You are in Guest mode. If you want to post, you'll need to register (we promise it's painless).
Registered users should log in now. (Forgot your password?)

Guest-accessible forum This forum allows unregistered guests access to read. You must register to post in this forum.

Nature_and_Environment.28

Topic HomeTopicsForum HomeForumsHomeSearchSettingsHelpExit

Human Ecology

--------

{Nature_and_Environment.28.9}: Carl Sachs {foo42} Thu, 21 Oct 2004 14:01:13 CDT (HTML)

{8}"The reason ecology is subversive is because it is holistic or comprehensive rather than strategic.

Capitalism is built to facilitate the pursuit of strategy. Strategy is the epitome of rational economic self-interest. "

I largely agree with the second paragraph, and I largely agree with the first. So what's my problem?

My problem is this: I'm not yet convinced that ecology is any more subversive of capitalism than, say, fluid dynamics or biochemistry are. Aren't all sciences "holistic and comprehensive"? I can't think of any that aren't. (One might say that economics isn't, but there are lots of reasons why economics should not be considered a science.)

Now, there is some respect in which fluid dynamics and biochemistry have been more smoothly integrated into techo-industrial monopoly capitalism than ecology has been. But that strikes me as saying something about capitalism, not about ecology.

I dunno. Any follow ups?

--------

Page Forum
Topic HomeTopicsForum HomeForumsHomeSearchSettingsHelpExit
Guest-accessible forum This forum allows unregistered guests access to read. You must register to post in this forum.

You are in Guest mode. If you want to post, you'll need to register (we promise it's painless).
Registered users should log in now. (Forgot your password?)

The New Café  Home | Your Hotlist and Directory | Independent Partner Forums |
FAQ | User Guidelines | Privacy Policy