[ show plain text ]
In reply to your query for citations, see Althusser, first note "Preface
to *Capital*":
"...The remarkable 'Introduction" remained unpublished. In many places in
the *Grundrisse*... a strong Hegelian influence can be detected, combined
with whiffs of Feuerbachian humanism. It can be predicted with some
certainty that, along with *The German Ideology*, the *Grundrisse* will
provide all the dubious quotations needed by idealist interpretations of
Marxist theory". (p. 98)
Thus, Althusser finds the "Intro." remarkable, while seemingly not to
worried about Hegelianisms that bother him elsewhere in the Grundrisse.
There are MANY citations by Althusser to either "Intro." or "1857 Intro."
listed in the indexes under "Marx" -- see *For Marx* and *Reading Capital*
which you may consult. However, I am on other research topics now and do
not have time to do a proper review of the specific issues you ask.
Paul Z.
***********************************************************************
Paul Zarembka, supporting RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY
******************** http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka
"Fred B. Moseley" <fmoseley@mtholyoke.edu> said, on 05/22/00:
>Paul, a question about Althusser: did Althusser ever discuss this
>Introduction to the Grundrisse? Did he ever argue that Marx rejected the
>aspects of his logical method as outlined here (which seem very Hegelian,
>as Alfredo said)? Was this supposed to be part of Marx's
>"epistemological break"? If not, then what was the "epistemological
>break" about with respect to Marx's ECONOMIC theory? Or was it instead
>mostly about his theory of society or history (as discussed in the
>Preface to the Contribution)?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 31 2000 - 00:00:10 EDT