[OPE-L:8158] Re: the triumph of value theory?

From: gerald_a_levy (gerald_a_levy@msn.com)
Date: Tue Dec 10 2002 - 18:05:14 EST

• Next message: Fred B. Moseley: "[OPE-L:8159] Re: Re: direct and indirect causes of surplus-value"
• Previous message: Gil Skillman: "[OPE-L:8157] Re: the triumph of value theory?"
• In reply to: Gil Skillman: "[OPE-L:8157] Re: the triumph of value theory?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Re [8157]:

> For the record, the paper does not argue that the "development of Marx's
> value theory represented a 'triumph' over historical materialism," as
> Jerry suggests below.  The "triumph" referred to in the title is of what
> in the  paper I term Marx's "value-theoretic account of surplus value"
> over  what I  call his '"historical account of surplus value."  Gil

OK.  Thanks for the correction.  So I guess I should re-phrase my question
as follows: do others agree that Marx's 'value-theoretic account of surplus
value'  triumphs over his 'historical account of surplus value'?  If so,
what is the significance of this 'triumph'?

In solidarity, Jerry

• Next message: Fred B. Moseley: "[OPE-L:8159] Re: Re: direct and indirect causes of surplus-value"
• Previous message: Gil Skillman: "[OPE-L:8157] Re: the triumph of value theory?"
• In reply to: Gil Skillman: "[OPE-L:8157] Re: the triumph of value theory?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Dec 11 2002 - 00:00:01 EST