I am a little puzzled here. See below: At 12:11 PM 9/16/2005 +1000, Ian Hunt wrote:
Dear Ralph, Now I see your point - it was not clear before. (BTW "In Contradiction" is earlier - the science and society article is based on it but it does spell out more completely his argument). I agree with you that Graham Priest's interest is primarily with logic and ways in which we represent the world rather than with the way the world works.
Well, I don't see Priest saying very much about the representation of the world either.
In so far as Graham Priest contributes to changing the world
I don't even care about this.
it would only be by participating in the debate over the interpretation of Marxist ideas eg the dismissive rejection of talk of 'dialectic' as 'nonsense' by what used to be the school of Analytical Marxism.
Well, if you're interested in ideas, you have to participate in discussing and debating ideas.
But maybe, as you say, Priest's way of doing it shows that it does not materially matter much whether one takes talk of 'dialectic' as he interprets it as 'nonsense' or otherwise,
I don't understand this. _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
