{"id":585,"date":"2018-05-09T10:39:24","date_gmt":"2018-05-09T07:39:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/?p=585"},"modified":"2022-12-06T12:09:26","modified_gmt":"2022-12-06T09:09:26","slug":"marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/","title":{"rendered":"Marx ve do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi"},"content":{"rendered":"

Kaan Kangal<\/strong><\/p>\n

Diyalekti\u011fin sadece toplumsal bir kategori mi oldu\u011fu yoksa do\u011fay\u0131 da m\u0131 kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sorusu Marksist literat\u00fcr\u00fcnde neredeyse bir as\u0131r boyunca tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f klasik bir polemik konusudur. Bir dizi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcre g\u00f6re Marksizmin do\u011fa ve do\u011fa bilimler g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc sadece Engels taraf\u0131ndan form\u00fcle edilmi\u015ftir. Bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe g\u00f6re Engels\u2019ten farkl\u0131 olarak Marx tarih-\u00fcst\u00fc evrensel yasalar\u0131 de\u011fil belirli baz\u0131 toplumsal \u00fcretim bi\u00e7imleri ve tiplerini incelemi\u015f, bu d\u00f6nem ve ko\u015fullara \u00f6zg\u00fcn toplumsal yasalar\u0131 ke\u015ffetmi\u015ftir. Marx ve Engels\u2019i birbirinden kal\u0131n bir \u00e7izgiyle ikiye ay\u0131ran bu yakla\u015f\u0131m daha da ileri giderek Engels\u2019in sahte bir bilimci, kaba bir indirgemeci, pozitivist ve metafizik\u00e7i oldu\u011funu iddia eder.[1]<\/a> Engels diyalektik “y\u00f6ntemi do\u011faya uygulayarak … Hegel\u2019in hatas\u0131n\u0131 tekrar eder<\/em>\u201d. Ama diyalektik, “tarihsel ve toplumsal ger\u00e7eklikle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131d\u0131r<\/em>\u201d.[2]<\/a> Baz\u0131 ba\u015fka d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcrler bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe kar\u015f\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kar ve Engels\u2019i Marx\u2019\u0131n bir kar\u015f\u0131t\u0131 olarak yans\u0131tma giri\u015fimini bo\u015funa bir \u00e7aba, art niyetli bir giri\u015fim, mistik idealizmin bir tezah\u00fcr\u00fc oldu\u011funu s\u00f6ylerler.[3]<\/a> Tabiri caizse bu Engels\u00e7i kamp Engels\u2019in do\u011fa kavram\u0131n\u0131n Marx\u2019\u0131n materyalist felsefesiyle “tamamen uyum i\u00e7inde<\/em>\u201d oldu\u011funu savunur.[4]<\/a> Do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi “Engels\u2019in icad\u0131 de\u011fildir<\/em>\u201d; tam tersine o, Marx ve Engels\u2019in k\u0131rk y\u0131ll\u0131k yolda\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n ve ortakla\u015fa y\u00fcr\u00fctt\u00fckleri bilimsel \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n bir \u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcd\u00fcr.[5]<\/a><\/p>\n

Daha sonralar\u0131 Marx ve Engels\u2019in birlikte y\u00fcr\u00fctt\u00fc\u011f\u00fc \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n onlar\u0131n her konuda ayn\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe sahip oldu\u011fu veya fikir ayr\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ya\u015fayamayaca\u011f\u0131 anlam\u0131na gelemeyece\u011fi tezi ortaya at\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. “Marx ne Engels\u2019in diyalektik yasalar\u0131n\u0131 tart\u0131\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r ne de kendisinin Engels ile birlikte evrensel materyalizmi ortakla\u015fa in\u015fa etti\u011fini destekleyen kayda de\u011fer herhangi bir fikir beyan etmi\u015ftir.<\/em>\u201d[6]<\/a> Keza burada Marx\u2019\u0131n Engels\u2019in do\u011fa ve diyalektik \u00fczerine y\u00fcr\u00fctt\u00fc\u011f\u00fc \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalara verdi\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131k destek g\u00f6rmezlikten gelinir. Marx asl\u0131nda “bilime derin bir ilgi g\u00f6stermi\u015ftir ve do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011finin b\u00fct\u00fcnl\u00fckl\u00fc bir bilimsel teorinin \u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fc olu\u015fturdu\u011funu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/em>\u201d[7]<\/a><\/p>\n

Ge\u00e7ti\u011fimiz y\u0131llarda Engels\u2019e y\u00f6neltilen benzeri ele\u015ftiriler tart\u0131\u015fman\u0131n halen s\u00fcrmekte oldu\u011funa i\u015faret ediyor. \u0130ddia \u015fudur: Do\u011faya ve topluma \u00f6zg\u00fc farkl\u0131 i\u00e7 yap\u0131, unsur ve s\u00fcre\u00e7ler her iki alan\u0131 da i\u00e7ine alabilen evrensel bir diyalekti\u011fin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fini olanaks\u0131z k\u0131lar. Do\u011fan\u0131n yasalar\u0131 insan bilinci ve eyleminden ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131zd\u0131rlar ve bunlara biat etmezler. “Bundan dolay\u0131 Engels\u2019in do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi topluma uyarlanamaz.<\/em>\u201d[8]<\/a> Di\u011fer bir deyi\u015fle Marx, Engels\u2019ten farkl\u0131 olarak “diyalektik yasalar\u0131 bir dizi do\u011fal g\u00fc\u00e7 (\u00f6rne\u011fin yer \u00e7ekimi) olarak ele almaz.<\/em>\u201d[9]<\/a><\/p>\n

Bu tip itiraz ve ele\u015ftiriler kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda Marx ve Engels\u2019in yaz\u0131 ve yaz\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131na biraz a\u015fina olanlar do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011finin sistematik olarak geli\u015ftirildi\u011fi Anti-D\u00fchring<\/em>\u2019in bir b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fcn Marx taraf\u0131ndan yaz\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve Engels\u2019in kitap bas\u0131lmadan \u00f6nce t\u00fcm metni Marx\u2019la payla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 hat\u0131rlayacaklard\u0131r. Do\u011fa bilimleri konusunda Marx\u2019\u0131n Engels\u2019e 1864 y\u0131l\u0131nda \u015fu s\u00f6zlerle iltifatta bulundu\u011fu da bilinir: “her zaman senin ayak izlerini takip ediyorum.<\/em>\u201d[10]<\/a><\/p>\n

Bir ba\u015fka \u00f6rnek Kapital<\/em>\u2019in Birinci Cildi (Eyl\u00fcl 1867) bas\u0131lmadan k\u0131sa bir s\u00fcre \u00f6nce Marx ve Engels aras\u0131nda ge\u00e7en bir yaz\u0131\u015fmad\u0131r. 16 Haziran\u2019da Engels, Marx\u2019\u0131n dikkatini Alman kimyac\u0131 August Wilhelm von Hofmann\u2019\u0131n Modern Kimyaya Giri\u015f<\/em> (1866) kitab\u0131na \u00e7eker ve Hofmann\u2019\u0131n “maddenin en ufak tanecikleri olarak molek\u00fcllerin kendi ba\u015flar\u0131na varolabildiklerini<\/em>\u201d ortaya koydu\u011funu s\u00f6yler. Hofmann\u2019\u0131n molek\u00fcl kavram\u0131 sonsuz b\u00f6l\u00fcnme dizgesinde “son derece rasyonel bir kategori, Hegel\u2019in tabiriyle bir \u2018d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcm noktas\u0131\u2019<\/em>\u201dd\u0131r, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc Hofmann molek\u00fcl\u00fc sonsuz bir do\u011fal devinim zinciri ve niteliksel d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm s\u00fcrecinin temel unsuru olarak kavramaktad\u0131r.[11]<\/a> Birka\u00e7 g\u00fcn sonra Marx \u015funlar\u0131 yazar: “Hofmann hakl\u0131nda olduk\u00e7a hakl\u0131s\u0131n. Ayr\u0131ca i\u015f\u00e7i ba\u015f\u0131n\u0131n kapitaliste d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fcn g\u00f6sterildi\u011fi [Kapital, Cilt 1] 3. b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcm\u00fcn sonunda da orada metinde Hegel\u2019in nicel de\u011fi\u015fimin nitel olana d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015fme yasas\u0131yla ilgili yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ke\u015ffi al\u0131nt\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131 ve bunun tarih ve do\u011fa biliminde muhafaza edildi\u011fini \u00a0 g\u00f6receksin.<\/em>\u201d[12]<\/a> Ger\u00e7ekten de Marx Kapital<\/em>\u2019in Art\u0131 De\u011ferin Oran\u0131 ve K\u00fctlesi<\/em> b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fcn sonunda \u015f\u00f6yle yazar: “Hegel\u2019in Mant\u0131k\u2019\u0131nda ke\u015ffetmi\u015f oldu\u011fu yasa, do\u011frulu\u011funu, do\u011fa bilimlerinde oldu\u011fu gibi, burada da g\u00f6sterir: s\u0131rf nicel de\u011fi\u015fiklikler, belli bir noktada, nitel farkl\u0131l\u0131klara d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr.<\/em>\u201d[13]<\/a><\/p>\n

EL\u0130PS D\u0130YALEKT\u0130\u011e\u0130 <\/strong><\/p>\n

Ben bu k\u0131sa yaz\u0131da Engels ele\u015ftirmenlerinin g\u00f6rmezden geldi\u011fi Marx\u2019\u0131n Kapital <\/em>Cilt 1\u2019in ikinci k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n (Dola\u015f\u0131m Arac\u0131. Metalar\u0131n Ba\u015fkala\u015f\u0131m\u0131<\/em>) ba\u015f\u0131ndaki bir pasaj\u0131 ele alaca\u011f\u0131m.[14]<\/a> S\u00f6z konusu pasajda \u015f\u00f6yle denmektedir:<\/p>\n

