From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joanna writes:
A critique of the development of science under capitalism would take much
more than an email. Suffice it to say that what we refer to as SCIENCE
today is a specific historical form suffering from specific historical
deformations. I leave it
At 05:12 PM 10/10/2002 +, you wrote:
Again, I believe it's the nature of science itself -- not just the
corruptive effects of capitalism -- that so often causes technology to
have a destructive, dehumanizing impact on society. The ever increasing
specialization of scientific knowledge
At 06:01 PM 10/09/2002 +, you wrote:
From: joanna bujes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 02:41 PM 10/09/2002 +, you wrote:
That's the horror of it all. As Huxley suggested in Brave New World,
there doesn't seem to be any choice between the dehumanization of
science and reversion to simple
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31184] Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Western Rationality
Joanna writes:
A critique of the development of science under capitalism would take much
more than an email. Suffice it to say that what we refer to as SCIENCE
today is a specific historical form suffering from specific
Ian Murray wrote:
Like I said in advance, the question was a simple one; the notion that it
has a simple answer is ridiculous given that you did not answer it
Yes I did: I said that it is not a legitimate question, and therefore
has no answer, simple or complicated. When it
- Original Message -
From: Carrol Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes I did: I said that it is not a legitimate question, and therefore
has no answer, simple or complicated. When it comes up as a legitimate
question, it would come up in the course of collective practice, and
would be
Come on, cool it everybody.
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 09:46:03PM -0700, Ian Murray wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Carrol Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes I did: I said that it is not a legitimate question, and therefore
has no answer, simple or complicated. When it comes up as a
