Moore, Stanley - Marx and the State of Nature

8/13/2019 Moore, Stanley - Marx and the State of Nature

1/17

Marx and the State of Nature

Stanley Williams Moore

Journal of the History of Philosophy, Volume 5, Number 2, April 1967,

pp. 133-148 (Article)

Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press

DOI: 10.1353/hph.2008.1147

For additional information about this article

Access provided by University of Michigan @ Ann Arbor (26 Jan 2014 12:13 GMT)

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v005/5.2moore.html
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v005/5.2moore.htmlhttp://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v005/5.2moore.html


2/17

arx and theState o f N ature

S T A N L E Y M O O R E

TH RO UG HO UT H IS C RITIQ UES o f p o l i t i c a l e c o n o m y M a r x m a k e s t h e c l a i m t h a tb o u r g e o i s e c o n o m i s t s , w h e n d i s c u s s i n g c e r t a i n c r u c i a l i s s u e s , o f fe r i n p l a c e o f t h e o -r e t i c a l a n a l y s i s o n l y i m a g i n a r y h i s t o r y . I n t h e e a r l i e s t o f t h e s e c r i t i q u e s , T h eE c o n o m i c - P h i l o s o p h i c a l M a n u s c r i p t s h e w r i t e s :L e t u s n o t r e s o r t t o a f i c ti t i o u s p r i m o r d i a l c o n d i t i o n , a s t h e p o l i t i c a l e c o n o m i s t d o e s w h e nh e t r i e s t o e x p l a i n . S u c h a p r i m o r d i a l c o n d i t i o n e x p l a i n s n o t h i n g . T h e q u e s t i o n i s m e r e l yp u s h e d b a c k i n t o t h e g r e y a n d n e b u l o u s d i s t a n c e . W h a t t h e t h e o r i s t i s s u p p o s e d t o d e d u c e - -f o r e x a m p l e , t h e n e c e s s a r y c o n n e c t io n b e t w e e n d i v i s i o n o f l a b o u r a n d e x c h a n g e - - h e a s s u m e si n t h e f o r m o f fa c t s , e v e n t s o c c u r r in g i n t h e p a s t . I n l i k e m a n n e r t h e o l o g y e x p l a i n s t h e o r i g i no f e v i l b y t h e f a l l o f m a n : w h a t o u g h t t o b e e x p l a i n e d i s a s s u m e d a s a f a c t o f h i s t o r y .1

I n l a t e r c r i t i q u e s t h i s c r i t i c i s m i s r e p e a t e d a n d e l a b o r a t e d . T h e s t a n d a r d p r o c e -d u r e o f c l a s s i c a l e c o n o m i s t s , M a r x c l a i m s , i s t o s t a r t w i t h t h e m y t h o f t h e i n d e p e n d -e n t , s e l f - s u f f ic i e n t , i n d i v i d u a l p r o d u c e r . T h e s e c o n d s t e p i s t o i n t r o d u c e a s e c o n dm y t h , t h e c l a ss l e s s e c o n o m y o f i n d e p e n d e n t c o m m o d i t y p r o d u c e r s . A n d t h e t h i r ds t e p i s t o p r o v i d e a p s e u d o h i s t o r i c a l a c c o u n t o f t h e t r a n s i t i o n f r o m t h i s c l a s s l e s se c o n o m y t o t h e c l a s s e c o n o m y o f c a p i t a l i s m .

D i s c u s s i n g t h e p r o b l e m o f m e t h o d i n h i s I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e C r i t iq u e o ] P o l i t i c a lE c o n o m y h e w r i t e s :T h e s i n g le , i s o l a t e d h u n t e r o r f i sh e r w i t h w h o m S m i t h a n d R i c a r d o s t a r t b e l o n g s t o t h e f a n t a s i e so f t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y . S u c h R o b i n s o n a d e s d o n o t b y a n y m e a n s r e p r e s e n t , a s h i s to r i a n so f c u l t u r e b e l i e v e , a r e a c t i o n a g a i n s t o v e r r e f i n e m e n t a n d a r e t u r n t o a n e r r o n e o u s l y c o n c e i v e dn a t u r a l s t a t e . T h e y r e p r e s e n t s u c h p r i m i t i v i s i m a s l i t t le a s d o e s R o u s s e a u ' s s o c ia l c o n t r a c t , w h i c hb r i n g s i n d i v i d u a l s w h o a r e i n d e p e n d e n t b y n a t u r e i n t o i n t e r c o u r s e a n d a s s o c i a t i o n t h r o u g he x p r e ss a g r e e m e n t . I n s t e a d t h e y a r e r e f le c t i o n s o f t h a t c i v i l s o c i e t y w h i c h, s t a r t i n g i t s d e v e l o p -m e n t i n t h e s i x te e n t h c e n t u r y , h a d m a d e g i a n t s t ri d e s t o w a r d m a t u r i t y i n t h e e i g h te e n t h . I nt h a t s o c i e t y o f f r ee c o m p e t i t i o n t h e i n d i v i d u a l s e e m s f r e e d f r o m t h e b o n d s o f n a t u r e a n d t h el i k e w h i c h i n e a r li e r e p o c h s m a d e h i m a n a p p e n d a g e o f s o m e d e f in i t e, li m i t e d , h u m a n c o n -g l o m e r a t i o n . B e f o r e t h e p r o p h e t s o f t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y , u p o n w h o s e s h o u l d e r s S m i t h a n dR i c a r d o s t i l l s t a n d , t h i s i n d i v i d u a l o f t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y - - a p r o d u c t , o n t h e o n e h a n d , o ft h e d i s s o l u t io n o f t h e s o c i a l f o r m s o f f e u d a l is m , a n d o n t h e o t h e r , o f t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f n e wp r o d u c t i v e f o r c e s s i n ce t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y - - h o v e r s a s a n i d e a l w h o s e e x i s t e n c e b e l o n g s t ot h e p a s t . H e s e e m s t o t h e m , n o t t h e r e s u l t o f h is t o r y , b u t i t s s t a r t i n g p o i n t .2

1 M a r x , 0 k o n o m i s c h - p h i l o s o p h is c h e M a n u s k r i p t e , Marx/Engels Gesamtausgabe d iv . 1 ,I I I ( B e r l i n : 1 9 3 2 ) , m a n . 1 , s e c . 4 ( E n t f r e m d e t e A r b e i t ) , p a r a . 5 . C f . H e g e l , Phdnomenologie desGeistes ( L e i p z i g : 1 93 7), c h a p . 7 , d i v . 3, p a r a . 28 . F o r c o n v e n i e n c e i n u s i n g o t h e r e d i t i o n s , a l lp a s s a g e s a r e i d e n t i f ie d b y p a r a g r a p h n u m b e r . ..2 M a r x , E i n l e i t u n g z u r K r i t i k d e r p o l i t i s c h e n ~ ) k o n o m i e , Zu r Kr it i k der poli tischen Okono-mie ( B e r l i n : 1 9 51 ), s e c . 1, p a r a . 2 . F o r f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s , s e e m y The Critique of CapitalistDemocracy: A n Introduction to the Theory of the State in M arx Engels and Lenin ( N e w Y o r k :1957) , chap . 2 , sec . 4 , no te 3 .

[ 1 3 3 l


3/17

1 3 4 H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H YD i s c u s s i n g , i n h i s Critique o] Political Economy, S m i t h ' s t h e o r y o f v a lu e , M a r x

w r i t e s :A d a m , it is tr u e , d e t er m i n e s t h e v a l u e o f co m m o d i t ie s b y t h e l a b o u r t i m e t h e y e m b o d y ; b u the re l ega t e s t he appl i cab i l i t y o f t h i s p r i nc i p l e t o p re -Adami c t i mes . Wha t seems c l ea r t o h i mwi t h re spec t t o s i mpl e commodi t i e s becomes unc l ea r when he cons i de rs more compl ex forms ,such a s cap i ta l , wage l abour , and grou nd ren t . So he a s se r ts t ha t t he va l ue of com mod i t ie s oncewas measu red by t he l abour ti me t h ey embod i ed i n a l os t pa rad i se whe re me n dea l t wi t h oneanot he r , no t a s cap i t a l i s t s , wage worke rs , l and l ords , t enan t s , moneyl ende rs , and so on , bu t on l yas s imple producers and exchangers of commodi t ies .*

D i s c u s s i n g , i n t h e f i r s t v o l u m e o f Capital, t h e o r i g in s o f c a p i t a l i s m , h e w r i t e s :Thi s o r i g i na l a ccum ul a t i on p l ays t he same ro l e in po l i ti c a l e cono my a s does t he fa l l o f man i nt heo l ogy . A dam b i t t he appl e , and a s a consequence s i n fe l l up on m anki nd . Supposed l y t hesource of s i n i s exp l a i ned by re l a t i ng an anecd ot e abo ut t he pa s t . Now a t some t i me l ong agot he re we re t wo sor t s o f peopl e : on t he one hand , an i ndus t r i ous , i n t e l l i gen t , and above a l lt h r i f t y , e l it e ; on t he o t he r , l a zy ra scal s, spendi ng a l l t hey had and mo re i n r i o t ou s l i v ing . . . Soi t happened t ha t t hose of t he f i r s t sor t a ccumul a t ed wea l t h , and t he o t he rs a t l a s t had no t h i ngt o se l l bu t t he i r own h i des . F rom t h i s o r i g i na l s i n da t e s t he pove r t y o f t he grea t mass , who i nsp i te o f a l l t he i r l abou r s t il l have no t h i ng t o sel l bu t t hemse l ves , and t he wea l t h o f t he few,whi ch inc rea se s cons t an t l y t hou gh t h ey h ave l ong s ince cea sed t o w ork?

