From: Howard Engelskirchen (howarde@TWCNY.RR.COM)
Date: Fri Feb 18 2005 - 23:23:30 EST
Hi Andrew, Thanks. I think there were suggestions implicit in that work -- Bhaskar certainly highlighted real definitions as the goal of science and suggested in The Possiblity of Naturalism that they generally would have to precede causal hypotheses in social science (a suggestion I'm not sure I've ever understood actually -- it's in section 5 of ch. 2). But I'm not aware of much development of this thread. Ruth Groff has treated it briefly in her book on Bhaskar. howard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Brown" <A.Brown@LUBS.LEEDS.AC.UK> To: <OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 4:55 AM Subject: Re: [OPE-L] Fw: [OPE-L] Marx's Form of Analysis > Howard, > > You make a very important point, very well. Do you think that your specific application of scientific realism (and Aristotle) to Marx's argument on value was already present in early works such as Keat and Urry, Derek Sayer, or even Bhaskar's early stuff? (I don't think so myself, hence the high importance of your argument, imo). > > Many thanks, > Andy > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Feb 19 2005 - 00:00:01 EST