Passages Cited

In a passage cited In note 1, he also compares the allocation of personal income between selfish and public spending to the allocation of profit between investment at home and overseas investment. 

The notion that molecules at a surface are in a two-dimensional state of matter is reminiscent of E. A. Abbott s science fiction classic, Flatland.Perusal of this book for quotations suitable for Chapters 6, 7, and 8 revealed other parallels also the color revolt and light scattering, "Attend to Your Configuration" and the shape of polymer molecules, and so on. Eventually, the objective of beginning each chapter with a quote from Flatland replaced the requirement that the passage cited have some actual connection with the contents of the chapter. As it ends up, the quotes are merely for fun Perhaps those who are not captivated by colloids and surfaces will at least enjoy this glimpse of Flatland. 

Aristode does express the need to question whether all the items in the list are substances (Meta. 1028bl3) but he nowhere argues that bodies are not substances and his claim that form is primary substance (Metz. 1041b7) does not imply that bodies are not substances. Hence, given the explicit acceptance of such a thesis in the passages cited, it is safe to suppose that Aristode thinks individual bodies are substances. 

Finally, consider the extraordinary passage cited towards (he end of 2.3.3, which Marx says that the recognition by labour that its separation from the means of production is unjust is the knell of doom to capitalist production. The fact that Marx uses the term "recognition" (Ericiuiimjif) rather than some subjective term such as "belief", shows that he believed the injustice to be a/act about capitalism. Also, (he passage shows that the perception of this fact is at least a concomitant of the abolition of capitalism, and quite plausibly part of the motivation for abolishing it. 

It has been argued that Marx in these passages does not assert that capitalist exploitation is just, only that it appears to be so. Now i believe that Marx held the view that capitalist transactions generate the appearance that they are transhistorically just, and that he wanted to denounce this as mere appearance. Yet that denunciation does not imply that he took these transactions to be transhistorically unjust. When denying their transhistorical justice, he denied the "transhistoricar" not the "justice " part. This, in my view, is the only unstrained interpretation of the passages cited. 

As stated by Marx (see the passage cited in 4.3.1) the contribution principle requires that skilled and unskilled labour have been reduced to a common measure that takes account of this difference, so that the man who is "superior to another physically or mentally and so supplies more labour in the same time, or can labour for a longer time" is correspondingly better paid. I need not belabour the problems involved in this statement. I shall simply assume that the reduction has been accomplished, and that a similar operation can be carried out for capitalism. 

There are in Marx s work only 2.5 explicit references to the Asiatic mode of production. In addition to the passage cited in the preceding note, the term occurs in ZurKntik[Pg.257]

I refer to newspaper articles by giving the date and the name of the newspaper in question. Similarly, 1 refer to letters by giving the date and the name of the addressee. Most of the passages cited from letters are taken from the translations in Saul K. Padover (ed.). The Utters of Karl Marx, Englewood CliBs, N.J. Prentice Hall 1979, Works co-authored with Engels are prefaced by an asterisk ( ). 

In the passage cited above, Beguin is concerned with the ambiguity of the term principle , pointing out that it can be used to designate both the... 

---