Alan proposes developing an analysis by way of a critique of bourgeois
economics in parallel with and investigation of the real world
problems.
I am a bit intimdated by this as I know very little about
bourgeois economics and am rather loath to give up a portion of
my life to its study, but for those who are familiar with the
subject it might be useful politically. Whether it would be useful
scientifically is another matter.
Gould and Dawkins both devote some small portion of their energies
to critiquing the anti-darwinist positions of the creation-science
people, but I dont think that they claim that biological science
is in anyway advanced thereby. Are the bourgeois economists
of a more scientific stature than the creation scientists?
I dont know.