Digloria asks me: doyle, please let me know if you are a lurker at bad. thank you.
Doyle I ain't been there since last summer meaning I removed my subscript from that list, so I don't know what has transpired from that moment on when I left. Just for public knowledge I was there and started writing and I got attacked right away. I left because I wasn't welcome there. I don't understand why you ask this question.
Digloria: well that you'd say this at all suggests that you have no idea what 'positivism' means and what a nd how folks have used it. positivism doesn't simply equal science. it's far more complicated and has much to do with an attitude toward the *uses* of scientific knowledge. the idea that facts about the social and natural world are apprehendable or that we can look and see what is out there is a variant to empiricism, not to be reduced to positivism, though clearly associated with it. suggestions for further reading if you'd like: Brian Fay, Social Theory and Political Practice. (short and sweet; clear language) Charles Morrow Critical Theory and Methodology.
otherwise, i have no interest in discussing positivism with folks who've read one or two polemics agaisnt anti-positivists and think they know what positivism is by virtue of a critique of anti-positvism. phooey.
Doyle Well ok. I won't discuss it with you. I'll be sure and read the two books you recommend. Are they pro-positivist, or anti-positivist? Does it take a graduate school education to read, or can a high school dropout read them? regards, Doyle Saylor