'Reason in Revolt: and Modern Science' by Alan Woods and Ted Grant, Wellred Publications, 1995 Reviewed by Jonathan Josoph The Marxist philosopher Walter Beniamin has a story about a chess playing puppet. A Grandmaster player is hidden inside. This expert puppet he likens to the Stalinist version of Marx's theory of history. It wins out every time.
In this view history becomes an inevitable process, with a pre-ordained destiny - the communist nirvana. Society and science make steady progress through a number of predetermined phases. The puppet history is flawlessly directed.
Under Stalin this simple view of history was ruthlessly used to justify the brutal industrialisation of soviet society. Reformist socialism rests on a similar premise -the gradual cumulative changes in capitalist society growing into socialism.
Unfortunately some of these ideas have also crept into Marxism. In this book they are preeminent.
Much of this is down to a misreading of the German idealist philosopher Hegel. According to Grant and Woods, Hegel came up with the basic laws and Marxists just need to invert them -"real philosophy died with Hegel" they say.
This is presumably why there is no mention of Heiddeger, Husserl or Wittgenstein, never mind Marxist philosophies like Althusser's, critical theory or all the current work being done by the critical realist school.
This gives the book a "timeless" air. It is as if all the work done by twentieth century Marxists has never happened.
But the problem is bigger than the authors' belief that all the problems of philosophy were solved a century ago. They have the wrong understanding of Marxism.
We cannot just "invert" Hegel's idealism. It remains idealist whatever way up it stands.
We have to extract elements that are useful and dump the rest, taking out the rational kernel from the mystic shell. This is what Marx did in Capital.
Nevertheless 'Reason in Revolt' is more serious than most efforts. It contains genuinely interesting material. The critique of reactionary genetic theories, like that in Richard Dawkins' 'The Selfish Gene', is particularly good.
Modern science For those interested in keeping a check on modern scientific developments and theories, the book is also of value. It is a pity the leaders of Socialist Appeal chose not to pay contemporary Marxism the same regard.
However, despite its scope, the book does no more than take sides with some theories rather than This does not invalidate others. It has nothing par- the whole work - but it does ticularly novel to say. It is an suggest that Marxism is account rather than an argu- more of a living, breathing, ment. developing theory than the For the authors, Engels is authors describe. the be all and end all. His In keeping with Engels, 'Dialectics of Nature' is held Woods and Grant argue that up as definitional. philosophy is the "Queen of There is a big problem the sciences". Perhaps we here. Engels' book was should give it a less majesbased on a careful study of tic role, but no less importhe most advanced scientific tant, that of an knowledge of the day to 'underlabourer' for the sciprove its theories. This was ences. Its job becomes to its strength. explain science's method, Now it is a weakness. As rather than to make substanthe science loses its credibil- tive proposals. ity, so too do some of Marxist philosophy is Engels' claims about nature. therefore implicit in its scienScientific knowledge often tific method not some grand progresses by means of rup- schema. tures and revolutions which This means that there are radically challenge pre- some major questions reviously held theories - the main for Marxist philosochanges have discredited a phy. It is not as cut and dry number of Engels' posi- as this book might suggest. tions.
SOCIALIST OUTLOOK No. 87, July 15 1995, Page 14