2 ms·

I’m not interested in the categorical definition of spirituality in the Western philosophical tradition. I don’t think Western definitions have anything to do w

by xtian 6y ago

I’m not interested in the categorical definition of spirituality in the Western philosophical tradition. I don’t think Western definitions have anything to do with the spirituality humans have participated in for tens of thousands of years. That spirituality is about an unfolding and reintegration of personal, social, and natural meaning and mystery, not metaphysical assertions.

achillesheels 6y ago
You asked me where Marxism denies spirituality and I quoted sources verbatim. There’s not much more I can do for you.
- xtian 6y ago
  I asked where Marx denied spirituality, and you misinterpreted quotes based on the assumption that spirituality as humans experience it is the same as Western metaphysical idealism. The long history of mystic and traditional practices refute this assumption.
  - achillesheels 6y ago
    I am not speaking about "The long history of mystic and traditional practices". I am responding to your query: "where did Marx deny spirituality?" I answered with sufficient sources. In response you tell me spirituality is different than Western metaphysical idealism. But your query is specifically about Karl Marx and his judgment of spirit. I quote his judgment of spirit as secondary to matter. You say I misinterpret the quotes. I am applying it directly to support my judgment of his "philosophy." You claim I make an "assumption that spirituality as humans experience it is the same as Western metaphysical idealism". I am speaking in direct reference to dialectical materialism which rejects idealism - as I have quoted. Can you understand why I quote dialectical materialism in regards to spirituality?
    - xtian 6y ago
      Dialectical materialism isn’t in conflict with spirituality. It doesn’t deny that humans are spiritual creatures. It is in conflict with metaphysical idealism. If that’s what you’re trying to say then I agree, but I’m simply making the point that metaphysical idealism does not represent the sum total of human spirituality throughout history. Marx no more denies that humans are spiritual creatures than Taoism does, e.g. He certainly never says that all human meaning is reducible to domination and metabolic function.
      - achillesheels 6y ago
        "Does it require deep intuition to comprehend that man’s ideas, views, and conception, in one word, man’s consciousness, changes with every change in the conditions of his material existence, in his social relations and in his social life? What else does the history of ideas prove, than that intellectual production changes its character in proportion as material production is changed? The ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class." "But whatever form they may have taken, one fact is common to all past ages, viz., the exploitation of one part of society by the other." -Chapter II, Proletarians and Communists, Communist Manifesto And please watch the first five minutes of this video, where "labor" is understood to be necessarily metabolic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2hhrUHSD6o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2hhrUHSD6o I cannot help you reach the intuitive judgment of "class antagonism", "ruling class", "class exploitation", etc. vis-a-vis labor being metabolic and ideas being a function of material ergo calorie affordances. It is demonstrative based on the sources I have provided.
        xtian 6y ago
        I'm not sure what you think you're proving, but to me it seems like you have a restrictive conception of human meaning and spirituality that you're trying to forcefully ascribe to Marx.
    - achillesheels 6y ago
      The point is we must judge spirituality as how Marx understands the term, not how Mongolians do. And prey tell, who said this as it pertains to dialectic materialism? "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles." "struggle", "conflict", etc. is not exactly harmonious, is it?

by xtian 6y ago

achillesheels 6y ago

You asked me where Marxism denies spirituality and I quoted sources verbatim. There’s not much more I can do for you.

xtian 6y ago
I asked where Marx denied spirituality, and you misinterpreted quotes based on the assumption that spirituality as humans experience it is the same as Western metaphysical idealism. The long history of mystic and traditional practices refute this assumption.
- achillesheels 6y ago
  I am not speaking about "The long history of mystic and traditional practices". I am responding to your query: "where did Marx deny spirituality?" I answered with sufficient sources. In response you tell me spirituality is different than Western metaphysical idealism. But your query is specifically about Karl Marx and his judgment of spirit. I quote his judgment of spirit as secondary to matter. You say I misinterpret the quotes. I am applying it directly to support my judgment of his "philosophy." You claim I make an "assumption that spirituality as humans experience it is the same as Western metaphysical idealism". I am speaking in direct reference to dialectical materialism which rejects idealism - as I have quoted. Can you understand why I quote dialectical materialism in regards to spirituality?
  - xtian 6y ago
    Dialectical materialism isn’t in conflict with spirituality. It doesn’t deny that humans are spiritual creatures. It is in conflict with metaphysical idealism. If that’s what you’re trying to say then I agree, but I’m simply making the point that metaphysical idealism does not represent the sum total of human spirituality throughout history. Marx no more denies that humans are spiritual creatures than Taoism does, e.g. He certainly never says that all human meaning is reducible to domination and metabolic function.
    - achillesheels 6y ago
      "Does it require deep intuition to comprehend that man’s ideas, views, and conception, in one word, man’s consciousness, changes with every change in the conditions of his material existence, in his social relations and in his social life? What else does the history of ideas prove, than that intellectual production changes its character in proportion as material production is changed? The ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class." "But whatever form they may have taken, one fact is common to all past ages, viz., the exploitation of one part of society by the other." -Chapter II, Proletarians and Communists, Communist Manifesto And please watch the first five minutes of this video, where "labor" is understood to be necessarily metabolic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2hhrUHSD6o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2hhrUHSD6o I cannot help you reach the intuitive judgment of "class antagonism", "ruling class", "class exploitation", etc. vis-a-vis labor being metabolic and ideas being a function of material ergo calorie affordances. It is demonstrative based on the sources I have provided.
      - xtian 6y ago
        I'm not sure what you think you're proving, but to me it seems like you have a restrictive conception of human meaning and spirituality that you're trying to forcefully ascribe to Marx.
  - achillesheels 6y ago
    The point is we must judge spirituality as how Marx understands the term, not how Mongolians do. And prey tell, who said this as it pertains to dialectic materialism? "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles." "struggle", "conflict", etc. is not exactly harmonious, is it?