Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy
Abstract This article aims to offer a reply to Steedman’s critique of Marx’s labor theory of value. Although this critique having been there for about three decades, the anti-critiques from Marxists are up to date flawed with fatal limitation, losing sight of an important dimension of labor theory o...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Meng, Jie [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2010 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Frontiers of economics in China - Beijing : Higher Education Pr., 2006, 5(2010), 4 vom: 19. Nov., Seite 657-676 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:5 ; year:2010 ; number:4 ; day:19 ; month:11 ; pages:657-676 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
SPR019846967 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | SPR019846967 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20220111071945.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 201006s2010 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)SPR019846967 | ||
| 035 | |a (SPR)s11459-010-0118-9-e | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 330 |q ASE |
| 100 | 1 | |a Meng, Jie |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2010 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract This article aims to offer a reply to Steedman’s critique of Marx’s labor theory of value. Although this critique having been there for about three decades, the anti-critiques from Marxists are up to date flawed with fatal limitation, losing sight of an important dimension of labor theory of value, i.e., without taking it as a theoretical tool of understanding the uncertainty rooted in capitalist mode of production. The first part of this article reviews the controversy initiated by Steedman. Part 2 discusses Marx’s dual theory of market value and Rubin’s interpretation. Our view is that, if Rubin’s interpretation is accepted, a refutation of Steedman’s critique towards Marx will be impossible. Part 3 of this article explores the possible reconstruction of market value in the perspective of the dynamics in the pivoting of market value. We concludes that, the relationship between the standard condition of production and value is not, as argued by Steedman, of deterministic and one-directional character. For Marx, labor theory of value is applied to analyze the uncertain relation between the means and the end, the condition and the result of capitalist production. Meanwhile, another reply is attempted towards the negative comment on labor theory of value made by contemporary evolutionary economist such as Hodgson. In our view, Marx’s labor theory of value is not irrelevant as claimed by Hodgson to the main topics of evolutionary economics such as variety and “natural selection.” It is through labor theory of value that Marx explains the co-evolution of technology and economy. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a uncertainty |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a labor theory of value |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Rubin |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Steedman |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Frontiers of economics in China |d Beijing : Higher Education Pr., 2006 |g 5(2010), 4 vom: 19. Nov., Seite 657-676 |w (DE-627)510464262 |w (DE-600)2230600-6 |x 1673-3568 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:5 |g year:2010 |g number:4 |g day:19 |g month:11 |g pages:657-676 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_26 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_1200 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2018 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2129 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2153 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4046 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 5 |j 2010 |e 4 |b 19 |c 11 |h 657-676 | ||
| author_variant |
j m jm |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:16733568:2010----::aoterovlentenetitic |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2010 |
| publishDate |
2010 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 doi (DE-627)SPR019846967 (SPR)s11459-010-0118-9-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 330 ASE Meng, Jie verfasserin aut Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract This article aims to offer a reply to Steedman’s critique of Marx’s labor theory of value. Although this critique having been there for about three decades, the anti-critiques from Marxists are up to date flawed with fatal limitation, losing sight of an important dimension of labor theory of value, i.e., without taking it as a theoretical tool of understanding the uncertainty rooted in capitalist mode of production. The first part of this article reviews the controversy initiated by Steedman. Part 2 discusses Marx’s dual theory of market value and Rubin’s interpretation. Our view is that, if Rubin’s interpretation is accepted, a refutation of Steedman’s critique towards Marx will be impossible. Part 3 of this article explores the possible reconstruction of market value in the perspective of the dynamics in the pivoting of market value. We concludes that, the relationship between the standard condition of production and value is not, as argued by Steedman, of deterministic and one-directional character. For Marx, labor theory of value is applied to analyze the uncertain relation between the means and the end, the condition and the result of capitalist production. Meanwhile, another reply is attempted towards the negative comment on labor theory of value made by contemporary evolutionary economist such as Hodgson. In our view, Marx’s labor theory of value is not irrelevant as claimed by Hodgson to the main topics of evolutionary economics such as variety and “natural selection.” It is through labor theory of value that Marx explains the co-evolution of technology and economy. uncertainty (dpeaa)DE-He213 labor theory of value (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rubin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Steedman (dpeaa)DE-He213 Enthalten in Frontiers of economics in China Beijing : Higher Education Pr., 2006 5(2010), 4 vom: 19. Nov., Seite 657-676 (DE-627)510464262 (DE-600)2230600-6 1673-3568 nnns volume:5 