From: Dave Zachariah (davez@KTH.SE)
Date: Wed Jan 09 2008 - 12:40:55 EST
on 2008-01-09 15:53 Paul Zarembka wrote: > I don't think so but I suppose this is clear enough from my messages. > Paul > > --On 1/9/2008 3:23 PM +0100 Dave Zachariah wrote: > >> But if one says that capital *is* a relation, then "capital >> accumulation" >> --- by definition a quantitative process --- loses its meaning and >> Marxist >> economic theory will be obscured. >> Ok, I know you disagree. But then if capital is by itself a relation, what does it mean to "accumulate relations"? Can an agent do so or only the economic system? Relations are subsets of cartesian products between sets of agents. Then according to the argument above, "capital accumulation" suggests that the cardinality of relation (set) that constitutes capital is increasing. //Dave Z
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 31 2008 - 00:00:06 EST