Re Paul C's [[5561]: > There are certain unchanging regularities, - > commodities are produced every year. Labour is > performed every year. Commodities are sold > every year. Wages are paid every year. These > provide us with the data to test general theorems > about the relationships between the prices that > commodities are sold for and for instance the > wages that were paid to make them. > What is the difficulty with this? Yes, there are regularities within a mode of production. Yet, are these regularities unchanging in the same sense in which we can refer by observation to unchanging natural regularities in astronomy? One can be able to predict *with precision* such questions as the height and declination of heavenly bodies in relation to particular observation points at particular times on Earth. For example, one can be able to predict precisely -- to the minute -- what time sunrise and sunset will occur in different latitudes and longitudes on Earth. *That* degree of regularity is not to be found in the developmental tendencies of capitalism. Let us consider this question more: what are the variables that can stop the Sun from rising or setting as predicted? Not many are there? (perhaps a super-nova or a degradation of the Earth's orbit?.) Within political economy, we can't be able to subject theorems to such tests both because of the quantity of variables concerned and the fact that the 'observers' can also alter the outcome. Unlike physicists, we can not put two objects in a vacuum to observe -- and test -- their relationship to each other. Instead, the c.p. assumption is used to clear the 'clutter' caused by other variables. Yet, we can never forget that the conclusions that we come to with the c.p. assumption are *conditional* and *tentative* in a way in which conclusions that we come to through vacuum testing are not. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Jun 02 2001 - 00:00:07 EDT