摘要
本文的主要目的之一 ,是要回答斯蒂德曼对马克思劳动价值论的诘难。虽然这个诘难早在约30年前就提出来了 ,但马克思主义者迄今为止所做的反批判 ,仍然是片面的 ,这些反批判丢失了劳动价值论在分析功能上的一个重要维度 :没有把劳动价值论把握为理解资本主义再生产中的不确定性的理论工具。针对斯蒂德曼的批评 ,本文提出 :生产的标准技术条件与市场价值之间的关系 ,并不像他所理解的那样具有单向的、决定论的性质 ;劳动价值论在马克思的经济学中被用来揭示资本主义再生产的目的和手段、条件和结果之间的不确定的联系。针对霍奇逊的观点 ,本文提出 ,马克思的劳动价值论和多样性、“自然选择”等演化经济学所探讨的主题并不是无关的。马克思想要做的 ,是通过劳动价值论说明技术与经济的协同演化。
This article aims to offer a reply to Steedman's challenge to Marx's labor theory of value. Marxists have never been able to answer the challenge sufficiently since it was posted thirty years ago. Having failed to see the theory as a key to understanding the uncertainty in capitalist reproduction, they fatally crippled its analytical functions. The author outlined Marx's two theories of market value and Rubin's elaboration, and Ian Steedman's critique of the theory in the first and second sections, and explored the possible reconstruction of market value from the perspective of dynamics in the pivoting of market value. In the concluding section, the author attempted a formal reply to Steedman by stating that the relationship between the standard condition of production and market value is by no means deterministic and one directional. Marx applied labor theory of value in his economics to analyze the changing relations between the means and the end, and the cause and the result in capitalist reproduction. It is also pointed out that contrary to what evolutionary economists such as G. Hodgson believe, Marx's labor theory is relevant to the major topics in evolutionary economics such as diversity and “natural selection.' It is through labor theory of value that Marx explained the co evolution of technology and economy.
出处
《中国社会科学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2004年第3期4-16,共13页
Social Sciences in China
