Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General

From: Rakesh Bhandari (bhandari@BERKELEY.EDU)
Date: Thu Oct 20 2005 - 11:17:31 EDT

Next message: glevy@PRATT.EDU: "Re: [OPE-L] Antonio Gramsci is Dead!"
Previous message: Rakesh Bhandari: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
In reply to: Andrew Brown: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
Next in thread: glevy@PRATT.EDU: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

At 2:12 PM +0100 10/20/05, Andrew Brown wrote:
>Rakesh and Chris,
>
>Actually Chris's post is useful in showing just how far a variant of
>value form theory can get towards a the sort of position I am
>advocating. It is still not far enough, in my view, because the emphasis
>is still too strongly upon the appearance form of value (money and
>price) as opposed to the essence of value (congealed abstract labour) as
>the stress on 'form determination' makes clear.

And I wanted to grant a reality to abstract labor outside of the
appearance form of value. I was led to this rethinking by Ian as well
as your earlier 'materialist' criticisms of some variants of VFT. But
my understanding may well change again (and hopefully will) in the
dialectics of discussion.

rb

>  So I have got a lot out
>of the discussion - am not frustrated any more! - and am happy to agree
>to disagree for now.
>
>Many thanks,
>
>Andy

Next message: glevy@PRATT.EDU: "Re: [OPE-L] Antonio Gramsci is Dead!"
Previous message: Rakesh Bhandari: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
In reply to: Andrew Brown: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
Next in thread: glevy@PRATT.EDU: "Re: [OPE-L] Capital in General"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Oct 21 2005 - 00:00:03 EDT