Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

How Dialectics Runs Aground: The Antinomies of Arthur's Dialectic of Capital

How Dialectics Runs Aground: The Antinomies of Arthur's Dialectic of Capital Historical Materialism , volume 13:2 (167–188) © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2005 Also available online – www.brill.nl 1 This is particularly clear in Arthur 2003. 2 See Sekine 1997 for a strong presentation of the inner logic of capital as a dialectical logic. Rober t Albritton How Dialectics Runs Aground: The Antinomies of Arthur’s Dialectic of Capital Chris Arthur and I agree on the basic nature of dialectical reasoning, but, when it comes to thinking through the ways in which Marx’s theory of capital’s inner logic is and is not dialectical, I shall argue that his dialectics runs aground and finally breaks up on the rocky materiality of class struggle. 1 In developing my analysis, I shall start with a brief discussion of his take on dialectics, where there is much accord between us. It is my belief that his account gets stuck on two specific oppositions: the opposition between value and use-value and between capital and labour. It seems to me that a dialectical approach based on the work of Japanese political economists Uno and Sekine can deal with these oppositions in a much more effective way than does Arthur, a way that conceives of Marx’s theory http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Historical Materialism Brill

How Dialectics Runs Aground: The Antinomies of Arthur's Dialectic of Capital

Albritton, Robert
Historical Materialism , Volume 13 (2): 167 – Jan 1, 2005
Download PDF
22 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/how-dialectics-runs-aground-the-antinomies-of-arthur-s-dialectic-of-aoglEqB7XK

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2005 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
1465-4466
eISSN
1569-206X
DOI
10.1163/1569206054127165
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Historical Materialism , volume 13:2 (167–188) © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2005 Also available online – www.brill.nl 1 This is particularly clear in Arthur 2003. 2 See Sekine 1997 for a strong presentation of the inner logic of capital as a dialectical logic. Rober t Albritton How Dialectics Runs Aground: The Antinomies of Arthur’s Dialectic of Capital Chris Arthur and I agree on the basic nature of dialectical reasoning, but, when it comes to thinking through the ways in which Marx’s theory of capital’s inner logic is and is not dialectical, I shall argue that his dialectics runs aground and finally breaks up on the rocky materiality of class struggle. 1 In developing my analysis, I shall start with a brief discussion of his take on dialectics, where there is much accord between us. It is my belief that his account gets stuck on two specific oppositions: the opposition between value and use-value and between capital and labour. It seems to me that a dialectical approach based on the work of Japanese political economists Uno and Sekine can deal with these oppositions in a much more effective way than does Arthur, a way that conceives of Marx’s theory

Journal

Historical Materialism – Brill

Published: Jan 1, 2005

There are no references for this article.