Polylogism - Revision history

98.235.239.108 at 02:02, 27 December 2012

2012-12-27T02:02:56Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:02, 27 December 2012
Line 4:		Line 4:

	==Basic Refutation==		==Basic Refutation==
	All humans are fallible rational actors. They choose the course of action they believe will increase their subjective standard of living at their lowest subjective cost. Differences are ~~the~~ not the result of different modes of logic, but rather the result different subjective values or relative positions within an exchange. The implication is that humans can and do seek out mutually beneficial exchanges and participate in the division of labor for their own benefit.<ref name="Mises_polylogism_defined" />		All humans are fallible rational actors. They choose the course of action they believe will increase their subjective standard of living at their lowest subjective cost. Differences are not the result of different modes of logic, but rather the result of different subjective values or relative positions within an exchange. The implication is that humans can and do seek out mutually beneficial exchanges and participate in the division of labor for their own benefit.<ref name="Mises_polylogism_defined" />

	==Origin of the concept==		==Origin of the concept==

Mcc1789: /* Origin of the concept */

2012-11-18T20:01:35Z

Origin of the concept

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:01, 18 November 2012
Line 9:		Line 9:
	Until the middle of the nineteenth century no one ventured to dispute the fact that the logical structure of mind is unchangeable and common to all human beings. All human interrelations are based on this assumption of a uniform logical structure. Men enter into discussions; they speak to each other; they write letters and books; they try to prove or to disprove. Some men can think deeper and more refined thoughts than others. There are men who unfortunately cannot grasp a process of inference in long chains of deductive reasoning. But as far as a man is able to think and to follow a process of discursive thought, he always clings to the same ultimate principles of reasoning that are applied by all other men. There are people who cannot count further than three; but their counting, as far as it goes, does not differ from that of Gauss or Laplace. Daily, it is true, people violate logical principles in reasoning. But whoever examines their inferences competently can uncover their errors.		Until the middle of the nineteenth century no one ventured to dispute the fact that the logical structure of mind is unchangeable and common to all human beings. All human interrelations are based on this assumption of a uniform logical structure. Men enter into discussions; they speak to each other; they write letters and books; they try to prove or to disprove. Some men can think deeper and more refined thoughts than others. There are men who unfortunately cannot grasp a process of inference in long chains of deductive reasoning. But as far as a man is able to think and to follow a process of discursive thought, he always clings to the same ultimate principles of reasoning that are applied by all other men. There are people who cannot count further than three; but their counting, as far as it goes, does not differ from that of Gauss or Laplace. Daily, it is true, people violate logical principles in reasoning. But whoever examines their inferences competently can uncover their errors.

	Yet, in the course of the nineteenth century ~~has~~ this been contested. [[Karl Marx\|Marx]] and the Marxians, foremost among them the "proletarian philosopher" [[Wikipedia:Joseph Dietzgen\|Dietzgen]], taught that thought is determined by the thinker's class position. What thinking produces is not truth but "ideologies." This word means, in the context of Marxian philosophy, a disguise of the selfish interest of the social class to which the thinking individual is attached. It is therefore useless to discuss anything with people of another social class. Ideologies do not need to be refuted by discursive reasoning; they must be unmasked by denouncing the class position, the social background, of their authors. Thus Marxians do not discuss the merits of physical theories; they merely uncover the "[[Wikipedia:Bourgeoisie\|bourgeois]]" origin of the physicists.		Yet, in the course of the nineteenth century this had been contested. [[Karl Marx\|Marx]] and the Marxians, foremost among them the "proletarian philosopher" [[Wikipedia:Joseph Dietzgen\|Dietzgen]], taught that thought is determined by the thinker's class position. What thinking produces is not truth but "ideologies." This word means, in the context of Marxian philosophy, a disguise of the selfish interest of the social class to which the thinking individual is attached. It is therefore useless to discuss anything with people of another social class. Ideologies do not need to be refuted by discursive reasoning; they must be unmasked by denouncing the class position, the social background, of their authors. Thus Marxians do not discuss the merits of physical theories; they merely uncover the "[[Wikipedia:Bourgeoisie\|bourgeois]]" origin of the physicists.

