Jerry: Quickly, re your last post: [...] >The TSS perspective is not, as Andrew and other TSS advocates have >repeatedly told us, a new social theory. I really cannot recall anything written by a TSSer arguing that TSS is a "new social theory". Can you quote some published piece saying that? On the contrary, it's been always stressed that TSS is indeed an *intepretation of Marx's value theory", as Fred's or Duncan's or the standard physicalist versions are. Andrew's post suggests a "Copernican Revolution" (note the quotation marks that you forgot in your reply...) regarding *the interpretation of Marx's value theory* in the sense that following the equilibrium oriented dominant interpretation, Marx's value theory has alwasys seemed nonsensical, self-contradictory, flawed, etc., etc. In the TSS interpretation, on the contrary, some of its more controversial aspects seems to make sense. This is the so-called "Copernican Revolution" the post refers to. Not a "new social science". In any case, I find the pairing of the TSS effort to a "Copernican Revolution" misleading because people tends to get only this by side aspect, then distorting the real issues. >Rather it is a (relatively new) >interpretation of Marx. If one wants to claim that TSS really does represent >a Copernicun revolution in Marxian value theory then one must demonstrate >that one has developed a revolutionary advance *beyond* what Marx wrote. It is NOT a "revolution in Marxian value theory", as you write here, but another perspective in the interpretation of Marx's value theory. >Yet, this has not been claimed. Of course not. [...] Good night! A.R.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 01 2001 - 14:01:38 EST