kelley wrote:
> wow. nothing like removing human beings entirely from the picture.
It depends. I've not been following this thread so I don't know what specifically you are responding to, but some social understanding is achievable *only* by removing human beings from the picture. Suppose the question is, What distinguishes life in in 12th century France from life in 20th c. France? Unless your *first* response ignores human beings you will never arrive at human beings. Your first response must focus on abstract social relations ignoring all the features which make a person a person, even those features which make a person a woman rather than a man, an adult rather than a child. If you don't do that, you will end up with Adam Smith's instinct for trading and bartering, and therefore will have forever missed your chance to understand even your next door neighbor (or yourself).
Carrol