	The Marxians have resorted to '''polylogism''' because they could not refute by logical methods the theories developed by "bourgeois" economics, or the inferences drawn from these theories demonstrating the impracticability of [[socialism]]. As they could not rationally demonstrate the soundness of their own ideas or the unsoundness of their adversaries' ideas, they have denounced the accepted logical methods. The success of this Marxian stratagem was unprecedented. It has rendered proof against any reasonable criticism all the absurdities of Marxian would-be economics and would-be sociology. Only by the logical tricks of polylogism could etatism gain a hold on the modern mind.		The Marxians have resorted to '''polylogism''' because they could not refute by logical methods the theories developed by "bourgeois" economics, or the inferences drawn from these theories demonstrating the impracticability of [[socialism]]. As they could not rationally demonstrate the soundness of their own ideas or the unsoundness of their adversaries' ideas, they have denounced the accepted logical methods. The success of this Marxian stratagem was unprecedented. It has rendered proof against any reasonable criticism all the absurdities of Marxian would-be economics and would-be sociology. Only by the logical tricks of polylogism could etatism gain a hold on the modern mind.
Line 20:		Line 20:

	===Proletarian Logic===		===Proletarian Logic===
	The term 'proletarian logic' is sometimes taken as evidence of polylogism. This term is usually traced back to [[Joseph Dietzgen]] in his 11th letter on logic.<ref>Emmett, Dorothy, 1928, "Joseph Dietzgen: The Philosopher of Proletarian Logic," Journal of Adult Education 3, pp.26–35</ref><ref>The Positive Outcome of Philosophy; Letters on Logic, Especially Democratic Proletarian Logic.</ref> Dietzgen is the now obscure philosophical monist of the 19th century who coined the term 'dialectical materialism' and was praised by seminal communist figures such as [[Karl Marx]] and [[Vladimir Lenin\|V.I. Lenin]].<ref>A Dictionary of Marxist thought</ref> His work has received modern attention primarily from the philosopher [[Bertell Ollman]]. As a monist, Dietzgen ~~insists on~~ a unified treatment of mind and matter. As [[Simon Boxley]] puts it, for Dietzgen "thought is as material an event as any other". This means that logic ~~too~~ has "material" underpinnings.		The term 'proletarian logic' is sometimes taken as evidence of polylogism. This term is usually traced back to [[Joseph Dietzgen]] in his 11th letter on logic.<ref>Emmett, Dorothy, 1928, "Joseph Dietzgen: The Philosopher of Proletarian Logic," Journal of Adult Education 3, pp.26–35</ref><ref>The Positive Outcome of Philosophy; Letters on Logic, Especially Democratic Proletarian Logic.</ref> Dietzgen is the now obscure philosophical monist of the 19th century who coined the term 'dialectical materialism' and was praised by seminal communist figures such as [[Karl Marx]] and [[Vladimir Lenin\|V.I. Lenin]].<ref>A Dictionary of Marxist thought</ref> His work has received modern attention primarily from the philosopher [[Bertell Ollman]]. As a monist and materialist, Dietzgen insisted upon a unified treatment of mind and matter. As [[Simon Boxley]] puts it, for Dietzgen "thought is as material an event as any other". This means that to him logic also has "material" underpinnings.

	==Examples==		==Examples==

Pestergaines: /* Proletarian Logic */ Typo.

2011-08-22T11:38:14Z

Proletarian Logic: Typo.

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:38, 22 August 2011
Line 20:		Line 20:

	===Proletarian Logic===		===Proletarian Logic===
	The term 'proletarian logic' is sometimes taken as evidence of polylogism. This term is usually traced back to [[Joseph Dietzgen]] in his 11th letter on logic.<ref>=Emmett, Dorothy, 1928, "Joseph Dietzgen: The Philosopher of Proletarian Logic," Journal of Adult Education 3, pp.26–35</ref><ref>The Positive Outcome of Philosophy; Letters on Logic, Especially Democratic Proletarian Logic.</ref> Dietzgen is the now obscure philosophical monist of the 19th century who coined the term 'dialectical materialism' and was praised by seminal communist figures such as [[Karl Marx]] and [[Vladimir Lenin\|V.I. Lenin]].<ref>A Dictionary of Marxist thought</ref> His work has received modern attention primarily from the philosopher [[Bertell Ollman]]. As a monist, Dietzgen insists on a unified treatment of mind and matter. As [[Simon Boxley]] puts it, for Dietzgen "thought is as material an event as any other". This means that logic too has "material" underpinnings.		The term 'proletarian logic' is sometimes taken as evidence of polylogism. This term is usually traced back to [[Joseph Dietzgen]] in his 11th letter on logic.<ref>Emmett, Dorothy, 1928, "Joseph Dietzgen: The Philosopher of Proletarian Logic," Journal of Adult Education 3, pp.26–35</ref><ref>The Positive Outcome of Philosophy; Letters on Logic, Especially Democratic Proletarian Logic.</ref> Dietzgen is the now obscure philosophical monist of the 19th century who coined the term 'dialectical materialism' and was praised by seminal communist figures such as [[Karl Marx]] and [[Vladimir Lenin\|V.I. Lenin]].<ref>A Dictionary of Marxist thought</ref> His work has received modern attention primarily from the philosopher [[Bertell Ollman]]. As a monist, Dietzgen insists on a unified treatment of mind and matter. As [[Simon Boxley]] puts it, for Dietzgen "thought is as material an event as any other". This means that logic too has "material" underpinnings.

	==Examples==		==Examples==

Pestergaines: Typo.

2011-08-22T11:34:17Z

Typo.

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:34, 22 August 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Stub}}		{{Stub}}

	'''Polylogism''' is the notion that different ~~group~~ of people have different and incompatible modes of logic. Polylogism is a false axiom used in many ideologies (Marxism, etc) to form the basis of irreconcilable differences between the different groups.<ref name="Mises_polylogism_defined">Ludwig von Mises. [http://mises.org/humanaction/chap3sec2.asp "2. The Logical Aspect of Polylogism"], Chapter III. Economics and the Revolt Against Reason from the online version of [[Human Action]]. See also sections [http://mises.org/humanaction/chap3sec2.asp 2] and [http://mises.org/humanaction/chap3sec3.asp 3]. Referenced 2010-08-12.</ref>		'''Polylogism''' is the notion that different groups of people have different and incompatible modes of logic. Polylogism is a false axiom used in many ideologies (Marxism, etc) to form the basis of irreconcilable differences between the different groups.<ref name="Mises_polylogism_defined">Ludwig von Mises. [http://mises.org/humanaction/chap3sec2.asp "2. The Logical Aspect of Polylogism"], Chapter III. Economics and the Revolt Against Reason from the online version of [[Human Action]]. See also sections [http://mises.org/humanaction/chap3sec2.asp 2] and [http://mises.org/humanaction/chap3sec3.asp 3]. Referenced 2010-08-12.</ref>

	==Basic Refutation==		==Basic Refutation==

169.252.4.21: /* Proletarian Logic */

2011-08-22T11:00:21Z

Proletarian Logic

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:00, 22 August 2011
Line 20:		Line 20:

