This is a reply to Nicky's (5617). Nicky, thanks a lot for your post. For purposes of the present discussion, we don't have to decide whether the qualitative side or the quantitative side of Marx's theory is the most important. (I will come back to this question in a subsequent post.) For now, I hope we can agree that both sides of Marx's theory are important. My question in recent posts has been about the quantitative side of Marx's theory, especially his theory of the magnitude of surplus-value. I would like to know how Marx's quantitative theory of the magnitude of surplus-value is interpreted by the VF interpretation. Marx presented his theory of the magnitude of surplus-value in Chapter 7 of Volume 1. In Chapter 7, it is certainly true that, when Ls = 0 hours, then S = 0 shillings, and when Ls = 6 hours, then S = 3 shillings. More generally, the magnitude of surplus-value is determined by the magnitude of surplus labor, as represented by the equation: S = m Ls as I have discussed. Marx's logic in this chapter certainly seems to assume a CAUSAL LINK between surplus labor and surplus-value. Nicky (and others), if the VFI provides another interpretation of Marx's theory of the magnitude of surplus-value in Chapter 7 (or elsewhere), would you please summarize this alternative interpretation for me (us). How does the VF interpretation explain why the magnitude of surplus-value is 3 shillings rather than 0, or 6, etc.? Or how does the VF interpretation explain why the magnitude of surplus-value increases or decreases? Thanks in advance for your reply. Comradely, Fred
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Jun 02 2001 - 00:00:08 EDT