[Marxism] Studying philosophy at the New School

[Haines Brown]

> I don't know -- but no university should teach any "course that is
> explicitly Marxist".  The course itself (or the professor) should
> never take any position. Then it becomes indoctrination (and turns
> people off).

I hesitate to launch a new thread, but perhaps the following is
germane. 

I disagree. _All_ courses and texts are theoretically loaded. I
believe this is the consensus. For example, for a long time now it is
a conventional truth in the natural sciences.

A more contentious specification of this point is that all courses and
texts are ideologically loaded. That is, any course or text has,
whether intentionally or not, explicitly or implicitly, has a
functional relation to social class. This seems the Marxist position,
and I suspect it may be a consensus in the sociology of knowledge,
although I'm not sure.

In other words, we all occupy a social location, and in the present
context, that location is primarily one of class. No one today would
suggest that this implies pure subjectivism. After all, since Peirce,
we realize that our views are all "one-sided" (a term he shared with
Marx. Anyone know if he picked it up from Marx?) and only
approximations of truth (anyone know if Lenin was influenced by
Peirce?).

In Marxist terms, relative truth value depends in part on a body of
knowledge being developed from a universal social location, the modern
working class. This seems analogous to the suggestion that natural
science acquires a relatively high degree of truth value because it
represents knowledge that all classes share the world over, although
it is also somewhat ideological.

As for courses, their object, I hope, is to be explicit about their
theoretical and ideological position. If the axioms are conventional,
it is very constructive in pedagogical terms to dredge them up for
inspection; it makes the subject matter far more transparent and
interesting. And, of course, if the theoretical content is
unconventional, then one makes it explicit for the sake of honesty, to
lend coherence to the specifics of the content, and to make the course
intellectually exciting.

I believe the traditional concern about this is one of two things: a)
bend the facts to fit the theory; b) preach the theory in order to
indoctrinate. I suspect both are real concerns, but are no reason to
pillory Marxism. The dangers are always present, whether or not the
theory is implicit or unconventional. The former is a danger in any
science and seems only controlled by wise and honest respect for
empirical facts. The latter is always present, but raises more
difficult issues. But I think that in either case, the counter for
these omnipresent dangers is simply wisdom. Marxism is no more subject
to them than any other field of knowledge.

But let me expand on the second point a bit. Education, after all,
_is_ indoctrination. Higher education, at least, seems committed to
both a conservative and a critical end, passing along a culture, but
also develop the student's critical powers. The former is
indoctrination by definition, but not the latter unless it is
dishonestly more a doctrine than critique. I imagine a course in
Marxism could be doctinaire and not self-critical, but that
shortcoming is a danger in any subject matter.

This issue really only becomes touchy when the development of a
critical outlook is directed at the capitalist system or state, and
the reaction comes from those who thoughtlessly identify with them as
being beyond the reach of any criticism. But this surely does not 
represent a shortcoming of a course in Marxism, but of those who might
object to it. Marxism is a perfectly legitimate science of society
that is no less valid than, say, a Parsonian or Weberian outlook. A
course on Parsons or Weber? Sure, that would be good, and no one would
presume it is indoctrination (I actually did take a course on Parsons
at one point). So why not a course on Marxism? Only because it does
not happen to support the ruling-class preference? That would be very
narrow minded and prejudicial.

-- 
 
       Haines Brown, KB1GRM