""" The very little Marxism I know tells me that it is the "triumph" of capitalism to reduce all relationships to money. """
To reduce all relationships to money is an operation that seeks to objectify things via construal as scalar valuations. That is, two things are considered the same if they trade the same. The pedantic here may point out the possibility of vector valuations, but the idea for me would be no different. This is one reason I feel that it is fair to criticize EricC when he suggests that two theories ought to be considered the same if they measure the same. """ Reduction is a triumph if it captures what you're looking for. """ When reductions capture what one is looking for then the resulting categories make for powerful rhetoric. IMO, it is exactly that reductions to crisp objects capture what *some* want, while obfuscating the desired objects of others, that makes the whole reduction-objectification game so insidious in practice (a kind of conceptual imperialism?). Sometimes objects can be presented with such clarity and precision that it becomes difficult to imagine any others, to dislodge unproductive beliefs or practices, or to remember that the objects are fantastic shorthands. """ But, ultimately, it's a capitalist suggestion, proposed by *conservatives* who want to prolong the status quo. """ And in theory, services could be provided (at reasonable prices) to these *conservatives*, services that ultimately (once capitalism enters its death throes and not even the most unscrupulous can frack it for value) provide infrastructure for the next and hopefully more equitable world to come. -- Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
