Ideology vs. Science vs. Sciencism vs. Superman vs. ...

[Lisa & Ian Murray]

If it is legitimate to apply the concept of reduction [questionable] then
yes, it would be a reductionist claim.  It is also an exclusionary process
which delimits other possible meanings of wealth which may not be
commodities or commodifiable.

ian

what's wrong with trivia?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of Carrol Cox
> Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 1999 5:08 PM
> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> Subject: Re: Ideology vs. Science vs. Sciencism vs. Superman vs. ...
>
>
>
>
> Lisa & Ian Murray wrote:
>
> > Which makes an excellent case for an irreducible methodological
> pluralism.
> > The dialectical approach works best at the organism/environment
> interface;
> > reductionism works best at the molecular scale and anarchic
> pluralism works
> > on the ecosystem scale.
>
> I think we have either a non-sequitur or a triviality here. Using one
> method to saw firewood, another to cut bread, and a third to
> paint doors does not create a methodological pluralism. Different
> tasks, different methods.
>
> The quarrel over reductionism is often a quarrel over what is the
> *appropriate* reduction for a given purpose or object of study.
>
> Is the opening sentence of *Capital* a reduction?
>
> Carrol
>
>