dor_id: 4115148

506.#.#.a: Público

590.#.#.d: Cada artículo es evaluado mediante una revisión ciega única

510.0.#.a: Arts and Humanities Citation Index, Revistes Cientifiques de Ciencies Socials Humanitais (CARHUS Plus); Latinoamericanas en Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades (CLASE); Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ); European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH PLUS); Sistema Regional de Información en Línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y Portugal (Latindex); SCOPUS, Journal Storage (JSTOR); The Philosopher’s Index, Ulrich’s Periodical Directory

561.#.#.u: https://www.filosoficas.unam.mx/

650.#.4.x: Artes y Humanidades

336.#.#.b: article

336.#.#.3: Artículo de Investigación

336.#.#.a: Artículo

351.#.#.6: https://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica

351.#.#.b: Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía

351.#.#.a: Artículos

harvesting_group: RevistasUNAM

270.1.#.p: Revistas UNAM. Dirección General de Publicaciones y Fomento Editorial, UNAM en revistas@unam.mx

590.#.#.c: Open Journal Systems (OJS)

270.#.#.d: MX

270.1.#.d: México

590.#.#.b: Concentrador

883.#.#.u: https://revistas.unam.mx/catalogo/

883.#.#.a: Revistas UNAM

590.#.#.a: Coordinación de Difusión Cultural

883.#.#.1: https://www.publicaciones.unam.mx/

883.#.#.q: Dirección General de Publicaciones y Fomento Editorial

850.#.#.a: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

856.4.0.u: https://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica/article/view/561/540

100.1.#.a: Lorenzano, César

524.#.#.a: Lorenzano, César (1985). El materialismo de Marx. Reflexiones metodológicas acerca de la ontología marxista en El Capital. Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía; Vol. 17 Núm. 49, 1985; 21-47. Recuperado de https://repositorio.unam.mx/contenidos/4115148

245.1.0.a: El materialismo de Marx. Reflexiones metodológicas acerca de la ontología marxista en El Capital

502.#.#.c: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

561.1.#.a: Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas, UNAM

264.#.0.c: 1985

264.#.1.c: 2018-12-07

506.1.#.a: La titularidad de los derechos patrimoniales de esta obra pertenece a las instituciones editoras. Su uso se rige por una licencia Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 Internacional, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode.es, para un uso diferente consultar al responsable jurídico del repositorio por medio del correo electrónico alberto@filosoficas.unam.mx

884.#.#.k: https://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica/article/view/561

001.#.#.#: 034.oai:ojs2.132.248.184.97:article/561

041.#.7.h: spa

520.3.#.a: Marx has always been considered a pure materialist; there has never been any doubt about this point. However, in the first chapter of Das Kapital, ‘‘work’’ is a strange substance, different from the material nature of things, hidden in goods, called by Marx “ghost matter, gelatinious matter, almost no matter at all”. So, in goods there are, together, two kinds of substances: the matter of the objects, and the ghost matter, put there by the work that became itself a matter, and that remains even when you take off all the matter with which goods are made. The ontological monism of Marx -all things are matter-, stands postulating a very suspicious gelatinious matter. Why does Marx behave in this way? Mainly, to lay the foundations of the theoretical concept of “value”, essential to his economic theory. He makes a substantialistic foundation of “value”, thinking, with all the scientists of his time, that theoretical constructs have a substantial base. Even the image “gelatinous” is taken from physics: we might remember that the ether was equally gelatinous. This problem is solved by Diederich and Fulda´s formal reconstruction of value law, in which is no needed to say anything about the kind of substance value is. Let us see how they do it: (Value Law) z ★ v ★ p z is the time of work that is needed to make one product v is the value p is the price of that product ★ is a function that determines the value once the time is known, and then determines the price. The Value Law says that if one knows the time needed to make one product, there is a function that determines the value, and once that the value is determined, there is a function that determines the price. The substantial quality of value is eliminated. But, in this reconstruction, value itself is eliminable because it is possible to put a composit function ★★, and take off the formula the “value”, in this way: VL) z ★★ p And this is possible because in Diederich and Fulda´s reconstruction, even when “value” appears in the formula as a result of a function between “time” and “price”, there is no numerical value of “value”; there is only scales of “time” and “price”. If it is so, Marx´s theory is changed so deeply in this reconstruction, that Marx would not have accepted it. “Value” is a construct that can not be dismissed from the theory without eliminating the theory itself. Let us see first how Marx states the problem. Surprinsingly, he does not try to define “value”, but “equal value”, as it appears when two goods are exchanged in the market. The problem he tries to explain, is how is it possible that: 1 quarter of wheat = 1 quintal of iron Marx answers, followin Aristotle, that they must have something in common: a common substance, a substance created by human work, the value. Mach does the same when he defines first “equal mass” in his reconstruction of classic mechanics, and then defines “mass”, showing that the way Marx goes is legitimate, and that in this direction no common substance is needed. Some years later, Frege and Russell, trying to define “number”, stated that sets have “equal number” when it is possible to put their elements in biunivocal correspondance. “Number” is the set of all sets that have "equal number". In the same way, the symbol (=) (equal) that is put between two products when they are exchanged, needs no common substance. The only thing we need is to state a relationship of biunivocal correspondence between the elements of these two sets. From that point on, we can stand that there is a function in real numbers that goes from the set of time to the set of products, a different function for each kind of product and that this function determines the quantity of a certain product that is related to t hours of work; these functions change, as Marx said, with the development of the productive forces. The time socially necesary to produce an object is the measure of its value. In a formal way: M = fM (tM) N = fN (tN) M has the same value as N if and only if tM = tN. And the claim is that “value” is the set of all sets that have the same value, in a form that resembles the Frege-Russell solution to “number”. The set definition of “value” is possible, instead of defining it by means of an obscure metaphysical substance. Marx´s methodologic problem is solved.

