[OPE-L:4912] Re: epicycles and smoke strategies

From: Paul Zarembka (zarembka@ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU)
Date: Fri Feb 16 2001 - 09:32:03 EST

"Gerald_A_Levy" <Gerald_A_Levy@email.msn.com> said, on 02/16/01:

>In his [Andrew's] diatribe against levels of abstraction, 

DIATRIBE?  Andrew had written: 

--The way you [Fred] try to put it over is by means of the tried-and-true
"levels of abstraction" stuff.  As I have said in the past, "levels of
abstraction" is no term of Marx's.  When I hear it, I always check to see
that my wallet hasn't been lifted.

--But even the "levels of abstraction" methodology requires a *wee bit* of
discipline in argument.  To employ it, what comes before must be more
abstract, and what comes after must be more concrete....' 

Andrew is not engaging here in a diatribe.  Actually, it is something to
think about.

>Andrew has not directly confronted the following VERY EXPLICIT quote from
>*Marx* from  that chapter:

Jerry's quoted passage doesn't seem to directly bear on "levels of
abstraction" as the phrase does not appear in the passage.


>Do others outside of those who agree with the TSSIM  believe that I have
>claimed too much above?

>In solidarity, Jerry

Yes, I believe you have claimed too much (without getting into the rest of
your email).  Paul

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 01 2001 - 14:01:38 EST