T h i s c r i t iq u e o f t h e m y t h i c e l e m e n t i n b o u r g e o i s e c o n o m i c t h e o r y c a n b e d e v el -o p e d i n t w o d i r e c t io n s . O n t h e o n e h a n d , i t o f fe rs a k e y f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e r o l ep l a y e d b y t h e c o n c e p t o f a s t a te o f n a t u r e i n t h e s o c i a l p h i l o s o p h y o f t h e s e v e n t e e n t ha n d e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u ri e s. C o n s i d e r , f o r e x a m p l e , t h e t h e o r i s t M a r x m e n t i o n s .R o u s s e a u ' s Discourse on the Origin o] Inequality d i s t i n g u i s h e s t h r e e s t a g e s i n t h ed e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e s t a te o f n a t u r e : i n d i v i d u a l i s m w i t h o u t s o c i e ty , s o c i e ty w i t he q u a l i t y , a n d s o c i e t y w i t h i n e q u a l i t y . C a n t h e s t a g e o f i n d i v i d u a l i s m w i t h o u ts o c i e t y b e c o m p a r e d w i t h t h e e c o n o m i s t s ' i n d e p e n d e n t , s e lf - su f f ic ie n t p r o d u c e r ?C a n t h e s t a g e o f s o c i e t y w i t h e q u a l i t y b e c o m p a r e d w i t h t h e e c o n o m i s t s ' c la ss le s ss o c i e t y o f c o m m o d i t y p r o d u c e r s ? A n d c a n R o u s s e a u ' s a c c o u n t o f t h e t r a n s it i o n t os o c i e t y w i t h i n e q u a l i t y b e c o m p a r e d w i t h t h e e c o n o m i s t s ' a c c o u n t o f o ri g in a l a c -c u m u l a t i o n ? W h a t s o l u t i o n d o e s t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s u g g e s t f o r t h e p r o b l e m o fd i s c e r n i n g t h e c e n t r a l t h e s i s o f t h e Discourse? O r f o r t h e p r o b l e m o f r e l a ti n g t h eDiscourse t o Emile a n d The Social Contract? O r f o r t h e p r o b l e m o f r e l a ti n g R o u s -s e a u ' s t h e o r y o f t h e s t a te o f n a t u r e t o t h e t h e o ri e s o f L o c k e a n d H o b b e s ? S u c hq u e s t i o n s i l l u s t r a t e a M a r x i a n a p p r o a c h t o t h e p h i l o s o p h y o f n a t u r a l r ig h ts . 5

3 M a r x , Zur Kritik der politischen )konomie,chap . 1 , s ec . A, pa ra . 6 . (For g rammar ' s sake Ih a v e c h a n g e d M a r x ' s " p a r a d i s e l o s t " i n t o " l o s t p a r a d i s e . " M i l t o n ' s e x p re s s io n , a s t h e n a m e o fa p r o c e s s , w o u l d a p p l y m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e l y t o w h a t M a r x c a l l s o r i g i n a l a c c u m u l a t i o n . ) F o rf u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e s se e m y Critique,chap. 2, sec. 5~.note 2.4 M a r x , Das Kapital. Kritik der politischen ~Jkonomie, I (Vol ksausgabe , M oscow: 1932) ,chap . 24 , s ec . 1 , pa ra . 2 . For fu r t he r r e fe rences , s ee my Critique, chap . 2 , s ec . 5 , no t e 3 . OnM a r x ' s c o m p a r i s o n o f e c o n o m i c a n d r e li g io u s s u p e r s t i t io n s , s ee a ls o t h e l a t t e r w o r k , c h a p . 4 ,sec . 5 , para . 2; chap. 4, sec . 3 , paras . 8-10.O n R o u s s e a u s ee M a r x , " Z u r J u d e n f r a g e , " Marx/Engels Gesamtausgabe, div. 1 , I , ha l f-vol .1 (Fran kfu r t a .M . : 1927) , e s say 1 , pa ra s . 63-94; Eng e l s , "H e r rn E ug en D t i hr i ngs Umw~i lzunge r w i s s e n s c h a f t , " Marx~Engels Gesamtausgabe, spec . ed . (M oscow : 1935) , i n t ro . , chap . 1 ,pa ra s . 2 -3 ; pa r t 1 , chap . 10 , pa ra s . 6 , 17-22 . On Lock e see M arx / E ng e l s , "D i e deu t sche Ideo l o-ie " " 9 -, Marx/Engels Gesamtausgabe,dl v . 1 , V (M o scow/ -Lem ngrad : 1933) , chap . 3 , d l v . 1 , pa r t 2 ,s e c. 5, s u b s e c. " M o r a l , V e r k e h r , E x p l o i t a t i o n s t h e o r i e , " p a r a s . 7 - 9 ; M a r x , Theorien iiber den


4/17

MAR X AND NAT URE 135On the other hand, these attacks upon bourgeois economic theory can be turned

against Marx himself. Suppose some careful student first reads T h e C r i t i q u e o ]P o l i t i c a l E c o n o m y pondering its attacks on the myth of Robinson Crusoe and themyth of a classless exchange economy. Suppose this student then reads C a p i t a l .Imagine his astonishment to find Marx, in the analysis of commodity fetishism atthe start of the first volume, arguing from the case of Robinson Crusoe. And tofind Marx, in the account of the connection between value and price a t the star t ofthe th ird volume, initia lly assuming a classless economy of commodity producers.Has the theory of value expounded in C a p i t a l no firmer foundation , he would ask,than these fantasies of the eighteenth century?Marx, it might be replied, does not base his argument upon these myths. He t rea tsthem as analytic fictions rather than historical descriptions. And he uses them forillustration rather than for proof. His argument would be as firmly based, thoughnot as easily understood, without them.Since the time of Hume this has been the s tandard defense for theorists who talkabout a state of nature, in reply to attacks like tha t of Marx on Smith and Ricardo.In some cases, and to some extent, this defense is valid. To what extent it is validin the case of Marx can be decided only by examining his arguments.

I IMarx's theory of value is developed in two sections of C a p i t a l separated by overa thousand pages. One section comprises the three opening chapters of the first

volume; the other, the twelve opening chapters of the third volume. To distinguishclearly between wha t he attempts to prove in the first section and what he attemptsto prove in the second is the key to understanding his argument.

To facilitate this task, it is useful to provide labels for three different proposi-tions. There is the proposition tha t long-run prices of freely producible commoditiesare determined solely by labor costs. I shall call this the l abor doc t r ine o f pr i ce .There is the proposition that the real cost of any thing is the quant ity of effort orsacrifice entailed by the labor of producing it. I shall call this the l a b o r d o c t r i n eo] real cost . There is finally the proposition th at for any economy--viewed as awhole and through time--natural resources are free requisites of production andcapital goods are produced requisites of production, so that for a capitalisteconomy--viewed from this standpoin t--the aggregates of rent and profit representdeductions from the aggregate product of labor. I shall call this the l a b o r d o c t r i n eo] surp lus e

Two theses are central for Marx's theory of value: first, that the labor doctrineof surplus entails the labor doctrine of real cost; second, th at a scientific theory ofprice must be based upon the labor doctrine of real cost. In the course of his argu-ment both the labor doctrine of surplus and the labor doctrine of real cost areunequivocally affirmed.Mehrwert I (Berlin: 1956), app. 4. On Hobbes see Marx/Engels, Die deutsche Ideologic,chap. 3, div. 1, part 2, sec. 5, subsec. Aneignungdurch zusammengesetzte Antithese, para.1 subsec. Das Gesetz, para. 10; Marx an Engels 18. Juni 1862, M arx/Engels BriefwechselIII (Berlin: 1950), para. 3; Marx, Theorien iiber den M ehrwert I, app. 1; app. 4, para. 2.6 ~ tFor a discussion of these doctrines in Marx s predecessors, see my Ricardo and the Stateof Nature, Scottish Journal of Political Economy XIII (1966), secs. 5-6.


5/17

136 HIST ORY OF PHILOS OPHYBy comparison, the labor doctrine of price plays an ambiguous role. At the startof the first volume Marx seems prepared to show that this doctrine--embodied inwhat he calls the law of value--holds true for all commodity exchange. But at thestart of the third volume he admits that capitalist prices are not normally propor-tionate to labor costs. The labor doctrine of price, he asserts at this point, holds

only for pre-capitalist exchange. What he writes in the two volumes is not formallyinconsistent, in the sense that proportionality of capitalist prices to labor costs isexplicitly asserted in one and explicitly denied in the other. Only after his generalexposition of the law of value in the opening chapters of the first volume does heopen his discussion of specifically capitalist exchange. At this point, for the firsttime explicitly equating capitalist prices with labor costs, he leaves open the pos-sibility that this equation is a contrary-to-fact simplification, useful for exposingthe basic laws of capitalist production.7 To commence by adopting and end bywithdrawing an assumption of this sort does not involve self-contradiction. Yetthough Marx's exposition is formally consistent in the sense just stated, it is highlymisleading. His explanation of capitalist price, which in prospect seems to pivot onthe labor doctrine of price, turns out in retrospect to pivot on the labor doctrine ofreal cost.

