Interesting.

  • a_blanqui_slate [none/use name, any]
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Well, he doesn't now, but he also didn't then. Not in 'science' as it follows in the western historical tradition. Offshoots of Cartesianism or Newtonianism you might say.

      • a_blanqui_slate [none/use name, any]
        ·
        1 year ago

        Looks, I've integrated far, far too many dynamical systems on Cartesian meshes to take you seriously there. Classical mechanics (by you'll never guess who) undergirds a huge number of modern sciences.

              • a_blanqui_slate [none/use name, any]
                ·
                1 year ago

                Well, we've certainly gone a long ways toward correcting my misconception that Marxists are a contentious and needlessly contrarian lot.

                • Pluto [he/him, he/him]
                  hexagon
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You're not explaining yourself and are generalizing an entire political minority.

                  • a_blanqui_slate [none/use name, any]
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Explaining myself? You're talking right past me. I say Marx is an offshoot of Hegelianism and you say "Marx isn't Hegelianism", addressing an entirely different question. I say many branches of current science still make explicit use of Newton's laws and formalism, and your response is not "oh in what ways?" its "no they don't" without further explanation like you're doing a bad homage to the Monty Python argument clinic sketch.

                    Looking at this from my side, it absolutely looks like you're trying to pick an argument that no one was trying to have for some reason, and will now contradict me on pretty much anything no matter how ridiculous that makes you sound. If that's not what you're trying to do, I'm all ears for a different explanation.