[lbo-talk] Note of thanks

[Carrol Cox]

ravi wrote:
> 
> P.S: given all my prior rants about "science", I should clarify that I
> am using "science" here in the traditional sense.

Probably one needs to clarify the resemblances/differences between
"psitivism" and "science." They are linked but do not coincide, and to
attempt to identify social theory as a purely positivist science is, I
suspect, disastrous. Paul Paolucci has an article in Vol. 11 of
Historical Materialism which focuses on the extent to which Marx was
positivist. I haven't read it yet, but it looks valuable.

Carrol