Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 22:06:47 -0500 (EST)
From: Justin Schwartz <jschwart-AT-freenet.columbus.oh.us>
Subject: Re: M-TH: Re: Pragmatism


On Mon, 15 Dec 1997, Carrol Cox wrote:

> Justin writes:
> <SNIP> 
> > It's absolutely mind-boggling ignorance of pragmatism to think that we
> > take the perspective of the isolated individuals apart from all social
> > relations. Carroll says this has to be "demonstrated." That's like a
> 
> Justin's argument, to begin with, must be with Desmond, whose post
> I took off from. My argument was merely an if...then. Until I hear
> more, I'll put my trust in Desmond and Geras rather than Justin, who
> in the past has offered defenses of rational choice marxism.

Which obviously puts me beyond the pale, in the category of flat-earthers,
CIA agents, and persons convicted of multiple counts of mail fraud.
Carroll admits that he knows nothing about pragmatism and doesn't care to
learn, but he feels competent to weigh into the discussion with ridiculous
and blatantly false remarks. I don't care to pull "rank," if that's the
word, but I _was_ a pilosophosy professor and I _did_ teach pragmatism now
and then, as well as write in the professional journals on pragmatic
themes. I suppose that does suggests that, while I might be wrong in my
claims about the subject, something I am happy to admit when shown by
argument, I am probably at least minimally qualified to suggest a basic
characterization of pragmatism. That's not a raeson to believe what I say
about it. But it's a reason to rake it seriously. Carroll's statements
about pragmatism, and Desmond's--I don't know what Geras C is referring
to--are on the order of error of saying that Aquinas was an
atheist, Berkelry a materialist, or Marx a proponent of capitalism.

--jks





     --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---