year:2010 number:4 day:19 month:11 pages:657-676 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_26 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_1200 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4126 AR 5 2010 4 19 11 657-676 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 doi (DE-627)SPR019846967 (SPR)s11459-010-0118-9-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 330 ASE Meng, Jie verfasserin aut Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract This article aims to offer a reply to Steedman’s critique of Marx’s labor theory of value. Although this critique having been there for about three decades, the anti-critiques from Marxists are up to date flawed with fatal limitation, losing sight of an important dimension of labor theory of value, i.e., without taking it as a theoretical tool of understanding the uncertainty rooted in capitalist mode of production. The first part of this article reviews the controversy initiated by Steedman. Part 2 discusses Marx’s dual theory of market value and Rubin’s interpretation. Our view is that, if Rubin’s interpretation is accepted, a refutation of Steedman’s critique towards Marx will be impossible. Part 3 of this article explores the possible reconstruction of market value in the perspective of the dynamics in the pivoting of market value. We concludes that, the relationship between the standard condition of production and value is not, as argued by Steedman, of deterministic and one-directional character. For Marx, labor theory of value is applied to analyze the uncertain relation between the means and the end, the condition and the result of capitalist production. Meanwhile, another reply is attempted towards the negative comment on labor theory of value made by contemporary evolutionary economist such as Hodgson. In our view, Marx’s labor theory of value is not irrelevant as claimed by Hodgson to the main topics of evolutionary economics such as variety and “natural selection.” It is through labor theory of value that Marx explains the co-evolution of technology and economy. uncertainty (dpeaa)DE-He213 labor theory of value (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rubin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Steedman (dpeaa)DE-He213 Enthalten in Frontiers of economics in China Beijing : Higher Education Pr., 2006 5(2010), 4 vom: 19. Nov., Seite 657-676 (DE-627)510464262 (DE-600)2230600-6 1673-3568 nnns volume:5 year:2010 number:4 day:19 month:11 pages:657-676 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_26 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_1200 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4126 AR 5 2010 4 19 11 657-676 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 doi (DE-627)SPR019846967 (SPR)s11459-010-0118-9-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 330 ASE Meng, Jie verfasserin aut Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract This article aims to offer a reply to Steedman’s critique of Marx’s labor theory of value. Although this critique having been there for about three decades, the anti-critiques from Marxists are up to date flawed with fatal limitation, losing sight of an important dimension of labor theory of value, i.e., without taking it as a theoretical tool of understanding the uncertainty rooted in capitalist mode of production. The first part of this article reviews the controversy initiated by Steedman. Part 2 discusses Marx’s dual theory of market value and Rubin’s interpretation. Our view is that, if Rubin’s interpretation is accepted, a refutation of Steedman’s critique towards Marx will be impossible. Part 3 of this article explores the possible reconstruction of market value in the perspective of the dynamics in the pivoting of market value. We concludes that, the relationship between the standard condition of production and value is not, as argued by Steedman, of deterministic and one-directional character. For Marx, labor theory of value is applied to analyze the uncertain relation between the means and the end, the condition and the result of capitalist production. Meanwhile, another reply is attempted towards the negative comment on labor theory of value made by contemporary evolutionary economist such as Hodgson. In our view, Marx’s labor theory of value is not irrelevant as claimed by Hodgson to the main topics of evolutionary economics such as variety and “natural selection.” It is through labor theory of value that Marx explains the co-evolution of technology and economy. uncertainty (dpeaa)DE-He213 labor theory of value (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rubin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Steedman (dpeaa)DE-He213 Enthalten in Frontiers of economics in China Beijing : Higher Education Pr., 2006 5(2010), 4 vom: 19. Nov., Seite 657-676 (DE-627)510464262 (DE-600)2230600-6 1673-3568 nnns volume:5 year:2010 number:4 day:19 month:11 pages:657-676 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_26 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_1200 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4126 AR 5 2010 4 19 11 657-676 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 doi (DE-627)SPR019846967 (SPR)s11459-010-0118-9-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 330 ASE Meng, Jie verfasserin aut Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract This article aims to offer a reply to Steedman’s critique of Marx’s labor theory of value. Although this critique having been there for about three decades, the anti-critiques from Marxists are up to date flawed with fatal limitation, losing sight of an important dimension of labor theory of value, i.e., without taking it as a theoretical tool of understanding the uncertainty rooted in capitalist mode of production. The first part of this article reviews the controversy initiated by Steedman. Part 2 discusses Marx’s dual theory of market value and Rubin’s interpretation. Our view is that, if Rubin’s interpretation is accepted, a refutation of Steedman’s critique towards Marx will be impossible. Part 3 of this article explores the possible reconstruction of market value in the perspective of the dynamics in the pivoting of market value. We concludes that, the relationship between the standard condition of production and value is not, as argued by Steedman, of deterministic and