Marxism was founded upon a scientific analysis of economics and its impact upon history and societal development. Read "Socialism: Utopian and Scientific" by Engels, it's a short and accessible read compared to something like Kapital, and it addresses this exact question specifically.
The reason th at you cannot derive an "ought from an is" is not cause its to complicated. Its cause you cannot deductively infer a value claim from truth claims alone.
I think he's trying to say that you can't take an axiom and derive a decision algorithm that's then morality from it for every possible (or most) situation. Like in tic tac toe you can write down every possible move and right counter move, but for chess it's too complicated so you can just hope to find useful strategies by trial and error. But these aren't derived sturdily by logic, they are merely heuristics that probably lead to a better outcome.
@@razum1448 I get that but its a wrong interpretation of the is-ought gap. Your subjective opinion or values of how things should is not part of the objective structure of our reality.
2:49 Wasn't Marxism founded on philosophical principles (dialectical materialism) rather than scientific ones?
Marx attempted to redefine the dialectic as a scientific method of analysis rather than a philosophical one
Marxism was founded upon a scientific analysis of economics and its impact upon history and societal development. Read "Socialism: Utopian and Scientific" by Engels, it's a short and accessible read compared to something like Kapital, and it addresses this exact question specifically.
The reason th at you cannot derive an "ought from an is" is not cause its to complicated. Its cause you cannot deductively infer a value claim from truth claims alone.
I think he's trying to say that you can't take an axiom and derive a decision algorithm that's then morality from it for every possible (or most) situation. Like in tic tac toe you can write down every possible move and right counter move, but for chess it's too complicated so you can just hope to find useful strategies by trial and error. But these aren't derived sturdily by logic, they are merely heuristics that probably lead to a better outcome.
@@razum1448 I get that but its a wrong interpretation of the is-ought gap. Your subjective opinion or values of how things should is not part of the objective structure of our reality.
Hume did not say that you cannot get an ought from an is !! Peterson has not done his homework
yes he did