“Metalar\u0131n m\u00fcbadele s\u00fcrecinin birbirleriyle \u00e7eli\u015fen ve birbirlerini d\u0131\u015flayan ili\u015fkileri i\u00e7erdi\u011fini g\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015f bulunuyoruz. Metan\u0131n geli\u015fimi bu \u00e7eli\u015fkileri ortadan kald\u0131rmaz; ama i\u00e7inde hareket edebilecekleri bi\u00e7imi yarat\u0131r. Ger\u00e7ek \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclme y\u00f6ntemi tam olarak budur. \u00d6rne\u011fin, bir cismin bir ba\u015fka cisme do\u011fru s\u00fcrekli olarak d\u00fc\u015fmesi ve yine s\u00fcrekli olarak ondan uzakla\u015fmas\u0131 bir \u00e7eli\u015fkidir. Elips, i\u00e7inde bu \u00e7eli\u015fkinin hem kendisini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011fi hem de \u00e7\u00f6zd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc hareket bi\u00e7imlerinden birisidir.<\/em>\u201d[15]<\/a><\/p>\n

Marx burada gezegenlerin eliptik y\u00f6r\u00fcngelerine g\u00f6ndermede bulunur. G\u00fcne\u015f \u00e7evresinde hareket eden herhangi bir gezegenin bir yanda g\u00fcne\u015fin \u00e7ekim kuvvetiyle ona yak\u0131nla\u015fma e\u011filimi i\u00e7inde olmas\u0131na ve ayn\u0131 zamanda bir merkezka\u00e7 e\u011filimini de i\u00e7inde bar\u0131nd\u0131rmas\u0131na Marx \u00e7eli\u015fki demektedir. E\u011fer \u00e7eli\u015fki z\u0131tlar\u0131n birli\u011fini \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fcyorsa ve do\u011fada z\u0131tlar\u0131n birlikteli\u011finden bahsedilebilirse, o zaman Engels\u2019in anlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u015fekliyle Marx do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi fikrini benimsemi\u015ftir diyebiliriz.[16]<\/a> Marx, Kapital<\/em>\u2019de “t\u00fcm diyalekti\u011fin kayna\u011f\u0131<\/em>\u201dn\u0131n “Hegelci \u00e7eli\u015fki<\/em>\u201d kavram\u0131 oldu\u011funu vurgular.[17]<\/a> Hegel\u2019e g\u00f6re “hareket, varolan \u00e7eli\u015fkidir.<\/em>\u201d[18]<\/a> Engels, Anti-D\u00fchring<\/em>\u2019de (1876-78), Hegel\u2019den yola \u00e7\u0131karak hareket eden her \u015feyin bir \u00e7eli\u015fkiyi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011fini savunur. Gezegenlerin hareketleri hareketin genel do\u011fas\u0131na \u00f6zg\u00fcn \u00e7eli\u015fki olgusunun sadece bir \u00f6rne\u011fidir.[19]<\/a> Kapital<\/em>\u2019in birinci versiyonunun bask\u0131 tarihi (1867) ve Anti-D\u00fchring<\/em>\u2019in tarihleri temel al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda gezegenlerin eliptik hareketlerinin bir \u00e7eli\u015fki oldu\u011fu fikrinin Engels\u2019ten \u00f6nce Marx\u2019a ait oldu\u011fu ve Engels\u2019in bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc Anti-D\u00fchring<\/em> ve Do\u011fan\u0131n Diyalekti\u011fi<\/em>\u2019nde geli\u015ftirdi\u011fi bile ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilir.<\/p>\n

Marx\u2019\u0131n yukar\u0131daki pasajda elips \u00f6rne\u011fini kullanmas\u0131 bir dizi soruyu beraberinde getiriyor. Marx astronomiye ne kadar hakimdi? Eliptik hareketi neden \u00e7eli\u015fki kavram\u0131yla ifade etti? Engels ile Marx bu konuda hemfikirler mi? A\u015fa\u011f\u0131da bu sorulara cevap vermeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015faca\u011f\u0131m. Bu ara\u015ft\u0131rmaya bir ek olarak Kapital<\/em>\u2019in Sol ve Yordam yay\u0131nlar\u0131ndan \u00e7\u0131kan \u00e7evirilerinde bu pasaj\u0131n orijinalinden farkl\u0131 nas\u0131l anlamlar kazanabildi\u011fini g\u00f6stermeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015faca\u011f\u0131m.<\/p>\n

MARX\u2019IN ASTRONOM\u0130 \u00c7ALI\u015eMALARI<\/strong><\/p>\n

Marx\u2019\u0131n astronomi ve fizik okumalar\u0131, doktoras\u0131n\u0131 yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 1830\u2019lar\u0131n sonu ve 1840lar\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131na kadar gider. Bu y\u0131llarda Hegel\u2019in fizik felsefesini, Leibniz-Clarke yaz\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n\u0131 ve Newton\u2019un yer\u00e7ekimi kuram\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131r.[20]<\/a> Newton\u2019un Principia <\/em>adl\u0131 eserinini okurken \u015fu notlar\u0131 al\u0131r: “Do\u011fru s\u00f6yl\u00fcyorsun, ihtiyar Isaak Newton!<\/em>\u201d ve “Bravo, ihtiyar Newton!<\/em>\u201d[21]<\/a> Ren Gazetesi<\/em>\u2019ndeki bir makalesinde Leibniz-Newton tart\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131na de\u011finir.[22]<\/a> Alman \u0130deolojisi<\/em>\u2019nde Newton\u2019un, mekanik fizi\u011fi b\u00fcy\u00fck bir geli\u015fkinli\u011fe ula\u015ft\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 yazar.[23]<\/a> 1853 tarihli New York Tribune <\/em>k\u00f6\u015fe yaz\u0131s\u0131nda “Kepler\u2019in yasalar\u0131<\/em>\u201dna ve “Newton\u2019un b\u00fcy\u00fck ke\u015ffi<\/em>\u201dne yer verir.[24]<\/a> Kapital<\/em>\u2019\u0131n bas\u0131lmas\u0131ndan iki sene \u00f6nce Engels\u2019e, bir ara f\u0131rsat bulup “astronomiye yeniden el att\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131<\/em>\u201d iletir.[25]<\/a> Bu sefer “Laplace\u2019\u0131n gezegenler sisteminin olu\u015fumu teorisine ve onun farkl\u0131 cisimlerin kendi y\u00f6r\u00fcngeleri etraf\u0131nda d\u00f6nd\u00fcklerini nas\u0131l a\u00e7\u0131klad\u0131\u011f\u0131na<\/em>\u201d ilgi duymaktad\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca Laplace\u2019\u0131n teorisinin son zamanlarda Daniel Kirkwood adl\u0131 bir astronom taraf\u0131ndan geli\u015ftirildi\u011fini s\u00f6yler.<\/p>\n

Kirkwood “daha \u00f6nce istisnai oldu\u011fu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclen, gezegenlerin rotasyon farklar\u0131yla ilgili bir t\u00fcr yasa ke\u015ffetti. … [Buna g\u00f6re] iki gezegen aras\u0131nda her ikisinin \u00e7ekim kuvvetinin e\u015fit oldu\u011fu bir noktan\u0131n bulunmas\u0131 gerekir ki, bir cisim bu noktada, her ikisinin aras\u0131nda sabit dursun. Bu nokta gezegenin \u00e7ekim alan\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturur. … Kirkwood buradan hareketle gezegenin rotasyon h\u0131z\u0131yla y\u00f6r\u00fcnge halkas\u0131n\u0131n geni\u015fli\u011fi aras\u0131nda bir ili\u015fki oldu\u011fu sonucuna var\u0131r. … \u0130htiyar Hegel merkez \u00e7ekim kuvvetinin \u2018aniden\u2019 merkezka\u00e7 kuvvetine d\u00f6nmesiyle ilgi birka\u00e7 g\u00fczel espri yapar. … merkez \u00e7ekim kuvveti g\u00fcne\u015fin yak\u0131n\u0131nda en g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fcd\u00fcr; dolay\u0131s\u0131yla, der Hegel, merkezka\u00e7 kuvveti en g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fcd\u00fcr, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc o, merkez \u00e7ekim kuvvetinin en \u00fcst de\u011ferini a\u015far ve tam tersi.<\/em>\u201d Merkezka\u00e7 ve merkez \u00e7ekim kuvvetleri “orta bir noktada dengelenirler. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bu dengeyi asla terk etmezler.<\/em>\u201d[26]<\/a><\/p>\n

Marx burada g\u00fcne\u015fin y\u00f6r\u00fcngesinde elips seyrinde hareket eden gezegenlerin neden g\u00fcne\u015ften uzakla\u015fmad\u0131klar\u0131 veya g\u00fcne\u015fe yak\u0131nla\u015fmad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 sorgulamaktad\u0131r. Hegel\u2019in al\u0131nt\u0131da ge\u00e7en espirisi Hegel\u2019in Newton\u2019a getirdi\u011fi baz\u0131 ele\u015ftirileri ifade eder. Newton bir gezegenin g\u00fcne\u015fe yak\u0131nla\u015fma ve ondan uzakla\u015fma e\u011filimlerinin iki fiziksel g\u00fc\u00e7 oldu\u011fu iddia etmi\u015ftir. Hegel (ve g\u00fcn\u00fcm\u00fcz modern fizi\u011fi) sadece g\u00fcne\u015fin \u00e7ekim kuvvetinin ger\u00e7ek bir g\u00fc\u00e7 oldu\u011funu, gezegenin merkezden ka\u00e7ma e\u011filiminin sadece bir hareket e\u011filimi oldu\u011funu, fiziksel bir g\u00fc\u00e7 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrer.<\/p>\n

Kapital<\/em>\u2019de bir pasaj Marx\u2019\u0131n bu konuyla ilgili 19. y\u00fczy\u0131lda hakim bir astronomik kan\u0131ya a\u015fina oldu\u011funu g\u00f6sterir. Bu kan\u0131 “D\u00fcnyan\u0131n bir g\u00fcn g\u00fcne\u015fin \u00fczerine d\u00fc\u015fmesi olas\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131<\/em>\u201dyla ilgilidir.[27]<\/a> Bu analojiyi Marx toplumsal bir k\u0131yamet senaryosu ba\u011flam\u0131nda kullan\u0131r: “Her hisse senedi d\u00fczenbazl\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, er ya da ge\u00e7 f\u0131rt\u0131nan\u0131n bir g\u00fcn kopaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 herkes bilir; ama herkes onun, kendisi alt\u0131n ya\u011fmuruna tutulduktan ve kendisini g\u00fcven alt\u0131na ald\u0131ktan sonra, bir sonraki ki\u015finin ba\u015f\u0131nda patlamas\u0131n\u0131 \u00fcmit eder. … toplumdan gelen bir zorlama olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00fcrece, sermaye, i\u015f\u00e7inin sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ve \u00f6mr\u00fcn\u00fcn uzunluk veya k\u0131sal\u0131\u011f\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 kay\u0131ts\u0131zd\u0131r.<\/em>\u201d[28]<\/a> Benzeri bir ifadeyi Engels de Anti-D\u00fchring\u2019de dile getirir:<\/p>\n

