From: Ian Hunt (ian.hunt@FLINDERS.EDU.AU)
Date: Thu Jun 14 2007 - 23:15:19 EDT
Dear Howard, I don't see why something like that example can't happen. Perhaps the difference between us is this: I see abstract labour defined by an equivalence relation over concrete labours: "the use-value of the product of x is equally exchangeable in respect of labour content with the use-value of the product of y". Among similar use-values, this reduces to "x is equally productive of use-value A as y". So among concrete labours that produce similar use-values, you get abstract labour by abstracting from differences in labour productivity. If your reference point is ordinarily skilled labour, then skilled labour of x hours has s times more abstract labour in hours if the skilled labour is s times as productive. Less than ordinarily skilled labour will have fewer abstract labour hours. However, I can see no a priori reason why these must balance out, unless you assume that ordinarily skilled labour is averagely skilled labour (ranging over developed skills as well as what people ordinarily acquire as part of their culture). I take ordinarily skilled labour as 'the expenditure of simple labour power, ie. of the labour-power possessed ... by every ordinary man, on the average, without being developed in any way' Penguin capital: 135): this is an average but of samples of undeveloped labour-power. It presupposes general education and training in any society but not specialized education or training. With bricklaying, it is the comparison between the labour power of an apprentice at the beginning of the apprenticeship and what you get at the end. This explains why i see my example as I do, with 4 hours of ordinarily skilled plus skilled labour adding up to 10 hours of abstract labour. On your account, as I see it, average productivity is 4/10. the unskilled labour of 2 hours has 0.8 hours of abstract labour and the skilled labour of 2 hours has 3.2 hours of abstract labour. Total: 4 hours in each case. Does this explain the difference? Cheers, Ian >Hi Ian, > >No of course. The way you present it doesn't make sense. > >But that example can't happen. All you have is an aggregate. You can't >start out saying how much is skilled worth compared to unskilled in the >abstract. The point has no meaning in the abstract. The comparison of >skilled to unskilled only takes meaning in relation to how much each is >going to take from the aggregate relative to what they brought to it. > >In other words, all the labor there is is thrown into a pot and we stir. >Now how much labor do the products brought to market represent? They don't >represent the labor that brought them to market as such. Instead they >represent a portion of the pot. How much of the pot they represent depends >on their relative weight. If labor S is skilled and represents 4 times the >amount of labor U, and there's just the two of them in the pot, then S will >bring 2 hours to the pot and take out 8, and U will bring 8 hours to the pot >and take out 2. The total in the pot is 10. > >Howard > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Ian Hunt" <ian.hunt@FLINDERS.EDU.AU> >To: <OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> >Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 3:47 AM >Subject: Re: [OPE-L] Abstraction > > >> Sorry if that was obscure. Suppose you have two workers, one skilled >> the other unskilled, who each work 2 hours. The sum of their concrete >> labours will be 4 hours. But if 2 hours of concrete skilled labour >> equals 8 hours of abstract labour, then the sum of the abstract >> labour will be 10 hours, which is not equal to the sum of the >> concrete labours. But maybe I misunderstood the proposed way of >> dealing with skilled labour, >> Cheers, >> Ian >> >> >What about the point in the other post, that there is a mismatch between >the >> >aggregate totals? I didn't get that at all either. >> > >> >Howard >> > >> > >> >----- Original Message ----- >> >From: "Ian Hunt" <ian.hunt@FLINDERS.EDU.AU> >> >To: <OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> >> >Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 9:47 PM >> >Subject: Re: [OPE-L] Abstraction > > > >> > >> >> Dear Howard, >> >> I only meant that you cannot get an ordinarily skilled person to do >> >> the work of a surgeon over a longer period of time, as you can get an >> >> ordinarily skilled person to do the work of a bricklayer, though over >> >> a longer period of time. Of course, surgical services are brought to >> >> market like everything else (in the US at least) and thus hare >> >> equivalent in monetary terms to so many hours of ordinarily skilled >> >> work: but this equation is not explained by a reduction of surgical >> >> labour to a multiple of ordinary labour, it is the other way round, >> >> Cheers, >> >> Ian >> >> >> >> >Hi Ian, >> >> > >> >> >I don't understand the opening sentence here, either. Tins of >bootblack >> >can >> >> >be exchanged for castles, recall. They can also be exchanged for >> >> >complicated surgery. This is not about the character of the skill >but >> >the >> >> >fact that it is taken to market. Market is the night that turns all >> >labor >> >> >black. For this reason the news articles Rakesh offered are >completely >> >> >relevant. As a result of competition goods or services of the same >> >quality >> >> >will tend to sell for the same price. >> >> > >> >> >Howard >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >----- Original Message ----- >> >> >From: "Ian Hunt" <ian.hunt@FLINDERS.EDU.AU> >> >> >To: <OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> >> >> >Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 11:55 PM >> >> >Subject: Re: [OPE-L] Abstraction >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> I don't think any number of unskilled labour hours can perform the >> >> >> work of a skilled surgeon, but for that reason I don't think that >the >> >> >> hours worked by surgeons etc count as expenditures of labour >power, >> >> >> defined as the group of skills common to all human labour: surgery >is >> >> >> the expenditure of a skill that is not shared across people to a >> >> >> higher or lesser degree. On the other hand, it is arguable that an >> >> >> amateur plumber can do plumbing work but at the cost of a lot of >> >> >> hours finding out the regulations, planning the work, and doing >the >> >> >> job slowly (the ratio might perhaps be 8 to 1, so nearly everyone >> >> >> hires a plumber, not to mention those jobs where the work has to >be >> >> >> inspected and by regulation must be done by a qualified plumber - >so >> >> >> bricklaying might be a better example) >> >> >> >> >> >> >Marx says that commodities are commensurate in the market, but >there >> >> >> >is no way to >> >> >> >get behind the market to get a handle on the abstract labor >> >> >> >measures. How many >> >> >> >hours of abstract labor does a surgeon represent. Can 20 or 50 >> >> >> >unskilled labor >> >> >> >perform the same procedure? >> >> >> > -- >> >> >> >Michael Perelman >> >> >> >Economics Department >> >> >> >California State University >> >> >> >Chico, CA 95929 >> >> >> > >> >> >> >Tel. 530-898-5321 >> >> >> >E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu >> >> >> >michaelperelman.wordpress.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Associate Professor Ian Hunt, >> >> >> Dept of Philosophy, School of Humanities, >> >> >> Director, Centre for Applied Philosophy, >> >> >> Flinders University of SA, >> >> >> Humanities Building, >> >> >> Bedford Park, SA, 5042, >> >> >> Ph: (08) 8201 2054 Fax: (08) 8201 2784 >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Associate Professor Ian Hunt, >> >> Dept of Philosophy, School of Humanities, >> >> Director, Centre for Applied Philosophy, >> >> Flinders University of SA, >> >> Humanities Building, >> > > Bedford Park, SA, 5042, >> >> Ph: (08) 8201 2054 Fax: (08) 8201 2784 >> >> >> -- >> Associate Professor Ian Hunt, >> Dept of Philosophy, School of Humanities, >> Director, Centre for Applied Philosophy, >> Flinders University of SA, >> Humanities Building, >> Bedford Park, SA, 5042, >> Ph: (08) 8201 2054 Fax: (08) 8201 2784 -- Associate Professor Ian Hunt, Dept of Philosophy, School of Humanities, Director, Centre for Applied Philosophy, Flinders University of SA, Humanities Building, Bedford Park, SA, 5042, Ph: (08) 8201 2054 Fax: (08) 8201 2784
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jun 30 2007 - 00:00:04 EDT