[OPE-L:5772] Re: Re: the infinite quantity of logically plausible social theories theorem (IQLPSTT)

From: Andrew Brown (Andrew@lubs.leeds.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Jun 04 2001 - 05:12:00 EDT

Hello Jerry,

On 2 Jun 2001, at 21:20, Gerald_A_Levy wrote:

> > Re discussing more concrete things: What you
> > say is fair enough
> > but I think the reason that abstract issues (eg
> > TP) are discussed is
> > because they have massive implications for more > concrete work.
> They _might_ have important ('massive')
> implications for analyzing more concrete subjects,
> but I don't think that there is much (any?)
> evidence to show that that is 'the reason' these
> abstract issues are discussed at length.

What can you mean by 'evidence' here? I take it that the fact is 
that these issues are discussed at length. This is surely a kind of 
'evidence' for my suggestion? Indeed, viewing this 'evidence' any 
other way is likely to be be a rather less sympathetic 
interpretation, for it would cast doubt on the scientific justification of 
these long debates. Further 'evidence' of a different sort is that 
different theories of value yield very different concrete results. This 
is why I mentioned Ben Fine's many, many concrete studies, 
based explicitly on a take on the LTV (though rather ignored on 
OPEL). For this is clear 'evidence' that a take on the debates has 
'massive' implications for more concrete work.

Best wishes,


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jul 15 2001 - 10:56:28 EDT