[lbo-talk] URPE Summer Conference -- Aug 15-18 -- REGISTERNOW!ORGANIZE A PANEL!

Carrol Cox cbcox at ilstu.edu
Sat Jul 12 12:15:53 PDT 2008


Miles Jackson wrote:
>
> I agree that all facts are theory laden. That said, on practical
> grounds, I see no reason to overthrow empiricism. I don't know if the
> scientific method uncovers any profound and immutable truths about the
> universe, but it has made possible cool stuff like vaccines, the
> internet, and guitar amps.

We're probably not so far apart. A couple observations. I think the discussion between you and Jerry on what "theory" was didn't go far enough. We ned, perhaps, two or three 'core' senses of Theory (with the upper-case T)m wutg eacg ibe if those senses covering a range. (It is probalby also useful to hold on to his distinction between "theory" and "world view": i.e., materialism is not a theory but a frame within which one articulates theories.

For instance, I'm in complete agreement with a post by Jenny Brown in which she spoke of revolutionary theory (and with her use of "theory" in that context), but I would also want to hold to my position that there is not and cannot be a Theory (Science) of History, of Revolution, and of Socialist Society for a number of reasons, including the large element of contingency in each of these areas, plus what I would provisionally call "necessary freedom of whim" within socialist society. (This is related, for example, with my argument on abortion: whim on the woman's part is not only a but _the_ sufficient justification.) A Theory of Revolution (in the strictest use of the term) would have to apply with some concreteness across radically different social (goegraphical, political, tempral) conditions. And all the search for such a thoery would turn up is a set of fairly banal tautologies, none of which could usefully guide action.

But this is beginning to verge on free association and I'd better stop before I dig too deep a hole.

Carrol

P.S. According to T. Rajan, if I recall correctly, French 'Theory' began as an attempt to defend philosophy against the incursions of the Social Sciences -- which I would construe as delimiting the domain in which "Scientific Method" could reign.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list