IMPORTANT: If you cite this message, OPE-L policy requires you not to reveal the identity of the author.
You may cite this message only if you do not disclose who wrote it.
Regarding your summary of my position on value: this is aOn issues of the philosophical status of maths and logic,
reasonable summary -- and thanks for that -- though it does of
course beg crucial questions such as the nature of 'logic' and its
relation to matter, so I probably wouldn't have put it quite the same
way.
I enclose a his key 1985 paper and a recent summary.
-- Paul Cockshott Dept Computing Science University of Glasgow 0141 330 3125
Attachment:
deutsch85.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
Attachment:
deutsch.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
- Re: More re 'dreams and nightmares', (continued)
- Re: More re 'dreams and nightmares', Rakesh Bhandari Wed 21 May 2003, 15:50 GMT
- (OPE-L) The Cuban Five (was: 'dreams and nightmares'), glevy Wed 21 May 2003, 16:59 GMT
- Re: value, labour and conservation laws, Ian Wright Wed 21 May 2003, 03:56 GMT
- Re: value, labour and conservation laws, Andrew Brown Wed 21 May 2003, 09:12 GMT
- Re: value, labour and conservation laws, Paul Cockshott Wed 21 May 2003, 09:54 GMT
- Re: value, labour and conservation laws, Michael Eldred Fri 23 May 2003, 20:10 GMT
- Re: value, labour and conservation laws, clyder Fri 23 May 2003, 20:42 GMT
- Re: value, labour and conservation laws, Michael Eldred Sat 24 May 2003, 14:19 GMT
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: value, labour and conservation laws, Ian Wright Thu 22 May 2003, 07:36 GMT