In reply to OPE-L 5048:
Paul Cockshott writes,
"I, for one, can see no meaning for a concept of price in a
one commodity world. I find it incomprehensible."
(What if, in this same world, money is not a commodity?)
But the real point, Paul (Cockshott) is whether *your* inability
to comprehend it is legitimate grounds for excluding others -- who
think they do comprehend it -- from publishing their work.
That's what happened.
The Ptolemaists found the notion of a moving earth
incomprehensible. (See the quote from Kuhn in Alan Freeman's
post.) Was it legitimate for them to persecute Galileo and to try
to keep his work from being propagated?
You write that I thought the referee's comments were "excessively
harsh."
That's not really it. I think they constitute suppression of my
work, and more importantly the ideas I put forth, on
political-ideological-theoretical grounds. As you can see from
the above, I reject the GROUNDS for rejection, not just the
particular judgment, as unscholarly and dogmatic.
For Pluralism,
Andrew ("Drewk") Kliman
Dept. of Social Sciences
Pace University
Pleasantville, NY 10570 USA
phone: (914) 773-3968
fax: (914) 773-3951
Home: 60 W. 76th St. #4E
New York, NY 10023 USA
"The practice of philosophy is itself theoretical. It is the
critique that measures the individual existence by the essence,
the particular reality by the Idea."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 01 2001 - 14:01:40 EST