From: Howard Engelskirchen (howarde@TWCNY.RR.COM)
Date: Mon Jun 14 2004 - 10:11:38 EDT
Hm, I read him differently. Howard ----- Original Message ----- From: "ajit sinha" <sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM> To: <OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 9:39 AM Subject: Re: [OPE-L] (OPE-L) Ajit's paper > --- Howard Engelskirchen <howarde@TWCNY.RR.COM> wrote: > > Hi Ajit, > > > > Welcome back! > > > > In regards to grains of gold being a way to measure > > the passage of time, why > > do you say "Marx is definitely not doing anything > > like that"? > > > > Howard > ____________________ > It is because I have read Marx, and have not found him > telling time by measuring grains of gold. By the way, > telling the time in producing grains of gold requires > you to tell the time in terms of producing various raw > materials and machines, etc. that is needed to produce > gold. Cheers, ajit sinha > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "ajit sinha" <sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM> > > To: <OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> > > Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 9:57 AM > > Subject: Re: [OPE-L] (OPE-L) Ajit's paper > > > > > > > --- Howard Engelskirchen <howarde@TWCNY.RR.COM> > > wrote: > > > > Hi Ajit, > > > > > > > > You write: > > > > > > > > > I think most of us understand that the > > movement of > > > > the > > > > > earth on its own axis and its movement around > > the > > > > sun > > > > > is taken as standard on the basis of which we > > > > derive > > > > > our measure of value. > > > > > > > > I take it you are not saying that the movement > > of > > > > the earth and around the > > > > sun somehow is what time is, because there are > > other > > > > suns and planets, of > > > > course. So by your use of the word "standard" > > you > > > > mean that the movement of > > > > the earth is a good way to *refer* to the > > passage of > > > > time. > > > > > > > > My point was that any activity or process occurs > > in > > > > time. That means any > > > > process can be used to refer to the passage of > > time. > > > > Change occurs in time, > > > > so any activity that produces a changed result > > can > > > > be used to refer to the > > > > passage of time. > > > > > > > > Obviously some things will refer poorly, some > > things > > > > well. It will depend > > > > on our purposes. You wouldn't want to use the > > time > > > > it would take an apple > > > > to rot for some kind of medical procedure that > > > > demanded precision in terms > > > > of minutes. > > > > > > > > But once we recognize that when we measure time, > > > > however we do it, we are > > > > only using some process or result to refer, then > > we > > > > can step back and look > > > > critically at the alternatives available to us. > > > > > > > > So, yes, I am saying that we can measure time in > > > > terms of units of gold. > > > > Gold is a result produced by activity that takes > > > > time. We can use grains of > > > > gold to tell time. > > > > > > > > Howard > > > _______________ > > > But this measure would be particularly poor. It > > takes > > > different amounts of time, i.e. different amounts > > of > > > time pass, in producing the same amount of > > gold--given > > > the mine is rich or not, etc. What do you gain by > > this > > > kind of measure? And Marx definitely is not doing > > > anything like that. Cheers, ajit sinha > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "ajit sinha" <sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM> > > > > To: <OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> > > > > Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2004 8:06 AM > > > > Subject: Re: [OPE-L] (OPE-L) Ajit's paper > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- Howard Engelskirchen > > <howarde@TWCNY.RR.COM> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Ajit, > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm not sure I understand what you don't > > > > understand, > > > > > > but let me repeat the > > > > > > argument I made: > > > > > > > > > > > > Time doesn't measure itself. We select any > > > > process, > > > > > > acvtivity or change > > > > > > whatsoever and use it to refer to the > > passage of > > > > > > time. Where activity > > > > > > produces a result we can use the result to > > refer > > > > to > > > > > > the passage of time. > > > > > > Ounces of gold are a result produced by > > > > activity. > > > > > > Therefore, they can be a > > > > > > means of referring to the passage of time. > > Marx > > > > > > does that. He speaks in > > > > > > terms of hours because that is the way > > people > > > > speak. > > > > > > But he measures in > > > > > > terms of ounces of gold. > > > > > > > > > > > > Howard > > > > > _________________ > > > > > > > > > > I think most of us understand that the > > movement of > > > > the > > > > > earth on its own axis and its movement around > > the > > > > sun > > > > > is taken as standard on the basis of which we > > > > derive > > > > > our measure of value. But in any case, what I > > > > don't > > > > > understand is are you saying that the unit of > > time > > > > can > > > > > be changed feom say hour to gram of gold? Or > > are > > > > you > > > > > saying that one can say that a gram of gold is > > so > > > > many > > > > > hours? What are you saying and how do you > > explain? > > > > > Cheers, ajit sinha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: "ajit sinha" <sinha_a99@YAHOO.COM> > > > > > > To: <OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> > > > > > > Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 7:22 AM > > > > > > Subject: Re: [OPE-L] (OPE-L) Ajit's paper > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- Howard Engelskirchen > > > > <howarde@TWCNY.RR.COM> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now one thing Marx didn't do was come up > > > > with a > > > > > > > > bunch of neologisms. He > > > > > > > > pretty much used the vocabulary that > > > > existed. > > > > > > Since > > > > > > > > people already had ways > > > > > > > > of speaking about time he used them. > > But > > > > when > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > came to telling time, he > > > > > > > > also offered an alternative in terms of > > > > ounces > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > gold. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This bears on the question of how we > > measure > > > > ten > > > > > > > > hours of labor. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Howard > > > > > > > __________________ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This I don't understand. ajit sinha > > > > > > > > > > > === message truncated === > > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. > http://messenger.yahoo.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 15 2004 - 00:00:02 EDT