[Marxism] -ismic doctrine or science? (was: Cockburn contrarianism)

[Ruthless Critic of All that Exists]

On Jan 29, 2008 11:56 PM, Rod Holt <rholt at planeteria.net> wrote:

>  In
> fact, Marx had already absorbed through every pore the differential, the
> differential equation and the rest of the concepts of the calculus
> before he turned to the purely formal aspects of that area. Why was he
> so deeply interested in the intricate notation, the symbols and the
> proof structures of the calculus? I'd appreciate a hint from others who
> have studied this question.

My guess is that Marx was looking for new formalisms, new methods of
representing reality. The Marxist method of critique is a process of
uncovering things "as they really are" when the obfuscating veil of
ideology is lifted. To accomplish this, new representational schemes
were necessary.

At the rhetorical level, the language of _Capital_ is full of
metaphor. This too is related, because metaphors allow us to devise
new forms of representation by reinventing language.

The interest in mathematics, I believe, was related. It was part of
the search for new ways of symbolic representation that would allow
him to express his truths outside of the usual plain old language of
the bourgeoisie.