In reply to OPE-L 5048: Paul Cockshott writes, "I, for one, can see no meaning for a concept of price in a one commodity world. I find it incomprehensible." (What if, in this same world, money is not a commodity?) But the real point, Paul (Cockshott) is whether *your* inability to comprehend it is legitimate grounds for excluding others -- who think they do comprehend it -- from publishing their work. That's what happened. The Ptolemaists found the notion of a moving earth incomprehensible. (See the quote from Kuhn in Alan Freeman's post.) Was it legitimate for them to persecute Galileo and to try to keep his work from being propagated? You write that I thought the referee's comments were "excessively harsh." That's not really it. I think they constitute suppression of my work, and more importantly the ideas I put forth, on political-ideological-theoretical grounds. As you can see from the above, I reject the GROUNDS for rejection, not just the particular judgment, as unscholarly and dogmatic. For Pluralism, Andrew ("Drewk") Kliman Dept. of Social Sciences Pace University Pleasantville, NY 10570 USA phone: (914) 773-3968 fax: (914) 773-3951 Home: 60 W. 76th St. #4E New York, NY 10023 USA "The practice of philosophy is itself theoretical. It is the critique that measures the individual existence by the essence, the particular reality by the Idea."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 01 2001 - 14:01:40 EST