on 2/10/02 06:57 AM, Michael Perelman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In reply to Rakesh's comments:
>
> First, I would accept a modifies "largely not broken away."
>
>> Michael, i think i disagree with both you and Shortall that Marx had
>> not broken from what you are calling simple value an
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Perelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Nathan Rosenberg has picked up on these passages in a couple of
> > important articles in the mid 70s.
>
> Rosenberg was a Marxist, who became very conventional.
>
=
What happened?
Ian
In reply to Rakesh's comments:
First, I would accept a modifies "largely not broken away."
> Michael, i think i disagree with both you and Shortall that Marx had
> not broken from what you are calling simple value analysis in vol I.
>
To me simple value analysis means static, as in simple comm
In a message dated 2/8/2002 10:49:51 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alternatively Marx insisted that scientific method
to analyze concrete society must be began from abstract category, and
ascending to shape of concrete society (Engels modified title of Capital as
"process of
