I don't know why people think pomo is so difficult. Here's a young twenties non-native English speaker expressing his understanding of my classroom discussions of Neoclassical reductionism and Marxian overdetermination: Blair >>Thanks Blair >> >>Your answers were helpful. What I'm trying to find out is where exactly >>these two theories start arguing about. >> >>Currently my image is the following: >> >>Marxists see society as a spider net with economics embedded. All parts, >>strings, are interrelated and processes define the entity; a soft wind blow >>and the whole net starts wobbling. >> >>Neoclassical theorists select the economic part out of the spider net and >>therefore have only some strings left. The problem now with the Neoclassical >>approach is, that the content gets lost to a high degree. In other words, >>the spider net floats in the air with an unknown off-set. Also, for the sake >>of simplicities, the strings lack of elasticity when talking about basic >>Neoclassical economics, the remaining strings are assumed to be stiff. >> >>My interpretation is, that here with the spider net is the initial >>connection and simultaneously starts the divergence. >> >>What do you think about that? Blair Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
