Philosophically, that's a load of postmodernist shite. Factually, it's just misinformed, because the med profession talks about health and prevention all the time. Reality, however, dictates that better treatments for cancer require an obsession with talking about cancer.
> > Same thing with Marxists and pretty much all other scientists.
>
> I think (and I may be wrong) the point of the original observation
>
> >> But how many marxists notice anything except malnutrition
> >> and disease in the developing world?
>
> was that Marxists have a predetermined view of the world, which
> prevents them from seeing accurately. Makes sense to me--why should
> Marxism be different from any other ideology? What neither Ulhas nor
> Joseph said explicitly (and may not have intended to say--I can't know
> that) is that this point of view results from a eurocentric bias.
>
> All the best,
>
> John A
Sure, some, perhaps most, Marxists are stultifiers. But all? I think not. In fact, it seems you're the one with the blinders in this area.
As for Eurocentrism, take a look at Ulhas' terminology "joining the global economy," "the developing countries," etc. Straight out of modernization theory...