 |
|
 |
|
 |
||||||
 |
||||||
First, you don't need to apologize for your English. Tuo inglesi esse megior qui mi italiano, as I think I've just demonstrated. Second, it's contrary to American esthetics for you to recommend 150 year old economics and philosophy as "scientific." In the States, we understand science as something that's constantly evolving. Darwin's theory is only valuable as an historical document, not as a summary of scientific thinking about evolution. He didn't even understand how traits were inherited (because he believed in "blood"). If Marx and Hegel were scientific, you should be able to point to their current inheritors. If the ideas of Marx and Hegel haven't been replaced by objectively superior theories by now, then they weren't scientific in the first place. They may have been "right" in some other way, but they weren't scientific. Third, if you can point to a trend of US students going to Italian universities to learn "how economics really works," I'd appreciate it. From this end, it looks as though people in the States have a pretty good handle on economics, even if we come up a little short on the compassion and justice angles. Fourth, if you can document a US public school system teaching creationism, I'd appreciate it. For now, it seems as though the creationists have been forced to content themselves with thwarting the teaching of evolution, since teaching creationism doesn't fly. Fifth, on evolution, I agree that solidarity is a major innovation of the human species, and one I'd like to see extended as far as possible. The free market economy depends on solidarity, everyone working by the same rules instead of some working by the rules or privilege and others by the rules of service (the old European class and monopoly systems). Fifth, you might see capitalism as slowly collapsing, but it seems to be doing pretty well. You should have written to me 15 years ago during my idealistic youth, and I'd have agreed with you. —JoT top |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|