	===Proletarian Logic===		===Proletarian Logic===
	The term 'proletarian logic' is sometimes taken as evidence of polylogism. This term is usually traced back to [[Joseph Dietzgen]] in his 11th letter on logic.<ref>=Emmett, Dorothy, 1928, "Joseph Dietzgen: The Philosopher of Proletarian Logic," Journal of Adult Education 3, pp.26–35</ref><ref>The Positive Outcome of Philosophy; Letters on Logic, Especially Democratic Proletarian Logic.</ref> Dietzgen is the now obscure philosophical monist of the 19th century who coined the term 'dialectical materialism' and was praised by seminal communist figures such as [[Karl Marx]] and [[Vladimir Lenin\|V.I. Lenin]].<ref>A Dictionary of Marxist thought</ref> His work has received modern attention primarily from the philosopher [[Bertell Ollman]]. As a monist, Dietzgen insists on a unified treatment of mind and matter. As [[Simon Boxley]] puts it, for Dietzgen "thought is as material an ~~even~~ as any other". This means that logic too has "material" underpinnings.		The term 'proletarian logic' is sometimes taken as evidence of polylogism. This term is usually traced back to [[Joseph Dietzgen]] in his 11th letter on logic.<ref>=Emmett, Dorothy, 1928, "Joseph Dietzgen: The Philosopher of Proletarian Logic," Journal of Adult Education 3, pp.26–35</ref><ref>The Positive Outcome of Philosophy; Letters on Logic, Especially Democratic Proletarian Logic.</ref> Dietzgen is the now obscure philosophical monist of the 19th century who coined the term 'dialectical materialism' and was praised by seminal communist figures such as [[Karl Marx]] and [[Vladimir Lenin\|V.I. Lenin]].<ref>A Dictionary of Marxist thought</ref> His work has received modern attention primarily from the philosopher [[Bertell Ollman]]. As a monist, Dietzgen insists on a unified treatment of mind and matter. As [[Simon Boxley]] puts it, for Dietzgen "thought is as material an event as any other". This means that logic too has "material" underpinnings.

	==Examples==		==Examples==

147.9.241.43: fix reference formatting

2011-07-28T14:07:40Z

fix reference formatting

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:07, 28 July 2011
Line 20:		Line 20:

	===Proletarian Logic===		===Proletarian Logic===
	The term 'proletarian logic' is sometimes taken as evidence of polylogism.~~<ref>{{cite article \| title=Polylogism \|url=http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Polylogism"}}</ref>~~ This term is usually traced back to [[Joseph Dietzgen]] in his 11th letter on logic.<ref>~~{{cite article \| author~~=Emmett, Dorothy ~~\| year=~~1928 ~~\|title=~~Joseph Dietzgen: The Philosopher of Proletarian Logic ~~\| journal=~~Journal of Adult Education ~~\| volume=~~3 ~~\| pages=~~26–35}}</ref><ref>The Positive Outcome of Philosophy; Letters on Logic, Especially Democratic Proletarian Logic.</ref> Dietzgen is the now obscure philosophical monist of the 19th century who coined the term 'dialectical materialism' and was praised by seminal communist figures such as [[Karl Marx]] and [[Vladimir Lenin\|V.I. Lenin]].<ref>A Dictionary of Marxist thought</ref> His work has received modern attention primarily from the philosopher [[Bertell Ollman]]. As a monist, Dietzgen insists on a unified treatment of mind and matter. As [[Simon Boxley]] puts it, for Dietzgen "thought is as material an even as any other". This means that logic too has "material" underpinnings.		The term 'proletarian logic' is sometimes taken as evidence of polylogism. This term is usually traced back to [[Joseph Dietzgen]] in his 11th letter on logic.<ref>=Emmett, Dorothy, 1928, "Joseph Dietzgen: The Philosopher of Proletarian Logic," Journal of Adult Education 3, pp.26–35</ref><ref>The Positive Outcome of Philosophy; Letters on Logic, Especially Democratic Proletarian Logic.</ref> Dietzgen is the now obscure philosophical monist of the 19th century who coined the term 'dialectical materialism' and was praised by seminal communist figures such as [[Karl Marx]] and [[Vladimir Lenin\|V.I. Lenin]].<ref>A Dictionary of Marxist thought</ref> His work has received modern attention primarily from the philosopher [[Bertell Ollman]]. As a monist, Dietzgen insists on a unified treatment of mind and matter. As [[Simon Boxley]] puts it, for Dietzgen "thought is as material an even as any other". This means that logic too has "material" underpinnings.

