>
>Alan
>====
>
>Under discussion was the K-McG transformation interpretation. Allin said
>it did not equalise something that ought to be equalised; I replied that
>this was true, but it did equalise what Marx said should be equalised.
>I am happy to move on to the more complex issue of how the capitalists
>do accounts, but first we have some accounting of our own.
>
>Is this procedure an internally consistent and valid interpretation of
>Marx's transformation or not?
>
>If not, why not?
Paul
----
This is entirely the wrong question to ask, and so long as one
asks this one remains in the terrain of scholastic ideology.
The scientific question is whether the theory is a correct
portrayal of reality.
Paul Cockshott
wpc@cs.strath.ac.uk
http://www.cs.strath.ac.uk/CS/Biog/wpc/index.html