Subject: BHA: Re: multi-leveled ontology
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 10:47:26 +0100


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.


multi-leveled ontologyRakesh see Steve Fleetwood in Capital and Class no 73 2001 or the works of Andrew Collier from the late 1980s or contact Branwyn Gruffydd Jones there is also a book by Chris Harman called explaining the crisis written in the 1980s that has an ecellent account of why profit rates may not fall in its latter half

Jamie


  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Rakesh Bhandari
  To: bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
  Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 9:16 PM
  Subject: BHA: multi-leveled ontology


  I do peruse the archives of this stimulating list.
  I would appreciate  a reading recommendation or two about the problem of
  multi-layered ontologies. Where in Bhaskar's work in this problem
  discussed? Where is there a good Hegelian discussion of the multiple
  layerings of the ontological?
  The query arises out of an attempt to comprehend what kind of
  reality to attribute to  the tendency for the rate of
  profit to fall (as theorized Marx rather than say JS Mill).
  If the tendency is not actualized, does this
  mean it has no reality at all? I'm not happy with attributing
  to the tendency a virtual reality. That is, the replacement of the distinction
  between possibility and reality with one b/t virtuality and actuality does
  not seem to help much.
  I would appreciate it if replies were cc'd to my email address as well rakeshb-AT-stanford.edu
  Thanks all for the stimulating discussion.
  Yours, Rakesh Bhandari

HTML VERSION:

----- Original Message -----

From: Rakesh Bhandari

To: bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu

Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 9:16 PM

Subject: BHA: multi-leveled ontology

I do peruse the archives of this stimulating list.

I would appreciate  a reading recommendation or two about the problem of

multi-layered ontologies. Where in Bhaskar's work in this problem

discussed? Where is there a good Hegelian discussion of the multiple

layerings of the ontological?

The query arises out of an attempt to comprehend what kind of

reality to attribute to  the tendency for the rate of

profit to fall (as theorized Marx rather than say JS Mill).

If the tendency is not actualized, does this

mean it has no reality at all? I'm not happy with attributing

to the tendency a virtual reality. That is, the replacement of the distinction

between possibility and reality with one b/t virtuality and actuality does

not seem to help much.

I would appreciate it if replies were cc'd to my email address as well rakeshb-AT-stanford.edu

Thanks all for the stimulating discussion.

Yours, Rakesh Bhandari