[A-List] electronics and value

[Waistline2 at aol.com]

In a message dated 12/17/02 4:39:01 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
bobenoch at shaw.ca writes:

> The paragraph of the article I was criticizing
>  was not discussing human history, nor Marx, but Physics.
>  Perhaps you will agree with me that, while Marx's' method of analysis is 
> derived from, and confirmed by observation, this cannot be said about the 
> assertion that "matter created consciousness"
> 

You and I are more than simply on the same side of the social equation; we 
are brother/comrades traveling along a specific route. Our discussions have 
much to do with the inherent difference of experience that defines the 
individual, as opposed to "theoretical differences."  

This question of "matter created consciousness" requires reprinting the 
paragraph in dispute. Below is the paragraph.

"The basis of this "science of society" is historical materialism. Marxism 
builds on the philosophic principles of materialism  that the universe is "by 
its very nature material," it exists independent of consciousness. The 
universe is not the embodiment of a "universal spirit," or the construction 
of a subjective observer. The universe is objective, knowable, and 
law-governed. "Matter is not the product of mind, but mind itself is merely 
the highest product of matter."
 

I most certainly concede that the above paragraph reveals a lack of artistry 
in articulation. 

The universe may very well be the embodiment of a "universal spirit," 
governed by properties far outside the realm of mans unaided perception. The 
words "universal spirit" are torn from another historical period as you state 
and run into conflict with what would be called "universal substance - 
spirit," today. 

"Matter is not the product of mind, but mind itself is merely the highest 
product of matter," is rather quaint for many of us schooled in the method of 
Marx for many years, but a revelation to millions who are opening their minds 
eye to the unfolding social conflict. 

As a propagandist of Marx method, I would have written the lead paragraph 
much different, basically stating the following. 

"For thousands of years mankind has sought to understand why society changes. 
Karl Marx method of inquiry into the logic or law system governing the inner 
compelling driving forces underlying society change is called Marxism or the 
science of society. Marxism builds on the philosophic principles of 
materialism. Materialism as a branch of philosophy attaches fundamental 
importance to the material universe that exists outside the head - thinking 
or consciousness, of the individual, and this includes that tiny part of the 
universe we call island earth. 

"No longer is it enough to explain change in society based on a universal 
spirit. It is necessary to examine how and under what conditions mankind eats 
and reproduces it material needs in society." 

I would totally avoid the subject of the matter/consciousness concept because 
the focus of the article is electronics and value. 

As a sidebar, it is my understanding that our modern Bible - King James 
Version of the Sacred Text, Old Testament is a materialist document in 
ancient form of presentation. 

To the point: Do I believe that matter created consciousness? No or rather, 
yes . . . .wait a minute, the form of this materialist presentation is 
cloaked in mechanical logic. Actually, the paragraph states:

"Matter is not the product of mind, but mind itself is merely the highest 
product of matter."

This sentence should read: 

"Matter - the universe understood and not yet understood is at least 12 
billion years old according to current understanding, and does not spring 
from the mind or consciousness of man. The earth itself is perhaps 4.5 
billion years old and mankind appeared on earth much later. Human 
consciousness itself can be no more than a specific evolution or 
form/fragment of this material universe."   

Somewhere in Lenin - perhaps his Materialism and Empirio-Criticism, he calls 
the brain "matter that thinks," and by doing so does not seperated 
consciousness from the matter organism - the brain, from which it emerges. 

Machinery at the stage of electronic-computerize production process lacks 
consciousness and displaces labor - not the consciousness itself. 
Consciousness cannot be separated  from the from in which it expresses itself 
in man as productive activity. My point is that the quote from the article 
Historical Materialism is not so much about physics as it is about 
consciousness as the act of material reproduction of society and man herself. 


If in fact mans consciousness cannot be separated from the organism of the 
brain and the brain is a component of a larger organism, then the strength of 
the power of observation is bound up with the maintenance of the larger 
organism. That is to say, the strength of the power of observation and 
cognitive functioning as material consciousness existing outside the ability 
of the individual to see with the naked eye, rivets on what man literally 
eats.  

Eating or consumption contains its own law system and in terms of man's 
biology alkalinity is fundamental. 

What has this to do with the general discussion? Everything . . .including 
Mark's piece on population, energy conversion, this state of the destruction 
of environment and even social revolution. All of us come to the same 
juncture in the road from different sides of the social equation. 

To purify man's consciousness mean purifying the organism in which 
consciousness erupts and emerges and this carries one back to the logic of 
industrial society and the contamination of the environment called woman/man.

All of long held propositions and belief system are in disarray because we 
are undergoing the process of the evolutionary leap - transition, to a new 
mode of production. Yes, dialectics - the form of materialism, must be 
changed. Such a task is outside my ability. Yet, I have presented a 
materialist approach to man's consciousness outside the ideological 
formulation. This approach doesn't unfold the law system of consciousness 
formation. It is simply an approach. 

When Marx labored society was undergoing an evolutionary leap from 
agriculture to industry, and yes - the ideological form of combat most 
certainly contained an anticlerical character.  

All of this was written not because you speak untruth, but because the 
materialist presentation of the question of the transition in the mode of 
production became lost in approaching matter from the modern standpoint of 
physics. 

Your brother and comrade in arms - theoretical arms. 


Melvin P. 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 7737 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/a-list/attachments/20021217/e12e4fae/attachment.txt>