Re: [OPE-L] class theory

From: glevy@PRATT.EDU
Date: Mon Oct 29 2007 - 19:37:08 EDT 

>  But I have no evidence that people will
> respond in
the way you describe, and would not expect them to.

Ian:

I think there's plenty of  evidence from the fields
of social psychology and
social communication
studies.  Also, evidence from the history of political economy.


>There
> is no reason why a statement regarding
the class content of a social
> theory should cause any more
consternation than any other kind of
> critique. It can be argued
and refuted in the normal manner.


No, it
can't.  You missed my point.

We _already_ have _lots_ of
history in the "Neo-Ricardian" - Marxian literature
to show
that it's not productive.   It also tends to be circular.
For instance, in the
1980's Neo-Ricardianism, it was claimed,
represented vulgar economic theory.
Then, in a case of what goes
around comes around, the TSSI wa accused of being
a form
of vulgar economics.

In solidarity, Jerry

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Oct 31 2007 - 00:00:20 EDT