[OPE-L:4164] Re: Re: Re: RE: Part Two of Volume III of Capital

From: Rakesh Narpat Bhandari (rakeshb@Stanford.EDU)
Date: Thu Oct 19 2000 - 10:39:15 EDT

Please don't take my failure to respond to this for a few days as any 
indication that I have been stumped by this challenge.
Thanks, Rakesh

>The key problem I have with your approach, and I *hope* that at least some
>people on OPE share this concern, is that your procedure makes it
>effectively impossible to put what you see as Marx's logic into a format in
>which it can be tested for internal consistency. Popper described this kind
>of behaviour as the hallmark of a pseudo-science. While the philosophy of
>science has moved on a long way from Popper, his litmus test between a
>science and a non-science--that the former makes statements which can be
>falsified, whereas the latter makes it impossible to either verify or
>disconfirm itself--is still accepted.
>In other words, in the name of saving Marx from what you see as unjustified
>criticism, your approach effectively makes it impossible to make any
>criticism at all.
>I for one do not wish to "save" Marx in this fashion.
>At 22:14 18/10/00 -0700, you wrote:
>>Duncan K Foley (dkf2@columbia.edu)
>>Mon, 15 Jan 1996 12:34:48 -0800
>>         Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
>>         Next message: glevy@acnet.pratt.edu: "[OPE-L:788] Re: More
>>         Previous message: Iwao Kitamura: "[OPE-L:786] Re: Digression:
>>two qestions and a proposal"
>>If you write down an explicitly disequilibrium model with time subscripts
>>differentiating commodities at different times, thus allowing for prices
>>of inputs and outputs to differ, one solution will be the equilibrium
>>prices where the inputs and outputs have the same (relative) prices. This
>>is also the easiest solution to analyze, and its existence is a good
>>indication that the equations make sense. As an historical aside, this
>>seems to be the approach Marx took, for example, in his work on
>>reproduction schemes.
>>As I have tried to show in my previous post, this reference to
>>equilibrium prices in the reproduction schemes turns a  justifiable
>>simpflying assumption (contant value) in the context of the analysis
>>of a circulation problem into a controlling methodological postulate
>>for all economic analysis.  As I have already pointed out, Marx is
>>explicitly talking about why prices of production change in vol 3,
>>part 2: the first reason, a change in the general rate of profit,
>>manifests itself clearly only in the long run, leaving us to assume
>>that manifest shorter term changes in prices of production are caused
>>by changes in the values of the commodities themselves. There are
>>countless references to changes in productivity, making it
>>unbelievable that Marx had not abandoned the assumption of constant
>>value or unit prices. There is simply no methodological reason to
>>import the completely unrealistic, albeit simplfying, conditions from
>>vol 2 into volume 3. And if Marx's value-theoretic equations for r
>>and prices of production make no sense due to the misuse of
>>assumptions  retained because they give us "the easiest solution to
>>analyze", why should we leave Marx's value theory vulnerable on such
>>(flimsy) grounds?
>>Is it not possible to save honor all sides?  There is indeed a
>>transformation problem in terms of the easiest solution to analyze
>>(equilibrium prices or simple reproduction); there need be no
>>transformation problem in conditions which pay the least respect to
>>reality, however more difficult these realistic conditions may be to
>>Would any other theory but a revolutionary critique of bourgeois
>>society be thought to have fatal logical problems if only the
>>introduction of reality was needed for it to make sense?
>>All the best, Rakesh
>Dr. Steve Keen
>Senior Lecturer
>Economics & Finance
>University of Western Sydney Macarthur
>Building 11 Room 30,
>Goldsmith Avenue, Campbelltown
>PO Box 555 Campbelltown NSW 2560
>s.keen@uws.edu.au 61 2 4620-3016 Fax 61 2 4626-6683
>Home 02 9558-8018 Mobile 0409 716 088
>Home Page: http://bus.macarthur.uws.edu.au/steve-keen/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 00:00:10 EST