rwolff at minerva.cis.yale.edu
Sun Jan 15 12:04:26 MST 1995
Reply to Jamal Hannah:
The word "wrong" may, of course, be variously defined
according to the theoretical perspectives of definers. However,
in the context of a debate between an absolutist and an
anti-absolutist epistemological persepctive (Schartz's and my
perspectives, respectively, as I see them), the term "wrong"
does have a long history of definition by absolutists as "wrong"
in the absolutist sense...i.e., wrong for everyone, regardless
of perspective/theory/approach; "wrong" in the absolutist sense
of wrong INTERtheoretically and not only INTRAtheoretically.
And it was in precisely that historically common meaning of the
term "wrong" that I commented that Schwartz could use it (as an
absolutist), whereas I could not and would not.
Of course, if you relativize "wrong," make it a term
defined only in relation to SOME specific theroetical framework,
so that your wrong is not wrong for me, etc., then you have indeed
taken a long, significant step away from absolutism and towards
that set of different kinds of relativism I have been at some pains
to discuss and distinguish among.
More information about the Marxism