The task Marx sets himself in the opening chapters of his first volume is toprove the proposition that the real cost of any thing is the quantity of effort orsacrifice entailed by the labor of producing it. He discusses the case of RobinsonCrusoe because he believes that the truth of this proposition, obscure when we con-sider a capitalist economy by itself, becomes clear when we compare a capitalisteconomy with a Crusoe economy.The task Marx sets himself in the opening chapters of his third volume is to basea theory of price on the labor doctrine of real cost. He discusses a classless economyof commodity producers because he believes tha t the divergence of capitalist pricesfrom labor costs can be most easily understood by comparing a capitalist exchangeeconomy with a classless exchange economy.

In both cases, Marx claims, analysis of a fictitious economy reveals what obser-vation of a capitalist economy obscures. But in neither case, I propose to show,is this claim justified. Closely examined, his fiction of a Crusoe economy provides nomore persuasive arguments for the labor doctrine of real cost than does the actua lityof a capitalist economy. Carefully analyzed, his fiction of a classless economy ofcommodity producers involves the same divergence of prices from labor costs asdoes the actuality of a capitalist economy. In both cases Marx commits the sameerror tha t he attributes to Smith and Ricardo: he has recourse to a fiction in orderto assume what he finds it difficult to prove.

7 See Marx, Kapital I chap. 1, sec. 2, pars. 10, note 2; chap. 4, sec. 2, pars. 23, note; chap.7,see. 1, para. 20, note; III (Volksausgabe, Moscow/Leningrad: 1933-1934), chap. 8, pars. 33;chap. 9, pars. 50 Marx Randglossen zu Adolph Wagners 'Lehrbuch der politmchen (~kono-mm, Kap ~ a l I, pars. 5. For hm resort to the contrast between appearance and reahty m thinconnection see my The Metaphysical Argument in Marx's Labour Theory of Value J~tudesde M arxologie (Cahiers de l'Insti tut de Science t~conomique AppliquSe, Series S), no.'7 (1963),sees. 2, 4.


6/17

MAR X AND NAT URE 137

Marx s discussion of commodi ty fetishism in the first chapter of Capi ta l turnson a distinction between content and f orm in the process of adjusting work to wants.The content of this process he finds in all economies. Its fetishistic form he findsonly in exchange economies. In his usage the expression deter minati on of valueis associated with the enduring content of this process, while the term valu e isassociated only with its transit ory fetishistic form.The mystical character of commodities does not derive ... from the content of the determina-tion of value. In the first place, however different useful labours or productive activities may be,it is a physiological truth that they are functions of the human organism and that each suchfunction, whatever its content and form, is essentially an expenditure of human brains, nerves,muscles, sense organs, and so on. In the second place, with regard to the basis for determiningthe magnitude of value--the duration of this expenditure, the quantity of labour--it is clearlyperceptible that the quantity of labour is distinguishable from its quality. The cost in labourtime of producing the means of subsistence is of interest to men in all situations, though it isnot of equal interest at different stages of development. Finally, whenever human beings workfor one another in any way, their labour acquires a social form.The content of the valuation process is described in three propositions. First, thevarious kinds of human labor are comparable as work in the physiological sense.Second, they are measurable in units of time. Third, this comparison and measure-ment are in some degree necessary wherever there is division of labor.From what source then arises the enigmatic character of products of labour, when they takethe form of commodities? Clearly, from this form itself. The comparability of human labourstakes the thing-like form of the comparability of the products of labour as embodiments ofvalue. The measure of the expenditure of human labour power by its duration takes the form ofthe magnitude of the value of the products of labour. And lastly, the relations of the producers,in which the social character of their labour affirms itself, take the form of a social relationbetween the products of their labour.The fetishistic f orm of the valuation process is described in three propositions. First,comparability of different labors is disguised as comparability of commodityvalues. Second, measurement of different labors is disguised as measurement ofcommod ity values. Third, relations between people in the social division of laborare disguised as relations between th ings in co mmo dit y exchange, sCommodities are products endowed with a fetish character, non-human thingsto which human qualities are ascribed; because when produ cts become commodities,productive relations between people take on the form of exchange relations betweenthings. But since this conflict between appearance and reality is confined to ex-change economies, Marx argues, it can be exposed by comparing commodity ex-change with less myst ify ing mechanisms for adjust ing wor k to wants. I n s upportof this contention he cites four examples of economies where this adjus tment takesplace directly, without the intervention of a market, and where as a consequence

8 Marx, Kapital I, chap. 1, sec. 4, paras. 2-3. For further references, see my Critique chap.2, sec. 3, note 3; note 4; sec. 4, note 1.


7/17

1 38 H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Yt h e p r o c e s s o f v a l u e d e t e r m i n a t i o n d o e s n o t t a k e a f e t i s h i st i c f o r m . 0 I t h e s ee x a m p l e s , t h e f i r s t i s a C r u s o e e c o n o m y .Since pol i t ica l econom y loves Robinsonades, le t us tak e a look a t Ro binson on his island.M odera te as he is, he s ti ll has d ifferent wants to sa t isfy and mu st therefo re unde rtake differentkinds of useful labour , such as mak ing tools and furni ture , tam ing g oats , f ishing, and hun t-ing . . . In spi te of the v ar ie ty of h is produc t ive act iv i ties , he knows that the y are s imply differentform s of his own act iv i ty , tha t th ey are therefo re s im ply different mod es of huma n labou r .Necessi ty compels h im careful ly to d is tr ibute h is t im e betw een these d ifferent occupations. Th eamount of h is to ta l t ime a l lo t ted to each is proport ionate to the d iff icul ty of a t ta in ing theuseful effect desired . Robinson learns th is f rom experience, and. . , l ike a good Englishman setsup a system of bookkeeping. His in vento ry l is ts the useful objects in h is possession, the d ifferentact iv i t ies required for their production, and the am oun ts of labour t im e which specif ic quanti t iesof the d ifferent p roducts have, on the average, cost h im. All re la tions between Robinson andth ings wh ich com pr ise the w ea l th he has c rea ted a re . . , simple and c lea r . . . Bu t eve ry th ingessent ia l to the determinat ion of value is conta ined in them?

W h a t t r u t h s , o b s c u re d b y t h e m e c h a n i s m o f e x c h an g e , do e s M a r x c l a im to h a v er e v e a l e d i n t h is e x a m p l e ? O n e s e e m s t o b e t h e l a b o r d o c t r i n e o f s u r p l u s ; t h e o t h e r ,t h e l a b o r d o c t r i n e o f r e a l c o s t .

T h e l a b o r d o ct r in e o f s u r pl u s a s s e rt s t h a t f o r a n y e c o n o m y - - v i e w e d a s a w h o l ea n d t h r o u g h t i m e - - n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s a r e f re e r e q u i s it e s o f p r o d u c t i o n , a n d c a p i t a lg o o d s a r e p r o d u c e d r e q u i s i ti e s o f p r o d u c t i o n , s o t h a t f o r a c a p i t a l i s t e c o n o m y - -v i e w e d f r o m t h i s s t a n d p o i n t - - t h e a g g r e g a t es o f r en t a n d p r o f i t r e p r e s en t d e d u c -t i o n s f r o m t h e a g g r e g a t e p r o d u c t o f l a b o r. C r u s o e h a s f r e e a c c e s s t o t h e n a t u r a lr e s o u r c e s o f hi s is l a n d. H i s c a p i t a l g o o d s a r e p r o d u c t s o f h i s o w n l a b o r. W h a t i sn o r m a l l y a p p a r e n t o n l y w h e n t h e e c o n o m y i s v i e w e d a s a w h o l e i s i n t h is c a s ea p p a r e n t f r o m t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f t h e i n d i v i d u al p r o d u ce r .

S u p p o s e n o w t h a t t h e i s l a n d s n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s a r e a p p r o p r i a t e d b y a s e c on dm a n , w h o r e c e i v e s a r e n t f o r t h e i r u s e . A n d s u p p o s e C r u s o e s c a p i t a l g o o ds a r ea p p r o p r i a t e d b y a t h i r d m a n , w h o m a k e s a p r o f i t o n t h e i r u se . C r u s o e w il l n o wb e c o m p e l l e d t o s h a r e t h e p r o d u c t o f h i s l a b o r w i t h t h e l a n d o w n e r a n d t h e c a p i t a li s t .C o n s i d e r a t i o n o f a C r u s o e e c o n o m y re v e a l s w h a t o b s e r v a t i o n o f a c a p i t a l i s te c o n o m y c o n ce a ls . I n c o m e s i n th e f o r m o f r e n t a n d p r o f i t a r e n o t p a y m e n t s t o l a n da n d c a p i t a l f o r t h e i r p r o d u c t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n s : t h e y a r e t r i b u t e l e v ie d b y p r i v a t eo w n e r s f o r u s e o f n a t u r e s g i f ts a n d p r o d u c t s o f p a s t l a b o r.

T h e l a b o r d o c t r i n e o f r e a l c o s t a s s e r ts t h a t t h e r e a l c o s t o f a n y t h i n g i s t h eq u a n t i t y o f e f f o r t o r sa c ri f ic e e n t a i le d b y t h e l a b o r o f p r o d u c i n g i t . A s M a r xd e s cr i be s h is s y s t e m o f b o o k k ee p i n g , C r u s o e s m e t h o d o f a d j u s t i n g w o r k t o w a n t sr e s t s s q u a r e l y o n t h i s pr i n c ip l e . I n d e c i d i n g w h a t k i n d s a n d w h a t q u a n t i t i e s o ft h i n g s to p r o d u c e a n d b y w h a t m e t h o d s t o p r o d u c e t h e m , t h e s o le f a c t o r h e c o n si d e rso n th e c o s t s id e i s t h e q u a n t i t y o f l a b o r t i m e r e q u i r ed . C o s t o f p r o d u c t i o n i s i d e n t i -f ie d w i t h l a b o r c o s t. H e r e a g a i n , i f M a r x s a r g u m e n t i s c o r r e ct , c o n s i d e r a ti o n o f aC r u s o e e c o n o m y r e v e a l s w h a t o b s e r v a t i o n o f a c a p i t a l i s t e c o n o m y c o nc e al s. T h ec a p i t a l i s t m e t h o d o f a d j u s t in g w o r k t o w a n t s , a s t h e t h i rd v o l u m e o f Capitalp o i n t s o u t, e n t a il s f o r t h e g r e a t m a j o r i t y o f c o m m o d i t i e s a d i s p a r i t y b e t w e e n c o s to f p r o d u c t i o n a n d l a b o r c o s t.

