I notice that Fred is continuing to put Andrew on the spot (e.g., 4957 and 4958). But Fred hasn't answered Andrew's 4929 below as far as I can see. It's a tough question, maybe even unanswerable. In any case, oughtn't Fred to try to take a position on this question? Andrew once asked me the same question on another topic, and I told him I didn't know the answer and I still don't; I'm hoping to learn if there a way to answer such a question. Unfortunately, the tennis analogy is rather too true. This dialogue (such as it is) has taken on the character of a scoring match, particularly when there are references to "no one has dissented" (4957). I am here to learn and contribute as I see occasion, not for "yea, nay, abstain", implicit or explicit, voting. Indeed, the loner "against the current" could be the most correct. Paul Z. *********************************************************************** Paul Zarembka, editor, RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY at ******************** http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka "Drewk" <Andrew_Kliman@msn.com> said, on 02/17/01: >In reply to Fred's OPE-L 4924: >He wrote: "even if I am mistaken about market prices and the rate of >profit in Chapter 6 of Volume 3, this does not affect the validity of my >criticism of Andrew's >interpretation of Marx's prices of production." >What, in your opinion, WOULD affect the validity of your >criticism? Under what conditions would you be willing to concede that >your criticism is indeed invalid? I really need to know. As I've noted, >"WHAT'S THE POINT OF FURTHER "DISCUSSION," IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE 'RIGHT' >NO MATTER WHAT?" >Andrew Kliman
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 01 2001 - 14:01:39 EST