From: gerald_a_levy (gerald_a_levy@msn.com)
Date: Thu Dec 12 2002 - 07:46:02 EST
Re Michael E's [8053]: Replying to Andy B, you wrote: > The issue of materialist dialectics is a > large one, as you say. The task here would be to interpret Marx's > references to "law of motion" and "law of gravity" in another way which > puts a distance between these obvious Newtonian references and what Marx > attempts to establish as a "law of value". The expression "economic law of motion of capital" _sounds like_ Marx is conceptualizing "law of motion" in a Newtonian sense. Yet, this perspective on how Marx understands "law of motion" (and laws generally) has been challenged by others including John P. Burkett in "Marx's Concept of an Economic Law of Motion" (http://www.uri.edu/research/isiac/lawofmot.pdf ). J. Burkett claims that Marx rejected the Newtonian conception of laws in favor of Hegel's conception. [Burkett also claims that Marx's use of the Hegelian conception of law led to important theoretical problems such as "selectively ignoring observed variables and theorizing about unobserved ones".] Do you (and others on the list) agree with Burkett that Marx's conception of 'law of motion' was Hegelian and non-Newtonian? In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Dec 13 2002 - 00:00:00 EST