From: gerald_a_levy (gerald_a_levy@msn.com)
Date: Mon Dec 23 2002 - 09:41:05 EST
Re Chris's [8230]: >As we know money is the real measure. > Elsewhere Marx refines this statement here to read LT is the 'immanent > measure'. This is not a concept known to me from any other science. It is > tempting to read it as a confused way of saying immanent determinant as > when we say weight is 'mG' where m would model LT and G would be modeled > by some kind of exchange field. Or it could be there is some very > intimate relation between value and labour time which is neither identity > nor determinant but something in between. My instinct is to go for this > last. What about the Hegelian conception of science? Hegel uses the expression "immanent measure" in the _Science of Logic_ (in Volume 1 ["The Objective Logic"], Book 1 ["The Doctrine of Being"], Section 3 ["Measure"], Ch. 1 ["Specific Quantity"]). Within Hegelian thought the subjects of 'Magnitude' and 'Measure' are quite complex. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 31 2002 - 00:00:01 EST