Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: : Premises, Circularities

[Rakesh Bhandari <rakeshb@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > As is always the case with these debates, I can't resist the urge to
> > ask - so what? Why is the value controversy so important? Why is it
> > so important for Justin to reject it and Rakesh to defend it?
>
> This started with a brief remark. Then someone asked me to explain
> why I reject the LTV. Then the roof fell in. Rakesh wouldn't even
> let me back out of a discussion that (to be frank) doesn't interest
> me much. I did spend some time on value theoey, came to the
> conclusions I've had to adumbrate here, and never even wrote much on
> it because it was evident to be that the only pepople who werereally
> interestedw ere the true believers, and I wasn't going to persuade
> _them_. So, I agree, it's not that important.

A contemptuous comment.

You're not persuading us not because we are true believers but
because your reasons (redundancy, transformation problem) are not as
strong as you think they are.

Rakesh