[OPE-L:5840] RE: Re: form and content re value-form and abstractlabour

From: Chai-on Lee (conlee@chonnam.ac.kr)
Date: Fri Jun 08 2001 - 20:39:50 EDT

Next message: Fred B. Moseley: "[OPE-L:5841] Re: form and content re value-form and abstract labour"
Previous message: Andrew Brown: "[OPE-L:5839] Re: form and content re value-form and abst"
In reply to: Gerald_A_Levy: "[OPE-L:5834] Re: form and content re value-form and abstractlabour"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Jerry said,
=======

The reference, I think, tends to support (at least on
Hegelian terms) the VFT
interpretation against Fred's interpretatation.

Chai-on
-----------
No, I do not think so. Content is also a form but must be distinguished from the substance of the content.
This means the content of the value form is not the abstract labor but the value itself. 
In the VFT, it is ignored that the content of the value form is also the value itself. 


In solidarity
chai-on

Next message: Fred B. Moseley: "[OPE-L:5841] Re: form and content re value-form and abstract labour"
Previous message: Andrew Brown: "[OPE-L:5839] Re: form and content re value-form and abst"
In reply to: Gerald_A_Levy: "[OPE-L:5834] Re: form and content re value-form and abstractlabour"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jul 15 2001 - 10:56:29 EDT