[lbo-talk] Re: complex, theory, etc

[frank scott]

I tend to agree with chomsky on this, but maybe it's because of a bias
against the over-use of words like complex, which is repeatedly tripping
off the tongues of politicians who wiggle out of answering questions by
saying they are "complex" issues,  meaning they understand but mere
mortals can't be given a relatively simple answer...and by scholars and
alleged experts who use the word to mean that you mortals can't
understand this because it is too complicated, involved and needs too
much study - which I am capable of , because I have the time and brains,
and you have neither..

of course there is much that can be learned by probing deeply, beneath
the surface of issues and subjects that benefit from being studied , and
this is not to deny that fact, but only to criticize the overuse of the
word(s) which can also lead to the overuse of the practice: this must be
studied deeply, worked on intellectually, or nothing can be done about
changing the situation...to use a simple, non-complex expression, I
think that's bullshit...practice comes first, theory follows...

this may have something to do with whether the word  was the beginning,
as in some scriptural interpretation, the deed was the beginning - more
likely - or most likely of all,  that the one cannot be separated from
the other...

fs