“Kapitalist \u00fcretim bi\u00e7imi kendi k\u00f6kenine i\u00e7kin bu \u00e7eli\u015fki dolay\u0131m\u0131yla hareket eder … bu (k\u0131s\u0131r) d\u00f6ng\u00fc yava\u015f yava\u015f daral\u0131r ve hareket, t\u0131pk\u0131 gezegenlerin bir sarmal e\u011frisi izleyerek merkezle \u00e7arp\u0131\u015fmas\u0131nda oldu\u011fu gibi … ka\u00e7\u0131n\u0131lmaz olarak bir sonlan\u0131r. \u0130nsanlar\u0131n b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011funu giderek proleter kitlelere d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcren, \u00fcretimdeki toplumsal anar\u015finin itici g\u00fcc\u00fcd\u00fcr ve sonunda \u00fcretim anar\u015fisine bir son verecek olanlar da yine proleter kitlelerdir.<\/em>\u201d[29]<\/a><\/p>\n

Marx ve Engels\u2019in hakim oldu\u011fu baz\u0131 astronomi kaynaklar\u0131nda da gezegenlerin nihai s\u00fcre\u00e7te g\u00fcne\u015fle \u00e7arp\u0131\u015faca\u011f\u0131 fikrinin payla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 bilinir. \u00d6rne\u011fin Helmholtz y\u0131ld\u0131zlar\u0131n eliptik y\u00f6r\u00fcngelerin “giderek darald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131<\/em>\u201d ve “y\u0131ld\u0131zlar\u0131n g\u00fcne\u015fe \u00e7arpaca\u011f\u0131 zaman\u0131n gelece\u011fini<\/em>\u201d, ayn\u0131 kaderi t\u00fcm gezegenlerin payla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6yler.[30]<\/a> Mayer gezegenlerin g\u00fcne\u015f \u00e7evresinde “giderek daralan halkalar halinde hareket etti\u011fini ve en sonunda g\u00fcne\u015fe d\u00fc\u015fece\u011fini<\/em>\u201d belirtir.[31]<\/a> M\u00e4dler, Thomson ve Tait bu sav\u0131 merkezka\u00e7 e\u011filimleri ve kinetik teori ba\u011flam\u0131nda form\u00fcle ederler.[32]<\/a><\/p>\n

\u00c7EL\u0130\u015eK\u0130 KAVRAMI <\/strong><\/p>\n

Yukar\u0131da Marx\u2019\u0131n, Hegel\u2019in \u00e7eli\u015fki kavram\u0131na atfetti\u011fi \u00f6zel \u00f6neme de\u011finmi\u015ftik. Bu at\u0131f s\u00f6zgelimi neden Kant de\u011fil de Hegel i\u00e7in ge\u00e7erli oldu\u011fu sorusunu ak\u0131llara getiriyor. Kant kendi gezegenler mekani\u011fi teorisinde farkl\u0131 veya z\u0131t g\u00fc\u00e7lerin uzaydaki cisimlerin hareket y\u00f6r\u00fcngelerini etkiledi\u011fini kabul eder. Ama buna \u00e7eli\u015fki de\u011fil, z\u0131t g\u00fc\u00e7lerin etkile\u015fimi ismini verir. Kant \u00fc\u00e7 tip z\u0131tl\u0131\u011f\u0131 birbirinden ay\u0131r\u0131r. Mant\u0131ksal z\u0131tl\u0131k, ger\u00e7ek z\u0131tl\u0131k ve diyalektik z\u0131tl\u0131k. Birinci z\u0131tl\u0131k birbirini d\u0131\u015flayan veya yalanlayan mant\u0131ksal varsay\u0131m veya yarg\u0131lar\u0131n \u00e7eli\u015fkisidir. \u0130kinci tip, do\u011fada mevcut ve e\u015fzamanda \u00e7e\u015fitli cisimlere tesir eden z\u0131t do\u011fal g\u00fc\u00e7lerin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade eder. \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc tip ne mant\u0131ksal ne de ger\u00e7ektir. Diyalektik z\u0131tl\u0131k insan usunun sonsuzluk, mutlakl\u0131k veya ko\u015fulsuzluk gibi empirik olmayan d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnsel nesnelerin kavran\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kar\u015f\u0131m\u0131za \u00e7\u0131karlar. Bu tip nesneler sadece d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncede vard\u0131rlar, ama sanki ger\u00e7eklikte de mevcut olduklar\u0131 yan\u0131lsamas\u0131n\u0131 yarat\u0131rlar. Ger\u00e7eklik ve yan\u0131lsama aras\u0131ndaki bu ili\u015fki, Kant\u2019\u0131n diyalektik z\u0131tl\u0131k kategorisiyle ifade edilir.[33]<\/a><\/p>\n

Kant\u2019\u0131n aksine Hegel, \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin nesnel olarak da var olduklar\u0131n\u0131, sadece mant\u0131ksal \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrer. Hegel yer\u00e7ekimi kuvveti ile merkezi bir uzay cismi y\u00f6r\u00fcngesinde hareket eden cisimlerin aras\u0131nda nesnel bir \u00e7eli\u015fki oldu\u011funa i\u015faret eder. Yer \u00e7ekimi “atalet yasas\u0131yla \u00e7eli\u015fir.<\/em>\u201d[34]<\/a> Di\u011fer bir deyi\u015fle bir cismin ba\u015fka bir cisim taraf\u0131ndan \u00e7ekilmesi ile bu cismin di\u011fer cisim taraf\u0131ndan kendi taraf\u0131na \u00e7ekilmesi e\u011filimine g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi diren\u00e7 aras\u0131ndaki ili\u015fkiye Hegel \u00e7eli\u015fki demektedir.<\/p>\n

Kant ve Hegel\u2019in \u00e7eli\u015fki kavram\u0131na yakla\u015f\u0131m farklar\u0131 daha sonra Alman i\u015f\u00e7i hareketi i\u00e7inde mevcut baz\u0131 farkl\u0131 e\u011filimlerde de kendisini g\u00f6sterir. \u00d6rne\u011fin Eugen D\u00fchring, Marx\u2019\u0131n Kapital<\/em>\u2019ine kar\u015f\u0131 ba\u015flatt\u0131\u011f\u0131 karalama kampanyas\u0131nda Kapital<\/em>\u2019in Hegelci bir ruhla yaz\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve Hegel\u2019in t\u00fcm hatalar\u0131n\u0131n Marx taraf\u0131ndan tekrar edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrer.[35]<\/a> Bu hatalar\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131nda Marx\u2019\u0131n Hegelci \u00e7eli\u015fki kavram\u0131 gelir. D\u00fchring\u2019e g\u00f6re ger\u00e7ek \u00e7eli\u015fki veya ger\u00e7eklik i\u00e7inde mevcut bir \u00e7eli\u015fki diye bir olgu yoktur. \u00c7eli\u015fki, mant\u0131ksal hatalar\u0131 ifade eder ve toplumsal ya da do\u011fal olaylara uyarlanamaz.[36]<\/a><\/p>\n

Buna kar\u015f\u0131n Engels, Anti-D\u00fchring<\/em>\u2019de \u00e7eli\u015fki kavram\u0131n\u0131 \u00fc\u00e7 farkl\u0131 anlamda kullan\u0131r: mant\u0131ksal tutars\u0131zl\u0131k, do\u011fada \u00e7eli\u015fki olgusu ve her t\u00fcr bilimsel teoriye i\u00e7kin ka\u00e7\u0131n\u0131lmaz \u00e7eli\u015fki. \u0130lk \u00e7eli\u015fki tipi Kant ve D\u00fchring\u2019in \u00e7eli\u015fki kategorisiyle \u00f6rt\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr. \u0130kinci tip onlardan ayr\u0131\u015f\u0131r ve Hegel ve Marx\u2019\u0131n \u00e7eli\u015fki kavram\u0131n\u0131 destekler. \u00d6rne\u011fin do\u011fadaki her hareket olgusu bir \u00e7eli\u015fkidir der Engels.[37]<\/a> Do\u011fadaki nesnelerin \u00f6zde\u015fli\u011fi ve de\u011fi\u015fimi olgular\u0131n\u0131n bir aradal\u0131\u011f\u0131 nesnel bir \u00e7eli\u015fkidir. Bu, \u015f\u00f6yle anla\u015f\u0131labilir.<\/p>\n

Bir cismin \u00f6zde\u015fli\u011fi onu olu\u015fturan t\u00fcm \u00f6zelliklerin bir toplam\u0131d\u0131r. De\u011fi\u015fim bu \u00f6zelliklerin bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm ge\u00e7irmesidir. Nesneyi \u00f6zde\u015f k\u0131lan \u00f6zellikler ile bu \u00f6zelliklerin de\u011fi\u015fmesi birbirlerine z\u0131tt\u0131r. Bu de\u011fi\u015fime ra\u011fmen, bu de\u011fi\u015fim sayesinde ve bu de\u011fi\u015fim sonucu cismin \u00f6zde\u015fli\u011finden s\u00f6z edebiliyorsak, o zaman nesnenin \u00f6zde\u015fli\u011fi, \u00f6zde\u015flik ve de\u011fi\u015fim olgular\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7inde bar\u0131nd\u0131r\u0131yordur diyebiliriz. Bu iki nesnel kar\u015f\u0131t\u0131n nesnel bir aradal\u0131\u011f\u0131na Engels \u00e7eli\u015fki der. Engels bu \u00e7eli\u015fkinin her t\u00fcr do\u011fal veya toplumsal hareket olgusunda kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011funu s\u00f6yler. Gezegenlerin g\u00fcne\u015f \u00e7evresinde hareket etmeleri durumu do\u011fal \u00e7eli\u015fkinin sadece tikel bir \u00f6rne\u011fini olu\u015fturur. Eliptik \u00e7eli\u015fkiye \u00f6zg\u00fcn durum, gezegenlerin e\u015fzamanl\u0131 olarak z\u0131t e\u011filimlere tabi olmalar\u0131ndan ibarettir. \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc tip \u00e7eli\u015fki, evrensel ili\u015fkiler zincirinin sonu gelmez bir devinim ve geli\u015fim s\u00fcrecinde bulunmas\u0131 durumu ile bu ili\u015fkiler zincirini ele alan herhangi bir teorik kuram aras\u0131ndaki ili\u015fkiye i\u015faret eder. Her bir bireyin biyolojik sonlulu\u011fu ve o bireyin fiziksel ve zihinsel kapasitesinin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131, evrenin sonsuz devinim s\u00fcrecinini kavrama hedefiyle \u00e7eli\u015fir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla nesnel ger\u00e7ekli\u011fi kavramak ku\u015faktan ku\u015fa\u011fa devam eden sonsuz bir bilgisel ilerleme s\u00fcreci sonucu m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr.[38]<\/a><\/p>\n

