Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 331584007529824257
we can be smart about it
theories aren't something to be tried, they merely attempt to describe reality. You can use these theories to create fx socialism, but marxism is not a set of affairs to be established
why be attached so strongly to a set of rules that was forged century ago
>theories aren't something to be tried, they merely attempt to describe reality.
I'm not against this
then it doesn't make sense to say you can bet nations and lives on a theory
My issue is that clearly marxist mindset isn't enough to describe reality and we have plenty of disciplines to supplement and change it but most people don't want to
sociology, psychology, complex economics, geopolitical dynamics etc
>then it doesn't make sense to say you can bet nations and lives on a theory
on weak theory
I thought I was clear on that
Obviously theory is all we have, everything is a theory, a model of reality
that's a givegn
we don't have the means to simulate all of universe
you are completely right that theories should be critizised, and that the best critizism often comes from other fields. In fact, I am ringht now reading a book by an anthropologist that heaviliy critizises adam smith
for how long have I been misspelling criticism
: o
When will you criticize marxism ;p
after I understand it
well
I think the "invisible hand that fixes everything" is as wishful as thinking that good will and communism will solve all problems
then it's a good thing that no-one said either
it's the part of the simple weak theories that try to trivialize reality I was trying to communicate
Just saying you implied that I said all theories are bad trivialization of reality.
The problem I think it's obvious, dogmatic ideological follwoing
We should use political systems as tools to ends not as ends themselves
I have ancom and commie friends and acquaintances but I never really talk about politics irl with them bc I have noticed how hostile they become the moment they are criticized by others
and that's a huge issue for me
and it's scary
a theory states that if X is the case then Y will happen. One can then think that Y is preferable and therefore try to make X be the case. However, you cant say whether or not the theory will be satisfactory or not, as you do when you said "I don't think marxist doctrine provides that"
yeah that's really annoying, but that is what ideology is
well you could be ideological and still be open minded?
ideology != dogmatic zealot
in the ordinary sense, yes. I regrettably used the more zizekian version of ideology
>One can then think that Y is preferable and therefore try to make X be the case. However, you cant say whether or not the theory will be satisfactory or not
why exactly do you mean by that?
ideology pretrays itselfs as being able to see the truth, which I argue is the main reason why people strongly defend ideology
@Deleted User my point is that you cannot blame theories, like you cannot prove or disprove them
you can blame what people make of the theory
I didn't blame the theories though
I really think you're misinterpreting me
no, but you were talking about whether marxism was good enough "to work for all people, with different mindsets and endure over time", but this is not what a theory can do
sorry if I might misread you again
hmm
It's not to SATISFY all people but to affect all people so they can stay within the system.
If you have an ancom society and a fraction of that goes rogue and seizes everything because the theory didn't anticipated power-hungry people then the theory needs revision, which means it didn't work for all people (not satisfy them)