Michael W asked in [OPE-L:2634]:
> I profoundly disagree with Paul's apparent method (although his
> specific work - for example on the empirical correlation of vertically
> integrated labour times and money prices - is intriguing). But are we
> dealing here with incommensurable world-views, or can Paul and I
> fruitfully discuss these methodological matters.
> Can anyone else on the list offer some assistance?
A couple of brief suggestions (for all):
(1) Attempt to identify *both* differences and similarities in
perspective. As Marxists we are separated by many different
methodological and political traditions. We are also united in many
other ways in terms of perspective, purpose, and politics. On a
practical level, if we can understand what unites us, we are better
positioned to meaningfully discuss differences in interpretation and
methodology.
(2) To the extent that we can be more explicit and less assertive in
discussing differences in interpretation, we are more likely to have a
meaningful and productive exchange of perspectives.
In OPE-L Solidarity,
Jerry