> Now _if_, as I have been assuming, Marx's (unfinished) Critique of
> Political Economy is a scientific theory (in a sense of science & theory
> close to Jerry's restricted sense), _then_ of course a final word is/was
> a contradiction: there is no final word in science. (That is not to say
> that mere empirical research within a different framework can be very
> relevant to either expanding or contradicting the theory. I'm thinking
> of what seems to me the irrelevance of empirical research within any
> given historical period to the concepts of productive/unproductive
> labor, which is a high-order abstraction.)
>
> Carrol
=================
I'd like to know how there can be a priori truths about historical phenomena? :-)
Surely the claims that there are distinctions between productive/unproductive labor are based on empirical observation yada yada? Why the insistence that we must project these categories/terms onto markets, especially if it makes no difference to politcal strategy or tactics?
Ian