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.
> It was his disowning and thus implicit rejection of the concepts > of economic law and the of the economy that Ian was objecting to. > Ian was saying that in rejecting these concepts he was rejecting > some of the fundamental concepts of Marx, and was thus anti-Marx. Hi Paul C: Yes, I understood Ian's claim. Did you understand mine (see http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/ope/archive/0512/0029.html ) about the historical experience of what has happened when Marxists have used terms like "anti-Marx", "anti-Marxist", and "anti-science" to describe other Marxists? Note that I was not essentially making an ethical or normative claim, but rather a _historical_ one. Whether one believes that these terms have legitimate uses or not, one should not fail to recognize the historical record and the implications thereof about praxis. In solidarity, Jerry
- Re: [OPE-L] Theories and Practices, (continued)
- Re: [OPE-L] Theories and Practices, Howard Engelskirchen Wed 07 Dec 2005, 15:47 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Theories and Practices, Ian Wright Wed 07 Dec 2005, 18:07 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Scare Quotes (note 'Scare Quotes'), Jerry Levy Thu 08 Dec 2005, 14:01 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Scare Quotes (note 'Scare Quotes'), Paul Cockshott Thu 08 Dec 2005, 14:51 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Scare Quotes (note 'Scare Quotes'), Jerry Levy Thu 08 Dec 2005, 15:26 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Scare Quotes (note 'Scare Quotes'), Ian Wright Thu 08 Dec 2005, 20:24 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] Theories and Practices, Paul Bullock Thu 08 Dec 2005, 14:46 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] David F. Ruccio, (Un)Real Criticism, Post-Autistic Economics Review, issue 35, Howard Engelskirchen Wed 07 Dec 2005, 06:53 GMT
- Re: [OPE-L] David F. Ruccio, (Un)Real Criticism, Post-Autistic Economics Review, issue 35, Howard Engelskirchen Tue 13 Dec 2005, 23:34 GMT