Hi Andy, I'm quite willing to accept that the adjective "pure" is too extreme. Marx of course allowed that the use-value of workers had a qualitative aspect--that it was work of a particular type, whether weaving, ironworking, etc.--as well as having a quantitative use-value to its capitalist purchaser. Of course the same subtlety applies to machines, which have a qualitative aspect as well--that a machine used to produce steel cannot be used to shear sheep, for instance--as well as having a quantitative use-value to its capitalist purchaser. My proposition is that the latter, quantitative use-value, is the reason why capitalists both hire labour and purchase machinery, and that on this logic, both are sources of surplus value. Cheers, Steve At 01:35 PM 10/26/2000 +0100, you wrote: >Steve wrote: > >> Why is it "utterly absurd" to describe the use-value of machines as "purely >> quantitative", when it is not "absolutely absurd" to describe the use-value >> of workers as quantitative?: >> >> "Exchange-value and use-value [are] intrinsically incommensurable >> magnitudes" (Capital I, p. 506 [Progress Press Edition]) >> --------- > >Steve, > >Machines are not *purely* quantitative, nor are they *purely* >qualitative. Rather, they have various qualities and powers, and >various corresponding quantitative aspects (eg weight, volume, and >most importantly the socially accepted unit of measurement of >each specific type of machine). It is absurd to deny either aspect, >ie. a machine without qualities is an absurdity, it is nothing, not a >machine at all; and where there is quality there is quantity, the >most relevant one here being the number of machines at hand. > >So it is the word 'pure' that give us the absurdity. > >I'm not sure about your interesting citation from Marx (and I forget >the context) but I guess Marx means that use values cannot be >measured in units of abstract labour time, which, however, is the >internal or immanent measure of value (exchange value being the >external measure). > >> I also re-read our exchanges on this, as he suggested. These again relate >> to the distinction between labour-power and labour being the explanation as >> to why labour is the source of surplus-value. I know this is the standard >> position--and of course, it's not mine. I instead argue that this >> distinction is why Marx sees the value of labour power as being the minimum >> wage. Marx did continue to use this as a basis for his explanation of the >> source of surplus-value, coextensive with the use-value/exchange-value >> argument, but I argue that on this he was logically wrong. > >I have a feeling that a rather large gulf between our perspectives is >lurking, such that we may be talking at cross-purposes. My main >purpose in these exchanges is / was simply to argue that Marx is >not led to the absurd view that the use value of machines is >*purely* qualitative (a repeated assertion of yours) - SV is readily >explained by Marx without such absurdity. > >Thanks, > >Andy > > >> >> Of course, I don't expect to convince anyone on this list of that. > >> Still, I would appreciate people's "take" on the cite from Marx above. >> >> Steve >> >> At 11:41 26/10/00 +0100, you wrote: >> >I should have written 'purely qualitative' of course. >> > >> >sorry. >> > >> >andy >> > >> > >> Dr. Steve Keen >> Senior Lecturer >> Economics & Finance >> University of Western Sydney Macarthur >> Building 11 Room 30, >> Goldsmith Avenue, Campbelltown >> PO Box 555 Campbelltown NSW 2560 >> Australia >> s.keen@uws.edu.au 61 2 4620-3016 Fax 61 2 4626-6683 >> Home 02 9558-8018 Mobile 0409 716 088 >> Home Page: http://bus.macarthur.uws.edu.au/steve-keen/ >> > > Dr. Steve Keen Senior Lecturer Economics & Finance University of Western Sydney Macarthur Building 11 Room 30, Goldsmith Avenue, Campbelltown PO Box 555 Campbelltown NSW 2560 Australia s.keen@uws.edu.au 61 2 4620-3016 Fax 61 2 4626-6683 Home 02 9558-8018 Mobile 0409 716 088 Home Page: http://bus.macarthur.uws.edu.au/steve-keen/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 00:00:12 EST