For Marx, his dialectics was not a tool to arrive at a predetermined outcome. That’s why he rejected Hegel’s dialectics and introduced his own. He wanted an empirical method to study the means of production.

Engels would expand Marx’s dialectics to include other social spheres. Where Marx had a singular focus on production, Engels used his dialectics on other kinds of social forces. Both Marx and Engels, however, wanted an empirical model based on deductive logic.

The difference between deductive logic and inductive logic is that the data leads deductive logic to a conclusion, whereas inductive logic starts with the premise and includes what data supports the premise.

Hegel’s dialectics is inductive since it fixes the logical exercise with immutables, almost like the old Scholastics used their rigorous logic inside a rigid box of the existence and dogmatic nature of God.

A majority of modern Marxists appear to have descended into inductive logic, and have abandoned Marx and Engels innovation on Hegel’s dialectics. Can we even call these inductivists Marxists in any sense?

Shouldn’t we call them modern Hegelians as they’ve removed Marx and Engels innovations, and have resorted to reasoning around immutable dogma?

Looking at it from the outside, in movements like the Jeremy Corbyn phenomena, it appears that the modern left in large parts demand a dogma, and only permit discussions of the parameters inside this dogma.

If this is true, then that is a betrayal of the empiricism of Marx and Engels, and I’d be comfortable in labelling their movement as the modern Hegelians.

As one of the left, this is a source of disappointment and sadness because dogma and immutables are the preserve of conservatives.

Advertisements