Marxism as science -Reply

Pete Bratsis aki at cunyvms1.gc.cuny.edu
Tue Apr 18 22:49:10 MDT 1995




Sorry, I got cut off.  Continuing -

This conception of science is directly opposed to that held by empericists.
Science is not based on observation.  If anything, observation hinders
science since it creates this focus on apperences and a fixation with
the first experience.  Thus, we will 'abstract' or 'generalize' from
this experience so that our particular relation with reality becomes
what Bachelard would term 'false' science.  (For a brief example
see ch. 5 of The Psychoanalysis of Fire, or, read The New Scientific
Spirit).

At any rate, I am tring to make explict that AM is not necessarily
more 'scientific' than other Marxisms - although it certainly is more
empericist than most others.
(An excellect examination of the misrepresentations of science
through empericism and its negative effects within contemporary political
theory is John Gunnell's  Between Philosophy and Politics.)


It is also no less 'bullshit' just because it adopts empericist methods.
For example, what we could term
	I AM HAVING COMPUTER PROBLEMS  WILL CONTINUE LATER>

PETER BRATSIS





     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------



More information about the Marxism mailing list