Me: > Exactly. The Marxists who think this way tend to be Hegelians or > Althusserian structuralists. That is, they're well "educated," but not > so smart. > > IMHO, Marx and Marxists have had a lot of important insights into the > workings of the real world of capitalism and other modes of > production. I don't know what "fuck" means in this context. (It's not a very articulate way to disagree with someone's point of view.) I guess Ian wants empirical evidence to back up any kind of empirical statement. I don't see that as needed unless it's a controversial point.
On my IMHO statement, evidence isn't necessary. It's my humble opinion. I try to "prove" the importance of the ideas I'm referring to by _using_ them to help understand capitalism. The statement can't be proven in the abstract. BTW, my IMHO statement differs a lot from the kind of thing that Jurriaan has been saying (_all_ Marxists don't see the possibility of there being a ruling class that uses Marxian ideology, etc.) Instead of trashing an entire intellectual tradition (while ignoring details and variety of opinion), I'm trying to extract the valuable elements from that tradition. thus, there's the context that Ian omits, right after a parenthetical remark in the original: >Thus, I see the point as being to get rid of illogic, anti-empirical assertions, functionalism and the like. (Obscure jargon is another.) In my experience those flaws are totally unnecessary to a Marxist approach to understanding the social reality so that a cleaned-up theory can be produced. < > ================== > > Do you have a poll............................. > > > Fuck.
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
