Marxist confusion over ‘dialectics’…. From Samkhya to Diamat…dyadic and triadic logic

https://www.dropbox.com/home/Public?preview=Toward+a+New+Communist+Manifesto.pdf

There have been several versions of our Manifesto: this one contains an appendix called, From Samkhya to Diamat. This attempts to critique the ‘dialectic’ and more specially the Engels style ‘dialectics of nature’ by showing the uncanny resemblance to ancient Samkhya. The problem here, as noted by J.G. Bennett, is that marxists confuse dyadic and triadic logic, the latter being the source of much confusion because it is not directly accessible by the logic of standard thinking.

One can only recommend to marxists starting over with a larger view of their subject and a recognition that dyadic and triadic logic cannot be explicated in the naive fashion of marxixt ‘dialectics of nature’.

DialecticsThe term “dialectics” comes from the Greek dialektike, derived from dialegomai, to converse, or discuss. Originally, it signified the art of discussion, which may be seen in its highest form in the Socratic dialogues of Plato.

Source: Introduction to the revolutionary philosophy of Marxism – part one

One thought on “Marxist confusion over ‘dialectics’…. From Samkhya to Diamat…dyadic and triadic logic”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s