论文部分内容阅读
在对马克思劳动价值论的学习讨论中,于开红提出“无主草地”的价值是否存在、其是否由劳动所创造的问题,认为价值的主体是二元创造的。赵磊教授驳斥其陷入了庸俗经济学的误区,未能理解价值是历史范畴而非永恒范畴,混淆了价值与使用价值的概念;李俭国从历史逻辑的角度说明“无主草地”的特殊历史性;易淼认为应从自然力的价格与价值的区别来看待此问题;鲁保林认为没有价值的东西可以有价格,但是虚幻的;肖斌认为于的错误在于未完全理解马克思的劳动价值规律;李节认为,“疑似”商品可以没有价值而有价格;张朗朗则从逻辑分析的角度解析“普遍无主”是一个悖论;邹坤秘认为,价值的本质不是物,是社会对人力的耗费评价。这场劳动价值论之辩,有利于深化对马克思劳动价值论的理解。
In studying and discussing Marx’s labor theory of value, Yu Hong proposed whether the value of “sovereign grassland” existed or not and whether it was created by labor. He thought that the subject of value was created by dualism. Professor Zhao Lei refuted it into a misunderstanding of vulgar economics, failing to understand that value is a historical category but not an eternal category, confusing the concepts of value and use value; Li Jianguo explained the special history of “uncultivated grassland” from the perspective of historical logic Yi Miao thinks that this question should be viewed from the difference between the price and the value of the natural force; Lu Baolin thinks that there is value without value, but illusory; what Xiao Bin thinks the mistake lies in the incomplete understanding of Marx’s law of labor value; Li Jie believes that “suspect ” goods can have no value but price; Zhang Langlang from the perspective of logical analysis “universal non-ownership ” is a paradox; Zou Kun secret that the essence of value is not material, is Social consumption of human evaluation. This debate on the labor theory of value is conducive to deepening the understanding of Marx’s labor theory of value.