>
>Alejandro R. asks:
>
>Could you please expand on this? How can one study Marx's theory of
>value without "exploring the question of the theory of money"?
>
>(Almost 1/2 of Vol I, Ch. 1 is devoted to study the "value-form", 2/3
>of Vol. I Part 1, "explores" the "theory of money"; 3/4 if one
>includes Ch. 2, which essentially explains why the "process of
>exchange" necessarily generates "money".)
>
>I think there is no a "theory of money in Marx" as something
>separated of his theory of value. As Duncan says above: "one of his
>major achievements is the integration of the theory of money with the
>theory of the commodity and value in the first three chapters of
>Volume I of Capital."
___________________________
I wrote my Ph.D on Marx's theory of value without considering a 'theory of
money', and I think i did okay. Why don't you explain your position so that
we can see how sound is what you "think", if it goes beyond "what Duncan
says above". Cheers, ajit sinha
>
>Alejandro R.
>