>Alan replies
>But I get the impression that whenever Fred uses the word 'prior', he does
>so strictly in the sense of 'epistemologically prior'. I find this still
>ambiguous which is why I don't like using the word if I can avoid it, since
>I can never be sure how statements using this word will be read. 'Prior'
>could refer to the order of derivation of categories; to the order of
>mathematical calculation; or to a syllogistic precedence ordering in terms
>of generality. I don't think these are in every case the same thing.
>Perhaps Fred would like to comment.
>
>Alan
Yes indeed and one could add ontological priority when marx keeps
insisting something must be created before it can be distributed even if
there is no temporal gap. This seems to be the main thing motivating his
treatment of transformation and the main thing Fred starts from.
Comradely
Chris