On 2010-11-29 22:48, Paul Zarembka wrote:
> All my professional life I have tried to understand mathematical
> results, not simply report a derivation. Understanding implies being
> able to explain in normal language the mechanism that drives a result.
> That is the ONLY thing I am attempting now, with my questions to Paul C.
OK, in my view the mechanism could be understood in relatively simple
terms too. The result follows from Marx's idea of a falling ratio of
'living to dead labour'. If capitalists unproductively consume a large
share of their surplus value, less dead labour will accumulate. Is this
clearer?
(On a methodological note, 'understanding' does not necessarily imply
explaining things in a 'normal language'. Cf. results from quantum
mechanics, in which the derived results were first understood in
mathematical formalism, but had very weird consequences in the 'normal
language' of the time.)
//Dave Z
_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Mon Nov 29 17:14:05 2010
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 30 2010 - 00:00:04 EST