Carrol
Robert Wrubel wrote:
>
> --- Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:
> "It might help if I mention that I am currently
> reading Robert Albritton, _Economics Transformed."
>
> Alright, then I'll admit I'm re-reading Iris Murdoch's
> *Metaphysics as a Guide to Morals*, and very much
> enjoying her wry comments on the second-class status
> given to personality and individual consciousness in
> Marx, Freud, Sartre and the structuralists.
>
> Bob
>
> >
> >
> > Robert Wrubel wrote:
> > >
> > > --- Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > > "At the level of fundamental theory agents are
> > > merely_personifications of social relations."
> > >
> > > You mean "representatives" of social relations?
> > What
> > > is the point of talking about agents stripped of
> > their
> > > individual voice, their understanding, their moral
> > > passion?
> > >
> >
> > I didn't. I talked about fundamental theory. What
> > you are talking about
> > exists at an altogether different (and more
> > concrete) level. And I did
> > mean _personification_ NOT representative. It might
> > help if I mention
> > that I am currently reading Robert Albritton,
> > _Economics Transformed_. I
> > got excited about him first at a forum at Marxism
> > 2006 in Amherst, then
> > from an article in the HM forum on Arthur. I've just
> > ordered his
> > _Dialectics and Deconstruction in Political
> > Economy_. He has worked out
> > relationships between fundamental theory and
> > historical actuality that
> > I've been trying for some years to fumble out
> > myself.
> >
> > Carrol
> >
> > > BobW
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Michael Perelman wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > People organize their thoughts by stories.
> > > > Anecdotes about criminality and other
> > > > > abuses helped to form those stories. The
> > people
> > > > who do theory CAN, but not
> > > > > necessarily do help to give those stories
> > > > coherence. Yet Carroll is correct
> > > > > emphasized the importance of people on the
> > ground
> > > > doing person-to-person organizing,
> > > > > even Karl Marx never did that kind of
> > organizing
> > > > that Carroll is emphasizing.
> > > >
> > > > The theory is, I think, of crucial importance to
> > the
> > > > people doing such
> > > > organizing; one of their tasks is to simplify &
> > > > paraphrase such theory
> > > > to bring it into relationship with more concrete
> > > > levels of
> > > > understanding, and the more deeply they
> > understand
> > > > the fundamental
> > > > theory the better prepared they will be to
> > select
> > > > from and/or simplify
> > > > that theory in appropriate ways to fit
> > particular
> > > > situations or
> > > > particular people in those situations.
> > > >
> > > > At the level of fundamental theory agents are
> > > > _merely_ personifications
> > > > of social relations. Dogmatism is the belief
> > that
> > > > without translation
> > > > that theory can guide practice. What one might
> > call
> > > > reverse-dogmatism is
> > > > the belief that unless the theory can guide
> > > > practice it is bad theory.
> > > >
> > > > Carrol
> > > >
> > > > ___________________________________
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> > > >
> > >
> > > ___________________________________
> > >
> >
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
> > ___________________________________
> >
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk