Rejoinder to La Barre

Rejoinder to Gordon Tullock

Rejoinder: Response to Sobel*

Sobel claims to disagree with many of the points made in my paper. He also claims that much if not all of what I say is already in the statistical treatment effect literature. He treats my Section 4 as a literature review rather than an illustration of the basic principles made in Sections 1–3 of the paper, as I intended it to be. In joint work with Edward Vytlacil, I present a comprehensive li...

Rejoinder to Carlo Ratti

In this rejoinder, we answer questions about space syntax raised in Carlo Ratti's paper ``Urban texture and space syntax: some inconsistencies'', and discuss theoretical assumptions underlying some of his criticisms. DOI:10.1068/b3019a

Rejoinder to Professor Teller

At the outset of his comments Professor Teller expresses disquiet at what seems to him my claiming to have a rule which is capable of automatically generating the hypothesis to be adopted when given nothing but the experimental data. Such a claim would indeed be quite preposterous since everybody knows that there are no clear-cut principles for the production of hypotheses, but that these are s...

Alienability: rejoinder to Kuflik

Purpose – The purpose of writing this paper is to defend the doctrine of commodification, or alienability: that there are no exceptions to the principle that all things that are owned may be legally sold. Design/methodology/approach – The approach of this paper is to consider arguments to the contrary, mainly those, in this case, furnished by Kuflik, and then to refute these arguments. Findings...