| Subject: Darwin and Marx |
Author:
Howard Sherman
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 06:03:35 08/07/02 Wed
In reply to:
Jorge Nascimento Fernandes
's message, "A crise do PCP e o darwinismo" on 01:45:41 08/07/02 Wed
In spite of all qualifications listed above, it is correct to speak of a process of social change through stages of evolution (sublinhado meu). The analogy of Marxian with Darwinian evolution may even be extended to the selection mechanism. Marxian scholars discuss social evolution through competitive selection. This perspective, however, is very different from the conservative Social Darwinism, which claims that an individual who is at the top of society financially (such as Ross Perot) is necessary fitter or better than the poor. In contrast, in the Marxian view individual wealth is largely a function of existing class relations and financial inheritance.
Using the historical approach, Marxian social scientists do expect the best adapted mode of production to be more likely to survive in the very long run, provided that civilization on the earth is not destroyed in a nuclear war or environmental disaster. That society will probably survive which is best adapted to the fullest development of both technology and human potential. The phrase best adapted however, must be defined very carefully. When the Mongols wiped out the Persian civilization, they were no doubt stronger and better adapted to that environment in a military sense, but the destruction of Persia did mean the end of a flourishing cultural activity for a long period. Similarly, that the soviet system lost out to U.S. capitalism reflects the weakness of the soviet system but does not prove the superiority of the U.S. system in any ethical or cultural sense."
mais á frente ele afirma:
"Because most Marxian writers assert that the best adapted economic system has a higher probability of survival, in this very limited sense critical Marxian social scientists tend to be guardedly optimistic concerning the direction of present history. The competitive evolutionary process between societies only operates over a long time span, and nothing guarantees that civilization, as a Whole, will survive if there is a nuclear or environmental disaster. These, however are long term probabilities and tendencies based on experience of the past competition of groups and societies, not inevitable laws describing what will happen. Marxism is, thus, "a theory that did acknowledge overall directionality to historical change, but rejected the view that directionality implies a unique path and sequence of events" (Wright, Levine, and Sober 1992, 79)"
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 