From: glevy@PRATT.EDU
Date: Fri Jul 30 2004 - 09:03:44 EDT
>>> As for the special aspect of gold to which you speak above, gold is in fact a special status commodity by methodological fiat in Marx's system. It is assumed to have a given and fixed value throughout the three volumes of Capital. Grossmann argued that only someone who was scientifically untutored would consider this to be arbitrary and undermining of the scientific status of Capital. That is, you will not get off the block unless you make that assumption. <<< It wasn't an arbitrary assumption for Marx because it corresponded to the reality of capitalism during his time. Whether gold _continues_ to have the special status (as the money commodity) today is another question. More specifically, whether a theoretical system that purports to systematically explain the character of the bourgeois mode of production now requires such an assumption is debateable. The issue shouldn't be what Marx assumed but whether a comprehensive understanding of the subject matter (capitalism) requires that one analytically give gold a 'special status'. I wonder (I'm thinking aloud here): in many fields of study (most notably, anatomy and evolution) there is the recognition that there are forms that only have vestigal (sp?) meaning. E.g. body parts that are no longer reuired for existence because of the evolution of a species. Is the analysis (explanation) of vestigal (and no longer necessary) forms required in basic theoretical political economy or can such an analysis be treated as historical footnotes and curiosities? Now, back to the boat! In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jul 31 2004 - 00:00:01 EDT