(OPE-L) Re: Is value labour?

From: gerald_a_levy (gerald_a_levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Thu May 08 2003 - 09:05:15 EDT

• Next message: Paul Cockshott: "Re: (OPE-L) Re: Is value labour?"
• Previous message: gerald_a_levy: "(OPE-L) 'Capitalism' -- a Board Game"
• In reply to: Paul Cockshott: "Re: (OPE-L) Is value labour?"
• Next in thread: Paul Cockshott: "Re: (OPE-L) Re: Is value labour?"
• Reply: Paul Cockshott: "Re: (OPE-L) Re: Is value labour?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Paul C wrote on Thursday, in reply to Michael E:

> I think you are justified in calling attention to the use of the 
> term 'forms' in idealist metaphysics.  I prefer to use 
> terms like 'mode of representation' of value instead 
> of 'value form'.  

For the purpose of the following question, let's call it
exchange-value rather than value-form:

What is the difference conceptually between 'mode of 
representation'  and 'form of appearance'?

In solidarity, Jerry

• Next message: Paul Cockshott: "Re: (OPE-L) Re: Is value labour?"
• Previous message: gerald_a_levy: "(OPE-L) 'Capitalism' -- a Board Game"
• In reply to: Paul Cockshott: "Re: (OPE-L) Is value labour?"
• Next in thread: Paul Cockshott: "Re: (OPE-L) Re: Is value labour?"
• Reply: Paul Cockshott: "Re: (OPE-L) Re: Is value labour?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 09 2003 - 00:00:00 EDT