Sorry that one-liner was for Sartesian. Also - it sort of struck me Sartesian:
That perhaps you sometimes over-react to the term 'reductionism' from exactly this sort of vantage point. I do not know if this is accurate, and you may disagree. However I recall an instance where you objected strongly to what Mark Baugher was saying on the term as applied to the question of underlying bases-superstucture issues. There Mark was citing the famous letters of Engels - clarifying a few years after Marx had died if I recall. In recent biology - reductionism as you say, was/is rampant - and usually to 'pre-fit' in a 'Procrustean' way, facts to theory. I always think of Dawkins when this topic comes up. But in Marxist theory as applied, there is the same mis-application at times. But this does not discredit the term itself - if applied appropriately. Of course that is quite a big "if"! Be well, H -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#34831): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/34831 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/110792212/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
