[Marxism] Re: apes ad nauseam

mds zenporcupinegrind at breathe.com
Mon Dec 27 16:55:35 MST 2004


>> all I meant to draw attention to is that biological perspectives can 
>> of course be fetishised, leaving us with a conception of man that can 
>> be as paralysing for a movement for progress and social change as 
>> that of the theologians.
>
> And its inverse can also be fetishized. Which is why this discussion 
> is not "mountain out of a mole-hill".

Again, read in the context of the original message, which was, if you 
recall, ID.

> The critique of ape advocates (Goodall, Dawkins) as (pro-capitalists) 
> social activists, cannot be confused with their advances as 
> scientists, even if they subjectively go hand-in-hand.

Indeed this may be the case; I only posited Dawkins/Gould as a 
_potential_ example (which again I believe I made clear) - that is, I'm 
not versed enough to be able to draw concrete conclusions until I read 
further into their works. You seem to concur that it is of great 
importance to separate the biological science from the potential 
ideological connotations being attached / vocalised. That's what I was 
trying to reflect on in the first place. Circles.

>
>> Let's not simply laud 'basic materialism' without looking at its own 
>> ideological convictions.
>
> Oh, I agree, which is why I wanted to clarify yours. You see, there 
> are much more people willing to deny that we are apes for ideological 
> reasons, than people who become genetic determinists. You sounded like 
> the former.

I'm not. Shall we move on?

(Apologies to the group for dragging this out)

cheers,
M





More information about the Marxism mailing list