The Universal and the Particular in the Constitution of Value

John Rosenthal
Additional contact information
John Rosenthal: Colorado College

Chapter 14 in The Myth of Dialectics, 1998, pp 163-171 from Palgrave Macmillan

Abstract: Abstract Recall Marx’s observation from ‘The Value-form’: ‘This inversion, whereby the sensate-concrete counts only as the form of appearance of the abstract-universal, and not, on the contrary, the abstract-universal as a property of the concrete, characterizes the value-expression.’ In order to begin to grasp how the dealist connotation of Hegelian formulae gets expelled through their usage by Marx, we have only to pay attention to the manner in which Marx’s ‘mode of expression’ here in fact departs from Hegel’s. For the topic of Marx’s claim is explicitly not the sensate-concrete as such, but only the latter inasmuch as brought ‘within the value-relation’. Now, what Marx calls the ‘value-relation’ is, in effect, just the ratio at which different categories of marketable goods exchange: so many units of one good being regularly obtainable for so many units of another.

Keywords: Social Practice; General Equivalent; Social Product; Definite Amount; Functional Objectivity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1998
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

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:pal:palchp:978-0-230-37184-2_14

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.palgrave.com/9780230371842

DOI: 10.1057/9780230371842_14

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Palgrave Macmillan Books from Palgrave Macmillan
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().