	==Examples==		==Examples==

147.9.241.43: /* Origin of the concept */ add section on proletarian logic

2011-07-28T14:03:39Z

Origin of the concept: add section on proletarian logic

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:03, 28 July 2011
Line 15:		Line 15:
	Polylogism is so inherently nonsensical that it cannot be carried consistently to its ultimate logical consequences. No Marxian was bold enough to draw all the conclusions that his own epistemological viewpoint would require. The principle of polylogism would lead to the inference that Marxian teachings also are not objectively true but are only "ideological" statements. But the Marxians deny it. They claim for their own doctrines the character of absolute truth. Thus Dietzgen teaches that "the ideas of proletarian logic are not party ideas but the outcome of logic pure and simple." The proletarian logic is not "ideology" but absolute logic. Present-day Marxians, who label their teachings the ''[[Wikipedia:Sociology of knowledge\|sociology of knowledge]]'', give proof of the same inconsistency.		Polylogism is so inherently nonsensical that it cannot be carried consistently to its ultimate logical consequences. No Marxian was bold enough to draw all the conclusions that his own epistemological viewpoint would require. The principle of polylogism would lead to the inference that Marxian teachings also are not objectively true but are only "ideological" statements. But the Marxians deny it. They claim for their own doctrines the character of absolute truth. Thus Dietzgen teaches that "the ideas of proletarian logic are not party ideas but the outcome of logic pure and simple." The proletarian logic is not "ideology" but absolute logic. Present-day Marxians, who label their teachings the ''[[Wikipedia:Sociology of knowledge\|sociology of knowledge]]'', give proof of the same inconsistency.

	We may reasonably assume as hypothesis that man's mental abilities are the outcome of his bodily features. Of course, we cannot demonstrate the correctness of this hypothesis, but neither is it possible to demonstrate the correctness of the opposite view as expressed in the theological hypothesis. We are forced to recognize that we do not know how out of physiological processes thoughts result. We have some vague notions of the detrimental effects produced by traumatic or other damage inflicted on certain bodily organs; we know that such damage may restrict or completely destroy the mental abilities and functions of men. But that is all~~. It would be no less than insolent humbug to assert that the natural sciences provide us with any information concerning the alleged diversity of the logical structure of mind~~. Polylogism cannot be derived from physiology or anatomy or any other of the natural sciences.		We may reasonably assume as hypothesis that man's mental abilities are the outcome of his bodily features. Of course, we cannot demonstrate the correctness of this hypothesis, but neither is it possible to demonstrate the correctness of the opposite view as expressed in the theological hypothesis. We are forced to recognize that we do not know how out of physiological processes thoughts result. We have some vague notions of the detrimental effects produced by traumatic or other damage inflicted on certain bodily organs; we know that such damage may restrict or completely destroy the mental abilities and functions of men. But that is all. Polylogism cannot be derived from physiology or anatomy or any other of the natural sciences.

	Neither Marxian nor Nazi polylogism ever went further than to declare that the logical structure of mind is different with various classes or races. They never ventured to demonstrate precisely in what the logic of the proletarians differs from the logic of the bourgeois, or in what the logic of the Aryans differs from the logic of the Jews or the British. It is not enough to reject wholesale the Ricardian theory of comparative cost or the Einstein theory of relativity by unmasking the alleged racial background of their authors. What is wanted is first to develop a system of Aryan logic different from non-Aryan logic. Then it would be necessary to examine point by point these two contested theories and to show where in their reasoning inferences are made which — although correct from the viewpoint of non-Aryan logic — are invalid from the viewpoint of Aryan logic. And, finally, it should be explained what kind of conclusions the replacement of the non-Aryan inferences by the correct Aryan inferences must lead to. But all this never has been and never can be ventured by anybody. Polylogism, whether Marxian or Aryan, or whatever, has never entered into details.<ref name="Mises_Polylogism">Ludwig von Mises. [http://mises.org/etexts/mises/og/chap6.asp "Omnipotent Government: The Peculiar Characteristics of German Nationalism"] from ''Omnipotent Government'', 6. Polylogism. Referenced 2010-07-09.</ref>		Neither Marxian nor Nazi polylogism ever went further than to declare that the logical structure of mind is different with various classes or races. They never ventured to demonstrate precisely in what the logic of the proletarians differs from the logic of the bourgeois, or in what the logic of the Aryans differs from the logic of the Jews or the British. It is not enough to reject wholesale the Ricardian theory of comparative cost or the Einstein theory of relativity by unmasking the alleged racial background of their authors. What is wanted is first to develop a system of Aryan logic different from non-Aryan logic. Then it would be necessary to examine point by point these two contested theories and to show where in their reasoning inferences are made which — although correct from the viewpoint of non-Aryan logic — are invalid from the viewpoint of Aryan logic. And, finally, it should be explained what kind of conclusions the replacement of the non-Aryan inferences by the correct Aryan inferences must lead to. But all this never has been and never can be ventured by anybody. Polylogism, whether Marxian or Aryan, or whatever, has never entered into details.<ref name="Mises_Polylogism">Ludwig von Mises. [http://mises.org/etexts/mises/og/chap6.asp "Omnipotent Government: The Peculiar Characteristics of German Nationalism"] from ''Omnipotent Government'', 6. Polylogism. Referenced 2010-07-09.</ref>

