----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
 
Mohammad Gani wrote: 
 
> If I were to follow the journalistic approach, I would not even wonder if Marx and Smith
differed greatly. They could not possibly differ greatly in presenting concrete details.
 
Perhaps because I am in the midst of a course investigating "post-modernist" theories of
research, I couldn't leave that last claim unquestioned.
 
Assume for illustrative purposes that a large new factory is opened in a small, late 18th
century English town. The mill employs mostly women, paying them more than lower end of
wages for a male worker in that time and place.  Many of the women are local wives, who
previously didn't work outside the home. Others were unmarried teenagers from the
countryside. The factory also causes pollution and lower prices for certain goods. It uses
a lot of water, causing increased employment for those who work to move the stream, but
having a negative impact on fishing and farming downstream. I could go on.
 
In presenting "concrete details" one could focus on one, two, or a certain selection of
the facts presented above, and many others. A wide range of factors, specifically
including the writer's perspective and prior experiences, would influence the choices
(both conscious and subconcious) that are made. As would, of course, writing 70 or so
years apart, like Smith and Marx.
 
Mike Robison 
 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]