[OPE-L] transitive relationship

From: Michael Schauerte (mikeschauerte@GMAIL.COM)
Date: Fri Apr 27 2007 - 00:31:40 EDT


Paul,

Thanks for the link! I may be too "scientifically challenged" to benefit
from the comparision you make but I will try to look through your writings
on value.

Mike

>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: OPE-L on behalf of Pen-L Fred Moseley
> Sent: Thu 4/26/2007 2:09 PM
> To: OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU
> Subject: Re: [OPE-L] Michael Schauerte
>
> Quoting Paul Cockshott <wpc@DCS.GLA.AC.UK>:
>
> > What analysis of the logic of exchange shows is that there must
> > be a conserved scalar quantity in exchange.
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> Would you please explain this argument further?
> Have you written it up somewhere?
> If so, please send me a copy.
>
> I argue that Marx's argument in SEction 1 assumes that the general
> system of commodity exchange is transitive (mutually consistent), from
> which it follows that commodity exchange must be the exchange of
> equivalents (as discussed in my previous post).  Is your argument
> similar to this, or different?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Comradely,
> Fred
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>
>


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 30 2007 - 00:00:17 EDT