Re: [OPE] Reply to critics

From: Ian Wright <>
Date: Thu Sep 30 2010 - 19:29:51 EDT

 Hi Paula

> Maybe so; but then does he mean by 'purely social'? As opposed to 'purely
> natural', for example? 'By arbitrary convention'? Or what?
> There's no "maybe" about it. Marx is very explicit that labor-value is not
a physical property.

Some properties are not reducible to physical properties. For
example, whether a person is married or divorced is not a physical property
of that person. It is a `purely social' property in the sense that it is
manifested in a social practice. Marx asks us to consider that labor-value
is a social property in the sense that it manifests in the social practice
of generalized commodity exchange.

Hope this begins to answer your question.


ope mailing list
Received on Thu Sep 30 19:33:36 2010

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Oct 02 2010 - 00:00:03 EDT