| This question <189-4|57> overall <54|56> Che: <424|113>. |
| Question 145: Which two steps in the analysis of value did Aristotle make correctly, and which step did he not make? |
| [55] Che: In evaluating Aristotle's analysis of value his argument initially supports Marx's fundamental assertions on value and further supports Marx's logic in building this notion of value. |
| Aristotle arguments follows first that the value of a commodity finds some equal value in a given value of a another commodity, or that a certain amount of a commodity is equal to certain amount of money. This is important to Marx's building his argument of value commodities in the market. |
| The second point that Aristotle correctly makes and which further bolsters Marx's value argument is that there needs to be a qualitative element between commodities that in essence bring equality between them and allows for exchange to take place. |
| Where Aristotle's analysis of the value form fell short, where he failed to make a connection with Marx's concept is from what form equality among commodities is generated. He states that “There can be no exchange without equality.” This is where Marx is able to make this connection as to what common factor is in the equality of commodities. This is of course Marx's notion of homogeneous element of labor. Essentially Aristotle was remarkably close to Marxs' train of logic concerning value, but why he fell short in analysis is because he had no concept of the abstract labor, which is the essential component of value in Marx's argument. This is the key of Marx's theory and provides the basis for which all commodities are comprised of, and what generates equality between commodities and gives them value in the market. |
| This idea of human labor, not in its concrete form, but in its homogeneous abstract form is what eluded Aristotle, and was subsequently the primary tenet of Marx's theory on value. |
| Hans: Try to express things even more clearly and simply. |
|
|
|||||