M a r x , Kapital I, chap. 1, sec. 4, para. 12.


8/17

MARX AND NAT URE 139But Marx s a rgument is not correct. Whether or not we agree that the example of

Crusoe establishes the truth of the labor doctrine of surplus, we must certainlydeny that it establishes the truth of the labor doctrine of real cost. Some of thenatural resources on Crusoe s island are in limited supply. Choosing between plansof production requiring different quantities of limited resources, he would befoolish to consider o n l y the amounts of labor time involved. Every tool he producesties up quantities of his labor during the period required to produce it and duringthe period of its useful life. Choosing between plans of production involving toolswhich tie up labor for different periods, he would be foolish to consider o n l y theamounts of labor time involved. To equate cost of production with labor cost isno more plausible for a Crusoe economy tha n for a capitali st economy. As an argu-ment for the labor doctrine of real cost, Marx s appeal to Robinson Crusoe simplybegs the question.

Wha t is the source of Marx s e rror? Apparently his belief in a necessa ry connec-tion between the labor doctrine of surplus--an assertion about an economy con-sidered as a whole--and the labor doctrine of real cost---an assertion about eachproduct in that economy. He is not content to argue that the truth of the labordoctrine of surplus, obscured by the phenomenon of commodity fetishism, becomesapparent when we turn to the natural economy of Crusoe. He assumes, withoutargument, that the truth of the labor doctrine of real cost must be revealed at thesame time.Marx does not rest his exposure of commodity fetishism on this single example.In addit ion to the case of Crusoe, he discusses three othe rs: a self-sufficient peasantfamily, a feudal economy, and a socialist economy. But for these cases also theconnection between the labor doctrine of surplus and the labor doctrine of real costis not argued but assumed. In discussing his last example, Marx provides an answerfor the crucial question as to whether socialist planning will equate cost of produc-tion with labor cost. And what is the basis for that answer? A reference to his firstexample, the planned economy of Robinson Crusoe. 1~

IVMarx s discussion of value in the opening chapters of C a p i t a l reaches two con-

clusions: first, that the labor doctrine of real cost holds true for all economies; andsecond, that in capitalist economies the truth of this doctrine is obscured by thephenomenon of commodity fetishism. At this stage of his argument he does notattempt to analyze the connection between cost of production and real cost incapitalist economies. Inst ead he adopts, as a useful simplification, the con tra ry-t o-fact assumption that in such economies price and value coincide. Embarking uponhis analysis of capitalist production, he writes:Even if prices actually diverge from values, we must start by reducing the former to the latter,that is, we must disregard this divergence as an accidental circumstance. We can then deal withthe phenomenon of capital formation in its purity, and our examination will not be complicatedby accidental factors which have no bearing upon the essential process.~

lo Ib id . I, chap. 1, sec. 4, paras. 13-15.11 Ib id . I, chap. 4, sec. 2, para. 23, note.


9/17

140 H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H YT h r o u g h o u t t h e r e s t o f t h e f i rs t v o lu m e a n d t h e w h o l e o f t h e s ec o n d M a r x

r e t a i n s t h is a s s u m p t io n . B u t i n t h e o p e n i n g c h a p t e r s o f th e t h i r d v o l u m e he d r o p si t t o f a c e t h e f a c t t h a t c a p i t a l i s t p r ic e s a re n o t p r o p r o t i o n a t e t o l a b o r c o s ts . T h e s ec h a p t e r s c o n s t i t u t e th e s e c o n d s e c ti o n o f h i s a r g u m e n t . A c c e p t i n g a s a l r e a d y p r o v e nt h e l a b o r d o c t r in e o f r e a l c o s t h e n o w a t t e m p t s t o b a s e u p o n i t a n e x p l a n a t i o n o fcap i t a l i s t p r i ce . T

T h e d i v e rg e n c e o f p r ic e s f r o m v a l u e s i n a c a p i t a l is t e c o n o m y M a r x a s c ri b es t ot w o c i r c u m s t a n c e s . O n e i s v a r i a t i o n i n t h e r a t i o o f s t o r e d - u p l a b o r t o l i v i n g l a b o ra m o n g d i f f e r e n t l i n e s o f p r o d u c t i o n . T h e o t h e r i s v a r i a t i o n i n t h e p e r i o d o f c a p i t a lt u r n o v e r a m o n g d i f f e r e n t l i n e s o f p r o d u c t i o n . S i n c e t h e t w o f a c t o r s v a r y i n d e p e n d -e n t l y a n d m a y s t r e n g t h e n o r w e a k e n o n e an o t h e r t h e p r o b l e m i s m o s t e a s il ys t a t e d b y a s s u m i n g o n e o f t h e m i n o p e r a t i v e .

A c c o rd i n g t o M a r x t h e v a lu e o f a n y c o m m o d i ty p r o d u c ed b y c a p i t a li s t m e th o d sc a n b e b r o k e n d o w n i n t o t h r e e p a r t s :

V = c + v + sw h e r e c s t a n d s f o r c o n s t a n t c a p i t a l t h e v a l u e o f t h e r a w m a t e r i a ls u s e d u p p l u st h e v a l u e o f t h e p o r t i o n o f p l a n t a n d m a c h i n e r y u s e d u p ; v s t a n d s f o r v a r i a b l ec a p i t a l t h e v a l u e o f t h e l a b o r p o w e r u s e d u p ; a n d s s t a n d s f o r s u r p lu s v a l u e t h ed i ff e re n c e b e t w e e n t h e v a l u e o f t h e l a b o r p o w e r u se d a n d p a i d f o r a n d t h e v a l u ec r e a t e d b y t h a t l a b o r p o w e r i n th e p r o c e s s o f p ro d u c t i o n . F o r t h e d i ve r g en c e o fp r i c e f r o m v a l u e t h r e e r a t i o s a r e c r u c i a l : s / v , t h e r a t e o f s u r p l u s v a l u e ; c / v , t h eo r g a n i c c o m p o s i t i o n o f c a p i t a l ; a n d s ~ c +v ) , t h e r a t e o f p r o f i t } 3

M a r x a s s u m e s t h a t i f i n a c a p i t a li s t e c o n o m y l a b o r p o w e r o f a g i v en q u a l i t y s e ll sf o r t h e s a m e w a g e t h r o u g h o u t t h e d i f fe r e n t l in e s o f p r o d u c t i o n t h e r a t e o f s u r p lu sv a l u e i s u n i f o r m t h r o u g h o u t t h e d i f f e r e n t li n e s o f p r o d u c t i o n . ~ L e t u s c o n s i d e r t h e na m o d e l o f a c a p i t a l i s t e c o n o m y c o n s t r u c t e d u p o n t h e f o l lo w i n g a s s u m p t i o n s : p r i ce sa r e p r o p o r t i o n a t e t o v a l u e s ; t h e r a t e o f s u r p lu s v a l u e i s u n i fo r m a m o n g t h e d i f fe r en ti n d u s t r i e s ; t h e p e r i o d o f c a p i t a l t u r n o v e r i s u n i f o r m a m o n g t h e d i f f e r e n t i n d u s t r ie s ;a n d t h e o r g a n i c c o m p o s i t i o n o f c a p i t a l v a r i e s a m o n g t h e d i f f e r e n t i n d u s t r i e s . F r o mt h e a s s u m p t i o n s t h a t s / v is u n i f o r m a n d t h a t c / v var i es i t f o l l ows in t hese c i r-c u m s t a n c e s t h a t s ~ c +v ) , t h e r a t e o f p r o f i t v a r i e s a m o n g d i f f e r e n t li n e s o f p r o d u c -t i on .

B u t t h i s r e su l t s h o w s t h a t s o m e t h i n g i s w r o n g w i t h t h e m o d e l . A s M a r x s t a te st h e p r o b l e m i n t h e e i g h t h c h a p t e r o f h is t h i r d v o l u m eWe have shown that in different branches of industry different rates of profit may prevail, cor-responding to differences in the organic composition of the capitals involved, and also, withinthe limits indicated, to differences in their period of turnover. Given a uniform rate of surplusvalue and a uniform period of turnover, the law (operating as a general tendency) that profitsare proportionate to amounts of capital--that equal amounts of capital yield equal profits inequal times--holds only for capitals of the same organic composition. This follows from theassumption, which up to this point has been the basis of our analysis, tha t commodities are sold

i~ I b i d . II I, chap. 1, paras. 2-7, 33-35. See also Marx, Randglossen zu Wagner , para. 5.,8 Marx, K a p i t a l I chap. 6, paras. 20-23; chap. 7, sec. 1, paras. 2, 9; chap. 23, sec. 1, para . 2;III, chap. 2, para. 4.14 I b i d . II I, chap. 8, para. 1; chap. 10, para. 8.


10/17

M A R X A N D N A T U R E 141a t the i r va lues . On the o the r hand , the re i s no t the s l igh tes t doub t tha t in rea l i ty - -apa r t f romacc iden ta l and mutua l ly compensa t ing d i s to r t ions - -va r ia t ion in the ave rage ra te o f p ro f i t amongdifferent branc hes of indus try does not ex is t and cann ot exis t withou t abolishing the ent iresys tem o f cap i ta l i s t p roduc t ion . I t seems the re fo re tha t the theory o f va lue i s incompa t ib le a tth i s po in t wi th the ac tua l p rocess o f p roduc t ion , wi th the fac tua l da ta , and tha t the a t temptto unders tan d these fa cts mus t b e aba ndoned . 15

B u t M a r x i s n o t p r e p a r e d t o a b a n d o n h is t h e o r y o f v a l u e , m e r e l y b e c a u s e i t s e em si n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e f a c t s o f c a p i t a l i s t p ri ce . S u r f a c e p h e n o m e n a m a y o b s c u r e it .B u t t h e y c a n n o t r e f u t e i t, b e c a u s e i t r e s t s u p o n n o t h i n g l e ss t h a n a l a w o f n a t u r e .The exchange o r sale o f comm odi t ie s a t the i r va lues is the ra t iona l a r rang em ent , the n a tu ra l l awof the i r equ i l ib r ium. We mus t s ta r t f rom the law to exp la in the dev ia t ions , no t f rom thedevia t ions to tes t the law.~

H o w t h e n d o e s M a r x e x p l a in t h e d e v i a t i o n s ? O n e o f h i s m a j o r a r g u m e n t s i s a na p p e a l t o h i s t o r y . I n p r e - c a p i t a l i s t e c o n o m i e s , he a s s e rt s , e x c h a n g e r a t i o s w e r e d e t e r -m i n e d s o le l y b y l a b o r c o st s. B u t w i t h t h e r is e o f c a p i t a l i s m s e c o n d a r y d e t e r m i n a n t se m e r ge , w h i ch n o r m a l l y - - t h o u g h n o t d r a s t i c a l l y - - d i s t o r t t h e p r o p o r t i o n a l i t y o fp r i c e s t o l a b o r c o s ts . O n l y f o r a c a p i t a l i s t e c o n o m y is t h e r e a p r o b l e m o f c o n n e c t i n gp r i c e w i t h r e a l c o s t. O n l y t h e r e d o t h e y d i v e r g e . I t f o l lo w s t h a t o n e w a y o f e x -p l a i n i n g t h i s d i v e r g e n c e is t o t r a c e t h e h i s t o r y o f it s d e v e l o p m e n t .

H o w d o e s M a r x p r o v e t h a t t h e l a b o r d o c t r i n e o f p r i c e h o l d s t r u e f o r p r e - c a p i t a l i s te x c h a n g e ? H e d o e s n o t c o m m e n c e b y e x a m i n i n g e x c h a n g e in s l a v e o r f e u d a ls o c ie t ie s . I n s t e a d h e e x a m i n e s t h e c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n p r i c e a n d l a b o r c o s t i n ac l as s l e ss e c o n o m y o f c o m m o d i t y p r o d u c er s . L i k e S m i t h a n d R i c a r d o b e f o re h i m , h ea r g u e s f r o m a m y t h - - t h e l o st p a r a d i s e o f c l as s le s s ex c h a n g e.The dec is ive po in t can be revea led mos t c lea r ly i f we cons ide r the ma t te r in th i s way . Le t u sassume t ha t the w orkers them selves are in possession of their respec t ive mean s of product ionand tha t they exchange the i r p roduc ts a s comm odi t ie s . . . According to the techn ica l na tu re o fthe work invo lved , the va lue o f the in s t rumen ts o f l abour and raw mate r ia l s employed wou ldvary among d i f fe ren t l ines o f p roduc t ion . Fur the rmore , apa r t f rom the unequa l va lues o f themea ns of product ion emp loyed, d ifferent qu anti t ies of these me ans of prod uct ion would b erequired for equal quanti t ies of labour because one commodity can be f in ished in an hour ,ano the r on ly in a day , and so on . Fur the rmore , l e t u s a ssume tha t on the ave rage these laboure rswork equal per iods of t ime, a l lowing for d ifferences in the in tensi ty of labour and so onY

M a r x ' s f i rs t a s s u m p t i o n c h a r a c t e r i z e s h i s m o d e l a s a c l a ss le s s e c o n o m y o f c o m -m o d i t y p r o d u c e r s , w h a t h e ca l ls a n e c o n o m y o f s i m p l e c o m m o d i t y p r o d u c t i o n . H i sl a s t a s s u m p t i o n a s s e r t s t h a t i n a n y g i v e n p e r i o d t h e v a l u e c r e a t e d b y a s in g le w o r k e ri s t h e s a m e in a ll li n es o f p r o d u c t i o n . H i s s e c o n d a n d t h i r d a s s u m p t i o n s a s s e r tt h a t t h e p e r i o d o f c a p i t a l t u r n o v e r a n d t h e r a t i o o f s t o r e d - u p t o l i v in g l a b o r v a r ya m o n g d i f f e re n t li n es o f p r o d u c t i o n . B u t s i nc e t h e s e t w o f a c t o r s c r e a t e t h e s a m e s o r to f c o m p l i c a t io n s , f o r t h e s a k e o f s i m p l i c i t y I s h a l l c o n s i d e r o n l y t h e s e c o n d i n d i s -c u s s i n g h i s m o d e l .

15 Ib id . I I I , chap . 8 , pa ra . 33. Also pa ra . 22.9 " . . . . . . (B erlin : 1952),

h:p/b/ld ~IaIrIa:~h ?p , 10a , Pa:n a 37ugeSlemelSnO I1 . cjh~p l ~ e c 4riP~:aa: ;KIIuIe l2 :Pn 1O, pa ras . 4~5;pa ra . 3 .17 M ar x, K a p i~a l I I I , chap . 10 , pa ra . 10 .


11/17

1 4 2 H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H YM a r x c o n c l ud e s t h a t i n su c h a n e c o n o m y e q u i l ib r i u m p r ic e s c o in c i de w i t h l a b o r

c o s ts . U s i n g t h e t e r m i n o l o g y h e a p p l i e s t o c a p i t a l i s m , w e c a n d e s c r i b e h i s m o d e l b yt h r e e e q u a l i t i e s a n d t h r e e i n e q u a l i t i e s .

O n t h e o n e h a n d , a l l w o r k e r s r e c e i v e t h e s a m e w a g e ; a l l r e c e i v e t h e s a m e p r o f i t ;a n d t h e r a t e o f s u rp l u s v a l u e i s u n i f o r m t h r o u g h o u t t h e e c o n o m y . V a l u e c r e a t e d ina n y g i v e n p e r i o d , v + s , i s u n i f o r m b y M a r x ' s l a s t a s s u m p t i o n . B u t t h e w a g e , v , i sa l so u n i f o r m , b e c a u s e i t e q u a l s t h e v a l u e o f a l a b o r e r ' s m e a n s o f s u b si s te n c e . T h e r e -f o r e s u r p l u s v a l u e , s , i s a l s o u n i f o r m . A n d s i n c e w h e r e p r i c e c o i n c i d e s w i t h v a l u ep r o f i t c o i n c id e s w i t h s u r p l u s v a l u e , t h e a m o u n t o f p r o f i t i s u n i f o r m t o o .

O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e v a l u e o f t h e m e a n s o f p r o d u c t i o n c o n s u m e d i n a g i ve np e r i o d v a r i e s a m o n g d i f f e r e n t l in e s o f p r o d u c t i o n . S o d o e s th e v a l u e o f t h e p r o d u c t st u r n e d o u t i n a g i v e n p er i o d . A n d s o d o e s t h e r a t e o f p r o fi t . T h e v a l u e o f th e m e a n so f p r o d u c t i o n c o n s u m e d , c , v a r i e s b y M a r x ' s s e c o n d a ss u m p t i o n . B u t s in c e v + si s u n i f o r m , t h e v a l u e o f th e p r o d u c t s , c + v + s , m u s t v a r y w i t h c . A n d t h e r a t e o fp r o f i t , s / c + v ) m u s t v a r y a l s o .

W h a t d i s ti n g u is h e s t h is e c o n o m y f r o m c a p i t a li s m , a c c o r d i n g t o M a r x , is t h e f a c tt h a t i n e q u a l i t i e s i n t h e r a t e o f p r o f i t d o n o t t h r o w i t o f f b a l a n c e .I f one worker has greater expenses , these are m ade good b y the greater s ize of the constantcom ponen t in the value of h is com m odity : and for the n ext per iod he m ust reconv ert an equ alport ion of the to ta l value of h is product in to the m ater ia l fac tors which th is constant com ponentrepresents. If an oth er worker collects less for this purpose, i t is because he requires tha t mu chless for reconversion. U nder these circumstances differences in the rate of profit would be a m att ero f no concern . . . . s

U p t o t h is p o i n t in h is d i sc u s si o n M a r x s a y s n o t h i n g a b o u t c o m p e t i ti o n . T h ec r u c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f h is m o d e l , l e a d i n g t o t h e c o i n c i d e n c e o f p r i c e s a n d v a l u e s ,s e e m s t o b e t h e a b s e n c e o f e x p l o i t a t io n . B u t i n d i s c u s s i n g u n e q u a l r a t e s o f p r o f i tM a r x i n t r o d u c e s a n a d d i t io n a l a s s u m p t i o n , t h a t w o r k e r s a r e n o t f r e e t o s h if t f r o mo n e l in e o f p r o d u c t i o n t o a n o t h e r . T A n d u p o n a n a l y s i s t h is , r a t h e r t h a n h is a s su m p -t i o n c o n c e r n i n g e x p l o i t a t i o n , t u r n s o u t t o b e d e c i s i v e f o r h i s a r g u m e n t .

