[OPE-L:7743] Re: does the theory of surplus value primarily concern magnitude?

From: gerald_a_levy (gerald_a_levy@msn.com)
Date: Fri Oct 04 2002 - 08:14:24 EDT

Re Paolo's [7741]:

> The nature or quality of capital is that of getting more
> than it advances. Therefore the question seems to be how to explain how
> enlargement of capital occurs. From this point of view does the
> qualitative/quantitative make any sense?

I think it does.
The theory of surplus value, as I asserted to Fred in [7726], concerns
the form that class exploitation takes under capitalism.  Thus, surplus
(and capital) represent a particular form of social relations.  These social
relations are qualitative. But, because value and s come to be expressed
thru the
value-form (and the value-form come to be expressed through the money-form)
value and s therefore come to be represented quantitatively as magnitude.
the problem with that way of conceptualizing the subject?

The question of  _how_ the enlargement of magnitude of surplus value occurs,
how surplus value is produced on an enlarged scale,  is *qualitative*: thus
in V1, Part 2 we see the discussions of forms of s (absolute and relative).
that sense the goal of capitalist production may be quantitative (increased
but that quantity can only be increased (assuming a fully capitalist
via the exploitation of wage-labor by capitalists (a particular form of
social relation).  Do you view that process differently?

In solidarity, Jerry

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Oct 05 2002 - 00:00:00 EDT