• Maoo [none/use name]
    ·
    4 months ago

    I don't understand what you mean by mechanical materialists being wrong due to the complexity of the world. Mechanical materialism is entirely compatible with an arbitrarily complex world so long as it follows certain ideas of causality.

    The key issue is that fatalism is incompatible with Marxism and I see all of the ingredients of fatalism in this post and interaction (though the conclusion is unclear). Will the world work out how it's going to no matter what, or do you have the agency to try and shape it? Or, most importantly, are you spreading a consciousness of inevitability? Diamat is antithetical to that.

    • QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml
      hexagon
      ·
      4 months ago

      My position is whether or not the universe is fatalist it doesn’t have rhyme or reason and we are part of the universe’s movement, not on the sidelines. We don’t know whether there is inevitability or what is inevitable. If the fatalists are right that shouldn’t lead to inaction.

      • Maoo [none/use name]
        ·
        4 months ago

        I'm even more confused now as the universe having no rhyme or reason is also incompatible with diamat. Discovering patterns, tendencies, conclusions from the material is core to it and those patterns are rhyme or reason. Capital is a work that is entirely about how the capitalist system follows clear material forces, that it subjugates all classes to its mechanisms, and that its class dynamics prime its downfall at the hands of the working class.

        • QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml
          hexagon
          ·
          4 months ago

          Maybe I phrased that poorly. The universe has no ultimate purpose or intention. The way things worked out seems relatively random, but it is a result of material laws. It is possible to study the world and find patterns.