Devine, James: >To say that models aren't useful is basically saying that theory and >abstraction have no >role. But people can't think without abstraction. A >mere list of "facts" doesn't help at >all. >The key is to combine abstract knowledge (theories, model) with concrete >knowledge >of the real world. We can often learn from the contrast between >the model and the >world.
I agree with almost everything Jim D. says, except for the term 'model'. I recognise the importance of theory and abstractions. My remarks were about 'models', not about theory and abstraction. I would like to distinguish between the two. I value a work like Capital, though it is abstract. But I don't find theories of imperialism now currently available, very convincing. My scepticism about "Global Theory" wasn't meant to include work like Capital or Grundrisse. It was used to indicate theories like theory of imperialism. I am not a theoretician and I don't claim to be an India expert. Ulhas
