Martin Schiller wrote:
> Carrol Cox said on 11/6/99 9:53 AM
> >of understanding society as other than an irrational chaos.) The
> >question is only whether there are "real reasons" for affirming the
> >impossibility of society, knowledge, revolution, etc.
> If the reasons are related to or rooted in a person's belief system would
> you be willing to recognize their affirmation as "real reasons"?
No! The "belief system" of someone who says "society is impossible" *includes* the belief that society is possible. And I hesitate to believe that anyone not brain damaged can hold such an incoherent belief. Hence I have to believe that the person who says "society is not possible" is in fact lying -- lying in the same way as I would be lying if I said in this post that that enjoy reading Stevens more than I enjoy reading Pound. The only difference is that my lie is not incoherent and hence does not give itself away as does someone claiming that society is impossible.
I cannot see why anyone should spend much intellectual energy or time in refuting positions which no one in fact holds.