On Fri, 5 Dec 2003, Jon Johanning wrote:
> I think this helps to explain something that always puzzles me when I
> hear people making the claim that a lot of high-powered "social theory"
> or "social science" is needed for effective radical political action:
> the fact that there have been revolutions going back to ancient Greece,
> ancient China, ancient nearly everywhere else. If a social science
> that even its champions admit is still far from being in a mature stage
> were necessary to pull off a successful revolution, how could it have
> been possible so long ago?
>
Hey, I agree: social sciences are neither necessary nor sufficient conditions for political change. However, like physics or art or literature, I think they're an interesting and vital part of the kind of society I want to live in. If social science research and theory are occasionally useful to revolutionaries (like physics and art sometimes are), all the better.
Miles