\u015eu ana kadar Marx ve Engels\u2019in do\u011fada ve toplumda \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin mevcut oldu\u011fu konusunda ve bu konuda verdikleri \u00f6rneklerde de fikirlerinin \u00f6rt\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcklerini, buna ek olarak Kant veya Kant\u00e7\u0131 \u00e7eli\u015fki anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 Hegelci bir yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131 benimsediklerini g\u00f6rd\u00fck. \u015eimdi yukar\u0131da al\u0131nt\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131z Kapital<\/em>\u2019deki elips pasaj\u0131na geri d\u00f6nelim.<\/p>\n

Marx bu pasajda do\u011fada mevcut bir \u00e7eli\u015fkiden bahsetmez sadece; bu \u00e7eli\u015fkinin hareket ve geli\u015fim bi\u00e7imini de dile getirir. Pasaj\u0131n baz\u0131 kavramsal detaylar\u0131 bir yana, burada birka\u00e7 p\u00fcf nokta oldu\u011fu s\u00f6ylenebilir. Bunlardan birisi \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin yal\u0131n bir geli\u015fim s\u00fcreci sonucu ortadan kalkmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, yani yok olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131d\u0131r. Marx\u2019\u0131n deyi\u015fiyle metan\u0131n “geli\u015fimi \u00e7eli\u015fkileri ortadan kald\u0131rmaz, ama i\u00e7inde hareket edebilecekleri bi\u00e7imi yarat\u0131r<\/em>\u201d. \u00c7eli\u015fkilerin ortadan kalkmamas\u0131, ama ba\u015fka bir bi\u00e7im kazanmas\u0131 bu bi\u00e7imin mevcut somut toplumsal ya da do\u011fal ili\u015fkiler zinciri taraf\u0131ndan yarat\u0131lmas\u0131na dayan\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla s\u00f6z konusu ili\u015fkilerin, bu \u00e7eli\u015fkiye uygun yeni bir bi\u00e7im yaratabilmesi \u00e7eli\u015fkinin hayatta kalabilmesini olanakl\u0131 k\u0131lar. Yeni bi\u00e7imi i\u00e7inde hareket etmeye ba\u015flayan \u00e7eli\u015fki, \u00f6nceki haline k\u0131yasla daha geli\u015fkin bir \u00e7eli\u015fki olarak yine kar\u015f\u0131m\u0131za \u00e7\u0131kar (“ger\u00e7ekle\u015fir<\/em>\u201d). Ama bu ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan yeni hareket bi\u00e7imi, \u00e7eli\u015fkinin \u00f6nceki hali i\u00e7inde geli\u015fmesi (“\u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi<\/em>\u201d) sonucu ortaya \u00e7\u0131km\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Gezegenlerin eliptik y\u00f6r\u00fcngeleri, bir gezegenin tabi oldu\u011fu z\u0131t e\u011filimlerinin bir \u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcd\u00fcr. Gezegenin eliptik y\u00f6r\u00fcngede hareket etmesi, tabi oldu\u011fu \u00a0 z\u0131t e\u011filimleri ortadan kald\u0131rmaz, tam tersine bunlar\u0131 bar\u0131nd\u0131rmaya devam eder. E\u011fer bunlar\u0131 bar\u0131nd\u0131rmasayd\u0131, hareket etmezdi. E\u011fer bu e\u011filimlerden birisi mevcut olmasayd\u0131, mevcut olan di\u011fer e\u011filimi takip ediyor olacakt\u0131. 19. y\u00fczy\u0131l astronomi kuramlar\u0131nda g\u00fcne\u015fin merkez \u00e7ekim kuvvetinin gezegenlerin merkezka\u00e7 e\u011filimlerinden daha g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc olmas\u0131n\u0131n gezegenlerin son kertede g\u00fcne\u015fe \u00e7arpaca\u011f\u0131 sonucuna vard\u0131klar\u0131ndan bahsetmi\u015ftik. Bu iddia bug\u00fcnk\u00fc astronomi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan tart\u0131\u015fmaya a\u00e7\u0131k olsa da bizim a\u00e7\u0131m\u0131zdan \u015f\u00f6yle bir soru \u00f6nem arzeder. Diyelim ki gezegenler son kertede g\u00fcne\u015fe \u00e7arpt\u0131lar. Eliptik harekete i\u00e7kin \u00e7eli\u015fkinin kaderini nas\u0131l anlamak gerek? \u00c7arp\u0131\u015fma eliptik \u00e7eli\u015fkiyi \u00fcreten g\u00fcne\u015f-gezegen somut ili\u015fkisini yok edece\u011fine g\u00f6re yok olan o tikel gezegenin \u00e7eli\u015fkili hareket bi\u00e7imini de ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131r. Bu ama, bu \u00e7eli\u015fkinin s\u00f6z gelimi \u00e7arp\u0131\u015fmadan sonra tekrardan ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmayaca\u011f\u0131 anlam\u0131na gelmez. Bu \u00e7eli\u015fkiyi \u00fcreten tikel unsurlar\u0131n yok olmas\u0131 o unsurlar\u0131n belirli bir ili\u015fki bi\u00e7iminde hareket edebilmesini olanakl\u0131 k\u0131lan do\u011fal yasalar\u0131n da ortadan kalkt\u0131\u011f\u0131na i\u015faret etmez.<\/p>\n

Marx, Laplace\u2019\u0131n astronomi teorisine ilgi duydu\u011fu y\u0131llarda (1864\/65) Kapital<\/em>\u2019in \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc cildi \u00fczerinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmaktad\u0131r. Kar oranlar\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fc\u015fme e\u011filimlerini inceledi\u011fi bir pasajda “mevcut sermayelerin birka\u00e7 elde toplanmas\u0131<\/em>\u201dndan ve bir\u00e7ok kimsenin “m\u00fclks\u00fczle\u015ftirilmesi<\/em>\u201dne \u00f6zg\u00fc “merkez \u00e7ekim kuvvetinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra merkezden uzakla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 ters y\u00f6nl\u00fc e\u011filimler<\/em>\u201dden bahseder.[39]<\/a> Sermayenin birikim s\u00fcreci “kar\u015f\u0131t e\u011filimlerini ve g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcmlerini ifade eder<\/em>\u201d. Kar\u015f\u0131t e\u011filimlerin bir aradal\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir “\u00e7eli\u015fki<\/em>\u201ddir. Bu kar\u015f\u0131t e\u011filimler ve bu e\u011filimlerin olu\u015fturdu\u011fu \u00e7eli\u015fkiler kendilerini en somut \u015fekilde krizlerde ifade ederler. “Krizler her zaman mevcut \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin ge\u00e7ici ve \u015fiddetli \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmleridir. Bunlar bozulmu\u015f dengeyi bir s\u00fcreli\u011fine tekrardan kuran \u015fiddetli patlamalard\u0131r.<\/em>\u201d[40]<\/a> Krizler mevcut toplumsal \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin en somut ifadesi oldu\u011fu gibi, hem o \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin geli\u015fmesi sonucu ortaya \u00e7\u0131karlar hem de ayn\u0131 veya benzeri \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin yeni bir bi\u00e7imde hareket etmesine arac\u0131 olurlar. \u0130\u00e7inde hareket ettikleri bi\u00e7imler ve bu bi\u00e7imleri yaratan ko\u015fullar ortadan kalkmadan \u00e7eli\u015fkiler ortadan kalkmaz; ama bu \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcl\u00fcm ve geli\u015fim d\u00f6ng\u00fcs\u00fc i\u00e7inde farkl\u0131 bi\u00e7imler halinde hareket ederler.<\/p>\n

Bu ve benzeri analojilerde Marx gezegenlerin hareket mekani\u011fi ile kriz yasalar\u0131n\u0131n birbirlerine indirgenebilece\u011fi sonucuna varmaz. E\u011fer her iki alan\u0131n i\u015fleyi\u015f mant\u0131\u011f\u0131 ayn\u0131 olsayd\u0131, do\u011fa ve toplumsal yap\u0131lar aras\u0131nda bir analojiye gerek kalmazd\u0131; tersine her\u015feyi a\u00e7\u0131klayabilen tek tip bir teori ile yetinirdi. Ger\u00e7ek \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin do\u011fa ve toplumdaki mevcudiyeti ba\u011flam\u0131nda Marx\u2019\u0131n vurgulad\u0131\u011f\u0131 nokta, z\u0131t e\u011filimlerin etkile\u015fiminin (\u00e7eli\u015fki) geli\u015fti\u011fi, bu geli\u015fim sonucu hareketin olu\u015ftu\u011fu ve hareket bi\u00e7imi i\u00e7inde ayn\u0131 \u00e7eli\u015fkinin daha geli\u015fkin bir \u015fekilde varoldu\u011fudur.<\/p>\n

KAP\u0130TAL \u00c7EV\u0130R\u0130LER\u0130NDE EL\u0130PS PASAJI<\/strong><\/p>\n

