For those who argue that Marx's order of enquiry began with *either* the
_Grundrisse_ *or* _TSV_, I have the following (mischievous) question:
* Is it not correct that before Marx was able to critique political
economy (whether in the _Grundrisse_ or _TSV_), he was *first*
required to critique contemporary *philosophical* thought?
That is, didn't Marx's attempt to discover the "economic law of motion of
modern society" only come after, and *presume*, his prior critique of
philosophical thought and political thought as well?
Does this not mean, for those who believe that a critique of existing
thought (e.g Friedman) is a prerequisite for "extending Marx", that one
should now *begin* with a critique of changes in philosophy and method
since Marx?
Or, does one begin by attempting to identify and logically sequence all
of the remaining topics related to understanding capitalism that have not
been satisfactorily answered by Marx both because of the incomplete
nature of the analysis in _Capital_ and the changes that have occurred in
capitalism since Marx's time? If we follow this latter path, then
critique would, of course, be a necessary *component* of addressing this
question.
In OPE-L Solidarity,
Jerry