773.1.#.t: Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía; Vol. 17 Núm. 49 (1985); 21-47

773.1.#.o: https://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica

022.#.#.a: ISSN electrónico: 1870-4905; ISSN impreso: 0011-1503

310.#.#.a: Cuatrimestral

300.#.#.a: Páginas: 21-47

264.#.1.b: Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas, UNAM

doi: https://doi.org/10.22201/iifs.18704905e.1985.561

handle: 01db1269a2f07f2e

harvesting_date: 2023-08-23 17:00:00.0

856.#.0.q: application/pdf

file_creation_date: 2008-05-28 01:18:29.0

file_modification_date: 2010-11-02 06:56:28.0

file_creator: Valued Customer

file_name: 3f360fe33420a84679911f0d3297cec533205932c1218434d74254863d80f253.pdf

file_pages_number: 27

file_format_version: application/pdf; version=1.6

file_size: 1119144

245.1.0.b: Marx´s Materialism

last_modified: 2023-08-23 17:00:00

license_url: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode.es

license_type: by-nc-nd

No entro en nada

No entro en nada 2

Artículo

El materialismo de Marx. Reflexiones metodológicas acerca de la ontología marxista en El Capital

Lorenzano, César

Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas, UNAM, publicado en Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía, y cosechado de Revistas UNAM

Licencia de uso

Procedencia del contenido

Cita

Lorenzano, César (1985). El materialismo de Marx. Reflexiones metodológicas acerca de la ontología marxista en El Capital. Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía; Vol. 17 Núm. 49, 1985; 21-47. Recuperado de https://repositorio.unam.mx/contenidos/4115148

Descripción del recurso

Autor(es)
Lorenzano, César
Tipo
Artículo de Investigación
Área del conocimiento
Artes y Humanidades
Título
El materialismo de Marx. Reflexiones metodológicas acerca de la ontología marxista en El Capital
Fecha
2018-12-07
Resumen
Marx has always been considered a pure materialist; there has never been any doubt about this point. However, in the first chapter of Das Kapital, ‘‘work’’ is a strange substance, different from the material nature of things, hidden in goods, called by Marx “ghost matter, gelatinious matter, almost no matter at all”. So, in goods there are, together, two kinds of substances: the matter of the objects, and the ghost matter, put there by the work that became itself a matter, and that remains even when you take off all the matter with which goods are made. The ontological monism of Marx -all things are matter-, stands postulating a very suspicious gelatinious matter. Why does Marx behave in this way? Mainly, to lay the foundations of the theoretical concept of “value”, essential to his economic theory. He makes a substantialistic foundation of “value”, thinking, with all the scientists of his time, that theoretical constructs have a substantial base. Even the image “gelatinous” is taken from physics: we might remember that the ether was equally gelatinous. This problem is solved by Diederich and Fulda´s formal reconstruction of value law, in which is no needed to say anything about the kind of substance value is. Let us see how they do it: (Value Law) z ★ v ★ p z is the time of work that is needed to make one product v is the value p is the price of that product ★ is a function that determines the value once the time is known, and then determines the price. The Value Law says that if one knows the time needed to make one product, there is a function that determines the value, and once that the value is determined, there is a function that determines the price. The substantial quality of value is eliminated. But, in this reconstruction, value itself is eliminable because it is possible to put a composit function ★★, and take off the formula the “value”, in this way: VL) z ★★ p And this is possible because in Diederich and Fulda´s reconstruction, even when “value” appears in the formula as a result of a function between “time” and “price”, there is no numerical value of “value”; there is only scales of “time” and “price”. If it is so, Marx´s theory is changed so deeply in this reconstruction, that Marx would not have accepted it. “Value” is a construct that can not be dismissed from the theory without eliminating the theory itself. Let us see first how Marx states the problem. Surprinsingly, he does not try to define “value”, but “equal value”, as it appears when two goods are exchanged in the market. The problem he tries to explain, is how is it possible that: 1 quarter of wheat = 1 quintal of iron Marx answers, followin Aristotle, that they must have something in common: a common substance, a substance created by human work, the value. Mach does the same when he defines first “equal mass” in his reconstruction of classic mechanics, and then defines “mass”, showing that the way Marx goes is legitimate, and that in this direction no common substance is needed. Some years later, Frege and Russell, trying to define “number”, stated that sets have “equal number” when it is possible to put their elements in biunivocal correspondance. “Number” is the set of all sets that have "equal number". In the same way, the symbol (=) (equal) that is put between two products when they are exchanged, needs no common substance. The only thing we need is to state a relationship of biunivocal correspondence between the elements of these two sets. From that point on, we can stand that there is a function in real numbers that goes from the set of time to the set of products, a different function for each kind of product and that this function determines the quantity of a certain product that is related to t hours of work; these functions change, as Marx said, with the development of the productive forces. The time socially necesary to produce an object is the measure of its value. In a formal way: M = fM (tM) N = fN (tN) M has the same value as N if and only if tM = tN. And the claim is that “value” is the set of all sets that have the same value, in a form that resembles the Frege-Russell solution to “number”. The set definition of “value” is possible, instead of defining it by means of an obscure metaphysical substance. Marx´s methodologic problem is solved.
Idioma
spa
ISSN
ISSN electrónico: 1870-4905; ISSN impreso: 0011-1503

Enlaces