Talk:On Contradiction

Philosophy: Literature / Social and political / Eastern / Contemporary Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Social and political philosophy
	Eastern philosophy
	Contemporary philosophy

Socialism

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

China Mid‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Controversy involving the conception of "On Contradiction"

The origin of On Contradiction is not a straight forward as you expressed. Although there are sources that claim the essay is the result of lecture notes, according to Lee Feigon's book, Mao, A Reinterpretation Mao has disavowed the lecture notes. He probably was concerned about being seen as a plagiarist. Therefore, it is not fair to claim On Contradiction is wrought from those notes. Additionally, the essay Stuart Schram noted in his book The Thought of Mao Tse-Tung that Mao only wanted people reading the most current versions of his work. He wrote that both On Practice and On Contradiction were officially published over ten years after those lectures. In that time the essays could have been thoroughly revised in order to reflect Mao's more current thoughts, so although the lectures were definitely a seminal part of Mao's journey as a thinker, they were not necessarily responsible for On Contradiction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammcallister (talk • contribs) 01:12, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a great article; the layout provides a solid background and basis. I enjoy the conclusion section as it adequately summarizes the most core aspects of Contradiction. In terms of content, I think what is here is brilliant. One editing change that might prove helpful is the addition of more links to other wikipedia pages. Ideas such as "metaphysics" and "proletariat" are not linked to their respective Wikipedia pages. While this is by no means a large issue, providing the means to discover the dialogue about these exact terms would be helpful for most readers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dukelouie (talk • contribs) 18:57, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it necessary to say "In the conclusion, Mao sums up all the points that were made in his essay."? It seems a little elementary, if readers are researching and understanding On Contradiction I'm fairly sure they understand essay structure regardless of the fact that there is no useful information conveyed by that summary sentence. Shouldn't it include either his main points summarized or be removed? Just my two cents... 99.249.182.150 (talk) 05:25, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any overlap with logical positivism?

Mao seems to criticize "metaphysicians" in a similar way to the logical positivists of the Vienna Circle (who met regularly up until 1936, a year before this piece of writing was published) AslanFrench (talk) 01:08, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]