🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <62flrf$eo8$2@clarion.carno.net.au>, j.stokes@bogus-address.anu.edu.au (Jason Stokes) says:
>
>In article <a147cd$142527.25a@MARLI>, Brian Paul Lilburn
><sambas@lynx.spambuster.co.nz> wrote:
>

>
>Nonsense.  I've never even heard of the New Right propoganda against
>socialism,

Well, you must have heard of it now, because you yourself are spouting it.

 I formed this opinion of it independently through my extensive
>contact with people in the Resistance campus socialist group.  Socialists
>have been taught not to think, it's as simple as that.  Suppressing your
>reasion is the only way that allows you to argue with any integrity that
>racism is solely a product of capitalist modes of production.

So you turn your back on socialism (altho you say you don't go along with
capitalism as it is operating at the present time) because some 'socialists'
you know have silly simplistic ideas! You're quite right. I despair sometimes.
But what brings them up to grasp at silly simplistic ideas? Why, the bland,
McDonalds-hamburger model of education they are brought up in, in this 
non-socialist country: "Keep your mind on sport, trivialities, and training
for your meal-ticket in the capitalist-run economy - stay off any profundity
or controversial, disturbing questioning of the 'status quo' ..." I think 
Karl Popper would agree with me on that, and advocate the teaching of 
philosophy (and historical scholarship) starting at a pretty young age. 
>

>>Karl Popper was good as a philosopher of scientific theories that have 
>>little to do with the behaviour of people and the currents of history. He's
>>not so good when trying to apply his strictures to sociology, psychology
>>and politics. (In fact he was such a bad psychologist he caused a dreadful
>>happening here in Christchurch.)
>
>Oh, please tell me.  I seem to remember you didn't want to have him -- he
>thought in a way that displeased you.

I don't follow your reference to what you "seem to remember". I don't feel 
like going into details about my reference to Popper in brackets, just to 
satisfy your curiosity. It may not be very honorable to some persons still
alive to do so. What I know I know thru hearsay, but from a person I think
could be trusted, as he wasn't directly involved, and he was head of the 
Philosophy department at Canty. He was Professor Prior. To say Popper 
caused a dreadful happening is probably too strong. It's certainly true 
tho, that he was part of the cause.

'To be possessed of an energetic mind is not enough; the first requirement
is to use it correctly.' (Descartes. - IMHO, neither Descartes himself nor
Popper succeeded in following this advice 'in toto'.)

Brian

 


>
>-- 
>Jason Stokes: j.stokes (at) bohm.anu.edu.au
> 
> I use a spam block.  Replace (at) with @ to discover my email address.
>