T h e i s s u e c a n b e c l a r i f i e d b y c o n s t r u c t i n g a m o d e l o f f u l l y c o m p e t i t i v e s i m p l ec o m m o d i t y p r o d u c t io n . L e t us re p l a c e M a r x ' s a s s u m p t i o n a b o u t c o m p e t i ti o n w i t ht h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t w o r k e r s a r e f r e e t o s h i f t f r o m o n e l i ne o f p r o d u c t i o n t o a n o t h e r ,w h i l e w e r e t a i n u n c h a n g e d h i s o t h e r s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t s i m p l e c o m m o d i t y p r o d u c -t i o n . I s s u ch a n e c o n o m y i n e q u i l i b r i m n w h e n p r i c e s e q u a l v a l u e s b u t t h e r a t e o fp r o f i t v a r i e s a m o n g d i f f e r e n t i n d u s t r i e s ?

I n s u c h a s it u a t i o n a n y w o r k e r i n a l in e o f p r o d u c t i o n w i t h a n o r g a n i c c o m p o s i-t i o n o f c a p i t a l , c / v , h i g h e r th a n t h e l o w e s t i n th e e c o n o m y c a n r e a li z e a g ai n b ys h i f t i n g a t t h e e n d o f a t u r n o v e r p e r i o d t o a l in e w i t h a l o w e r c o m p o s i t i o n . A c c o r d i n gt o M a r x ' s a s s u m p t i o n s h i s i n c o m e , v + s , w i ll r e m a i n u n c h a n g e d . A n d h e c a n p o c k e tt h e d i f f e re n c e b e t w e e n c i n t h e o l d l in e a n d c in t h e n e w .

M o r e g e n e r a l l y , i n s u c h a s y s t e m v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e o r g a n i c c o m p o s i t i o n o f c a p i t a lf r o m i n d u s t r y t o i n d u s t r y r e p r e s e n t v a r i a t io n s o f i n c e n ti v e to e n t e r a n d o f s e c u r i ty

is Loc. cit .19 Ibi d., III , chap. 10, para. 13.


12/17

MARX AND NAT URE 143to remain. The incentive for workers to enter different industries is weighted againstindustries of high organic composition, since these require investing larger amountsfor equal incomes. The security of workers to continue in different industries is alsoweighted against industries of high organic composition, since these involve risk-ing larger amounts for equal incomes.The effect of any or all of these factors is to induce a movement of workers outof lines of high organic composition into lines of low organic composition. Onetendency of this movement is to decrease the supply of commodities produced inlines of high organic composition, with the result that ti~eir prices are forced abovetheir values through competition of buyers. The complementary tendency is to in-crease the supply of commodities produced in lines of low organic composition, withthe result that their prices are forced below their values through competition ofsellers. The equilibrium condition for termination of both tendencies is a uniformrate of profit throughout the entire economy. The relation of prices to values insuch an economy is identical with that which Marx ascribes to capitalism.

In Marx's own model of simple commodi ty production, freedom to transfer fromone line of production to another is sharply restricted. But where the mobility offactors of production is limited, proportionality of prices to labor costs, far frombeing necessary, is most unlikely. Difficulties in transferring means of productionfrom one line to another are obstacles to the maintenance of any uniform relationbetween the prices and the values of the different commodities involved.

Suppose we assume an initial equality of prices and values. Under conditions ofpartial immobility, changes in techniques or tastes will produce disparities in therelation of supply to demand for specific commodities. In lines where shortagesdevelop, competition of buyers will force prices above values. In lines wheresurpluses develop, competition of sellers will force prices below values. To theextent that difficulties of transfer exist, these divergences will remain. A returnto equali ty of prices and values would be wholly accidental.

More generally, to the degree that difficulties exist in transferring means ofproduction from one line to another, competition is imperfect. To the degree thatcompetition is imperfect, elements of monopoly are present. And to the degree tha telements of monopoly are present, price is determined, in Marx's own words,

neither by the price of production of the commodity, nor by its value, but by theneeds and solvency of the buyers. 20Marx's appeal to the myth of simple commodity production is no more successfultha n his earlier appeal to the myt h of Robinson Crusoe. To the extent that competi-tion prevails in a classless economy of commodity producers, prices must divergefrom values for the same reasons as in capitalist economies. To the extent thatcompetition does not prevail, the relation of individual prices to values must beindeterminate. In so far as it relies on this example, Marx's attempt to explain thedivergence of capitalist prices from real costs is a failure.

2o I b i d . II I, chap. 45, para. 29; chap. 46, para. 4. In chap. 10, para. 14, Marx states as a condi-tlon for the coincidence of prices and values in simple commodity production that there be noaccidental or artificial monopolies. But his assumption of limited mobility entails that thiscondition will not be met.


13/17

144 HISTORY OF PHILOS OPHYMarx, it is true, does not state his argument in terms of a single example. Ex-change of commodities at their values, he claims, is normal for all economies exceptthe capitalist.

This principle applies where the means of production belong to the worker, that is, to thesituation of the peasant who owns the land he works and to the situation of the independentartisan, in both ancient and modern times . . . It also applies to economies based on slavery andserfdom, and to the guild organization of handicrafts--providing that the means of produc-tion installed in each line of production can be transferred only with difficulty o another branch,so that in their relations with one another the different branches of production resemble to acertain degree foreign countries or the communistic societies of primitive times.~But these appeals to history beg the question. Marx points to the fact thatmobili ty of factors was limited in pre-eapitalist economies. He concludes from thisfact that in these economies prices coincided with values. He does not test the

principle that limited mobility entails proportionality of prices to labor costs byexamining any historical evidence. Instead he treats thi s principle as a truth alreadyestablished by his analysis of simple commodity production.The hypothetica l example of simple commodity production and the hypotheticalexample of Robinson Crusoe play the same role with respect to the actual examplesthat follow them. In each case Marx claims to establish a general principle throughhis analysis of the hypothetical example. And in each case this general principle is

assumed, without further proof, to hold for the actual examples as well. In each casehis assertions of fact depend on his analysis of a fiction. If that analysis is erroneous,the entire argument fails.

VSuppose that these two arguments are rejected not because they appeal to fic-

tions, but because the generalizations Marx bases on these fictions do not followfrom the premises on which the fictions are constructed. How much of his theory ofvalue then remains?Marx s exposition of his theory in C a p i t a l does not rest solely on these two argu-ments. His attempt in the first volume to establish the labor doctrine of real costrelies heavily on his comparison of capital ist with non-capitali st economies in the

section on commodity fetishism. And that comparison turns on his account ofRobinson Crusoe. His attempt in the third volume to explain the divergence ofcapitalist prices from real costs relies heavily on his comparison of capitalistwith pre-capitalist economies in the chapter on equalization of the rate of profitthrough development of competition. And tha t comparison turns on his account ofsimple commodity product ion. Bu t in each case he presents a second line of argu-ment, which does not rest on a comparison between capitalist and non-capitalisteconomies.Yet these non-comparative arguments have weaknesses of their own, weaknesseswhich become far more obvious when the support of the comparative arguments~1 Ib id . II I, chap. 10, para. 13. Also paras. 20, 54-63.


14/17

M A R X A N D N A T U R E 1 4 5i s r e m o v e d . T h e p l a u s i b i l i t y o f M a r x ' s t h e o r y i s d r a s t i c a l l y , i f n o t d e c i s i v e l y ,r e d u c e d b y e l i m i n a t i n g i t s q u e s t i o n - b e g g i n g a p p e a l s t o f i c t i o n .

T h e n o n - c o m p a r a t i v e a r g u m e n t b y w h i ch M a r x a t t e m p t s t o e s t a b l i s h t he l a b ord o c t r i n e o f r e a l c o s t i s h i s d e r i v a t i o n o f v a l u e f r o m e x c h a n g e v a l u e . T h a t d e r i v a t i o nr e s t s u p o n t w o p r e m i s e s . F i r s t , s i n c e a ll r e l a ti o n a l p r o p e r t i e s r e f l ec t n o n - r e l a t i o n a lp r o p e r t i e s o f t h e t h i n g s re l a t e d , t h e r a t i o s i n w h i c h c o m m o d i t i e s e x c h a n g e m u s t b ee x p l a in e d in t e r m s o f s o m e p r o p e r t y p o s s e ss e d b y e a c h c o m m o d i t y s e p a r a t e l y . S e c -o n d , t h e o n l y n o n - r e l a t io n a l p r o p e r t y p o s s e s se d b y e v e r y c o m m o d i t y i s t h a t o f b ei n ga p r o d u c t o f la b o r . 22 T h i s a r g u m e n t i s i n v a l i d , b u t i t s i n v a l i d i t y i s t o s o m e e x t e n to b s c u r e d b y t h e o r d e r o f M a r x ' s e x p o s i ti o n .

