Lakshmi first wrote (in response to my post on Marx's analysis of capitalism as a system with an institutional structure and associated properties that are not reducible to the will of individuals):
> That is a gruesome post; I don't understand a word of it. But the
> following paragraph seems
> sweet indeed.
>
> LR
>Is
"sweet" here supposed to be a hip-ironic dismissal or something else
(more positive)? I was thinking the former, if it really is the case that you
didn't understand a word of the post it's a part of. Btw, I admit it's
dense (somewhat unavoidable given the topic and compressed format) but
why incomprehensible? As for "gruesome," nice.
Lakshmi followed up with: http://minds.wisconsin.edu/bitstream/handle/1793/28992/Sensat.pdf.txt;jsessionid=csof78aafcpt?sequence=3
Find where the analysis begins discussing how we become playthings of forces that we create."
The link is to an article by Julius Sensat with the (to my mind) promising title "Rawlsian Justice and Estrangement: Insights from Hegel and Marx." If you just mean to point out stuff that I might like, thanks, I'll take a look. From a quick skim, it seems similar in spirit to what I wrote in compressed form here, but maybe you mean it to be stuff that would disagree with or correct what I said, or illustrate the low value of this general line of thinking?
Nelson Goodman
_________________________________________________________________ Introducing Windows® phone. http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9708122