Rich, the three propositions are:
If valid arguments lead to opposite conclusions, the problem has been
poorly posed (usually too narrowly);
When two movements for human well-being conflict, they are both asking too
little.
All theories are wrong that promote, justify or tolerate injustice.  Best
wises, Dick

On 5/30/14 4:30 AM, "Rich Rosen" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Sigrid, thanks, again for all the hard work.  Are we any closer to a
>discussion about continuing some aspect of the conference?   ---Rich Rosen
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Science for the People Discussion List
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sigrid Schmalzer
>Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 10:27 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Query re the Amherst Conference
>
>Hello! We are SO close to getting the videos for the conference up.
>There have just been a few technical problems delaying things, but I
>expect them up within the next few weeks at the lastest. I will be sure
>to post a link to them to this list-serv as soon as they're ready!
>
>I was at a different session during the much-acclaimed Levins talk so I
>haven't yet seen it myself...
>
>Sigrid
>
>Sigrid Schmalzer
>Associate Professor, History Department
>Director, Social Thought & Political Economy Program UMass Amherst
>
>On 5/27/2014 9:44 PM, Charles Schwartz wrote:
>> I do not often engage in the philosophical debates on this list (good
>> or bad as they might be) but I must respond - as one octogenarian to
>> another - that I greatly appreciate what Carrol offered in his P.S.
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>> On May 27, 2014, at 5:02 PM, Carrol Cox wrote:
>>
>>> The Amherst Conference was one of the best left conferences I have
>>> ever attended, and Dick Levins's paper in one of the conferences one
>>> of the best I have heard.
>>>
>>> But my octogenarian short-term memory fails me. At the end of his
>>> paper Dick laid down three wonderful propositions, and I can only
>>> remember the third of them. All three revolved around what I consider
>>> a key issue for contemporary soc8ialist activists: the scope and
>>> limits of theory. The third of his closing propositions was, "All
>>> theories are wrong." (he meant of course, _eventually_ proved wrong.)
>>> That is of crucial importance. But I can't remember the first two of
>>> the three.
>>>
>>> I hope I can be illuminated here.
>>>
>>> Carrol
>>>
>>> P.S. There is a new MRE book, selected writings of Rosa Luxemburg.
>>> The blurb
>>> for it calls her the most powerful socialist intellect since Marx
>>> himself & I tend to agree. In her day the Grudrisse was not
>>> available, but her remarks on "the final goal" are in the spirit of a
>>> wonderful aphorism from that
>>> work: "The anatomy of man is a key to the anatomy of the ape."
>>> Bertell Ollman catches up the import of this in his phrase, "Doing
>>> History Backwards as does sweezy in his phrase "the present as
>>> history," as does Mao when he remarks, "Marxists have no crystal
>>> ball." And this is consistent with the claim that all theories are
>>> _eventually_ wrong. We work with the best theory that we can carve
>>> out, but we (must) work with the awareness that eventually (the
>>> present as history) that theory will fail.