Re: [OPE] How to read Capital

From: Dave Zachariah (
Date: Fri Apr 04 2008 - 07:13:58 EDT

Dogan wrote:
>             Well, how do you explain then the genesis of money. I hear 
> from you solely that Marx's explanation does not work,
>             that it does not hold to the empirical evidences. So, what 
> is your explanation of the genesis  of money?

I think the best theories available are the state theories of money. 
Paul C has pointed to some good sources. The genesis of money can be 
traced to taxation by states in pre-capitalist societies. In short, when 
the tax debt is transferable you have money.

Dogan also quoted and asked:
> "Science is the construction of parsimonious, internally consistent 
> models that can reliably predict observations. No amount of 
> dialectical logic can alter this criterion. "
>           Do you mean by construction apriori or aposteriori 
> constructions? do you mean that dialectical logic is denying predictions?

The constructions are based both on axiomatic principles and assumptions 
that have empirical support.

What I meant was that logic --- whether dialectical or not --- deduces 
certain consequences or predictions and excludes other predictions. More 
than that it cannot do for science. Whether these predictions are then 
observed or not is not the domain of logic.

//Dave Z
ope mailing list

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 30 2008 - 00:00:18 EDT