S o m e e x c h a n g e a b l e t h i n g s -- - v ir g i n la n d , f o r e x a m p l e - - a r e n o t p r o d u c t s o f l a b o r.B u t s u c h t r o u b l e s o m e t h i n g s a r e n o t m e n t i o n e d i n t h e f i r st t h r e e s e c t io n s o f t h eo p e n i n g c h a p t e r o f C a p i t a l w h e r e M a r x p r e s e n ts h i s d e r i v a t i o n o f v a l u e f r o m e x -c h a n g e v a l u e . T h e f i r s t m e n t i o n o f v i r g i n l a n d o c c u r s t w o c h a p t e r s l a t er , w h e r eM a r x a s s e r t s w i t h o u t a n y a r g u m e n t t h a t s u ch th i n g s h a v e a p r i c e b u t n o t a v a l u e .T h e s t a t e m e n t t h a t a n y e x c h a n g e a b l e t h in g s l a c k t h e p r o p e r t y o f v a l u e i s i nc o n -s i s te n t w i th h i s o p e n i n g a r g u m e n t . B u t b e f o r e m a k i n g t h i s s t a t e m e n t h e h a sp r e s e n t e d , i n s ec t i o n f o u r o f t h e f i r st c h a p t e r , h is c o m p a r a t i v e a r g u m e n t , b a s i n g t h el a b o r d o c t r i n e o f r e a l c o s t u p o n t h e l a b o r d o c t r i n e o f s u rp l u s . T h e c o m p a t i b i l i t y o fh is s t a t e m e n t a b o u t v i r g in l a n d w i t h t h is i n t e r v e n in g a r g u m e n t m a s k s i ts in c o m -p a t i b i l i t y w i t h h is i n i t ia l a r g u m e n t . T o d e l e te th e i n t e r v e n i n g a r g u m e n t i s t o l a yb a r e t h e c o n t r a d i c t i o n .

I t i s i n t e r e s t in g i n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n t o c o n s i d er t h e r e s p o n s e o f M a r x t o a r e v i e w e r ' sc o m m e n t o n th e f i r st v o l u m e o f C a p i t a l . T h e a n o n y m o u s r e v ie w e r w r o t e :The fundamenta l ax iom, wh ich we encoun te r a t the ve ry beg inn ing , i s " tha t the quan t i ty o fsocia l ly necessary labo ur , or the labou r t ime socia l ly nece ssary to produce a com m odity ,de te rmines the magn i tude o f i t s va lue ( the am oun t o f i t s exchange va lue )" . For M arx th i ss ta tem en t i s ax iomat ic : i t i s no t p roved bu t s imply repea ted in va r ious fo rms . . . There jec t ion o f the theory o f va lue i s the s ing le ta sk o f Marx ' s opponen t ; fo r i f one accep ts h i saxiom, one must grant a lmost a l l the consequences der ived from i t by his r igorous logic .For tun ate ly there is no necessi ty to bel ieve th is basic do gma. M arx himse lf recognizes the d iff i-cul ty of reducing to a c om mo n unit the d ifferent grad es of skil led labour . Th e quest ion of howhis formula expla ins the value of commodit ies whose supply cannot be increased a t wil l , ins teadof being sa t isfactor i ly answered, is s imp ly ignored. And f inally , nowhere does he provide thesl ightest evidence tha t h is a lleged law of nature actual ly g overns the world. ~

M a r x c o m m e n t e d o n t h is c r i t ic i s m i n a l e tt e r t o K u g e l m a n n :The poor fe l low does no t see tha t , even i f the re were no chap te r on "va lue" in my book , theana lys i s o f ac tua l re la t ions tha t I g ive wou ld con ta in the ev idence fo r and the dem ons t ra t ionof the real value re la t ions . . . Ev ery chi ld knows th at obta inin g the quanti t ies of d ifferentproducts which correspond to the magnitudes of d ifferent needs requires quanti ta t ively deter-mined amou n ts o f d i fferen t types o f soc ie ty 's to ta l l abour . T ha t th i s necess ity o f d i s t r ibu tingsocia l labour in def in i te proport ions cannot be t ranscended owing to the particular ]orm o fsocial production, but can only change its mode o] appearance is self-evident9 N o law o f na tu re

~2 For a d i scuss ion o f bo th p remises , see my "M etaph ys ica l Arg um ent . "~8 Rezens lon uber Das Ka p l ta l , L~teramsch es Centralblatt [Z entralblatt] fu r Deutschland1868, no. 28 (4. Juli), paras. 2-3.


15/17

14 6 H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H Ycan be transcended. W ha t can change with different historical circumstances is only the ]orm inwhich such a law prevails. And the form in which this proportional distribution of labourprevails in a state of society where the interconneetion of social labour is asserted throughprivate exchangeof the individual products of labour is precisely the exchange value of theseproducts. ~

T o a c r it i ci s m c o n c e r n e d w i t h r a t io s o f e x c h a n g e i n a c a p i t a l i s t e c o n o m y , M a r xd o e s n o t r e p l y b y d e f e n d i n g hi s d e r i v a t i o n o f v a lu e f r o m e x c h a n g e v a l u e . I n s t e a dh e r e s t a t e s h i s c o m p a r a t i v e a r g u m e n t . T h e l a b o r d o c t r i n e o f s u r p l u s is p r e s e n t e d a ss e l f -e v i d e n t , t h e s t a t e m e n t o f a l a w o f n a t u r e g o v e r n i n g a ll e c o n om i e s . T h e l a b o rd o c t r i n e o f r e a l c o s t is p r e s e n t e d a s a l o g i c a l c o n s e q u e n c e o f t h i s u n i v e r s a l l a w . I tf o l lo w s t h a t i n s p i t e o f a l l a p p e a r a n c e s b o t h p r i n c i p l e s a p p l y i n a c a p i t a l i s t e c o n o m y .B u t t h i s i s t h e a r g u m e n t w h i c h a t i ts c r u c ia l p o i n t - - t h e c o n n e c t i o n b e tw e e n t h el a b o r d o c t r i n e o f s u r p lu s a n d t h e l a b o r d o c t r i n e o f r e a l c o s t - - t u r n s o n t h e a p p e a l t oR o b i n s o n C r u s o e .

T h e n o n - c o m p a r a t i v e a r g u m e n t b y w h i c h M a r x a t t e m p t s , i n t h e t h i rd v o l um e o fCapital t o e x p l a i n t h e d i v e r g e n c e o f c a p i t a l i s t p r i c e s f r o m r e a l c o s t s c o n s i s t s i nh is s o lu t io n f o r w h a t i s u s u a l l y c a l l e d t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n p r o b l em . I n a d d i ti o n t oh i s h i s t o r i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n , w h i c h c o m p a r e s t h e r e l a t i o n o f p r i c e t o v a l u e i n c a p i t a l i s ta n d p r e - c a p i t a l i s t e c o n o m i e s , h e p r e s e n t s a m e t h o d f o r c a l c u l a t i n g f r o m a g i v e n s e to f v a l u e s t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g s e t o f c a p i t a l i s t p r i c e s . B u t h e r e , t o a n e v e n g r e a t e r e x -t e n t t h a n i n t h e f ir s t v o l u m e , th e p l a u s i b i l i ty o f t h e n o n - c o m p a r a t i v e a r g u m e n t d e -p e n d s o n th e a c c e p t a b i l i t y o f t h e c o m p a r a t i v e . C o n s i d e r e d a p a r t f r o m h is a c c o u n to f p r e - c a p i t a l i s t e c o n o m i e s, M a r x ' s p r o c e d u r e f o r c a l c u la t i n g c a p i t a l is t p r ic e s f r o mv a l u e s a m o u n t s t o n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n t h e c o n c l u d i n g h a lf o f a c ir c u l a r a r g u m e n t .I n a c a p i t a l is t e c o n o m y , a c c o r d i n g t o M a r x , l a b o r c o s ts a r e n o t o b s e r v a b l e q u a n -t i ti e s . T h e o n l y w a y t o d i s c o v e r t h e v a l u e s o f t h e d i f f e r e n t c o m m o d i t i e s i s t o c a l c u -l a t e t h e m f r o m p r ic e s. B u t s u c h a c a l c u l a t io n i n v o l v e s th e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t t h er a t e o f s u r p l u s v a l u e i s u n i f o r m t h r o u g h o u t t h e d i f f e r e n t l i n e s o f p r o d u c t i o n . I n ac a p i t a l i s t e c o n o m y th i s a s s u m p t i o n is u n t e s t a b l e . I t c a n n o t b e c o n f i r m e d o r r e fu t e dw i t h o u t c a l c u l a t i n g a s e t o f v a l u e s ; y e t a n y c a l c u l a t io n o f v a l u e s m u s t a s s um e i tst r u t h t o g e t s t a r te d . F o r a c a p i t a l i s t e c o n o m y c o n s i d e r e d b y i t s e lf , a s e t o f v a l u e si s a n a r b i t r a r y t r a n s l a t i o n o f a s e t o f p r ic e s . T o r e v e r s e t h e p r o c e s s , c a l c u l a t in g f r o ma s e t o f v a l u e s t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g s e t o f p r ic e s , is n o t a s c i e n t if i c e x p l a n a t i o n b u t am a t h e m a t i c a l e x e r c i s e . 26F o r M a r x ' s m e t h o d o f c a l c u l a ti n g p r ic e s f r o m v a l u e s t o c o n s t i t u t e a n e x p l a n a ti o no f c a p i t a l is t p r i c e , i t m u s t c o n n e c t - - -h o w e v e r i n d i r e c t l y - - o n e s e t o f o b s e r v ab l ef a c t s w i t h a n o t h e r s e t o f o b s e r v a b l e f a c t s . S in c e t h e l a b o r c o s t s i n v o l v e d a r e n o tt h e m s e l v e s o b s e r v a b l e , to c o n n e c t t h e m w i t h p r i c e s is a t b e s t o n l y p a r t o f a n e x -p l a n a t i o n . W h a t t h e n i s t h e o t h e r p a r t ? I s i t M a r x ' s d e r i v a t i o n o f v a l u e f r o m e x -c h a n g e v a l u e i n t h e f ir s t v o l u m e o f Capital? F o r a c a p i t a l i s t e c o n o m y co n s id e r edb y i t se l f , h i s d e r i v a t i o n i n t h e f i rs t v o l u m e s t a r t s f r o m t h e s a m e c a p i t a l i s t p r i c e s t ow h i c h h i s c a l c u l a t i o n i n t h e t h i r d v o l u m e r e t u r n s . I f t h i s i s t h e o t h e r p a r t , t h e n

~4 M arx an Kug elm ann 11. Jul i 1868, para . 3 .25 Fo r fu r the r d iscuss ion o f th i s po in t , see Joan R ob inson , Th e Labou r The ory o f Va lue ,Collected Economic Papers (New Yo rk: 1951) .


