 The Form of Value: The Scylla of Bailey and the Charybdis of HegelDesmond McNeill ()
Chapter 6 in Fetishism and the Theory of Value, 2021, pp 77-107 from Palgrave Macmillan Abstract: Abstract In this long chapter, I trace Marx’s route beyond Ricardo, as his criticisms become gradually more apparent. In Theories of Surplus Value, the break is clear; here, Marx criticises Ricardo for failing to analyse the form of value. But what exactly does this mean? To address this question, I examine the first chapter of Capital Volume I in great detail. It is particularly enlightening to analyse the revisions that Marx makes in the Second Edition. Here it is clear that he wishes to distinguish his position from that of an influential contemporary economist, Samuel Bailey who, like other economists, ‘exclusively give their attention to the quantitative aspect of the question’. But in doing so, Marx risks indulging in the sort of speculative philosophy that he had earlier criticised. A close analysis of the first, and revised, texts thus offers a valuable insight into what precisely Marx was seeking to communicate. Keywords: Marx; Hegel; Ricardo; Samuel Bailey; Exchange-value; Form of value; Relative value; Substance of value; Magnitude of value; Inversion (search for similar items in EconPapers) There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it. Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:pshchp:978-3-030-56123-9_6 Ordering information: This item can be ordered from DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-56123-9_6 Access Statistics for this chapter More chapters in Palgrave Studies in the History of Economic Thought from Palgrave Macmillan |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.