Re: unified field theory

[Zeynep Tufekcioglu <zeynept@xxxxxxxx>]

Famous last words:
>Please stay at least a little longer.

>(her? him?),
Her, as I'm proud to be in this male-dominated list!

>What is the unified field theory that links together the subjects
>you mention, from the psychology of personal relations to
>the increasing instability of patterns of global capital accumulation?

I don't know why I named that post that. I often object to direct analogies
>from physics. I was actually thinking about to something on another level of
abstraction from the "law of value". I think politically the communist left
is affected by a single underlying phenomenon that reflects on each aspect
of our debates and struggle. The phenomenon itself is complicated, but I
find myself often surprised by the similarities of the experience, problems,
obstacles, ilnesses of the left in so many different countries.

As for law of value, I adhere to that analysis, and find it central.

>1. Exchange value nests within a wider marxist concept of value,
>all socially-valued interactions including those not mediated
>by commodity exchange. This permits analysis of contradictory
>positions on this boundary. Such as women with housework and
>child bearing/rearing. The impact on personal and interpersonal
>psychology. Alientation. Gender questions. People outside the
>mainstream labour force. Minorities. Cuts in social benefits.

a. I'll assume capital (as wage-form) <-> labour-power exchange is the
interaction you point to.
b. I think that the wage paid to the worker is paid for him to reproduce his
labour-power, which intrinsically includes the labour wife, children..
(Replace his with his/her, wife with wife/husband. Sake of ease of reading).
>From there, of course, things get a bit complicated, as class domination and
division of labour and domination by gender mix.


>2. Exchange value is an emergent property of complex commodity
>exchange. The concept of an emergent property, not unreal,
>but not mechanically linked to the concrete phenomena, needs to
>be understood subtly.

Hello? Run that by me again please, defining emergent property, unreal in
what terms, complex commodity exchange, which concrete phenomena. Unsubtly.

>3. Exchange value is not a uniform field, but like gravity and
>other force fields, has unevennesses. Fundamentally it is
>essential to understand that the mathematics are non-equilibrium
>and non-linear. Like most of life, actually.

Exchange value as a field? I wonder what you exactly mean.

Again for the purpose of illustration, I find it cute to say that the law of
value stipulates market-prices will revolve around the labour-content, a
strange attractor. Just cute though, I've no more analytical claim in this
manner.

>So a uniform field theory no. A unified field theory, why not?

I think I've gotta stop this free-association post naming. But, yes,
obviously, if life were uniform ontologically, there'd be no movement.

Zeynep

P.S. Satan is a fallen angel. You know, for the record;-)



     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---