> So now you guys have decided that there should be "a clear distinction
> between Marxology and a positive Marxian research program".
Jurriaan:
Those were Dave's words (not "you guys") and I doubt if he was referring
specifically to a Lakotosian concept.
> - and actually, the best scientists are fiercely dogmatic about
> their central scientific beliefs, even although they know that they could be
> wrong.
They may hold strongly to particular beliefs but that, by itself, does
not mean that they are dogmatic. Dogmatism, quite simply, is antithetical
to science. This is not to say, of course, that some of the best scientists
can not be inconsistent: they often are, especially as it relates to
religion.
> It looks to me that after being Marx's faithful servant for many years,
If you think that I have been "Marx's faithful servant for many years"
then it simply means that you either haven't been listening for many years
or don't remember.
As for your comments at the end of your post, I do wish you wouldn't
constantly try to consider social and political questions in terms of
your personal experiences. The fallacy of composition.
In solidarity, Jerry_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Fri Jun 5 15:58:09 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jun 30 2009 - 00:00:03 EDT