----- Original Message ----- From: "Jurriaan Bendien" <j.bendien@wolmail.nl> To: <gerald_a_levy@msn.com> Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2002 8:33 AM Subject: Marx on solving human problems Jerry, You wrote: "We can't accept Marx's maxim that mankind (sic) never sets itself problems that it can't solve". I don't see why not. Note that Marx uses a double negative. He is not trying to play the optimist He is saying that problems and solutions develop hand in hand, but that social-material conditions need to mature before they can be correctly grasped in thought. The pertinent point is that he says "cannot solve" and not "will not solve". Historical development presents humanity with certain problems of their own making, which in principle are solvable once they are recognised for what they truly are (perhaps with a time-lag, given the normal conservatism of social consciousness). It is at least possible for humanity to recognise them for what they truly are, because they are a consequence of human action, not an act of God or the World Spirit (thus, also, the problems of capitalism are human problems, not acts of God). But this in itself carries no guarantee that in practice they will be solved, because more is necessary for that. After all, one can recognise a problem for what it is, recognise that an appropriate solution is available which could be implemented, and yet not implement the solution. This is why, for example, people talk about the concept of "political will". They say, "this problem could have been solved long ago, but the political will was not there to solve it". The problem was known, the solution was known, but the problem wasn't solved. So I think I will stick with Marx and the materialist conception of history on this one - that is, the Marxian concept that problems and solutions do go hand in hand in human (sub-)consciousness, while admitting that this does not cancel out the need for making conscious choices, assigning priorities, plotting an appropriate strategy and asserting the will. If this argument is wrong, it might be because (1) capitalism creates conditions which destroy the ability to make conscious choices, to assign priorities and assert the will, a sort of barbaric devolution of the human mind. But this is by no means proved, and I would say rather than the opposite is the case. The capitalist experience has not made human beings less conscious, but more conscious. Or (2) the possibility of e.g. natural disasters which are not the consequence of human actions - but even here we have the possibility of estimating their probability of occurrence, so that we can do something about it (this is not really what Marx had in mind). Regards Jurriaan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jun 02 2002 - 00:00:06 EDT