Suchergebnisse

Schwartzman's response to our article follows a strange line of argument. He seems to assume, first, that once you quote some author, you implicitly agree with what the author says in the quote, & second, if you do agree with that one statement, then you agree with everything that author has said & written. More specifically, although we quote Nicolas Georgescu-Roegen & mention him as a significant contributor to the growth debate & the development of ecological economics, this does not imply that Georgescu-Roegen's theory of entropy is "the theoretical basis for our critique." Schwartzman's argumentation appears to be based on the implicit assumption that you can only base your work on one single theory: you can either be a follower of Marx, or you can be a follower of Georgescu-Roegen! Distinct from such orthodoxy, we believe that the reality we have to deal with when discussing economic growth, climate, & the environment includes a multitude of different causal powers & disciplines operating at different strata of reality & at different scales. One single theory can of course not fathom all these mechanisms. Instead, we have to draw on theories from several fields & disciplines. Adapted from the source document.