Religion Versus Marxism

I know that this doesn't really have much to do with TOE vs ID, however I believe I could start an objective discussion here, possibly with creationists on one side and Athiest evolutionists on the other. I would like each member who comes in here to outline their veiw and state some evidence on their opinion.

Punkie the head nurse was unable to extriacate whatever this MARXISM of richard boyd could be, so I do not see why we start to objectively discuss cre- evo sidely like an ISLAND CRYSTAL under the issue of marxism. This ism is still with us only I have become very clear about my dissagreement in this MArxism of the reality we can share on this board.I do not however know if this is more creationist or evolutionist as you seem to suggest I have analytically available. I do have some believe in synthetic apriori in this question long before asked but as to the use of marxism in e-commerce I am far from certain even for some knowledge OUt of panbiogeography that still timeless does not side either with creation or evolution.

Brad...what is "synthetic apriori"? I was doing an internet archive dig, and I stumbled upon a short yet sweet post that you replied to.
Funny how it never took off. I suppose that very few if any Marxists are religious, but I could be wrong.
Brad, who is Richard Boyd? Hold up, Mr. McFall let me google him.
Here is the google: You know, Brad, you are a hidden mine of information. You namedrop these people so casually, yet we must mine to find what you assumed we know! Did you ever read anything from Professor Boyd concerning the "ism" of Marx and how it relates to religion?One more question, Mr. McFall: What does panbiogeography mean?This message has been edited by Phatboy, 12-06-2004 05:27 PM

I completely agree with Brad. Atheism does not have anything to do with evolution, evolution does not have anything to do with Marxism, Marxism does not have anything to do with ID, and ID certainly does not have anything to do with religion. So, what the hell are we suppose to do with this topic?This message has been edited by Lam, 12-06-2004 05:35 PM

Lam- I dunno. If nobody responds to the topic, it will die a second death. I just brought it up because of the wit and wisdom of Mr. McFall. Now I am blessed with the grumpiness of Lam! What does a Groucho know about Marxism, anyway?

Metalpunk's registration has been restored.This message has been edited by Admin, 12-06-2004 09:44 PM

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

PB,Synthetic a priori is taken from Kant. Here's some information that I pulled from Kant: Judgments for you:What is the a priori vs. a posteriori distinction? What is the analytic vs. synthetic distinction? How the heck does Kant combine the terms 'a priori' and 'synthetic'?? You'll get a more complete summary and discussion at the website. I hope this helps (but I think it's hard stuff).BenP.S. If you ask how Docta' McFall is using this term... I haven't figured it out yet. Sorry about that. Brad, I'm doing my best still... but there's a long way to go.

I was hoping that Contracycle would take the bait. He has always defended Marxism and has a low regard for Christianity as a serious discipline. What I want to know is if one can be a Christian Marxist?
Is Marxism an ideology that places religion as an opiate of sorts?

Let's start at the top box shall we?KANT GOT THE DISTINCTION volitionally. He wrote in FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF THE METAPHYSIC OF MORALS; First Section: transition from the common rational knowledge of morality to the philosophical, "It is clear from what precedes that the purposes which we may have in view in our actions or their effects regarded as ends and springs of the will, cannot give to actions any unconditional or moral worth. In what, then can their worth lie, if it si not to consist in the will and in reference to its expected effect? It cannot lie anywhere but in the principle of the will without regard to the ends which can be attained by the action. For the will stands between its a` priori principle, which is formal, and its a` posteriori spring, which is material, as between two roads, and as it must be determined by something, it follows that it must be determined by the formal principle of volition when an action is done from duty, in which case every material principle has been withdrawn from it."The question of which "road" this must have been was put by Richard Boyd to us in his "Philosopy of Science Class" but his graduate student grader did not like my volitionally used cut and paste response. I had used modern computer word processing programs to wend MY OWN understanding of the genetics of my grandfather between the formal physical maths necessary and any last formatting feature lexicologically(there were few to deal with in the 80s) and keep it to ONE ROAD. My father who writes public relations pieces just laughed the whole road through Christmas ~85! But I kept it to VOLITIONALLY won one thing that might have been what "disappears" in D'Arcy Thompson's grammer on extinction.Take in this context for instance Gould's "including an ingenuous analysis of sponge and holothurian spicules as minearlized maps of the junctions between units, and not as phyletically unique and distinctive forms" with reference to Thompsonianisms ON GROWTH AND FORM.
some spics;
Microscopy UK - Science & Education
----------------------------------------------------------------
such a road IS such a map and such a map may be such a road.But GOULD not understanding that morphometrics DO NOT apply to Thompsonian transforms NO MATTER THE ALLOMETRY THOUGHT, failed to VOLITIONALLY seperate final and efficient Aristoleian form-made FROM that feeling a taxonmist gains on APPARENTLY panscribing a lineage around the globe. He filtered his reading through his old canard of functionlism vs strucutralism that could fail should such a map BE the road of a Croizat topography but I get beyond the cream of the top of the egg nog. I suspect but have not tried any where to reason and proove that this is BECUASE of latent marxism but it is clear that DAS KAPTIAL is at odds sans some boydiansm with supramolecular chemistry WIHTIN the current darwinian economics (say politics of stem cells etc).