ujuphleg said:
I've found it, ease wise, a hell of a lot better than last semesters ECOP, mostly because of the lack of terminology and algebra - I couldn't stand that last semester.
I will say that, from an academic perspective, it isn't very helpful at the moment. The lecturing style is pretty biased, one sided and lacking the academic analysis which features in Frank/Joseph's lecturing.
I will keep it (because I need the CP for my degree) but I may cease to attend lectures as he never deviates much from the slides anyway...
First of all, I don't think Damien would deny it is 'biased' or value ridden. He doesn't pretend to be positivist and have objectivity. The course isn't meant to be pluralist and look at a wide variety of views, but is meant to use the example of SSA to assist in explaining the social underpinnings of capitalism. I think you have missed the point of the course if you haven't realised this.
I'm not sure what Damien is teaching in the first half of the course (as last year the course was team teached with Evan Jones). I do know that he has kept the whole SSA framework as the basis of the course. However, I don't know how you can say he wouldn't atleast be slightly critical of it, as Damien (or anyone else in the disciple) doesn't adhere to SSA or any regulation school relatives.
First of all, you can't go comparing everyone to Frank or Joseph. They are both outstanding teachers and academics. Frank is highly regarded academic in Australia and Jo is probably one of the most internationally recognised academics at Usyd. You should take it as a prilege having them taught. That said, I think Damien is very analytical. Oh and the man will drink
Nothing wrong with anarchists. Most people would probably say my ideas were anarchist, but then the term 'anarchism' is so loose that it can refer to anything from a market economy and capitalist society without a government, to a participatory anti-heirarchical post-capitalist primitivist society.
