On the Scientific Method

ermadog at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca ermadog at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca
Sat Dec 1 16:34:03 MST 2001

On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, Greg Schofield wrote:

> First there is no such thing as bourgeois science - there is just
> science, a relatively new form of human thinking and as distinct from
> religion and ideology as can be imagined. Alas directly derived from
> religious understanding and born within ideological comprehensions.

The general distinctions we were making were serving a rough purpose. The
roots of science which are found in religion are not science. In order to
be able to make that distinction, we need some agreement as to what
science is. This does not have to be precise; and no one should be looking
for pure science.

> The spritual understanding of consciousness, dismissed by crude
> materialists as mysticism (it has a relation to it but is not
> identitical - mysticism being the ideology of sporitual knowledge).

What do you think of my conclusion that mysticism fetishizes a state of

> Arranging the myriad of associations, making sense of all the
> ideological componants of life is the area of real regious inspiration,
> art, spirtualism etc.

"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely
rearranging their prejudices." -William James

My dog does this. Conclusions still have to be tested in reality.

> Without spirtual understanding we are socially adrift, all religions in
> so far as they maintain their religious and not class ideological basis
> have this in common. Yes it is ideological, but it is ideology brought
> to a higher plane, it is ideology understanding itself. Science stakes
> out parts that once belonged to it, but in terms of religious
> understanding none o0f them are important parts, for religion is not
> about explaining the world but explaining ourselves in it.

Religion is a form of societally imposed self-expression - it's not group
think, it's group feel. If we didn't have religion messing us up, we would
need no voyage of internal self-discovery. No one's dispising the journey:
it's a job that's got to be done.

If religion is once again becoming the mode of expression of the masses,
we need to be able to think clearly about it. Not every sigh of the
oppressed has revolutionary implications.

I suspect that this "two ways of knowing" business is just semantic

Joan Cameron

PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.

More information about the Marxism mailing list