User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 34

  1. #11
    Senior Member ObliviousExistence's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    loco
    Enneagram
    5W4
    Posts
    178

    Default

    Freud tried to oversimplify and reduce everything to the extent of forcing the simplification, and like someone else said he overemphasized sex. I think Marx is still relevant except to those who misunderstand his theories.

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    297

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ObliviousExistence View Post
    Freud tried to oversimplify and reduce everything to the extent of forcing the simplification, and like someone else said he overemphasized sex. I think Marx is still relevant except to those who misunderstand his theories.
    His labour theory of value and factors of productio nare outdated and would simply be regard ed as lacking or false in today's understanding of econocmis.

    The phillosophical and sociological impolications of this are quite relevant.

  3. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaunward View Post
    His labour theory of value and factors of productio nare outdated and would simply be regard ed as lacking or false in today's understanding of econocmis.

    The phillosophical and sociological impolications of this are quite relevant.
    You mean Ricardo's labour theory of value?

    The thing about Marx, like I said before, is that he was a student, gathering together into a single hypothesis other theories, therefore a lot of the people who condemn Marx and Marxism dont realise that they are condemning by the same token a lot of classical economics. Its a little clearer if you go to the original sources, read Adam Smith the way that Marx did, Hegel the way he did and really early Proudhon (seriously Proudhon typified French "socialism's" popular reaction to the change and development which industrialisation and economic restructuring were bringing in, you'll not believe it but a lot of the work attempted to explain and pitch Smith's ideas to people more likely to demand paternalistic despotic regimes).

    Marx was a champion of capitalism BTW, the communist manifesto is basically a defence of capitalism against paleoconservatives and socialists, basically he suggests that the system has huge potential and that prosperity would be generated by the superabundance it could create NOT redistribution per se, its similar to Durkheim's distinctions between socialism or syndicalism and communism. That'll be a surprise to many but its none the less a fact if you make a close and proper reading of his books.

    Freud's legacy I believe is much, much, much more literary than anything else, ego psychology and his theories of the conscious/unconscious divide (the subconscious isnt his terminology, not in my reading anyway) but I think even in his errors he was a trail blazer and system builder. The conflicts and alternatives which were sparked off by his theorising were a tribute to him I'd say.

    Besides those theorists, I was thinking about archana too, all those theories, in particular alchemy, which on the face of it were wiped out by modern findings, such as chemistry, in a way and properly understood or filtered I think still have a value if you consider them as processes of conceptualisation. Different times and cultures and contexts but human beings trying to process things and share how that was going.

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    297

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    You mean Ricardo's labour theory of value?
    Yes, but after comparitive advantage, I gave him a pass on ltv. Marx took it further.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    The thing about Marx, like I said before, is that he was a student, gathering together into a single hypothesis other theories, therefore a lot of the people who condemn Marx and Marxism dont realise that they are condemning by the same token a lot of classical economics. Its a little clearer if you go to the original sources, read Adam Smith the way that Marx did, Hegel the way he did and really early Proudhon (seriously Proudhon typified French "socialism's" popular reaction to the change and development which industrialisation and economic restructuring were bringing in, you'll not believe it but a lot of the work attempted to explain and pitch Smith's ideas to people more likely to demand paternalistic despotic regimes).
    I understand with a lot of what Marx said, especially many facutal things about capitalism. My biggest beef with him is his understanding of fairness, the ethics of exploitation, et cetera. Also, I feel his understanding of the factors of production (his overemphasis for labour anyway) to be insufficient.


    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Marx was a champion of capitalism BTW, the communist manifesto is basically a defence of capitalism against paleoconservatives and socialists, basically he suggests that the system has huge potential and that prosperity would be generated by the superabundance it could create NOT redistribution per se, its similar to Durkheim's distinctions between socialism or syndicalism and communism. That'll be a surprise to many but its none the less a fact if you make a close and proper reading of his books.
    Yes, I'm aware Marx coined capitalism as being the most productive system or whatever. I agree with that part.

  5. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaunward View Post
    Yes, but after comparitive advantage, I gave him a pass on ltv. Marx took it further.


