there's no such thing as positivism

[Chris Burford]

Going back to Jim H's original post, I do not doubt that logical
positivists were intelligent enough to allow verbally for the limits of
observable reality, but the philosophical enemy is surely better defined as
empricism.

Chris Burford

London.

At 11:35 AM 12/29/98 +0000, Jim Heartfield wrote:
>Sam Pawlett wrote
>
>>> Logical Positivism is not the enemy. The Vienna Circle were all
progressives, 
>>Neurath
>>> was a Marxist.
>
>It's true that if you read any contemporary social theory there is an
>obligatory passage denouncing 'positivism'.
>
>But first, the critics rarely mean the same thing by 'positivism' as the
>few logical positivists there are mean by it.
>
>And second, all of the criticisms that the sociologists make of
>'positivism' have already been made by the logical positivists
>themselves.