(OPE-L) Ernesto's "Damned Lies" ?

["Gerald A. Levy" <Gerald_A_Levy@xxxxxxx>]

Title: Re: (OPE-L) Ernesto's "Damned Lies" ?

Hi again Phil.  I had a longer version of the following

butI edited it to ensure that the focus stays where I

think it should remain.

 

> I have not seen Andrew Kliman's paper so I cannot

> really comment on title selection.

 

It's the *title* of the paper which is so damning (excuse

the pun). By picking that title any possible discussion

of the article contents (good or bad) is -- almost inevitably

-- blocked  and the focus of discussion then is (and should

be) re-directed to the title itself.  It is thus a self-defeating act.

 

Had someone who was critical of the TSSI  written an

article directed at an interpretation of Marx by a TSS

supporter named  'Omega'  entitled  "Lies, Damned

Lies, Omega's Critique of Marx",  would you still have to

see and read the paper before commenting on title

selection?

 

Whether I agree or disagree with Ernesto is really besides

the point.  There is an important political point here related

to solidarity.  And, btw, had there really been an 'Omega'

and had someone written an article with the title above,

then I would have called the attention of the list to it.  The

issue here is more important,  imo, than disputes over

TSS vs. SSS interpretations of the quantitative aspects of

Marx's theory.

 

> I do not agree with either the orthodox theory or Screpanti's,

> but that is irrelevant.  It is the charge of incoherence that -

> I would guess-  would attract the 'Damned Lies' bit. 

 

One can have a mistaken interpretation of Marx, but that

doesn't mean that *lies* are being spread.  And here I differ

a bit with Riccardo who suggested that Ernesto spread

lies but not "damn lies".  In the English language to say

that something is a lie is a much stronger statement than

to suggest that someone's perspective is mistaken or in

error.  I don't know Ernesto personally, but I find the implication

(and how else could one read the title as suggesting

anything other than this?) that he is a *liar* to be *highly*

offensive and objectionable.

 

In solidarity, Jerry