    I understand with a lot of what Marx said, especially many facutal things about capitalism. My biggest beef with him is his understanding of fairness, the ethics of exploitation, et cetera. Also, I feel his understanding of the factors of production (his overemphasis for labour anyway) to be insufficient.



    Yes, I'm aware Marx coined capitalism as being the most productive system or whatever. I agree with that part.
    Hmm, yeah, you seem to have a pretty vague idea overall.

    Just what were his ethics of expolitation etc? His understanding of fairness? Those were implicit rather than explicit for the most part and carried over from enlightenment or classical liberalism. He and Engels dismissed a lot of that exlicitly as cantor.

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    297

    Default

    For example, "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." I find unethical. My understanding is that this was part opinion and not simply what he believed to be a necessity under communism. Do you disagree?

  7. #17
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaunward View Post
    The one advocating the contemporary relevance of Marxism is surprised by how things played/are playing out, the one doing the opposite is not.
    Really? I disagree. I wasn't surprised by the current economic crisis, neither are most Marxists. Nearly all bourgeois economists were, and have been unable to explain it seriously.

    In fact no other "school" of economics has a theory of why crises are inherent to capitalism, yet we can see they are.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaunward View Post
    For example, "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." I find unethical. My understanding is that this was part opinion and not simply what he believed to be a necessity under communism. Do you disagree?
    It's neither an "opinion" or a "fact", it's a proposal for a rationally organized society.
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  8. #18
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Likewise Marx tried to construct a similarly reductionist and deterministic theory, like Freud, I tend to think he was as great an economist as others of his day and age, just saw the invisible hand guiding society in a different direction to that predicted by classical liberals. Or rather saw the visible hand to class struggle in the place of invisible market forces. His theories about motivation and individuals being frustrated producers instead of frustrated consumers, they all predate him. He was really an archetypical student who spent time in the British Libraries reading rooms trying to weave his favourite authors (German philosophy, english economists, french socialists) into a single tapestry.
    I disagree with this too. Marx was active in the workers movement, he conceived of theory as a guide to action, and he tested it empirically, revising it honestly in line with developments in the class struggle. Likewise Lenin and Trotsky are a continuation from this, and also tested and proved the applicability of Marxism in theory by winning the leadership of the great majority of the urban proletariat away from the Mensheviks.
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  9. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaunward View Post
    For example, "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." I find unethical. My understanding is that this was part opinion and not simply what he believed to be a necessity under communism. Do you disagree?
    Its also the ethical basis for capitalism if you give it a bit of thought. Its not that radical.

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    297

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcda View Post
    Really? I disagree. I wasn't surprised by the current economic crisis, neither are most Marxists. Nearly all bourgeois economists were, and have been unable to explain it seriously.

    In fact no other "school" of economics has a theory of why crises are inherent to capitalism, yet we can see they are.

    It's neither an "opinion" or a "fact", it's a proposal for a rationally organized society.
    Chicago and Austrian schools have explanations for crises under a market economy. Neither while doing undergrad and postgrad economic studies, did I once hear the expression 'bourgeois economists', what does that mean?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Its also the ethical basis for capitalism if you give it a bit of thought. Its not that radical.
    I don't agree, although I can't specifically say where I disagree with you because you haven't provided your specific argument. I don't believe capitalism necessitates a perfectly competitive market and that there will always be administrative costs. From such observations alone, I don't see how 'from each according to etc.' is the ethical basis for capitalism. Please explain specifically?

Similar Threads

  1. Which 24 Character Are You and More? (BuddyTV)
    By Mondo in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-15-2014, 04:22 PM
  2. [MBTItm] Tangents, Tangents, and More Tangents
    By Little Linguist in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 11-19-2009, 07:55 PM
  3. Ni vs Si, and more
    By Cimarron in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-19-2009, 11:58 AM
  4. Boy Scouts (USA) To Train To Fight Terrorists and More...
    By heart in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-20-2009, 03:20 AM
  5. INTP and more?
    By neonbuddha in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-11-2008, 10:09 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO