Tang Fen, Your Interpretation of Marx's Labor Theory of Value Has Serious Problems.
2006/8/14 21:18:34
Although this Tang Fen person has recently been defending this ID's proof that "all human thought cannot be completely recorded by computers," this ID will not feel any gratitude, because this ID's proof is correct, and defending what is correct is merely a person's most basic standard — there's nothing to be grateful about. Likewise, although Tang Fen wrote "The labor theory of value can of course be criticized," which shut that math person up for several days, this cannot conceal the problems in your interpretation of Marx's labor theory of value.
Although Tang Fen, more clearly than everyone here except this ID, pointed out that the labor theory of value derives from Marx's historical materialism and is a necessary conclusion thereof, and you also know that value is a holistic, historical category, your explanation is extremely muddled — proving that you yourself are not entirely clear, only grasping the general idea.
In truth, "labor determines value" is an equivalent proposition to "social relations of production determine social relations of exchange." Value is the totality of all exchange relations in society, and labor is the totality of all production relations in society — the latter determines the former. Although you are slightly more enlightened than those who try to view labor and value as singular relationships, in this ID's judgment you're still not up to par, because you failed to explicitly state the equivalent proposition of "labor determines value." And this equivalent proposition — that social relations of production determine social relations of exchange — is the core of the labor theory of value.
To refute the theory that labor determines value, one must first refute the claim that social relations of production determine social relations of exchange — meaning that the category of production ultimately determines the category of exchange. This is the true vital point of Marx's labor theory of value. True masters only strike at the vital point; only amateurs exhaust themselves on peripheral details. As for treating things like "value equals socially average labor time" as a scientific hypothesis — that person hasn't even found Marx's front door. Such people are completely unqualified for in-depth discussion.
Tang Fen, you seem like a good-tempered person, and I don't want to make you admit fault. Of course, if you want to take the lead, this ID won't oppose it either. But you must continue studying! Go read some books!
Replies
缠中说禅 2006/8/15 12:11:19
Are you the only one in the comments above? Isn't it clear who this ID was referring to? Why so guilty?
缠中说禅 2006/8/15 9:59:34
Commenter above — since you know this ID wants to destroy all men, why do you keep hovering around this ID? Posting so many comments — are you trying to be this ID's boy toy? Die together with this ID?
But this ID won't be buried with medicine dregs.