This question <579|218> overall <586|588> Steph: <1273|588>.  
  Question 277: Where else should one start science if not with facts? How did Marx himself come to his findings?   
  [587] Steph: One should start science without facts due to societies and previous experiences that others have gone through. For example: Marx's philosophy hinged on his view of human nature. (Wiki) Along with the Hegelian dialectic, Marx inherited a disdain for the notion of an underlying invariant human nature. Sometimes Marxists express their views by contrasting “nature” with “history” which could be compared to us as a science. The point, in either case, is that who a person is is determined by where and when he is, thus creating a science with no facts. Social context takes precedence over innate behavior; or, in other words, one of the main features of human nature is adaptability For Marx, this is a natural capacity for a physical activity, but it is intimately tied to the active role of human consciousness and therefore he came to his findings and created a science. He was well traveled and would often make comparisons and come to conclusions based upon what he had seen or been a part of. He could prove his science through that which had already happened. Through life experience Marx was able to develop a science and become a brilliant man.   
  Hans: How does the view that human nature is malleable amount to a science without facts?   
  Do you have the impression, reading Capital, that this is a science without facts?   
 
 
 
  Students enrolled for Econ 5080 in 2009fa are invited to give feedback to the above message
Pseudonym:      UofU ID:  
Text: