RE: BHA: Epistemological relativism

["Marsh Feldman" <MarshFeldman@xxxxxxx>]

Let me try to disprove one thing:

Marko said:

	Social entities exist. But not in of themselves. They exist because we
exist
	and we have a biological nature which enables them to exist. Therefore
	sociology must reduce to biology...the manifesto of an unashamed
	reductionist.


Here is a close analogue to the above passage.

	Skyscrapers exist. But not in of themselves. They exist because we exist
	and we have a biological nature which enables them to exist. Therefore
	architecture must reduce to biology...

An another.

	Skyscrapers exist. But not in of themselves. They exist because bricks
exist
	and bricks have a physical nature which enables them to exist.
	While humans may put bricks in place and even may make bricks, bricks
themselves consist
	of materials independent of biology. Therefore architecture must reduce to
materials science.

The last two reductions contradict each other. Yet the premises are true in
each case. Therefore the basic structure of the argument itself is flawed.

Cheers.

	Marsh Feldman



     --- from list bhaskar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---