Mairian wrote the following:
Marx, when he argued for example
that the problem with conventional philosophy was that it confined itself
to simply interpreting the world instead of changing it, drove a wedge
between theory and practice, and between ideology and praxis.
This has me concerned (no offense Mairian) because it seems to be a
misinterpretation of Marx - one that maybe most people are guilty of (I
know I was until I became friends with a die hard marxist).
First, I am stumbling over the internal logic -- to me this sentence is
inconsistent becuase the first phrase implies that marx is for changing
the world thru philosophy. If so, then how does it follow that this move
"drives a wedge betweentheory and practice"?
Second, I should say that Marx recognizes the *distinction* between theory and
practice, in the same way Dewey does. But he wants them in unity, he
wants praxis.
Third, I am confused as to why you are equating driving a wedge between
theory and practice (which IS praxis) with a wedge between ideology and
praxis. Marx DID want to explicate the difference between ideology and
praxis, but never ever did he want a separation of theory and
practice.
So, perhaps we have completely differnt interpretations of Marx, but this
is the one I go with....uhm. Could you perhaps flesh out what you mean? Do
you mean to suggest that even though Marx struggled to uphold the beliefs
that I interpret to have, he actualy in reality messed up and ended up
splitting things even further? I think that Marxism is less guilty of the
charge of dualism than is capitalism.
regards,
alexa
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|