JKSCHW at aol.com wrote:
>
> Bhashkar's an obscurantist fool, not taken seriously by anyone in philosophy of science outside the cult. I do not understand why he has a cult. Let's stick to the serious people, please. --Justin Schwartz (a reformed philosopher)
Bhaskar does say some reasonable things e.g. in his book *A Realist Theory of Science* and his book-length polemic against Rorty. However, none of these things are original. I think what Brian Barry said of Rawls is appropriate "Some of it is true and some of it is original, but what's true isn't original and what's original isn't true." I once began reading B's *Dialectics*, I got to page 4 before I realized I had other things to do and quickly went and did them. Obscurantist isn't strong enough.
Sam Pawlett