Philp Pilkington wrote:
>
> It
> also calls into question the whole notion that the history of ideas can be
> looked at ahistorical or synchronically/structurally as a series of
> definitive "breaks"...
[For another post: Scope and Limits of what we call "science." I would regard class struggle as _beyond_ the scope of anything that can usefully be labelled "science."]
"History of Ideas," crudely, doesn't exist. The phrase implies (and this implication is confirmed by most texts attempting such history) that ideas have a history of their own. They do not. As Miles points out, ideas are social practices, not separable from the other social practices within which one finds them.
Carrol