Almanca orijinalinden hareketle y\u00fcr\u00fctt\u00fc\u011f\u00fcm\u00fcz bu incelemeyi elips pasaj\u0131n\u0131n iki farkl\u0131 T\u00fcrk\u00e7e \u00e7evirisiyle kapataca\u011f\u0131z. Bunlardan ilki Alaattin Bilgi\u2019nin \u0130ngilizce\u2019den \u00e7evirisi; ikincisi Mehmet Selik ve Nail Satl\u0131gan\u2019\u0131n Almanca\u2019dan \u00e7evirisi. Bilgi, s\u00f6z konusu pasaj\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yle \u00e7eviriyor:<\/p>\n

“Bundan \u00f6nceki b\u00f6l\u00fcmde, metalar\u0131n de\u011fi\u015fiminin, \u00e7eli\u015fik ve birbirlerini kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 d\u0131\u015ftalayan ko\u015fullar\u0131 i\u00e7erdi\u011fini g\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015f bulunuyoruz. Metalar\u0131n b\u00f6ylece meta ve para olarak farkl\u0131la\u015fmas\u0131, bu tutars\u0131zl\u0131klar\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmaz, ama i\u00e7inde bunlar\u0131n yanyana varolabilecekleri bir bi\u00e7im, modus vivendi <\/strong>yarat\u0131r. Bu genel olarak, ger\u00e7ek \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin uzla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 yoldur. \u00d6rne\u011fin, bir cismin s\u00fcrekli olarak bir ba\u015fka cisme do\u011fru d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc, ama ayn\u0131 zamanda da durmadan ondan uzakla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6ylemek bir \u00e7eli\u015fkidir. Elips, hem bir \u00e7eli\u015fkinin s\u00fcr\u00fcp gitmesini, hem de uzla\u015fmas\u0131n\u0131 saptayan bir devinim bi\u00e7imidir.<\/em>\u201d[41]<\/a><\/p>\n

Bilgi\u2019nin kayna\u011f\u0131n\u0131n \u0130ngilizce oldu\u011funu g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurursak, \u00e7evirideki anlam kaymalar\u0131n\u0131 incelemeden \u00f6nce bu metnin daha p\u00fcr\u00fczs\u00fcz \u0130ngilizce\u2019den nas\u0131l aktarabilece\u011fini de d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmeliyiz. Benim \u00f6nerim \u015fu \u015fekilde:<\/p>\n

“Bundan \u00f6nceki b\u00f6l\u00fcmde, metalann de\u011fi\u015fiminin, \u00e7eli\u015fkili ve birbirini kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 olarak d\u0131\u015flayan ko\u015fullar\u0131 ifade etti\u011fini g\u00f6rd\u00fck. Metalar\u0131n meta ve para olarak farkl\u0131la\u015fmas\u0131, bu tutars\u0131zl\u0131klar\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131rmaz, ama i\u00e7inde bunlar\u0131n yan yana varolabilecekleri bir bi\u00e7im, modus vivendi yarat\u0131r. Bu genel olarak, ger\u00e7ek \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin uzla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 yoldur. \u00d6rne\u011fin, bir cismin s\u00fcrekli olarak bir ba\u015fka cisme do\u011fru d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc, ama ayn\u0131 zamanda da durmadan ondan uzakla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6ylemek bir \u00e7eli\u015fkidir. Elips, hem bir \u00e7eli\u015fkinin s\u00fcr\u00fcp gitmesini olanakl\u0131 k\u0131lan, hem de uzla\u015ft\u0131ran bir hareket bi\u00e7imidir.<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n

C\u00fcmle yap\u0131s\u0131 ve s\u00f6zc\u00fck tercihi ile ilgili baz\u0131 detaylar\u0131 bir kenara b\u0131rak\u0131rsak, Almanca metin ve \u0130ngilizce \u00e7eviri aras\u0131ndaki farkl\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131 \u015fu \u015fekilde \u00f6zetleyebiliriz. \u0130lk c\u00fcmlede metalar\u0131n de\u011fi\u015fimiyle ilgili \u00e7eli\u015fkiler Almanca metinde bu de\u011fi\u015fime i\u00e7kin ve onun i\u00e7indeki \u00e7eli\u015fkiler olarak ge\u00e7erken, \u0130ngilizce\u2019de bu i\u00e7indelik ili\u015fkisinin yerini ifade olgusu al\u0131yor. Halbuki \u2018ifade etme\u2019 veya \u2018bir\u015feyin anlam\u0131na gelme\u2019 zorunlu bir i\u00e7indelik ili\u015fkisini \u015fart ko\u015fmaz. Meta m\u00fcbadelesine \u00f6zg\u00fc \u00e7eli\u015fkiler bu de\u011fi\u015fime tabi olmayan \u00e7eli\u015fkileri ifade etmez; kendi i\u00e7inde bar\u0131nd\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin hareket s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 belirler ve geni\u015fletir.<\/p>\n

\u0130kinci c\u00fcmlenin ba\u015f\u0131nda ge\u00e7en “Metalar\u0131n meta ve para olarak farkl\u0131la\u015fmas\u0131<\/em>\u201d deyimi Almanca metinde de\u011fil, \u0130ngilizce \u00e7eviride ge\u00e7iyor. Ayn\u0131 c\u00fcmlede ge\u00e7en “tutars\u0131zl\u0131k<\/em>\u201d, Almanca metinde “\u00e7eli\u015fki<\/em>\u201d. \u0130ngilizce \u00e7eviride de “tutars\u0131zl\u0131k<\/em>\u201d kelimesi kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in Bilgi\u2019nin T\u00fcrk\u00e7e \u00e7evirisinin \u0130ngilizce metni izledi\u011fini s\u00f6yleyebiliriz. Ama tutars\u0131zl\u0131k, s\u00f6z gelimi fikri tutars\u0131zl\u0131k veya mant\u0131ksal hata veya abs\u00fcrtl\u00fckle yak\u0131n anlaml\u0131d\u0131r. Marx\u2019\u0131n nesnel \u00e7eli\u015fki vurgusu burada \u00f6znel \u00e7eli\u015fki ile birbirine kar\u0131\u015f\u0131yor. Yine ayn\u0131 c\u00fcmlede \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin “yan yana varolabilecekleri<\/em>\u201d ifadesi Almanca\u2019da “i\u00e7inde hareket edebilecekleri<\/em>\u201d \u015feklinde dile getiriliyor. Yan yana varolmak, bu varolanlar aras\u0131nda herhangi bir ili\u015fki oldu\u011fu anlam\u0131na gelmek zorunda de\u011fil. E\u011fer \u00e7eli\u015fki varsa ili\u015fki vard\u0131r denebilir. Ama hem \u00e7eli\u015fki var, hem de yan yanalar demek anlams\u0131z. B\u00f6yle olsayd\u0131, \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin \u00e7eli\u015fki olmak d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bir de birbirleriyle yan yana olma \u00e7eli\u015fkisi i\u00e7inde olmalar\u0131 durumu ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmaktad\u0131r ki, Almanca metinde b\u00f6yle bir ifade bulunmuyor. Ayr\u0131ca burada \u00e7eli\u015fkinin karakterine bir yan yanal\u0131k de\u011fil, i\u00e7indelik durumu hakim. \u00d6b\u00fcr t\u00fcrl\u00fc meta de\u011fi\u015fiminin geli\u015fimi ve bu geli\u015fim sonucu ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan yeni hareket bi\u00e7imi i\u00e7inde mevcut \u00e7eli\u015fkinin kendine hareket alan\u0131 kazanabilmesinden bahsetmek anlams\u0131z olurdu.<\/p>\n

\u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc c\u00fcmledeki “\u00e7eli\u015fkilerin uzla\u015fmas\u0131<\/em>\u201d ibaresi yine \u0130ngilizce metinden kaynaklan\u0131yor. Almanca\u2019da bir uzla\u015f\u0131dan de\u011fil, \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmeden bahsediliyor. \u00d6rne\u011fin emek ve sermayenin aras\u0131ndaki \u00e7eli\u015fkinin uzla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131labilir bir \u00e7eli\u015fki oldu\u011funu s\u00f6ylemek ile bu \u00e7eli\u015fkinin farkl\u0131 bi\u00e7imler kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bu bi\u00e7imler i\u00e7inde kendisini ifade etti\u011fini s\u00f6ylemek aras\u0131nda da\u011flar kadar fark var. D\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc c\u00fcmledeki “s\u00f6ylemek \u00e7eli\u015fkidir<\/em>\u201d Almanca metinde “ger\u00e7ek \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclme y\u00f6ntemi tam olarak budur<\/em>\u201d \u015feklinde ge\u00e7iyor. Bizim \u00e7eli\u015fkili bir ger\u00e7ekli\u011fi ifade edi\u015f bi\u00e7imimizden ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z olarak bu \u00e7eli\u015fkiler nesnel olarak mevcutturlar. Biz \u00e7eli\u015fkileri, \u00e7eli\u015fkili \u015fekilde ifade etti\u011fimizden dolay\u0131 \u00e7eli\u015fkiler vard\u0131r demek Marx\u2019\u0131n \u015fiddetle ka\u00e7\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir s\u00fcbjektivizmdir. Son c\u00fcmlede de yine \u00e7eli\u015fkinin uzla\u015fmas\u0131 ifadesi ile belirtti\u011fimiz \u00e7eviri hatas\u0131n\u0131n tekrar edildi\u011fini g\u00f6r\u00fcyoruz.<\/p>\n

Selik ve Satl\u0131gan\u2019\u0131n metninin daha iyi bir \u00e7eviri oldu\u011fu s\u00f6ylenebilir.<\/p>\n

“Metalar\u0131n m\u00fcbadele s\u00fcrecinin birbirleriyle \u00e7eli\u015fen ve birbirlerini d\u0131\u015flayan ili\u015fkileri i\u00e7erdi\u011fini g\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015f bulunuyoruz. Metan\u0131n geli\u015fmesi bu \u00e7eli\u015fkileri ortadan kald\u0131rmaz; ama bunlar\u0131n bir arada bulunabilecekleri bi\u00e7imi yarat\u0131r. Ger\u00e7ek \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi genellikle b\u00f6yle sa\u011flan\u0131r. S\u00f6z geli\u015fi, bir cismin devaml\u0131 olarak bir di\u011fer cisme do\u011fru d\u00fc\u015fmesi ve yine devaml\u0131 olarak ondan uzakla\u015fmas\u0131 bir \u00e7eli\u015fkidir. Elips, bu \u00e7eli\u015fkinin hem ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesine hem \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesine olanak sa\u011flayan hareket bi\u00e7imlerinden biridir.<\/em>\u201d[42]<\/a><\/p>\n

