|
|
|
| Revealing the Twofold Character of Labour, Analyzing the Forms of Value, and Critiquing Fetishism: Logical Progression and Dialectics of the “Commodities” Chapter in Capital |
| Cui Chenxi, Liu Zhaofeng |
| School of Marxism, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract In order to respond to the discussions concerning the relationship between abstract labour and the value form, the value substance and the value form, the value form and the nature of fetishism, exchange value and the value form, as well as the relationship between Marx’s analysis of the value form and his theory of the critique of fetishism, and to present the rich connotations of Marx’s dialectics, it is necessary to analyze the logical structure of the “Commodities” chapter in Capital.By inquiring into the sameness within the difference of various commodities, Marx reveals the twofold character of the labour embodied in commodities. In Capital, Marx takes the commodity as the starting point for his exposition and analysis. Labour as concrete labour is difference (qualitative distinctions), while labour as abstract labour is sameness (quantitative variations without qualitative distinctions); the difference in use value arises from the difference in concrete labour, whereas the sameness in exchange value arises from the sameness of abstract labour embodied therein. The response to the inquiry into the sameness within difference discusses value substance only in the sense of abstract labour (general), without yet addressing how labour is manifested as value, and therefore still cannot explain the specificity of the commodity.Further analysis of the value form addresses how labour, as abstract labour, is manifested as value. Marx proposes the roundabout way of value manifestation, which is the key to grasping the theory of the value form. The value of one commodity is expressed by the use value of another. This unique, materialized, and indirect form of abstract human labour’s expression is the value form. This does not yet explain what kind of labour it is that creates value, and why it does so, nor does it distinguish between commodities and non-commodities.Finally, through the critique of fetishism, the question of what kind of labour it is that creates value, and why it does so is addressed, and on this basis, the historicity of labour manifesting as value is revealed, along with a critique of the fetishistic conception held by bourgeois economists who eternalize value. Once commodities appear as commodities, or once labour products possess the value form, they acquire a mysterious character. Only by placing the value form within a specific social formation and examining it from a historically transient perspective can a clear critical stance on fetishism be achieved.The logical progression of Marx’s analysis of the commodity contains a rich and profound dialectic: in terms of the relationship between phenomenon and essence, the dialectic in the analysis of the commodity in Capital examines the value form (phenomenon) of abstract labour as the substance (essence). In terms of the relationship between content and form, it explores the combination and separation of the material content of production and its specific social form. In terms of revealing the historicity and temporality of the commodity, the dialectic in the analysis of the commodity in Capital is a historical dialectic, embodying a historical consciousness.The dialectic in Marx’s analysis of the commodity is a constructive dialectic, rich in historical content and characterized by concreteness. Only by employing a dialectical mode of thinking and carefully analyzing the “inverted” world of commodities can we truly grasp the brilliance of Marx’s dialectic.
|
|
Received: 13 September 2024
|
|
|
|
1 苏］卢森贝：《〈资本论〉注释》第一卷，赵木斋、朱培兴译，北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店，1963年。
2 德］马克思：《资本论》第一卷，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯文集》第5卷，北京：人民出版社，2009年。
3 德］马克思：《资本论》第一卷（根据作者修订的法文版翻译），见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯全集》第43卷，北京：人民出版社，2016年。
4 郑志国：《效用价值论的四个矛盾》，《经济学家》2003年第3期，第39-43页。
5 赵磊：《抽象劳动和一般劳动的异同》，《财经科学》1986年第4期，第70-72页。
6 德］马克思：《资本论》第一卷（根据德文第一版翻译），见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯全集》第42卷，北京：人民出版社，2016年。
7 日］佐藤金三郎、冈崎荣松、降旗节雄等编：《〈资本论〉百题论争》（一），刘焱、赵洪、陈家英译，济南：山东人民出版社，1993年。
8 尤歆惟：《〈资本论〉价值形式论的两个问题意识——从久留间鲛造对价值形式的解读出发》，《马克思主义哲学研究》2023年第1期，第169-178页。
9 德］马克思：《资本论》第二卷，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯文集》第6卷，北京：人民出版社，2009年。
10 德］马克思：《资本论》第三卷，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯文集》第7卷，北京：人民出版社，2009年。
11 刘召峰：《商品世界的物化现实、社会认知与行为逻辑——对马克思与若干后世研究者的拜物教批判的比较分析》，《浙江大学学报（人文社会科学版）》2023年第10期，第5-14页。
12 刘召峰：《Fetischismus及相关词在马克思著作中的话语变迁》，《现代哲学》2017年第1期，第9-16页。
13 德］马克思、恩格斯：《共产党宣言》，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯文集》第2卷，北京：人民出版社，2009年，第3-67页。
14 德］马克思：《〈黑格尔法哲学批判〉（导言）》见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译：《马克思恩格斯全集》第3卷，北京：人民出版社，2002年，第199-214页。
15 白刚：《〈资本论〉：“应用”还是“构建”了辩证法？》，《哲学研究》2022年第4期，第24-35，128页。
16 吴旭平：《〈资本论〉中的辩证法结构与特征——基于李嘉图学派政治经济学的形而上学批判》，《哲学研究》2024年第5期，第35-45页。 |
|
|
|
2026, Vol. 56 
