Sapiens nihil affirmat quod non probat

Guglielmo Carchedi

Review of Political Economy, 2005, vol. 17, issue 1, 127-139

Abstract: This paper responds to Ernesto Screpanti's critique of Guglielmo Carchedi's approach to Marx's transformation procedure. It argues that there is no logical inconsistency in that procedure once one introduces time, rather than denying it as Marx's critics do. Further, it examines Screpanti's critique and argues that, while Marx's algebra is correct, Screpanti's own 'refutation' of Marx is invalid because it balances neither in physical nor in algebraic terms. It finally examines some old critiques which, while presented by Screpanti as novel, are well-known acquaintances which have already been shown to be invalid. Two conclusions are reached. First, Screpanti concedes that the circularity critique does not hold when time is introduced in the analysis and, second, Screpanti's critique is an attempt to vindicate a method of inquiry (simultaneism) which is unsuited to understanding what really matters, a temporal situation, i.e. reality.

Date: 2005
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0953825042000313852 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:revpoe:v:17:y:2005:i:1:p:127-139

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CRPE20

DOI: 10.1080/0953825042000313852

Access Statistics for this article

Review of Political Economy is currently edited by Steve Pressman and Louis-Philippe Rochon

More articles in Review of Political Economy from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().