On "capitalist science" [was RE: On LM Re: Fidel vs LM]

E.C.Apling E.C.Apling at SPAMbtinternet.com
Mon Aug 30 13:00:05 MDT 1999

Although there is plenty of "flaky" science around - where the supposed
conclusions do not stand up to everyday reality - the use of statistics is
faulty - or the conclusions are presented as having general validity when
they really only apply within the limitations of a small group studied,
etc...  science ITSELF is NOT class-based.  Its application, however, is a
differnt matter altogether - and here it IS appropriate to apply the
question cui bono.  If you are talking about capitalist APPLICATIONS of
science then I have no dispute.

Mailto:E.C.Apling at btinternet.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-marxism at lists.panix.com
> [mailto:owner-marxism at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of Charles Brown
> Sent: 30 August 1999 17:28
> To: marxism at lists.panix.com
> Subject: On "capitalist science" [was RE: On LM Re: Fidel vs LM]
> >>> "E.C.Apling" <E.C.Apling at btinternet.com> 08/28/99 07:46AM >>>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-marxism at lists.panix.com
> > [mailto:owner-marxism at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of Russell Grinker
> > Sent: 27 August 1999 20:46
> > To: marxism at lists.panix.com
> > Subject: Re: On LM Re: Fidel vs LM
> >
> > > Charles:
> >  Since we are talking about the absolutely most vital concerns of the
> human
> > species, why not err on the side of caution ?  To just have a "let her
> rip"
> > attitude toward capitalist science is the most insane
> recklessness in the
> > history of humanity given evidence which gives us probable cause to
> believe
> > there may be profound destruction of our living space, the only  one we
> > have. We can afford to just stop most projects that raise
> probable cause.
> Paddy:
> The use of the term "capitalist science" is a nonsense, and can
> only lead to
> the slippery slope of idealism.  Almost everyone in present-day society is
> "in the pay of the capitalists" - or how else do they earn their
> bread?  Of
> course, SOME science - much too much - is used against the
> interests of the
> metropolitan working class and the peoples of the so-called third
> world, but
> that does not alter the FACT that the application of science is necessary
> for problem solving...  AND all the scienctific method, leave alone
> dialectical materialism, is sceptical of MAYBEs.  It is necessary to study
> experimentally each problem - only then can we know (a) is it REALLY a
> problem and (b) what counter measures have a real chance of success.
> ((((((((((((((
> Charles: I'm not sure how use of the term "capitalist science"
> can lead to idealism.  Does it imply that objective reality
> doesn't exist ? or a belief in God ?   I mean by it scientific
> discoveries that are "controlled" by imperialism and the basis
> for engineerings of imperialism. With the collapse of European
> socialism, there is a revanchism of the control and use of
> scientific discovery by imperialism and state-monopoly
> capitalism. How's that , instead of "capitalist science" ? You
> have to have some way of indicating how the discoveries of
> science are impacting and impacted by the class struggle or you
> will truly be delving in idealist science.
> The mark of materialist science is its orientation to the working
> class in the class struggle.  The notion of problem solving in
> the abstract is not a materialist conception. Problem solving for
> what class ?
> Russell:
> > Unfortunately just the kind of caution you're talking about is now very
> much
> > part and parcel of international development policy dictating the nature
> of
> > projects in those parts of the world subject to IMF/World Bank
> development
> > programmes.  Fewer and fewer major civil engineering projects are
> happening
> > as a result of this coalescence of a green outlook with the policies of
> > these international institutions.
> >
> > So do we tell people in Africa and Asia to wait for clean water
> and power
> > until such time as we've put in place the kind of political order
> > which can > ensure rational and conscious use of technology and thus
> reduce > > the side effects of major developments?  Rather than
> put blanket
> bans on
> > big projects  (see the current fetish much of the green left has about
> "big
> > dams") why not fight for the best we can get out of these
> people under the
> > circumstances?
> Paddy
> With which I could not agree more!
> (((((((((((((
> Charles: Russell's statement sounds like a version of _The White
> Man's Burden_ 1999. How can the heroic IMF/World Bank save the
> Africans and Asians without modern science ?
> Charles Brown

More information about the Marxism mailing list