From: "Jesse bloom" <essej-AT-hotmail.com>
Subject: the method is ..
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 1998 21:33:13 PDT


a short note on the method . (us exploding into social-historio analysis 
arguments all of a sudden)

just to inject a Weberian thought here .. the objectivity of social 
sciences , it is logically impossible for an empirical discipline to 
establish, scientifically , ideals which define what 'ought to be'.(as 
summarised by giddens) i think our methods of social commentary have to 
come into question here , and what is important that we find out the 
position of what is possibly correct in correct historical 
circumstances, empirical facts seem to me to be able to dug up from 
anywhere, and in face of this i think N was also very aware of this . 
All drives to perpetuate a history , a special sideline history is a 
drive to power .(the christians had their own history , and the romans 
their own) . heres a quote that i love from Weber(who was considerably a 
Nietschean social theorist) 

"the totality of all the conditions back to which teh causal regression 
from teh 'effect' leads had to 'act jointly' in a definite way, and in 
no other for the concrete effect to be realised. In other words, the 
occurence of the result is , for every causally working empirical 
science, determined not just from a certain moment but 'from eternity'"


jesse






______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


	--- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---