Bilgi\u2019nin \u00e7evirisine k\u0131yasla yukar\u0131 de\u011findi\u011fimiz yan yanal\u0131k sorununun yerini ikinci c\u00fcmlede bir aradal\u0131\u011f\u0131n ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fcyoruz. Bir \u00e7eli\u015fkinin, metalar\u0131n m\u00fcbadele s\u00fcreci sonucu olu\u015fan bir bi\u00e7im i\u00e7inde yeni bir hareket imkan\u0131 kazanmas\u0131 konusunda Marx, bi\u00e7imin i\u00e7inde hareket edebilme olgusunu vurgular; \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin sadece bir aradal\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 de\u011fil. Bi\u00e7imin i\u00e7inde varolma veya yeniden belirme durumuna ek olarak Marx, \u00e7eli\u015fkinin hareketinden bahseder. Bir arada bulunmak, \u00e7eli\u015fkinin hareket halinde oldu\u011fu anlam\u0131na gelmek zorunda de\u011fil. Ama e\u011fer \u00e7eli\u015fki hareket halinde de\u011filse, o zaman \u00e7eli\u015fki geli\u015femez. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bir aradal\u0131k burada hem metnin Almanca asl\u0131na sad\u0131k kalmamaktad\u0131r, hem de anlam kaymas\u0131na neden olmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

\u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc c\u00fcmledeki “sa\u011flan\u0131r<\/em>\u201d ifadesi \u00e7eli\u015fkinin \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclme s\u00fcrecine \u00f6znel \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir unsurun m\u00fcdahalesi \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131\u015f\u0131m\u0131na sahiptir ki, b\u00f6yle bir anlam Marx\u2019\u0131n nesnel \u00e7eli\u015fkilerin \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi s\u00fcrecine dair g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r. Muhtemelen \u00e7evirmenler burada Marx\u2019\u0131n “y\u00f6ntem<\/em>\u201d kavram\u0131n\u0131n nesnel bir anlamda kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6rmezden gelmektedirler. En son c\u00fcmlede ge\u00e7en “olanak sa\u011flama<\/em>\u201d ifadesi sadece \u0130ngilizce metinde mevcuttur. Almanca metin ise \u015f\u00f6yledir: “Elips, i\u00e7inde bu \u00e7eli\u015fkinin hem kendisini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011fi hem de \u00e7\u00f6zd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc hareket bi\u00e7imlerinden birisidir.<\/em>\u201d T\u0131pk\u0131 i\u00e7indelik ili\u015fkisinin \u0130ngilizce \u00e7eviride kaybolmas\u0131 gibi “olanak sa\u011flama<\/em>\u201d kelimesi de yine \u0130ngilizce \u00e7eviriye \u00f6zg\u00fc bir \u00e7eviri hatas\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

SONU\u00c7<\/strong><\/p>\n

Marx literat\u00fcr\u00fcnde genelde dikkate al\u0131nmayan ya da g\u00f6zden ka\u00e7an bu elips pasaj\u0131 kan\u0131mca Marx\u2019\u0131n Kapital<\/em>\u2019deki diyalektik d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesini \u2013s\u0131k\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f bi\u00e7imde olsa da\u2013 en iyi \u00f6zetleyen pasajlar\u0131n aras\u0131nda yer al\u0131yor. Do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi veya Marx\u2019\u0131n do\u011fa bilimlerine hakimiyeti sorular\u0131na elips \u00f6rne\u011finin \u0131\u015f\u0131k tutabildi\u011fini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcyorum. Nesnel \u00e7eli\u015fki olgusunda Marx\u2019\u0131n Engels gibi Kant ve Yeni-Kant\u00e7\u0131lar\u2019a kar\u015f\u0131 Hegel\u2019in d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce \u00e7izgisini izledi\u011fi a\u015fikar. Nesnel \u00e7eli\u015fkinin de\u011fi\u015fim ve devinim olgular\u0131n\u0131n kalbinde yatt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bu ve benzeri pasajlarda Marx ve Engels dile getiriyorlar. Ama bildi\u011fim kadar\u0131yla \u00e7eli\u015fki ile hareket bi\u00e7imleri aras\u0131ndaki dinamik ili\u015fkiyi ortaya koyan ilk d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcr Marx\u2019t\u0131r. Her iki T\u00fcrk\u00e7e \u00e7eviride de \u00e7eli\u015fki ile bi\u00e7im aras\u0131ndaki i\u00e7indelik ili\u015fkisinin yok oldu\u011funu vurgulamam\u0131z\u0131n nedeni buradan kaynaklan\u0131yor.<\/p>\n

Marx, hareketin kayna\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ve temelinin \u00e7eli\u015fki oldu\u011funu belirtir. \u00c7eli\u015fkinin geli\u015fimi onu, ihtiya\u00e7 duydu\u011fu yeni hareket bi\u00e7imlerinin \u00fcretilmesine g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fcr. Yeni hareket bi\u00e7imleri i\u00e7inde, \u00e7eli\u015fkinin kareketeri bu bi\u00e7im taraf\u0131ndan belirlenir. Hareket bi\u00e7iminin \u00e7eli\u015fkinin geli\u015fimi sonucu ortaya \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f\u0131 ve bu yeni bi\u00e7im i\u00e7inde ayn\u0131 \u00e7eli\u015fkinin hareket etmeye devam etmesi, \u00e7eli\u015fkinin bi\u00e7imsel bir belirlenime tabi oldu\u011funa i\u015faret eder. \u00c7eli\u015fkinin bu yeni bi\u00e7im i\u00e7inde hareket etmeye ba\u015flamas\u0131na Marx \u00e7eli\u015fkinin \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi der. \u00c7eli\u015fkinin \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi, \u00e7eli\u015fkiyi yeni hareket bi\u00e7imlerine g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fcr. \u00c7eli\u015fkinin ortadan kalkmas\u0131, \u00e7eli\u015fkiyi olanakl\u0131 k\u0131lan ko\u015fullar\u0131n yok olmas\u0131ndan ge\u00e7er.<\/p>\n

[1]<\/a> Jean-Paul Sartre, Critique of Dialectical Reason. Volume 1. Theory of Practical Ensembles <\/em>(London: Verso, 2004), 26-7; George Lichtheim, Europe in the Twentieth Century <\/em>(New York: Praeger, 1972), 212; Lucio Colletti, Marxism and Hegel <\/em>(London: NLB, 1973), 46; Alfred Schmidt, Der Begriff der Natur in der Lehre von Marx <\/em>(Hamburg: Europ\u00e4ische Verlagsanstalt, 1993), 46, 55-6.<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> Georg Luk\u00e1cs, History and Class Consciousness: Studies in Marxist Dialectics <\/em>(Cambridge: MIT, 1971), 24, n. 6. 1925\/26 y\u0131llar\u0131nda, Luk\u00e1cs kendisine y\u00f6nelik ele\u015ftirilere kar\u015f\u0131 yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00e7eli\u015fkili bir savunmada do\u011faya i\u00e7kin diyalektik yasalar\u0131n oldu\u011funu teslim eder. Bkz. “Chvotismus und Dialektik\u201d, Jahrbuch der Internationalen<\/em> Luk\u00e1cs-Gesellschaft <\/em>(1998\/99): 127-28. 1960\u2019larda yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 savunmayla asl\u0131nda kendi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesinde hakim olan bir \u00e7eli\u015fkinin \u00fczerini \u00f6rtmeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 itiraf eder ve Tarih ve S\u0131n\u0131f Bilinci <\/em>kitab\u0131n\u0131 “a\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f bir kitap\u201d olarak g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc teyit eder. Bkz. Georg Luk\u00e1cs, “Zweites Gespr\u00e4ch. Georg Luk\u00e1cs \u2012Leo Kofler. Gesellschaft und Indiviuum”, Theo Pinkus (ed.), Gespr\u00e4<\/em>c<\/em>he mit Georg Luk\u00e1cs <\/em>(Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1967), 57-8; Georg Luk\u00e1cs, “Zur Ontologie des gesellschaftlichen Seins. I. Halbband\u201d, Georg Luk\u00e1cs Werke<\/em>, vol. 13 (Darmstadt: Luchterhand, 1984), 38, 395-96. Paul Burkett, Luk\u00e1cs\u2019\u0131n asl\u0131nda asla do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fini reddetmedi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrer, ama bu iddiay\u0131 Luk\u00e1cs\u2019\u0131n \u00f6zele\u015ftirisi yalanlamaktad\u0131r. Bkz. Burkett, “Luk\u00e1cs on Science: A New Act in the Tragedy\u201d, Historical Materialism<\/em>, 21, 3 (2013): 3. Ba\u015fka bir yerde ise Burkett\u2019in \u015fu s\u00f6zleri ba\u015fka tutars\u0131zl\u0131klara i\u015faret eder: “Luk\u00e1cs<\/em> diyalekti\u011fi hem do\u011faya hem de topluma uygulamad\u0131. Asl\u0131nda diyalekti\u011fin do\u011faya uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131 pozitivizme taviz vermek olarak g\u00f6rd\u00fc.<\/em>\u201d Paul Burkett, “Marx\u02bc Ecology and the Limits of Contemporary Ecosocialism”, Capitalism Nature Socialism<\/em>, vol. 12, 3 (2001): 130.<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a> A. Deborin, “G. Lukach i ego kritika marksizma\u201d, Pod Znamenem Marksizma<\/em>, 6-7 (1924): 49. Ayr\u0131ca bkz. R. K. Kirchhoff and T. I. Oiserman (ed.), 100 Jahre <\/em>“<\/em>Anti-D\u00fchring<\/em>\u201d<\/em>. Marxismus, Weltanschauung, Wissenschaft <\/em>(Berlin: Akademie, 1978); Sebastiano Timpanaro, On Materialism <\/em>(London: NLB, 1975), 74.<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a> V. I. Lenin, “Karl Marx. A Brief Biographical Sketch with an Exposition of Marxism”, in Lenin Collected Works<\/em>, vol. 21 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1974), 51.<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a> John Hoffman, Marxism and the Theory of Praxis <\/em>(London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1975), 56.<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a> Terrell Carver, “Marx, Engels and Dialectics\u201d, Political Studies<\/em>, Vol. XXVIII, No. 3 (1980), 360.<\/p>\n

[7]<\/a> John L. Stanley and Ernst Zimmermann, “On the Alleged Differences Between Marx and Engels\u201d, Political Studies<\/em>, XXXII (1984), 226.<\/p>\n

[8]<\/a> Guglielmo Carchedi, “Mathematics and Dialectics in Marx: A Reply\u201d, Science & Society <\/em>76, 4 (2012): 547. Ayr\u0131ca bkz. Guglielmo Carchedi, Behind the Crisis. Marx\u02bcs Dialectics of Value and Knowledge<\/em>, (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 37-8.<\/p>\n

[9]<\/a> Paul Paolucci, Marx\u02bcs Scientific Dialectics. A Methodological Treatise for a New Century <\/em>(Leiden: Brill, 2007), 245.<\/p>\n

[10]<\/a> Karl Marx, “Marx to Engels, 4 July 1864\u201d, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Collected Works<\/em>, vol. 41 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1985), 546.<\/p>\n

[11]<\/a> Frederick Engels, “Engels to Marx, 16 June 1867\u201d, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Collected Works<\/em>, vol. 42 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1987), 382.<\/p>\n

[12]<\/a> Karl Marx, “Marx to Engels, 22 June 1867\u201d, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Collected Works<\/em>, vol. 42, 385.<\/p>\n

[13]<\/a> Karl Marx, “Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen \u00d6konomie. Erster Band. Hamburg 1867\u201d, MEGA<\/em>, cilt II\/5 (Berlin: Dietz, 1983), 246. Marx, Kapital Cilt 1<\/em> (\u0130stanbul: Yordam, 2010), 299; Marx, Kapital Cilt 1 <\/em>(Ankara: Sol, 2011), 299.<\/p>\n

[14]<\/a> Bu pasaj ba\u015fka ara\u015ft\u0131rmac\u0131lar taraf\u0131ndan da Marx\u2019\u0131n do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fini benimsedi\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde yorumlan\u0131r, ama astronomi ve diyalektik \u00e7eli\u015fki aras\u0131ndaki ili\u015fki son derece y\u00fczeysel ele al\u0131n\u0131r. Bkz. Andreas Arndt, Karl Marx. Versuch \u00fcber den Zusammenhang seiner Theorie<\/em> (Berlin: Akademie, 2012), 239, 249; Hyman R. Cohen, “Countering the Revisionism of Marxist-Leninist Philosophy\u201d, Alan R. Burger (ed.), Marxism, Science, and the Movement of History<\/em> (Amsterdam: Gr\u00fcner, 1980), 111, 118; Hubert Horstmann, “Der dialektische Widerspruch im universellen Zusammenhang\u201d, Gerhard Bartsch (ed.), Der Dialektische Widerspruch<\/em> (Berlin: Akademie, 1986), 69; Chikatsugu Iwasaki, “Die Grundgesetze und die Kategorien der Dialektik\u201d, Siegfried B\u00f6nisch et al. (ed.), Marxistische Dialektik in Japan<\/em> (Berlin: Dietz, 1987), 64-5; M. Mark Mussachia, “On Contradiction in Dialectical Materialism\u201d, Science & Society<\/em>, vol. 41, no. 3 (Fall, 1977): 263, 275.<\/p>\n

[15]<\/a> “Man sah, da\u00df der Austauschproze\u00df der Waren widersprechende und einander ausschlie\u00dfende Beziehungen einschlie\u00dft. Die Entwicklung der Ware hebt diese Widerspr\u00fcche nicht auf, schafft aber die Form, worin sie sich bewegen k\u00f6nnen. Dies ist \u00fcberhaupt die Methode, wodurch sich wirkliche Widerspr\u00fcche l\u00f6sen. Es ist z.B. ein Widerspruch, da\u00df ein K\u00f6rper best\u00e4ndig in einen andren f\u00e4llt und ebenso best\u00e4ndig von ihm wegflieht. Die Ellipse ist eine der Bewegungsformen, worin dieser Widerspruch sich ebensosehr verwirklicht als l\u00f6st.\u201d Marx, “Kapital\u201d, MEGA<\/em>, cilt II\/5, 65.; Marx, Kapital Cilt 1<\/em> (\u0130stanbul: Yordam, 2010), 111; Marx, Kapital Cilt 1 <\/em>(Ankara: Sol, 2011), 112.<\/p>\n

[16]<\/a> Benzeri bir tez \u015furada da savunulmaktad\u0131r: Thomas Weston, “Marx on the Dialectics of Elliptical Motion\u201d, Historical Materialism, 20.4 (2012), 4; Kaan Kangal, “Carchedi\u2019s Dialectics; A Critique\u201d, Science and Society<\/em> 81:3 (2017), 428; Kaan Kangal, “Marx and Engels on Planetary Motion\u201d, Beitr\u00e4ge zur <\/em>Marx-Engels-Forschung Neue Folge<\/em>, 2016\/17, 207.<\/p>\n

[17]<\/a> Marx, “Kapital”, in MEGAII\/5, 481; Marx, Kapital Cilt 1<\/em> (\u0130stanbul: Yordam, 2010), 577; Marx, Kapital Cilt 1 <\/em>(Ankara: Sol, 2011), 570.<\/p>\n

[18]<\/a> G. W. F. Hegel, “Wissenschaft der Logik\u201d, Hegel Werke<\/em>, cilt 6 (Frankfurt a. M: Suhrkamp, 1986), 76.<\/p>\n

[19]<\/a> Friedrich Engels, “Anti-D\u00fchring”, MEGA<\/em>, cilt I\/27 (Berlin: Dietz, 1988), 318, 439.<\/p>\n

[20]<\/a> Karl Marx, “Hefte zur epikureischen Philosophie. F\u00fcnftes Heft\u201d, MEGA2<\/em>, cilt VI\/1 (Berlin: Dietz, 1976), 111-12.<\/p>\n

[21]<\/a> Bruno Kaiser and Inge Werchan, Ex Libris. Karl Marx und Friedrich Engels. Schicksal und Verzeichnis einer Bibliothek <\/em>(Berlin: Dietz, 1967), 127. Marx burada Newton\u2019un evrenin metafizik teorisini \u00f6ver. Yorumun yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 pasaj i\u00e7in bkz. A Collection of Papers, Which passed be-tween the late Learned Mr. Leibnitz, and Dr. Clarke, In the Years 1715 and 1716. Relat-ing to the Principles of Natural Philosophy and Religion <\/em>(London: Knapton, 1717), 51.<\/p>\n

[22]<\/a> Karl Marx, “Der leitende Artikel in Nr. 179 der \u2018K\u00f6lnischen Zeitung\u02bc\u201d, MEGA<\/em>, cilt I\/1 (Berlin: Dietz, 1975), 178. Engels 1844 tarihli bir makalesinde “Newton <\/em>bilimsel astronomiyi yer\u00e7ekimi yasas\u0131yla, bilimsel opti\u011fi \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131n da\u011f\u0131lmas\u0131yla, bilimsel matemati\u011fi binominal kuramla ve sonsuzluk teorisiyle ve bilimsel mekani\u011fi do\u011fal g\u00fc\u00e7lerin analiziyle in\u015fa etmi\u015ftir<\/em>\u201d der. Frederick Engels, “The Condition of England\u201d, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Collected Works<\/em>, vol. 3 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1975), 470.<\/p>\n

[23]<\/a> “Die Deutsche Ideologie\u201d, Karl Marx Friedrich Engels, Gesamtausgabe <\/em>(MEGA1<\/em>), cilt I\/5. (Glash\u00fctten im Taunus: Detlev Auvermann, 1970), 49; Marx ve Engels, Alman \u0130deolojisi, (Evrensel: \u0130stanbul, 2013), 63.<\/p>\n

[24]<\/a> Karl Marx, “Revolution in China and in Europe\u201d, MEGA<\/em>, cilt I\/12 (Berlin: Dietz, 1984), 147.<\/p>\n

[25]<\/a> “Marx to Engels, 19 August 1865\u201d, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Collected Works, cilt 42. (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1987), 529-530.<\/p>\n

[26]<\/a> A.g.e.<\/p>\n

[27]<\/a> “Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen \u00d6konomie. Erster Band. Hamburg 1872\u201d, Karl Marx Friedrich Engels, Gesamtausgabe (MEGA), cilt II\/6.1. (Berlin: Dietz, 1987), 272-273; Marx, Kapital Cilt 1<\/em> (\u0130stanbul: Yordam, 2010), 263; Marx, Kapital Cilt 1 <\/em>(Ankara: Sol, 2011), 263.<\/p>\n

[28]<\/a> Marx, Kapital Cilt 1<\/em> (\u0130stanbul: Yordam, 2010), 263-264.<\/p>\n

[29]<\/a> Engels, “Anti-D\u00fchring\u201d, Karl Marx Friedrich Engels, Gesamtausgabe (MEGA)<\/em>, cilt I\/27.1. (Berlin: Dietz, 1988), 439; Engels, Anti-D\u00fchring<\/em> (Ankara: Sol, ikinci bask\u0131), 434.<\/p>\n

[30]<\/a> H. Helmholtz, Ueber die Wechselwirkung der Naturkr\u00e4fte und die darauf bez\u00fcglichen neuesten Ermittelungen der Physik. Ein popul\u00e4r-wissenschaftlicher Vortrag gehalten am 7. Februar 1854<\/em> (K\u00f6nigsberg: Gr\u00e4fe, 1854), 38-9.<\/p>\n

[31]<\/a> J. R. Mayer, Die Mechanik der W\u00e4rme in gesammelten Schriften (Stuttgart: Cotta, 1874), 171.<\/p>\n

[32]<\/a> J. H. M\u00e4dler, Der Wunderbau des Weltalls oder Popul\u00e4re Astronomie<\/em> (Berlin: Carl Heymann, 1861), 165; William Thomson and Peter Guthrie Tait, Treatise on Natural Philosophy<\/em>. Vol. I (Oxford: Clarendon, 1872), 192. Marx ve Engels\u2019in bu kaynaklara dair yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 okumalarla ilgili bkz. Kangal, “Marx and Engels on Planetary Motion\u201d, Beitr\u00e4ge zur <\/em>Marx-Engels-Forschung Neue Folge<\/em>, 2016\/17, 202-224.<\/p>\n