one-directional character. For Marx, labor theory of value is applied to analyze the uncertain relation between the means and the end, the condition and the result of capitalist production. Meanwhile, another reply is attempted towards the negative comment on labor theory of value made by contemporary evolutionary economist such as Hodgson. In our view, Marx’s labor theory of value is not irrelevant as claimed by Hodgson to the main topics of evolutionary economics such as variety and “natural selection.” It is through labor theory of value that Marx explains the co-evolution of technology and economy. uncertainty (dpeaa)DE-He213 labor theory of value (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rubin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Steedman (dpeaa)DE-He213 Enthalten in Frontiers of economics in China Beijing : Higher Education Pr., 2006 5(2010), 4 vom: 19. Nov., Seite 657-676 (DE-627)510464262 (DE-600)2230600-6 1673-3568 nnns volume:5 year:2010 number:4 day:19 month:11 pages:657-676 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_26 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_1200 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4126 AR 5 2010 4 19 11 657-676 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 doi (DE-627)SPR019846967 (SPR)s11459-010-0118-9-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 330 ASE Meng, Jie verfasserin aut Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract This article aims to offer a reply to Steedman’s critique of Marx’s labor theory of value. Although this critique having been there for about three decades, the anti-critiques from Marxists are up to date flawed with fatal limitation, losing sight of an important dimension of labor theory of value, i.e., without taking it as a theoretical tool of understanding the uncertainty rooted in capitalist mode of production. The first part of this article reviews the controversy initiated by Steedman. Part 2 discusses Marx’s dual theory of market value and Rubin’s interpretation. Our view is that, if Rubin’s interpretation is accepted, a refutation of Steedman’s critique towards Marx will be impossible. Part 3 of this article explores the possible reconstruction of market value in the perspective of the dynamics in the pivoting of market value. We concludes that, the relationship between the standard condition of production and value is not, as argued by Steedman, of deterministic and one-directional character. For Marx, labor theory of value is applied to analyze the uncertain relation between the means and the end, the condition and the result of capitalist production. Meanwhile, another reply is attempted towards the negative comment on labor theory of value made by contemporary evolutionary economist such as Hodgson. In our view, Marx’s labor theory of value is not irrelevant as claimed by Hodgson to the main topics of evolutionary economics such as variety and “natural selection.” It is through labor theory of value that Marx explains the co-evolution of technology and economy. uncertainty (dpeaa)DE-He213 labor theory of value (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rubin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Steedman (dpeaa)DE-He213 Enthalten in Frontiers of economics in China Beijing : Higher Education Pr., 2006 5(2010), 4 vom: 19. Nov., Seite 657-676 (DE-627)510464262 (DE-600)2230600-6 1673-3568 nnns volume:5 year:2010 number:4 day:19 month:11 pages:657-676 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_26 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_1200 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4126 AR 5 2010 4 19 11 657-676 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Frontiers of economics in China 5(2010), 4 vom: 19. Nov., Seite 657-676 volume:5 year:2010 number:4 day:19 month:11 pages:657-676 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Frontiers of economics in China 5(2010), 4 vom: 19. Nov., Seite 657-676 volume:5 year:2010 number:4 day:19 month:11 pages:657-676 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
uncertainty labor theory of value Rubin Steedman |
| dewey-raw |
330 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Frontiers of economics in China |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Meng, Jie @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2010-11-19T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
510464262 |
| dewey-sort |
3330 |
| id |
SPR019846967 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR019846967</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20220111071945.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201006s2010 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR019846967</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s11459-010-0118-9-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">330</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Meng, Jie</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract This article aims to offer a reply to Steedman’s critique of Marx’s labor theory of value. Although this critique having been there for about three decades, the anti-critiques from Marxists are up to date flawed with fatal limitation, losing sight of an important dimension of labor theory of value, i.e., without taking it as a theoretical tool of understanding the uncertainty rooted in capitalist mode of production. The first part of this article reviews the controversy initiated by Steedman. Part 2 discusses Marx’s dual theory of market value and Rubin’s interpretation. Our view is that, if Rubin’s interpretation is accepted, a refutation of Steedman’s critique towards Marx will be impossible. Part 3 of this article explores the possible reconstruction of market value in the perspective of the dynamics in the pivoting of market value. We concludes that, the relationship between the standard condition of production and value is not, as argued by Steedman, of deterministic and one-directional character. For Marx, labor theory of value is applied to analyze the uncertain relation between the means and the end, the condition and the result of capitalist production. Meanwhile, another reply is attempted towards the negative comment on labor theory of value made by contemporary evolutionary economist such as Hodgson. In our view, Marx’s labor theory of value is not irrelevant as claimed by Hodgson to the main topics of evolutionary economics such as variety and “natural selection.” It is through labor theory of value that Marx explains the co-evolution of technology and economy.