>>24856050 (OP)
>go with popper you still wind up at a paradox. The power is definitely not with you. Relegated all subsequent adherents to economic phenomenonology, you basically give your power away.
You'll never step up to the plate.
>alright Zizek, I shouldn't have called your wife a man. We can refer to her as objet petit a and say you're surplus horniness is what allows you to try to reconstruct, yes I said reconstruct instead of construct, a semblance of truth for us. The problem with Zizek's distinctions usually leaves him with a split characterization where he has to admit full rationality leads to a sort of Stalinesque authority and full irrationality leads to a fascistic authority. So this is the normative critical theory type where you won't acknowledge backsliding and you still want to sanitize Marx.
This means you can't try for backsies.
>D&G and Land seem to just want to pick and choose what they like which puts them closer to adherents of popper, which is to say they are completely powerless and are the objects for demonstration rather then any sort of demonstrators. Affiliation is just that, for any 3 way split they can't continue, Land at some point seems to reject realism so of course his philosophy is trash but he might have some other stuff that isn't. D&G seem to be realist but with some tinkering.
Hit or miss.
The reason why Lakatos can continue on nearly every issue is due to the way he revitalized. His methods favor mathematical and analytic reasoning which is probably why he rubs continentals the wrong way but he also incorporated several continental sources and this includes some that were previously thought out of reach. He also didn't sanitize, acknowledged failures when they occurred and didn't try to pass it off as a propagandist peice, if the withering of the state is true then it's a degenerative program. The cessation of contradiction occurs at the end of the socialist phase provided there is a demonstration.
>you have something relevant or you don't.
