Duncan wrote in [1809];
=20
When I teach the labor theory of value, it is certainly easier to start =
with money value, something the students are familiar with from their =
everyday lives. In investigating and explaining the link between value =
and social production Marxist theory seems to me to be at its most =
persuasive.
----------
If we could arrive at the value itself starting from the money value as =
Marx did in his Grundrisse, then, surely, it must be heuristically the =
best method. In explaining the nature of money, too, Marx is the most =
persuasive. (But I am still struggling in representing Marx's idea of =
money in the modernised, plain form). =20
Chai-on
----------
From: Duncan K Foley
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 1996 11:45 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: [OPE-L:1809] Re: Definitions of value
On Mon, 15 Apr 1996, chaion lee wrote:
> Duncan raised a question,
> ------------------------
> Doesn't value have an immediate phenomenal form as the money value of =
a
> collection of commodities?
>=20
> Chai-on:
> --------
> If we understand the "immediate phenomenal form" as a form whose =
phenomenon is not distinct from its nature (or from its essence). Then, =
the answer should be "No". A collection of commodities represent its =
value in the form of money value but=20
> the money form is not the immediate value form. Because some conceive =
it as the immediate form, they argue money is a purely numerical =
account. The labor theory of value must explain how and why the value =
represent itself as another, which is the
> core of the transformation problem. IMO, money is also a commodity =
and the sole difference between money and any other ordinary commodity =
is in its functions as the general equivalence. I would like to =
continue the discussion on the nature of money.=20
When I teach the labor theory of value, it is certainly easier to start=20
with money value, something the students are familiar with from their=20
everyday lives. In investigating and explaining the link between value =
and=20
social production Marxist theory seems to me to be at its most =
persuasive.
Duncan
>=20
> Yours,
>=20
> Chai-on
>=20
>=20
>=20