More on the bizarre [OPE-L:5084]: I misunderstood the negative character of Kliman's "tests" (i.e. he wants me to dis-prove his allegations) of the empirical "evidence" so I will respond more: [Oh, really? Where? I respectfully call on Jerry <snip, JL> JL: Oh, really? You "respectfully" called on me? I don't think so.] Anticipating Jerry's next move, I will say that I will be willing to retract my charge of personal vilification if he can show that (a) he treated Duncan Foley and me equally during the period in which both Duncan and I were employing the v = 0 assumption; JL: Discussed previously, but note well that Kliman's "test" is faulty. For it to be legitimate, one would first have to show that the context and arguments used for employing this assumption was the same for both authors. That is not correct, however (as explained previously). (b) he didn't present himself to my wife as a friend of mine in order to start a conversation with her and then publicize to this list, out of context and without her permission, a statement she made during that private conversation, in order to make me look bad and (without success, thank god) to try to create dissension between us; JL: answered previously. (c) he didn't write that I engaged in a "diatribe" against Fred's use of a "levels of abstraction" dodge while later, when called on this, admitting that it was not a diatribe; and JL: answered previously. (d) he has not tried to ridicule my concern for empirical evidence. JL: have I tried to "ridicule" his concern for empirical evidence? No. In fa t I have encouraged him and others who share the TSSI to do empirical work. Rather than a "ridicule" of his concern, I have challenged him on this issue by demanding proof regarding a number of his claims. But, again, note well that a diference over whether certain standards can be able to settle particular diferences in THEORETICAL perspective is a diference about THEORY, it is IN NO WAY a "personal attack". Similarly, a demand that he produce evidence -- rather than make unsupported allegations about "suppression" is not a "personal" attack. One of the very first things I learned when I became political (at age 15) was to not understand political criticism as a personal attack. In discussing alternative THEORETICAL positions, as well, one must remember that debates (among scholars and/or economists and/or Marxists) about theory are NOT PERSONAL attacks. Kliman seems to have forgotten this very elementary point. Indeed, every case above (except the false belief about an incident with his wife) concerns diferences in *theoretical* perspective. To call the above "personal vilification" must be rejected as yet another of his unsupported allegations. IF THERE IS ANYONE WHO IS BEING VILIFIED, IT IS MYSELF. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 01 2001 - 14:01:40 EST