Are scientific socialists atheists these days?

[scawenb]

Origin of the term Scientific Socialism

Might be wrong, but i'd always understood Sci Soc to come from Engels pamphlet (Socialism: scientific and utopian).

Engels took it from Karl Grun who in turn took it form Proudhon who first used the term. But Socialism: scientific and utopian wasn't published until 1880s and it had already been used at the title of Joseph Dietzgen's essay of 1873.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/dietzgen/works/1870s/scientific-socialism.htm

 

[audiotech]

They're not exactly coming out against it either, are they? If pressed on it, I expect you'd get some line from them about how Lenin allowed Sharia law in the southern states of the USSR.

Yes, but what is Sharia Law? It's usually likened to Saudi and whippings and beheadings etc.

However, there was a piece on the news yesterday which looked at Ghrimi, part of the Russian Federation, which is 100 per cent Muslim. There, if anyone commits a crime, such as stealing, all the punishment consists of is apologising in front of the mosque.

Although there were some young zealots filmed going about the centre in a car with Kalashnikovs looking for "infidels" to kill - usually Russian police. They met with a gruesome death it should be added.

 

[Nigel]

Karl Popper V Maurice Cornforth

I'm not sure that by 'modern' concepts of Empiricism; Marx/Hegel, Plato/Aristotle, Freud/Psycho Analysists are truely considered to have a scientific argument. I've tried to plough through some Popper to try and understand what he is on about.

In my personal opinion he misses out the correlative process of dialectics and sees it as subjective interpretaion, not truly empirical(are the examples truly experiments) & having a tendency to be sophistic.

I have a feeling that I am wrong on this.

I think that anyone that has been in a leftist political party in Britain can see the similarities with religous cults: the duality between abstract/illusional dogma and rhetoric, and the practicality of doing political work on Terra Firma.

Maurice Cornforth wrote a book denouncing Poppers attack, but I've never got arounfd to reading it.
Has anyone else

http://en.wikepedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Cornforth

 

[danny la rouge]

can't really see the point of this thread then, is all.

There has been a fair bit you haven't been following particularly well.

 

[scawenb]

I've got a bit lost too - I'm not sure about the direct relevance of Popper and the Sharia law in the USSR.

 

[William of Walworth]

No idea what you are talking about - especially since I'm not and never have been a member of the SWP.

I was just illustrating that in a different context and time there could be a different approach to these things. In the context of central asia during the 1920s following a socialist revolution, to burn the veil as a symbolic end to religious repression of women was seen as a progressive step. In today's context it would undoubtedly be questionable.

OK, apologies, fair enough, I agree with your last two sentences.

I wrongly thought you were SWP

 

[Jonti]

Why are theologists so obsessed with science these days?

Perhaps because science, having slain God by showing the material world has no need of the supernatural, is beginning to engage with the problem of consciousness. That's traditionally been the preserve of religions (what with souls being the seat of consciousness and all that). A scientific theory of consciousness would be a massive blow to the priests, clerics and other mystagoons.

 

[In Bloom]

No its not a game and I'm not talking about the best politics but what Marx called "communism" and what others call "scientific socialism" is based on a certain understanding of human society and the laws that govern it.

(my emphasis added)

Communism is about human beings and how they interact with each other and society in general. What does it matter what those human beings happen to believe that the universe was sneezed into existence by the Great Green Arkleseizure?

This is exactly the problem with calling yourself a scientific socialist or overemphasising the signifigance of Marx, you end up parrotting crap that Marx was putting out when he was still a fucking Young Hegelian.

 

[belboid]

There has been a fair bit you haven't been following particularly well.

Have you anything to actually comment on, re thread topic? Or once it didnt go the way you wanted, did you just sulk off like a silly little boy?

 

[Jonti]

What does it matter what those human beings happen to believe that the universe was sneezed into existence by the Great Green Arkleseizure?

Yeah, what would it matter if people could be persuaded their rulers are carrying out the will of the Great Green Arkleseizure?

You can't prove they're not, can you, eh? Not if you allow the Great Green Arkleseizure in the first place. Death to those who disrespect the servants of the Great Green Arkleseizure!!

 

[scawenb]

This is exactly the problem with calling yourself a scientific socialist or overemphasising the signifigance of Marx, you end up parrotting crap that Marx was putting out when he was still a fucking Young Hegelian.

But the question is about whether Scientific Socialist are still Atheists - I don't actually think I even called myself one in any of my postings. I was just saying that anyone who claimed to be a Scientific Socialist (and who loved parrotting Marx's fucking Young Hegelian crap) would be hard pressed to NOT be an atheist.