• basiclemmon98@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    12 days ago

    First off, I do not think either example I gave was bad, because they did not “throw out” Darwin, nor did psychologists even fully “throw out” all of Freud. My point was that it would be accurate to say that the base theories arn’t actually very helpful for advanced precise sciences without the additional revisions made by new scientists after more tests and data. That is also true for political and philosophical theories in my opinion and I rarely see people trying to revise Marx’ perspectives. Which has been my turnoff for a lot of “communism”, because at the end of the day, Marx was not all knowing and did not have perfected concepts. And when people act like he, an educated white male author, did have it perfected, it makes anything they say after that seem cultish to me.

    Thank you, genuinely, for some more neuanced (I hope) writings. I will definately read them :)

    • UiUiUiUiUi@piefed.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      13 days ago

      Marx Orthodoxy is the word you’re looking for.

      For example the difference between a social democrat and a democratic socialist is that the latter read marx and disagreed while the former never read him at all.

    • psycholocomotor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      13 days ago

      “Nuanced.”

      You’re gonna have fun reading them, especially, George Jackson. He’d have a lot to say about you.