I’m going to put my points in. Forgive me for their simplicity.
I agree with Popper in so far as falsifiability is concerned, which is why I would describe myself as a Socialist rather than a Marxist. For Popper there is no truth, only ever closer approximations of the truth, and the functional abilities of those approximations. Aristotle’s physics allowed for things to be made, but were proven wrong with Newton’s physics. Newton’s physics were superseded by Einstein’s. Einstein’s with quantum physics. Yet at each point the physics of the day were functional. You could test them, make things out of their principles like pulley systems and atomic bombs. And all the theories were eventually proven false.
We are closing in on the truth, but we will never arrive.
I can accept this but I am not convinced that there is such a thing as progress towards truth. With Marxism, I am not convinced that revolution is inevitable. There are so many variables unaccounted for, not the least of them the propensity for people to act in their worst interests. I want a revolution. I will work towards a revolution. I want an economic system that distributes the profits of labour evenly. But I am not convinced these things will come to pass in all certainty, but I hope that we bring about closer approximations.
I mean, what if there was a mass extinction event? Where would that be placed in the dialectic transitions? Nothing is forgone, we must struggle towards inception.
So, having explained this, I turn to Popper and question whether he accounted for the wholesale servitude of science to the prevailing hegemony? There is no orderly procession towards truth. Science is the removed of weapon manufacturers, cosmetic and pharmaceutical companies, governments wishing to underwrite their policies, and whatever can garner popular appeal and make a buck.
With political theory, we are not bound to the supposed pristine principles of science, which in actual fact are blackened by the wheels of capitalism. We are bound by our service to humanity, by our hunger, and by wanting a better world for those that follow.
I’m going to put my points in. Forgive me for their simplicity.
I agree with Popper in so far as falsifiability is concerned, which is why I would describe myself as a Socialist rather than a Marxist. For Popper there is no truth, only ever closer approximations of the truth, and the functional abilities of those approximations. Aristotle’s physics allowed for things to be made, but were proven wrong with Newton’s physics. Newton’s physics were superseded by Einstein’s. Einstein’s with quantum physics. Yet at each point the physics of the day were functional. You could test them, make things out of their principles like pulley systems and atomic bombs. And all the theories were eventually proven false.
We are closing in on the truth, but we will never arrive.
I can accept this but I am not convinced that there is such a thing as progress towards truth. With Marxism, I am not convinced that revolution is inevitable. There are so many variables unaccounted for, not the least of them the propensity for people to act in their worst interests. I want a revolution. I will work towards a revolution. I want an economic system that distributes the profits of labour evenly. But I am not convinced these things will come to pass in all certainty, but I hope that we bring about closer approximations.
I mean, what if there was a mass extinction event? Where would that be placed in the dialectic transitions? Nothing is forgone, we must struggle towards inception.
So, having explained this, I turn to Popper and question whether he accounted for the wholesale servitude of science to the prevailing hegemony? There is no orderly procession towards truth. Science is the removed of weapon manufacturers, cosmetic and pharmaceutical companies, governments wishing to underwrite their policies, and whatever can garner popular appeal and make a buck.
With political theory, we are not bound to the supposed pristine principles of science, which in actual fact are blackened by the wheels of capitalism. We are bound by our service to humanity, by our hunger, and by wanting a better world for those that follow.