RE: [Marxism] If Marxism is a Science then its Predictions Should Matter...

["Mark Lause" <MLause@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hard sciences are said to be predictive in the sense of being able to
replicate outcomes through controlled experiment, the key concept here
being control and the exclusion of variable factors.  Although we can
strive for a certain scientific rigor, no study of society can or will
ever be "scientific" in the sense of being able to experiment, replicate
results, or exclude variables.

Marx discussed what he was doing in terms of "historical materialism,"
not science.  The tendency to talk about it terms of "science" was a
later response to the emergence of "social science," a conceit of
bourgeois ideology generated by the educational system.

And even the hard sciences talk today about uncertainty, randomness,
butterfly effects, etc.

If Marxism--or any study of society--actually would be predictive, we'd
be living in a strange Doctor Who world...fun in the short run, but a
pointlessly boring place for any human being to live, no?

Solidarity!
Mark L.




________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism