[Marxism] Who Will Do the Science This Millennium?

Stacey Barber emusis at adelphia.net
Tue May 4 08:07:45 MDT 2004


Message: 7
Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 17:34:08 EDT
From: Cnyadp at aol.com
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Who Will Do the Science of This Millennium?
To: marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu, furuhashi.1 at osu.edu
Message-ID: <1a7.2316e241.2dc814d0 at aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

When science has been corrupted scientists of merit  do not chose to compete
on advisory committees with corporate hacks or submit their findings to be
skewed and misused... In the social sciences  as well as
physics we live in  a middle ages intellectual climate serving
multi-national
 corporations created by current politics.

joe dubovy


Ever read Thomas Kuhn's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions"?  I had to
read it for my Resources in the Sciences class last semester.  He is
definitely a stickler for the social context in which science is practiced
in effecting which theories are accepted and which ones aren't.  Also-

http://www.philosopher.org.uk/index.htm

Paul Feyerabend
Paul Feyerabend thought that the superiority of the modern scientific method
should not be assumed. He argued for an anarchist approach to knowledge: we
cannot predict what shape future knowledge will have, so we should not
confine ourselves to one universal method of gaining knowledge. Feyerabend
agrees with Kuhn that the history of science is the history of different
viewpoints, and for Feyerabend this means that what counts as 'knowledge' in
the future may have paradigms we cannot yet know. As we cannot yet know
them, we should not attempt to forbid future intellectual enterprise by
attempting to define one narrow dominant paradigm of knowledge using the
model of physics.



Stacey B.





More information about the Marxism mailing list