Re: -Reply

[Ajit Sinha <ASINHA@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Laura Ebert says: "So it is true your detrministic 'puppet' view of humanity is
a convenient way of dismissing entirely the problematic of having to account
for the obvious complexity of human behavior..."
_________________________

Laura, have you thought of doing Ph.D in Psychology? The problem of accounting
the "complex motives for human behavior" is generally studied by Psychologists.
I had no desire to provide a theory of human behavior (deterministic or
otherwise). My point was to show that for the economic reproduction of
capitalism as a mode of production, it is required that its agents act in
certain ways; and that in different modes of production different forms of
ideology and ideological appratuses are used to produce such subjectivities in
its actors. Imagin what will happen if all the schools begin to teach nothing
but anarchyism and the families taught disrespect for fathers. Do you think
capitalism will survive? I think not. Thus, when one accepts that a 'system',
i.e. capitalist mode of production, has historical viability, then one must
admit that the system has some internal mechanism to inforce human action in
such a way that it is REPRODUCED. And this I think Marx was trying to say--
you do not need a theory of human nature ("Nature of Man") to be able to
analyze the nature of a social system and the mechanism of its reproduction.
Now, what's so terrible about it?
                                 Cheers, ajit sinha

ps. sorry for the delayed response. My earlier message didn't go through. The
system I work on sucks!