.
--- james daly <james.irldaly at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> Materialism on the contrary consists in seeing that
> particular philosophical
> position (German Idealism) as *the German
> Ide(a)-ology* reconciling
> feudalism and the nascent bourgeoisie; and that what
> would be reason now
> would be to see the even more recently nascent
> working-class as the
> universal (ethical) class, whose particular interest
> is the general
> interest); and to see working class Communists as
> leading the movement of
> the most downtrodden of classes towards its
> opposite, the negation of class
> in a world community which would *really*
> (materially) be the fullest
> development of humanity and human rationality,
> springing from the base of
> production from each according to ability and
> distribution according to
> need.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris Doss" <lookoverhere1 at yahoo.com>
> To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 1:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] "Theory's Empire," an
> anti-"Theory" anthology
>
>
> :
> : I do not believe there have even been idealists of
> the
> : sort Lenin thought he was describing. There has
> never
> : been a philosopher or philosphical movement that
> held
> : the belief that nothing exists outside the human
> mind.
> :
> : I personally think that both materialism and
> idealism
> : are incoherent doctrines, although the latter
> makes
> : marginally more sense.
>
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
Mataiotes mataioteton, eipen ho Ekklasiastes, mataiotes mataioteton, ta panta mataiotes.