From: Paul Cockshott (clyder@GN.APC.ORG)
Date: Wed Mar 31 2004 - 17:22:39 EST
The problem comes in trying to give an unabiguous measure of technical composition, since it involves a relationship between incomensurable quantities. Andrew Brown wrote: > > Hi > > On 25 Mar 2004 at 22:04, Paul Cockshott wrote: > > > Andrew Brown wrote: > > > > > > The theory has the same core as it always did, viz. LTV, emphasis on > > > levels of abstraction, importance of VCC/OCC/TCC distinctions, > > > emphasis on need to incorporate concrete, empirical, historical and > > > contingent material. > > > > Why do you consider VCC/OCC/TCC distinctions important. > > > > It has always struck me that only there is only one well defined > > concept there, the rest is handwaving. > > they are pivotal for grasping the LTRPF and the transformation > problem (both of which turn on difference or changes in 'the' 'CC'). > see Fine and saadi Filho's 'Marx's Capital', 4th ed, for example. > interesting to note that the distinction only really comes into its own > when thinking about disequilibrium. > > andy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 02 2004 - 00:00:02 EST