16/17

MAR X AND NAT URE 147Mar x's proffered explanation of capitalist price turns o ut to be a pseudoexplanation.And his labor doctrine of real cost turns out to be wholly superfluous, a fit victim forOccam's razor.

As an alternative, it might be claimed that the other part of Marx's explanationof capitalist price is his account of non-capi talist price. In pre-cap italist economies,he asserts, prices and values coincide. His method of calculating prices from values,it might be argued, serves to connect observable facts in capitalist economies withobservable facts in other economies. But if his comparative argument is rejected,this escape route is cut off.

It is interesting in this connection to consider the response of Engels to some re-viewers' comments on the third volume of C a p i t a l . Loria had denied any empiricalsignificance to the law of value. Sombart, while rejecting Marx's theory of pre-capitalist price, had defended the labor doctrine of real cost in very general terms:In its empirical significance Marx's concept of value is simply the economic expression of thefact that the productive power of society's labour is the basis of economic existence.~

Comment ing on these reviews in his S u p p l e m e n t t o t he T h i r d V o l u m e V f C a p i -t a l , Engels centers his defense of Marx on the theory of pre-capitalist price. WhatSomb art misses, he asserts, is the connection between the logical explanation a nd thehistorical process it reflects. His argument concludes:

Thus the Marxian law of value has general validity for a period lasting from the beginningof exchange, which transforms products into commodities, down to the fifteenth century of thepresent era. Commodity exchange dates from a time before all written history, which in Egyptgoes back to between 3500 and 5000 B.c. and in Babylonia to between 4000 and 6000 B.c. The lawof value has therefore ruled during a period of from five to seven thousand years. And now letus admire the thoroughness of Mr. Loria, who calls the value which is generally and directlyprevalent in this period a value at which commodities never have and never can sell, and withwhich no economist having a spark of common sense would concern himself ~The premises from which Engels reaches this conclusion differ from those of

Marx. Ignor ing Mar x's assumption of limited competition, he taci tly assumes fullmobility of factors. For the major part of his discussion he also ignores effects ofdifferences in the organic composition of capital and in the period of capital turn-over.The little that such a family had to obtain by barter or purchase from outsiders.., consistedprincipally of products of handicraft. The manufacture of such things was no mystery to thepeasant, and he did not produce them himself only because he lacked the raw materials orbecause the purchased article was much better or much cheaper .... The peasants, as well as thepeople from whom they bought, were workers; both sides exchanged their products as directproducers. What had they expended in making these products? Labour and labour alone. Forreplacing tools, for producing the raw material, and for working it up they spent nothing buttheir own labour power. How then could they exchange their products for those of otherworking producers otherwise than in proportion to the labour expended on them?~8

2s Werner Sombart, "Zur Kritik des 5konomischen Systems yon Karl Marx," Arch iv f i i rsoziale Gesetzgebung un d Stat i s t ik , VII (1894), sec. 3, paras. 16, 45-49.27 Engels, "Nachtrag," in Marx, K a p i t a l , III, sec. 1, para. 16.38 Ib id. , sec. 1, para. 12.


17/17

148 H I S T O R Y O F P H I L O S O P H YI ] w e a s s u m e f u ll m o b i l i ty o f f a c t o r s a n d i] w e a s s u m e u n i f o r m i t y i n t h e o r g a ni c

c o m p o s i t i o n o f c a p i t a l a n d i n t h e p e r i o d o f c a p i t a l t u r n o v e r , t h e n p r i c e s c o i n c i d ew i t h l a b o r c o s t s i n c o n d i t i o n s o f p r e - c a p i t a l i s t c o m m o d i t y e x c h a n g e . A n d , u n d e rt h e s e a s s u m p t i o n s , i n c o n d i t i o n s o f c a p i t a l i s t e x c h a n g e a s w e l l.

A t t h e e n d o f h i s d i s c u s s i o n E n g e l s m e n t i o n s t h a t s o m e c o m m o d i t i e s i n v o l v e d i np r e - c a p i t a l i s t e x c h a n g e h a d l o n g e r p e r i o d s o f p r o d u c t i o n t h a n o t h e r s . B u t a f t e rd r o p p i n g h i s a s s u m p t i o n t h a t t h e r e w e r e n o s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e p e r i o d o fc a p i t a l t u r n o v e r , h e re t a i n s h i s c o n c l u s io n t h a t p r i c e s e q u a l l e d v a l u e s . I n s u p p o r t o ft h i s c o n c l u s i o n h e a s s e r t s t h a t c a t t l e - - - t h e c o m m o d i t y w h i c h i n t h e e r a h e i s d i s -c u s s i n g h a d t h e l o n g e s t p e r i o d o f p r o d u c t i o n - - b e c a m e t h e f i r s t r a t h e r g e n e r a l l ya c c e p t e d m o n e y c o m m o d i t y . 29 T h i s e v i d e n c e , h o w e v e r , p r o v e s m e r e l y t h a t c o m -m o d i t ie s w e r e p r i c e d in te r m s o f a s t a n d a r d c o m m o d i t y . I t d o e s n o t p r o v e t h a t t h e s ep r i c e s w e r e p r o p o r t i o n a t e t o l a b o r c o s t s . E n g e l s s i m p l y a s s u m e s t h a t t h e e q u a l i t yo f p ri c e s a n d v a l u e s w h i c h o b t a i n s w h e r e p e r i o d s o f t u r n o v e r a r e e q u a l a l so o b t a i n sw h e r e p e r io d s o f t u r n o v e r a r e n o t e q u a l . B u t t h i s a s s u m p t i o n i s w h a t h e s e t o u tt o p r o v e ; a n d s i n ce h e o f f e rs n e i t h e r a n a l y t i c a r g u m e n t n o r h i s t o r ic a l e v i d e n c e t os u p p o r t i t , h i s d i s c u s s io n b e g s th e q u e s t i o n .

V IT h e a r g u m e n t s o f t h i s p a p e r c a n b e s u m m a r i z e d i n t h r e e p r o p o s it io n s . F i r s t,M a r x ' s c r it ic i sm o f S m i t h a n d R i c a r d o , o n t h e g r o u n d t h a t t h r o u g h a p p e a l t o f ic ti o n s

o f t h e e i g h t e e n th c e n t u r y t h e y a s s u m e w h a t t h e y o u g h t t o p r o v e , c a n b e t u r n e da g a i n s t t h e a r g u m e n t o f M a r x h i m s e l f i n Capi ta l . S e c o n d , a p a r t f r o m t h e d e f e n -s i b i li t y o f h i s m e t h o d , t h e g e n e r a l iz a t io n s M a r x b a s e s o n h i s a c c o u n t s o f R o b i n s o nC r u s o e a n d s i m p l e c o m m o d i t y p ro d u c t i o n d o n o t f o l lo w f ro m t h e a s s u m p t io n s o nw h i c h t h e s e f i c t i o n s a r e c o n s t r u c t e d . T h i r d , t o d e l e t e f r o m M a r x ' s e x p o s i t i o n t h ea r g u m e n t s t u r n i n g u p o n t h e s e a p p e a l s t o f ic t io n i s d r a s t i c a l l y , i f n o t d e c i s i v e ly , t ow e a k e n h is t h e o r y o f v a l u e a s a w h o le .

T h o u g h H e g e l h a s n o t b e e n m e n t i o n e d , t h i s d i sc u s s io n i s n o t i n te n d e d t o c h a l -l e n g e h is p o s i ti o n a s t h e m a j o r p h i l o s o p h i c a l i n f lu e n c e o n Capi ta l . H e g e l , h o w e v e r ,w a s m o r e i m p o r t a n t f o r s u g g e s t i n g t o M a r x t h e s t a t e m e n t o f h i s p r o b l e m s , e v e nt h e o u t l in e o f h i s s o l u t io n s , t h a n f o r p r o v i d i n g h i m w i t h p r o o f s t h a t t h e s e s o l u t io n sw e r e c o r re c t. W h e n i t c a m e t o e s t a b li s h in g t h e t r u t h o f hi s t h e o r y o f v a lu e , M a r xs w i t c h e d a t c r u c ia l p o i n t s t o th e v e r y u n - H e g e l i a n t r a d i ti o n o f r e a so n i n g f r o m as t a t e o f n a t u r e . B e n e a t h t h e s w i r l in g f l o o d o f d i a l e c t i c l ie , l ik e h i d d e n r o c k s, t h em y t h s o f t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t .U n i v e r s i t y o ] C a l i ]o r n ia S a n D i e g o

~ Ibid. sec. 1, para. 14.

Documents

Moore, Stanley - Marx and the State of Nature