Suchergebnisse

Reflections on Commercial Life, an anthology of writings, from the ancient Greeks to contemporary thinkers, provides students, scholars, and general readers an opportunity to develop a more self-conscious and critical relationship to commercial life. Selections are drawn from seminal works of high intellectual and literary quality. Through an inquiry into history, nature, and outcomes, this volume offers the opportunity to explore, as never before, alternatives to modern commercial life

In this reply to James Furner's undermining of the third thing argument -- that exchange-value expresses value -- that emerged from Marx's critique of Samuel Bailey, the author argues that a reconstruction along the lines of Chris Arthur is unnecessary. A summary of Furner's argument delineates his point that Marx's theory cannot be established at the conceptual level of the commodity, & is a mistaken call for reconstruction. A critique of Furner's argument argues that the notion that begs the question in the third thing argument is the result of an inversion of Marx's reasoning on the commodity having exchange value, & his critique of Kliman's appeal to common sense in relation to commodities having worth. Further critique of Furner's intention asserts that Marx does answer subjective value theory, the inadequacy of Bailey's alternative to Marx's value theory, the superiority of Marx's theory of money, & the problems with Furner's argumentative strategy on theory of value. Furner's assumption that commodities "have" exchange-values is argued to beg the question of Marx's "third thing argument," & the author concludes that Marx attacks on the idea the value can be purely subjective, rendering Bailey's value theory of purely subjective utility bogus. References. J. Harwell

AbstractIn the first part of this two-part article, I argued that, unlike the asocial classical (Ricardian) labour theory of value, Marx's labour theory of value is a 'truly social' one. In fact, it is a purely social one. Marx's theory of value is nothing but his theory of the social forms distinctive of the capitalist mode of production. Thus, we may speak of those forms as value-forms, the (generalised) commodity, money (in its several forms), capital, wage-labour, surplus-value and its forms of appearance (profit, interest, and rent), and more. The labour that produces value, then, is labour of a peculiar social sort. This thought is entirely foreign to the classical labour theory of value, and, likewise, to Marxist accounts of value theory that mistake it for a radical version of Ricardian value theory. The gulf between the classical and the Marxian labour theories of value is wide.

Marx's thoughts concerning capital's influence on the abstraction of labor have long confounded analysts. The purpose of this paper is to simplify Marx's thinking by explaining the concept of social form & its relation to wealth. It points out that Marx was a radical economist whose theory of value explained value as abstract labor itself (a component of which is commodity-producing labor), rather than exchange-value. Those who argue that Marx paired the idea of abstract labor with his conception of value-producing labor (such as Reuten) are incorrect. The paper then argues that Marx's theory of value should be thought of as a critique of economics, & Rubin's own solution to Rubin's dilemma is not acceptable. The paper concludes with a claim against Reuten: in fact, Marx's argument for commodity as a form of wealth segues perfectly into Marx's own systematic explanation of capitalist society. 61 References. K. A. Larsen

In the second part of a 2-part article, the author discusses the process by which "practically abstract labor" becomes actually abstract, in an attempt to correct an error by critics who regard Marx as a radical economist. The article begins with a recap of Part I, which presented Marx's labor theory of value as purely social, & identified three Marxian concepts: labor, abstract labor, & practically abstract labor. Next, the author invokes three rubrics that pertain to the qualitative sociological side of Marx's theory of value: the forms of subsumption of capital, the shadow-forms of capital, & the situation of labor in space & time. He concludes by examining formal, real, ideal, & hybrid subsumption, followed by a discussion of subsumption under capital's shadow-forms. J. R. Callahan

TARA (Trinity?s Access to Research Archive) has a robust takedown policy. Please contact us if you have any concerns: rssadmin@tcd.ie