[OPE-L] Helmut Reichelt on the Problem of Validity in the Dialectical Method of Presentation in Capital

From: Hanno Pahl (hanno.pahl@UNI-BIELEFELD.DE)
Date: Thu Jan 17 2008 - 15:49:19 EST

• Next message: Jerry Levy: "Re: [OPE-L] productive and unproductive labour and forms of surplus value"
• Previous message: Dave Zachariah: "Re: [OPE-L] productive and unproductive labour and forms of surplus value"
• In reply to: GERALD LEVY: "Re: [OPE-L] productive and unproductive labour and forms of surplus value"
• Next in thread: paul bullock: "Re: [OPE-L] productive and unproductive labour and forms of surplus value"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Dear OPE-L-Members,



I just want to draw your attention to the English translation of an article
of Helmut Reichelt entitled "Marx's Critique of Economic Categories:
Reflections on the Problem of Validity in the Dialectical Method of
Presentation in Capital"(details below).



Best wishes from Switzerland,

Hanno Pahl







Marx's Critique of Economic Categories: Reflections on the Problem of
Validity in the Dialectical Method of Presentation in _Capital_



   Author: Reichelt, Helmut (1)



   Source: Historical Materialism, Volume 15, Number 4, 2007 , pp. 3-52(50)



   Publisher: BRILL





   Abstract:

   It has often been pointed out that the Marxian theory of value contains
some

   inconsistencies, usually in relation to the concept of abstract labour.

   However, the contradiction between the concept of labour and the concept
of

   validity with which Marx operates in _Capital_ (without actually
explaining

   this conception) has never been discussed. A detailed analysis shows that

   this concept of validity refers to the process of abstraction which is

   carried out by the participants of the exchange process. Only the
rigorous

   comprehension of this process of abstraction can illuminate that for
which

   the concept of abstract labour was developed: the unity and universality
of

   value. On this basis, the paper criticises the Marxian development of the

   money-form and presents an alternative approach that builds on the

   aforementioned concept of validity. This concept is formulated in more
depth

   by recourse to the works of Hegel, Simmel and Adorno. Furthermore, the
paper

   reconsiders the dialectical development of categories in the light of
this

   alternative conception of the money-form as totality and abstraction (in
the

   sense of Hegel and the young Marx). Finally, the distinction between
simple

   circulation and the process as a whole (found only in the _Grundrisse_)
is

   explored and it is argued that, according to the novel reading proposed,
it

   acquires a fundamental significance.



   Keywords: ADORNO; MARX; DIALECTICS; VALUE-FORM; GRUNDRISSE; CAPITAL



   Document Type: Research article



   DOI: 10.1163/156920607X245823



   Affiliations: (1): University of Bremen; Email: reichelt@uni-bremen.de





http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/brill/hm/2007/00000015/00000004/art000
01

(16.01.2008)

• Next message: Jerry Levy: "Re: [OPE-L] productive and unproductive labour and forms of surplus value"
• Previous message: Dave Zachariah: "Re: [OPE-L] productive and unproductive labour and forms of surplus value"
• In reply to: GERALD LEVY: "Re: [OPE-L] productive and unproductive labour and forms of surplus value"
• Next in thread: paul bullock: "Re: [OPE-L] productive and unproductive labour and forms of surplus value"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 31 2008 - 00:00:06 EST