John Brentlinger's Final exam Fall 1988 David Mertz John,

'Marxism'

I found a few of my papers, but not all of them.

I am giving to I could

you a fresh copy of all my papers along with those which find with comments.

Question

3:
Thesi

The fourth

s on Peuerbach

concerns

itsel f with, among other A proper dialectic contradictions in

matters, the nature of dialectic understanding. understanding addresses itself to the immanent

the real concrete,

rather than merely

the contradictions

between

this real concrete and its ideological manisfestations religion. Yes, the self as part of the system

-- such as is

of religion

alienated from the self in concrete practical activity -- but this process of alienation Feuerbach's because critique is not explained by Feuerbach, only noticed. of religious life is not truly dialectical, transcendental, and not yet

his understanding

is still

immanent.

Let me explain, briefly, this difference between transcendental immanent qui te critique. that Feuerbach of must pretend activity

and

to take a perspective in order to see the

outside

concrete

contradictions

between it and religious activity -- he must treat

concrete activity as one indivisible object, and religious activity as another. From his viewpoint it may be seen that these

-----~-------------------~--------------

activities

contradict

one another,

but since nothing may be seen can be given for critique.

internal to concrete activity, no real explanation why this contradiction He looks from within structure far enough exists.

Marx makes an immanent

concrete activity, activity.

and may see the internal Feuerbach was materialist activi ty was the

of this concrete to assume

that concrete

productive

basic reality, of which religious but he was not materialist

life was a distorted reflection;

enough to examine the internal structure activity. Marx actually analyzes the within it, is

of this concrete productive

structure of concrete activity, and finds contradictions not merely between it and ideological immanent insofar activity.

This critique

as it looks wi thin the basic material

reali ty,

rather than at this reality from the outside.

More

than

critique

is at stake

in the

fourth
II

thesis,

as Marx

states. have only

As he writes
interpreted

in the eleventh the world,

thesis,

the phi losophers the point,

in various

ways;

however, is to change it." productive activity may has be

After an immanent critique of concrete been made, we -must after change its structure activity and to

contradictions eliminate its

seen,

this

contradictions

as Marx

writes

in the

fourth

thesis, concrete activity must be "revolutionized

in practice."

Question

6: is its reproduction and expansion. Nothing

The goal of capital

else is important for it; it cares not what form it takes, whether that of money, that of fixed capital, that of variable capital, or

whatnot.

It cares not what human has, nor for what as it reproduces

consequences

this reproduction in as

and expansion just so long

commodities itself and

it is realized expands

as rapidly

possible.

But by what means may capital

so expand?

It does so by

taking the form of one particular

commodity,

that of labor-power.

In order to understand of capi tal, we must Value

how this commodity first understand

allows for the expansion notions of

the

value and

surplus-value.
defined as mean

is, in the tradition price. Out of

of Smith and Ricardo, this defini tion, and

long-term

observation value':

of the world is derived

the so-called

'labor theory of to

namely,

that the value of a commodity into the commodity. hypothesis

is proportional

the labor time incorporated

Marx accepts this, is not

though whether as an empirical altogether labor-power clear.

or as a definition

In particular,

then, the value of the commodity for its production -- i.e.

is the labor time necessary

the labour time necessary

for the reproduction

of the laborer.

The value of labor-power the value produced power given belongs. laborer

is, in capitalist

production,

less than

by the labor of the laborer to whom the laborexample, all the commodi ties consumed by a

For

in a day may have required However,

four hours of labor for

their production.

this same laborer may be able to labor That labor time which of the commodities Those four

eight hours in a day (or twelve or sixteen). exceeds which hours the time necessary laborer consumes

for the production produces

the

surplus-value.

(or eight or twelve)

in which the laborer works, but are not

necessary reproduce purchased,

for and

the

reproduction capital.

of As

labor long

as as

class

serve may

to be of

expand

labor-power

and the associate

labor utilized itself.

in the production

surplus value,

capital may expand

Perhaps should activity

the distinction be briefly

between

labor, labor time and labor-power Labor is concrete particular acti vi ty, forms. and

clarified.

which,

at that, always

assumes

Labor which of

time is already an abstraction is made not merely

from labor, but an abstraction but also in the real

in thought

process

capitalism. particular It

Labor time is labor considered

in abstraction

from the or days. -as is

form it takes, measured only in hours, minutes, time, under capi talism, only which creates

is labor

value

opposed

to labor which

produces

use-values.

Labor-power

the capacity

or potential

which a laborer has to labor, producing value. This

use-value -- and also to utilize labor time, producing capacity, under capitalism, universally becomes a commodity; in fact.

the only commodity

owned by laborers,

Question

7: and 'reality' are, as I have written, grasping not existing the reality of theories one or

'Appearance' opposites

-- some theories or descriptions others are only its appearances. or

the world, descriptions Certainly,

However, than

usually

better given

worse

another. those

the descriptions

by Marx

are better him.

than

given by the vulgar economists a greater piece of the reality

who preceeded of capitalism

Marx describes

than do the vulgar

economists, Inasmuch describes describe as

and he does so with greater this is so, we may say,

systematicity in some sense,

and beauty. that Marx

the reality

of capitalism,

while

the vulgar

economists

only its appearance.

One

particular

appearance

discussed wri tes, and

in

Capital

is

that

of at Its Here

fetishized first

commodi ties. a very

Marx

.. A commodi ty appears, easily understood.

sight,

trivial

thing,

analysis

shows that it is, in reality,

a very queer thing." and reality thing,

is a place where Marx distinguishes way. Again, "A commodity

appearance

is some simply to them

is therefore

a mysterious

because

in it the social character character

of men's labour appears

as an objective The forms of

stamped upon the product of that labour." which cornmocli ties enter into, i.e.

interaction

exchange, underneath revealed itself ratios,

disguises

the full form of social interaction It is not quite "value" which that

which lies is

the commodity.

true that nothing

by this property --i t is a reali ty

appears

in the commodity at certain

commodi ties

exchange

and this reality

is revealed

by the appearance

of value.

However,

the

appearance

of

value

in the

form

of

the

commodity

itself, while revealing whole arrangement

something,

hides still more. commodities

It hides the are given a Marx, by

of production in which

in which labor time

particular pointing see,

form, and

is utilized. process, exchange

to the realities the reality

of the production that allows commodities

allows us to in certain

still,

ratios, but simultaneously

to see a great deal more about

capitalism, something social creating hidden

which had been hidden in the other appearance. is still hidden of of by Marx's analysis

Slirely, the in is in

-- for example, a key as role less

determination the exchange

lise-value, which commodities

plays

-- but

insofar

in Marx than to them,

in the vulgar to reveal

economists, reality,

he may be said, they see

comparison appearance.

where

only