From: Andrew Brown (Andrew@lubs.leeds.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Nov 04 2002 - 10:19:03 EST
Re 7891: Hi Fred, Many thanks for your reply and for the attachments. The 'hostile brothers' ch. is the one I have been studying, whilst also dipping in to the other ch. and also your 1993 ch. on the transformation problem. > What I mean by "theoretical determination" is that the total quantity > of surplus-value is determined in Volume 1 by the following equation: > > S = n [ m (LT - LN ) ] = n [ m ( LS ) ] > > where LT is the total working time for the average worker, LN is the > necessary labor-time for the average worker, m is the money value > added per hour, and n is the number of workers employed in the > capitalist economy as a whole. > The "cause" of surplus-value is surplus labor, in the sense of the > above equation, i.e. surplus-value is proportional to surplus labor. > Every hour that the average workers works over and above necessary > labor produces m amount of surplus-value for capitalists. > Could I ask for some points of clarification? You argue, of course, that m and LS (hence S) are 'taken as given' in volume 3. Is it the magnitude of their *product* (mLS) that is taken as given, or is the magnitude of the individual variables, i.e. m on the one hand and LS on the other, 'taken as given' (and their product then derived from these given magnitudes)? Indeed I could ask the same sort of question regarding LS and the sum of LT and -LN. The next question is not only a point of clarification, rather it also may reveal where I am finding it difficult to grasp your view: What is the causal process or mechanism, i.e. the social process, whereby S is made proportional to n [ m (LS) ] (such that the latter 'determines' the former)? Is this process established in Vol 1? (On my own reading, which I can now see is different to your interpretation, the answer to the last question is that this process has *not* been established. That is, I cannot see any social mechanism or structure in Vol 1 whereby proportionality between S and its own substance, viz nLS, is established). Hope these questions make sense - would be very glad to clarify them if that would be helpful. Thanks again, Andy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 05 2002 - 00:00:00 EST