Re: [OPE-L] questions on the interpretation of labour values

From: Diego Guerrero (diego.guerrero@CPS.UCM.ES)
Date: Mon Mar 05 2007 - 07:52:27 EST 

Hi, Ian,

You wrote

> Is it possible to maintain an ontological distinction between
> labour-value and price if the former is essentially defined in terms
> of the latter?
________________________________

I don't define labour-value in terms of price. I say that value is defined
by the process of labour creating NEW value, which is and has to be made in
a context where the means of production used for this purpose have
previously-determined values. The latter are not the central question
involved: rather they should be treated as the retorts used in the CREATION
of a new chemical substance. I have insisted that _new_ and _old_ values
have to be understood in logical terms, not cronological terms.

________________________________

Ian:
How can labour-values be attractors for prices (the law
> of value) if labour-values cannot be determined independently of
> prices? (This states Francisco's point in another way).
________________________________

Diego:
How can the psicological features of fathers (co)determine that of the
children if the former were children before being fathers?

The formation of real values is a real problem. You have real labour on the
one hand and real inputs with real values on the other. What matters is the
labour process.

Again:
The formation of real prices is a real problem. You have real labour on the
one hand and real inputs with real prices on the other. What matters is the
labour process.



Best wishes,
Diego

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 31 2007 - 01:00:12 EDT