Nicky wrote in [5617]: > VFT rejects an axiomatic or 'analytic' > interpretation of value theory, If VFT rejects an axiomatic or analytic interpretation of value, why does it not also reject the use of tautologies in interpreting value? In [5577], Geert wrote that the equation for aggregate value put forward by R/W represents an "informed tautology (for conceptual clarification) WITHIN the [R/W, JL] framework." What is an informed tautology and why is it any better than an axiom? What is the status of 'informed technologies' in the presentation of systemic dialectical theory? Is it an optional device for presentation purposes only (an example of 'picture-thinking'?) or is it an essential aspect of the theory itself? In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Jun 02 2001 - 00:00:08 EDT