"Incommensurable" not necessarily incompatible (esp. since there isn't a particularly thoughtout Koganesque usage); e.g., what I wrote about cookery and botany on the Kuhn thread: the same person could use the word "fruit" differently in depending on whether he were doing botany or doing cooking. But anyway, I don't think that my usage is incommensurable with a Marxist's, that there's some great difference in mode of thought surrounding our usage of the word "class" (as opposed to a Copermican's and a Ptolemian's uses of the word "planet," which were masssively different). That is, both the Marxist and I can understand that a class can be a category for this or that purpose and can also be a category of people whose economic and political interests coincide, while I and the Marxist can disagree on how class works and what's really worthy of being called a "class issue" and what class interests are and what deserves to be called a class. I don't see really that I'm excluding anything, or why I would be forced to.