[OPE-L:3969] Re: Re: Re: Re: m in Marx's theory

From: Simon Mohun (S.Mohun@qmw.ac.uk)
Date: Thu Oct 05 2000 - 11:33:29 EDT

At 17:13 05/10/00 +0530, you wrote:
>Simon Mohun wrote:
>> There are lots of empirical problems, and one needs a feel for plausible
>> orders of magnitude. But ex post it's certainly possible to calculate time
>> series of the value of money and its inverse. One might not have a theory
>> of determination, but at least rough accounting measures are possible (ven
>> if they still need more work!)
>So what is your point Simon? I could determine a variable say k, which is a
>ratio of the mass of moon to the mass of earth. But what is the point of
it, is
>my question. Cheers, ajit sinha


If I had a theoretical position which allowed me to identify the empirical
analogues to Marxian theoretical categories, then I could ex post identify
them in an accounting context, and I could compare their temporal movement
in terms of what Marxian theory might lead me to expect. And I can do this
without necessarily having a good theoretical account of determination of
some of the variables. For example, I don't have a secure theory of the
value of money, but I know it falls through time because of productivity
increases and because of inflation. And even if I don't have a secure
theory of inflation I can still measure it. Perhaps measurement is one way
in which to approach theoretical understanding. Imperfect and incomplete,
but part of scientific progress nonetheless.


Dr. Simon Mohun, HoD,
Dept of Economics,
Queen Mary, University of London,
London E1 4NS,
Tel: +44 (0)20 7882 5089; Fax: +44 (0)20 8983 3580

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 00:00:08 EST