For Lukács the problem of the unity between theory and practice is resolved in line a relationship between consciousness and reality. It would be a coming to consciousness is the process by which reality, resulting in revolutionary terms as a theory to reach the intellectual expression of the revolutionary process itself (p. 75). This reach consciousness, the theory is, in turn, a necessary step in the revolutionary process. Lukacs's book History and Class Consciousness understood from the beginning as one of their keys. The Hungarian Marxist gives great importance to the time of capturing the reality that being prior to it, however, requires to be captured for processing by men. Thus, the theory related to practice, in unity with it, means not so much to confuse the two moments (the real and the epistemological and theoretical), but keeping their distance from each other, are closely interconnected. Regardless of the use of Hegelianism by Lukacs, of the dialectic as a method that reflects what happens in reality (historical), their view of the real priority of what intelligence should be attached may have some parallels with Intelligence theory Zubiri, which we discuss later. In both cases one can speak of a consistent realism in that priority what is the reality. The effort of intelligence or theoretical abstraction should not obscure your vision with false theories, such substantivists and statice. Fluidized consciousness must assume a movement capable of reproducing the dynamism of reality. The opposite of this dialectic would capture both the subjectivist voluntarism as bourgeois historiography, on the other pole, fatalism objectivist crude positivism. In this there is an implicit criticism of both theoretical concepts of a liberal or conservative, as a Marxist conceptions that ended in an impermeable objectivism subjective moment of consciousness. In this I found a similarity with the approach of mature Gramsci his time in jail than in relation pedagogical issues points to the same errors from a non-dialectical approach to reality. In his talk soon, by the way, in a post dedicated to his critique of Rousseau spontaneity, or his qualification, from a Marxist perspective. This is a major issue in the history of educational thought we should look and that I'm rethinking the thread of the Marxist reading of these authors.
But again, it states: "The fatalism and voluntarism are opposed only to be excluded for consideration undialectical and ahistorical. For consideration of the dialectic story poles are to be necessarily coordinated, mental reflexes which clearly expresses the antagonism of capitalist social order, the unsolvability of problems in their own field "(p. 77). These errors are due dialectical thought is not, as the Hungarian philosopher, a contemplative pathos part of the typically modern split between thinking and being. Thinking is understood as not affected by the object being designed, and vice versa, in the scientific error based on this separation just ideal. It is not, I understand, to deny the scientific way of approaching reality, but to employ a scientific methodology that can self-critically applied to subject himself to think and observe. This is what takes place in an extraordinary fashion sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. A science with autodisolvente itching but without reaching the excesses typical of postmodern deconstructive thought. A science aware of its limitations and constraints, with a humility necessary epistemological level, a metaphysical science unpretentious impersonation of the real and aware of their place secondary to the priority of the real. Regardless of which way this is achieved grade Lukacs (perhaps questionable whether the Hegelian too) is some indication that his thought is fluid as it is the reality points to this kind of humility or priority of the real outside any epistemological rationalism or idealism. Aspires to it and warns us of the dangers of contemplative knowing Cartesian. Both he and Bourdieu, however, not lead, as mentioned above, the dissolution of science and thought even denying scientists an ability to make generalizations and probabilities that capture the real to some extent. Thus, science education or education would stop his momentum before reaching the sheer peculiarity, description of how dangerous biases unrelated game does, paradoxically, the single thought (Rorty). This, in Marxist terms of thought dialectic is also noted by Lukacs, as the difference, in a political sense, the social (devoting just given and relying on a gently upward progress linear laws) and the revolutionary approach (dialectical, which means the partial from a full conflict that is in all particulars.)
According to dialectical approach technological objects are products of a whole which includes a moral dimension and, above all, political. A tractor is not only the tractor, but the world and the history that produced it. Stop the scientific view on the tractor is to misunderstand the tractor. If this occurs things like that, how will not happen with something as complex human and historical as education. The look suited to understand the education has to aim at the global and the connections between different parts of the whole socio-historical. Lukacs says: "It is obvious that all knowledge of the reality of the facts. But what is being asked is: what fact of life and how methodical connection deserves consideration as a significant event for knowledge? The limited empiricism denies, of course, the facts become such only through a methodical, varying according to the objective of knowledge "(p. 78). This view, Lukács have said that it acquires, as a Marxist, a dialectical dynamism is necessary to grasp that the very isolated and quantitative data is the way to capturing the reality of the universe itself capitalist. There is a theoretical background which in turn is historic in the eyes of quantification of the liberal economy. "The fetish character of economic forms, the commodification of all human relationships, expanding, always growing, a division of labor that breaks in the abstract, rational production process, without worrying about the possibilities and human capacities of immediate producers, etc., transforms the phenomena of society and, along with them, their apperception. So facts are born 'isolated' complex factual isolated with its own laws partial fields (economics, law, etc..), Now in its immediate forms of expression seem previously developed for a scientific investigation of this nature "(p. 79). Thus, the problem is that this science segmented forget the historic nature of the facts that "discovered" in the world and studying. The dialectical view is, Lukacs insists, the point of view of the totality always necessary to capture this historic character in the events. Economic science, for example, the "facts" or isolated data segmented economy, lags behind reality, but in a way that means, in Lukacs, who is not able to capture the dynamism and the whole, the way she moves, the economic universe is, in his view, history. There would be a movement in the economy that escapes the gaze of positivism segmented liberal economic theory. Not properly capture the economic development and, more seriously, the historic character of the studied as substances or abstractions. It is, in essence, an ideological and politically interested in what is presented as a mere abstraction and realistic scientific theory naked. But there no less realistic than this mode of realism. A realism that says as fact given by a fatal and abstract, without historical reality the current economic crisis, without being aware neoliberal economist (or want to realize, of course) that after the crisis there is a whole history (and therefore not immutable , a non-static) has occurred. Anyway, about the same idea of \u200b\u200bfate and predestination of the capitalist ethic which indicated, from another perspective, Max Weber. Sentiment and moral impotence authorities responding to human too powerful and well rooted in this world. "So to get things properly we must begin by clearly and accurately capture the difference between real existence and inner nuclear structure, including the representations made about them and their concepts "(p. 81). So, be a way to manifest reality in the form of facts by an underlying structural framework of relationships that Lukacs is, indeed, watched the Marxist dialectic, but it also responds to look less substantial than that of Marxism, such as those of Bourdieu or Zubiri-Ellacuría. You could be accused, from the latter perspective, the Marxism of Lukács to maintain, against his initial inspiration, some form of substantial or excellent coseismic is overcome by these approaches (Bourdieu and Zubiri-Ellacuría).
0 comments:
Post a Comment