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">uncertainty</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">labor theory of value</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Rubin</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Steedman</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Frontiers of economics in China</subfield><subfield code="d">Beijing : Higher Education Pr., 2006</subfield><subfield code="g">5(2010), 4 vom: 19. Nov., Seite 657-676</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)510464262</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2230600-6</subfield><subfield code="x">1673-3568</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:5</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2010</subfield><subfield code="g">number:4</subfield><subfield code="g">day:19</subfield><subfield code="g">month:11</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:657-676</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_26</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_1200</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">5</subfield><subfield code="j">2010</subfield><subfield code="e">4</subfield><subfield code="b">19</subfield><subfield code="c">11</subfield><subfield code="h">657-676</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Meng, Jie |
| spellingShingle |
Meng, Jie ddc 330 misc uncertainty misc labor theory of value misc Rubin misc Steedman Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy |
| authorStr |
Meng, Jie |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)510464262 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
330 - Economics |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
springer |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1673-3568 |
| topic_title |
330 ASE Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy uncertainty (dpeaa)DE-He213 labor theory of value (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rubin (dpeaa)DE-He213 Steedman (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
| topic |
ddc 330 misc uncertainty misc labor theory of value misc Rubin misc Steedman |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 330 misc uncertainty misc labor theory of value misc Rubin misc Steedman |
| topic_browse |
ddc 330 misc uncertainty misc labor theory of value misc Rubin misc Steedman |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Frontiers of economics in China |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
510464262 |
| dewey-tens |
330 - Economics |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Frontiers of economics in China |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)510464262 (DE-600)2230600-6 |
| title |
Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR019846967 (SPR)s11459-010-0118-9-e |
| title_full |
Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy |
| author_sort |
Meng, Jie |
| journal |
Frontiers of economics in China |
| journalStr |
Frontiers of economics in China |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
300 - Social sciences |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2010 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
657 |
| author_browse |
Meng, Jie |
| container_volume |
5 |
| class |
330 ASE |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Meng, Jie |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 |
| dewey-full |
330 |
| title_sort |
labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy |
| title_auth |
Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy |
| abstract |
Abstract This article aims to offer a reply to Steedman’s critique of Marx’s labor theory of value. Although this critique having been there for about three decades, the anti-critiques from Marxists are up to date flawed with fatal limitation, losing sight of an important dimension of labor theory of value, i.e., without taking it as a theoretical tool of understanding the uncertainty rooted in capitalist mode of production. The first part of this article reviews the controversy initiated by Steedman. Part 2 discusses Marx’s dual theory of market value and Rubin’s interpretation. Our view is that, if Rubin’s interpretation is accepted, a refutation of Steedman’s critique towards Marx will be impossible. Part 3 of this article explores the possible reconstruction of market value in the perspective of the dynamics in the pivoting of market value. We concludes that, the relationship between the standard condition of production and value is not, as argued by Steedman, of deterministic and one-directional character. For Marx, labor theory of value is applied to analyze the uncertain relation between the means and the end, the condition and the result of capitalist production. Meanwhile, another reply is attempted towards the negative comment on labor theory of value made by contemporary evolutionary economist such as Hodgson. In our view, Marx’s labor theory of value is not irrelevant as claimed by Hodgson to the main topics of evolutionary economics such as variety and “natural selection.” It is through labor theory of value that Marx explains the co-evolution of technology and economy. |
| abstractGer |
Abstract This article aims to offer a reply to Steedman’s critique of Marx’s labor theory of value. Although this critique having been there for about three decades, the anti-critiques from Marxists are up to date flawed with fatal limitation, losing sight of an important dimension of labor theory of value, i.e., without taking it as a theoretical tool of understanding the uncertainty rooted in capitalist mode of production. The first part of this article reviews the controversy initiated by Steedman. Part 2 discusses Marx’s dual theory of market value and Rubin’s interpretation. Our view is that, if Rubin’s interpretation is accepted, a refutation of Steedman’s critique towards Marx will be impossible. Part 3 of this article explores the possible reconstruction of market value in the perspective of the dynamics in the pivoting of market value. We concludes that, the relationship between the standard condition of production and value is not, as argued by Steedman, of deterministic and one-directional character. For Marx, labor theory of value is applied to analyze the uncertain relation between the means and the end, the condition and the result of capitalist production. Meanwhile, another reply is attempted towards the negative comment on labor theory of value made by contemporary evolutionary economist such as Hodgson. In our view, Marx’s labor theory of value is not irrelevant as claimed by Hodgson to the main topics of evolutionary economics such as variety and “natural selection.” It is through labor theory of value that Marx explains the co-evolution of technology and economy. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Abstract This article aims to offer a reply to Steedman’s critique of Marx’s labor theory of value. Although this critique having been there for about three decades, the anti-critiques from Marxists are up to date flawed with fatal limitation, losing sight of an important dimension of labor theory of value, i.e., without taking it as a theoretical tool of understanding the uncertainty rooted in capitalist mode of production. The first part of this article reviews the controversy initiated by Steedman. Part 2 discusses Marx’s dual theory of market value and Rubin’s interpretation. Our view is that, if Rubin’s interpretation is accepted, a refutation of Steedman’s critique towards Marx will be impossible. Part 3 of this article explores the possible reconstruction of market value in the perspective of the dynamics in the pivoting of market value. We concludes that, the relationship between the standard condition of production and value is not, as argued by Steedman, of deterministic and one-directional character. For Marx, labor theory of value is applied to analyze the uncertain relation between the means and the end, the condition and the result of capitalist production. Meanwhile, another reply is attempted towards the negative comment on labor theory of value made by contemporary evolutionary economist such as Hodgson. In our view, Marx’s labor theory of value is not irrelevant as claimed by Hodgson to the main topics of evolutionary economics such as variety and “natural selection.” It is through labor theory of value that Marx explains the co-evolution of technology and economy. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_26 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_1200 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4126 |
| container_issue |
4 |
| title_short |
Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy |
| url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| ppnlink |
510464262 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9 |
| up_date |
2024-07-04T03:06:47.185Z |
| _version_ |
1803616158670127104 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR019846967</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20220111071945.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201006s2010 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR019846967</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s11459-010-0118-9-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">330</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Meng, Jie</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Labor theory of value and the uncertainty in capitalist economy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract This article aims to offer a reply to Steedman’s critique of Marx’s labor theory of value. Although this critique having been there for about three decades, the anti-critiques from Marxists are up to date flawed with fatal limitation, losing sight of an important dimension of labor theory of value, i.e., without taking it as a theoretical tool of understanding the uncertainty rooted in capitalist mode of production. The first part of this article reviews the controversy initiated by Steedman. Part 2 discusses Marx’s dual theory of market value and Rubin’s interpretation. Our view is that, if Rubin’s interpretation is accepted, a refutation of Steedman’s critique towards Marx will be impossible. Part 3 of this article explores the possible reconstruction of market value in the perspective of the dynamics in the pivoting of market value. We concludes that, the relationship between the standard condition of production and value is not, as argued by Steedman, of deterministic and one-directional character. For Marx, labor theory of value is applied to analyze the uncertain relation between the means and the end, the condition and the result of capitalist production. Meanwhile, another reply is attempted towards the negative comment on labor theory of value made by contemporary evolutionary economist such as Hodgson. In our view, Marx’s labor theory of value is not irrelevant as claimed by Hodgson to the main topics of evolutionary economics such as variety and “natural selection.” It is through labor theory of value that Marx explains the co-evolution of technology and economy.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">uncertainty</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">labor theory of value</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Rubin</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Steedman</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Frontiers of economics in China</subfield><subfield code="d">Beijing : Higher Education Pr., 2006</subfield><subfield code="g">5(2010), 4 vom: 19. Nov., Seite 657-676</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)510464262</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2230600-6</subfield><subfield code="x">1673-3568</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:5</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2010</subfield><subfield code="g">number:4</subfield><subfield code="g">day:19</subfield><subfield code="g">month:11</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:657-676</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11459-010-0118-9</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_26</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_1200</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">5</subfield><subfield code="j">2010</subfield><subfield code="e">4</subfield><subfield code="b">19</subfield><subfield code="c">11</subfield><subfield code="h">657-676</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.397252 |