Date: Mon, 03 Apr 1995 18:04:03 -0600 From: Lisa Rogers <EQDOMAIN.EQWQ.LROGERS-AT-email.state.ut.us> Subject: Re: Choas/marx -Reply >>> Justin Schwartz <jschwart-AT-freenet.columbus.oh.us> 3/31/95, 08:47pm >>> I'm a little confused by the discussion of progress and historical directionality. The remarks by Paul and Ron appended below address whether progress is a good thing. This seems an odd question. Isn't progress by definition change for the better? .... There is no guarantee that any given group will have the power to oppose its own domination successfully, ... This is part of the argument of a couple of long papers I have written arguing for objectivity about justice on a naturalistic basis. ... Comments welcome. --Justin Schwartz I'm willing to define progress as change for the better, but then I would ask "better for whom?" (which may be just another way to phrase some of Paul's and Ron's remarks.) As for the "no guarantee" of emancipation, I agree entirely! In fact, it seems to me that inequalities of power have some tendency to increase, because the powerless may have the least ability to resist, and the powerful are in the best position to further increase their power. Of course, this is not guaranteed either. Naturalistic basis for justice? Rather than the long papers, would you mind giving up a couple of paragraphs just to explain to us new-comers what you mean by that? Thanks, Lisa Rogers --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005