[33]<\/a> Immanuel Kant,”Versuch, \u00fcber den Begriff der negativen Gr\u00f6ssen in die Weltweisheit einzuf\u00fchren\u201d, Kant, Werke<\/em>, cilt I. (Darmstadt: WBG, 2016), 339; Immanuel Kant,”Kritik der reinen Vernunft\u201d, Kant, Werke<\/em>, cilt II. (Darmstadt: WBG, 2016), B 532.<\/p>\n

[34]<\/a> G. W. F. Hegel, “Enzyklop\u00e4die der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundrisse. 1830. Zweiter Teil\u201d Hegel, Werke<\/em>, cilt 9. (Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp, 1986), 80, 83.<\/p>\n

[35]<\/a> Eugen D\u00fchring, Kritische Geschichte der Philosophie von ihren Anf\u00e4ngen bis zur Gegenwart<\/em>, (Berlin: Heimann, 1873), 452, 445.<\/p>\n

[36]<\/a> Eugen D\u00fchring, Cursus der Philosophie als streng-wissenschaftlicher Weltanschauung und Lebensgestaltung, <\/em>(Leipzig: Heimann, 1875), 30, 32.<\/p>\n

[37]<\/a> Friedrich Engels, “Anti-D\u00fchring”, MEGA<\/em>, cilt I\/27 (Berlin: Dietz, 1988), 257, 318.<\/p>\n

[38]<\/a> A.g.e., 245, 288, 319, 330.<\/p>\n

[39]<\/a> Karl Marx, “Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen \u00d6konomie. Dritter Band. Hamburg 1894\u201d, MEGA<\/em>, cilt II\/15 (Berlin: Akademie, 2004), 243; Marx, Kapital Cilt 3 <\/em>(Ankara: Sol, 1997), 219.<\/p>\n

[40]<\/a> Karl Marx, “Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen \u00d6konomie. Dritter Band. Hamburg 1894\u201d, MEGA<\/em>, cilt II\/15 (Berlin: Akademie, 2004), 245; Marx, Kapital Cilt 3 <\/em>(Ankara: Sol, 1997), 220.<\/p>\n

[41]<\/a> Marx, Kapital Cilt 1 <\/em>(Ankara: Sol, 2011), 112. “We saw in a former chapter that the exchange of commodities implies contradictory and mutually exclusive conditions. The differentiation of commodities into commodities and money does not sweep away these inconsistencies, but develops a modus vivendi, a form in which they can exist side by side. This is generally the way in which real contradictions are reconciled. For instance, it is a contradiction to depict one body as constantly falling towards another, and as, at the same time, constantly flying away from it. The ellipse is a form of motion which, while allowing this contradiction to go on, at the same time reconciles it.\u201d Marx, “Capital. Volume 1\u201d, Marx-Engels Collected Works, cilt 35 (Moscow: Progress, 1996), 113.<\/p>\n

[42]<\/a> Marx, Kapital Cilt 1<\/em> (\u0130stanbul: Yordam, 2010), 299; Marx, Kapital Cilt 1 <\/em>(Ankara: Sol, 2011), 111.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Kaan Kangal Diyalekti\u011fin sadece toplumsal bir kategori mi oldu\u011fu yoksa do\u011fay\u0131 da m\u0131 kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sorusu Marksist literat\u00fcr\u00fcnde neredeyse bir as\u0131r boyunca tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f klasik bir polemik konusudur. Bir dizi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcre g\u00f6re Marksizmin do\u011fa ve do\u011fa bilimler g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc sadece Engels taraf\u0131ndan form\u00fcle edilmi\u015ftir. Bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe g\u00f6re Engels\u2019ten farkl\u0131 olarak Marx tarih-\u00fcst\u00fc evrensel yasalar\u0131 de\u011fil belirli baz\u0131 toplumsal \u00fcretim bi\u00e7imleri ve tiplerini incelemi\u015f, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":586,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_themeisle_gutenberg_block_has_review":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1,377,327],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-585","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-yazilar","category-felsefe","category-kaan-kangal"],"yoast_head":"\nMarx ve do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"tr_TR\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale:alternate\" content=\"en_EN\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Marx ve do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Kaan Kangal Diyalekti\u011fin sadece toplumsal bir kategori mi oldu\u011fu yoksa do\u011fay\u0131 da m\u0131 kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sorusu Marksist literat\u00fcr\u00fcnde neredeyse bir as\u0131r boyunca tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f klasik bir polemik konusudur. Bir dizi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcre g\u00f6re Marksizmin do\u011fa ve do\u011fa bilimler g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc sadece Engels taraf\u0131ndan form\u00fcle edilmi\u015ftir. Bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe g\u00f6re Engels\u2019ten farkl\u0131 olarak Marx tarih-\u00fcst\u00fc evrensel yasalar\u0131 de\u011fil belirli baz\u0131 toplumsal \u00fcretim bi\u00e7imleri ve tiplerini incelemi\u015f, […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Teori ve Eylem\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/teoriveeylem\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-05-09T07:39:24+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-12-06T09:09:26+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/5.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"564\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"312\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"\u00c7a\u011fda\u015f \u00c7avu\u015fo\u011flu\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@teoriveeylem\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@teoriveeylem\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Yazan:\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Tahmini okuma s\u00fcresi\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"33 dakika\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/09\\\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/09\\\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"\u00c7a\u011fda\u015f \u00c7avu\u015fo\u011flu\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/e9bd173f3b1d0175ee175b4b0114d308\"},\"headline\":\"Marx ve do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-05-09T07:39:24+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-12-06T09:09:26+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/09\\\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":6613,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/09\\\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/5.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Yaz\u0131lar\",\"Felsefe\",\"Kaan Kangal\"],\"inLanguage\":\"tr-TR\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/09\\\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/09\\\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\\\/\",\"name\":\"Marx ve do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/09\\\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/09\\\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/5.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-05-09T07:39:24+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-12-06T09:09:26+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/09\\\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"tr-TR\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/09\\\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"tr-TR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/09\\\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/5.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/5.jpg\",\"width\":564,\"height\":312},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/2018\\\/05\\\/09\\\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Anasayfa\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Marx ve do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/\",\"name\":\"Teori ve Eylem\",\"description\":\"\u00dc\u00e7 Ayl\u0131k Sosyalist Teori ve Politika Dergisi\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"tr-TR\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Teori ve Eylem\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"tr-TR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/12\\\/400x400-1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/12\\\/400x400-1.jpg\",\"width\":400,\"height\":400,\"caption\":\"Teori ve Eylem\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/teoriveeylem\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/teoriveeylem\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.instagram.com\\\/teoriveeylem\\\/\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/e9bd173f3b1d0175ee175b4b0114d308\",\"name\":\"\u00c7a\u011fda\u015f \u00c7avu\u015fo\u011flu\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/teoriveeylem.net\\\/tr\\\/author\\\/cagdas\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Marx ve do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/","og_locale":"tr_TR","og_type":"article","og_title":"[:tr]Marx ve do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi[:] - Teori ve Eylem","og_description":"Kaan Kangal Diyalekti\u011fin sadece toplumsal bir kategori mi oldu\u011fu yoksa do\u011fay\u0131 da m\u0131 kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sorusu Marksist literat\u00fcr\u00fcnde neredeyse bir as\u0131r boyunca tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f klasik bir polemik konusudur. Bir dizi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcre g\u00f6re Marksizmin do\u011fa ve do\u011fa bilimler g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc sadece Engels taraf\u0131ndan form\u00fcle edilmi\u015ftir. Bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe g\u00f6re Engels\u2019ten farkl\u0131 olarak Marx tarih-\u00fcst\u00fc evrensel yasalar\u0131 de\u011fil belirli baz\u0131 toplumsal \u00fcretim bi\u00e7imleri ve tiplerini incelemi\u015f, […]","og_url":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/","og_site_name":"Teori ve Eylem","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/teoriveeylem\/","article_published_time":"2018-05-09T07:39:24+00:00","article_modified_time":"2022-12-06T09:09:26+00:00","og_image":[{"width":564,"height":312,"url":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/5.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"\u00c7a\u011fda\u015f \u00c7avu\u015fo\u011flu","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@teoriveeylem","twitter_site":"@teoriveeylem","twitter_misc":{"Yazan:":false,"Tahmini okuma s\u00fcresi":"33 dakika"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/"},"author":{"name":"\u00c7a\u011fda\u015f \u00c7avu\u015fo\u011flu","@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/#\/schema\/person\/e9bd173f3b1d0175ee175b4b0114d308"},"headline":"Marx ve do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi","datePublished":"2018-05-09T07:39:24+00:00","dateModified":"2022-12-06T09:09:26+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/"},"wordCount":6613,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/5.jpg","articleSection":["Yaz\u0131lar","Felsefe","Kaan Kangal"],"inLanguage":"tr-TR"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/","url":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/","name":"Marx ve do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/5.jpg","datePublished":"2018-05-09T07:39:24+00:00","dateModified":"2022-12-06T09:09:26+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"tr-TR","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"tr-TR","@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/5.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/5.jpg","width":564,"height":312},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/2018\/05\/09\/marx-ve-doganin-diyalektigi\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Anasayfa","item":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Marx ve do\u011fan\u0131n diyalekti\u011fi"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/#website","url":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/","name":"Teori ve Eylem","description":"\u00dc\u00e7 Ayl\u0131k Sosyalist Teori ve Politika Dergisi","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"tr-TR"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/#organization","name":"Teori ve Eylem","url":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"tr-TR","@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/400x400-1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/400x400-1.jpg","width":400,"height":400,"caption":"Teori ve Eylem"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/teoriveeylem\/","https:\/\/x.com\/teoriveeylem","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/teoriveeylem\/"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/#\/schema\/person\/e9bd173f3b1d0175ee175b4b0114d308","name":"\u00c7a\u011fda\u015f \u00c7avu\u015fo\u011flu","url":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/author\/cagdas\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/585","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=585"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/585\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2344,"href":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/585\/revisions\/2344"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/586"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=585"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=585"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teoriveeylem.net\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=585"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}