Quote:
Originally Posted by onelifecrisis
I'd ask you to define "intellectual brilliance" but it might head along a pointless tangent. I guess what's really bugging me here is I'm seeing people attacking this guy Marx (who TBH I know very little about) on a sort of "personal" level (e.g. he had a bad character, he had a poor intellect, he wasn't original, and so on) which is all rather beside the point AFAIC. He could have been an immoral, stupid, idea-stealing moron but none of that has any bearing on whether or not the ideas were good ideas or bad ideas. If people disagree with the ideas they should attack the ideas, not the man. Attacking the man is just cheap.
|
I'm not sure what you're reading because we've all mentioned that his ideas were, well, crap, based upon flawed logic and seemingly rooted in his character.
Is there any particular idea you want to see refuted?
As far as attacking the man himself is concerned, really I think that only goes so far as stating that his ridiculous ideas were rooted in an attempt to justify his behaviors.
I really don't think anyone has the time or inclination to do a point-by-point list of all the errors in Marx's ideas, so in summation, you'll just have to accept that people think his ideas were, well, stupid - at least as far as the term "Marxism" is applied.