			===Proletarian Logic===
			The term 'proletarian logic' is sometimes taken as evidence of polylogism.<ref>{{cite article \| title=Polylogism \|url=http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Polylogism"}}</ref> This term is usually traced back to [[Joseph Dietzgen]] in his 11th letter on logic.<ref>{{cite article \| author=Emmett, Dorothy \| year=1928 \|title=Joseph Dietzgen: The Philosopher of Proletarian Logic \| journal=Journal of Adult Education \| volume=3 \| pages=26–35}}</ref><ref>The Positive Outcome of Philosophy; Letters on Logic, Especially Democratic Proletarian Logic.</ref> Dietzgen is the now obscure philosophical monist of the 19th century who coined the term 'dialectical materialism' and was praised by seminal communist figures such as [[Karl Marx]] and [[Vladimir Lenin\|V.I. Lenin]].<ref>A Dictionary of Marxist thought</ref> His work has received modern attention primarily from the philosopher [[Bertell Ollman]]. As a monist, Dietzgen insists on a unified treatment of mind and matter. As [[Simon Boxley]] puts it, for Dietzgen "thought is as material an even as any other". This means that logic too has "material" underpinnings.

	==Examples==		==Examples==

Pesterbot: /* Links */External Links to Links, replaced: ==External links== → ==Links==

2011-06-21T19:11:14Z

Links: External Links to Links, replaced: ==External links== → ==Links==

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:11, 21 June 2011
Line 27:		Line 27:
	{{Reflist}}		{{Reflist}}

	==~~External links~~==		==Links==
	* [[Wikipedia:Polylogism\|Polylogism]] on Wikipedia		* [[Wikipedia:Polylogism\|Polylogism]] on Wikipedia
	* [http://mises.org/daily/3677 Marxism without Polylogism] by Jeffrey A. Tucker, excerpted from ''Freedom, Property, and Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe.''		* [http://mises.org/daily/3677 Marxism without Polylogism] by Jeffrey A. Tucker, excerpted from ''Freedom, Property, and Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe.''

Forgottenman: /* External links */Category:Economical Concepts --> Category:Economic concepts using AWB

2010-11-09T18:02:26Z

External links: Category:Economical Concepts --> Category:Economic concepts using AWB

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:02, 9 November 2010
Line 34:		Line 34:
	* [http://mises.org/journals/scholar/long.pdf Wittgenstein, Austrian Economics, and the Logic of Action] (pdf) by Roderick T. Long		* [http://mises.org/journals/scholar/long.pdf Wittgenstein, Austrian Economics, and the Logic of Action] (pdf) by Roderick T. Long
	* [http://mises.org/daily/4538 The Ideological Impregnation of Thought] by Ludwig von Mises, excerpted from ''Theory and History''		* [http://mises.org/daily/4538 The Ideological Impregnation of Thought] by Ludwig von Mises, excerpted from ''Theory and History''
	[[Category:~~Economical Concepts~~]]		[[Category:Economic concepts]]

Pestergaines: 5 revisions: Importing pages from Autrian Economics Wiki.

2010-11-06T12:38:03Z

5 revisions: Importing pages from Autrian Economics Wiki.

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:38, 6 November 2010
(No difference)