[lbo-talk] Baby thoughts

Alan Rudy alan.rudy at gmail.com
Thu Sep 3 06:23:42 PDT 2009


Actually, what he said was that one appeals to objective truth whenever one uses the term ideology, which implies that one who uses the term at least has a strong sense of objective truth... And if reality is independent of our knowledge of it but we can only have the knowledge we have of it, how is this claim not effectively useless as anything other than an unfounded and unfoundable but nevertheless foundational position? Look, I'm a materialist not a realist or idealist. The world IS out there but any and all constructions and engagements with it are necessarily material semiotic, there is no utility whatsoever in insisting that there is a real material world and semiotic/scientific constructions of it... such a position gains us nothing.

********************************************************* Alan P. Rudy Dept. Sociology, Anthropology and Social Work Central Michigan University 124 Anspach Hall Mt Pleasant, MI 48858 517-881-6319

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 7:35 AM, Chris Doss <lookoverhere1 at yahoo.com> wrote:


>
> I think James is wrong about a lot of stuff ;) , but he didn't say that
> anybody could _know_ objective, unsituated truth. He said that reality is
> independent of your knowledge (or beliefs, or interpretations) of it.
>
>
>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list