{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","title":"Marx and the Concept of Historical Time","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":null,"requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","id":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","uuid":"b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","title":"Marx and the Concept of Historical Time","normalized_title":"marxandtheconceptofhistoricaltime","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":null,"isbns":[],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":200,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/Marx%20and%20the%20Concept%20of%20Historical%20Time","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/b1ad407a-d523-4f8b-bd50-238767f146d6/search"},"page":{"printed_page":102,"pdf_page":106,"physical_index":106,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"4fcb8878fe5750719f63daea6df0f9db61114558f26cee4844b46889ad150fbf"},"chapter":"第三章劳工向何处去？","content":"3.1 《抽象与具体劳动》\n\n我们不需要超越《资本论》第一卷的第一章，就能了解“一般劳动”是如何将其可理解性归功于资本的。本章对价值形式进行系统发展的一个直接结果是认识到资本主义交换关系不仅表达，而且实际上构成了一般劳动的范畴。下面这段话很好地概括了这一点：\n\n男人和女人……不会把他们的劳动产品作为价值相互联系起来，因为他们把这些物品看作是同质的人类劳动的壳子。事实恰恰相反。通过在交换中把他们的不同产品彼此等同为价值，他们把他们的不同种类的劳动等同为同一种人类劳动。他们不知道这一点，但他们这样做了10\n\n马克思在《资本论》第一章中反复强调这一点：“只有不同种类的商品之间的等价性的表现，才能使我们看到创造价值的劳动的特殊性质，因为它实际上把嵌入在不同种类的商品中的不同种类的劳动还原为它们作为一般人类劳动的共同性质。”“换句话说，交换行为决定了劳动的种类，而劳动的种类又决定了被交换物的价值。价值形式及其隐含的交换行为是马克思劳动价值论的原始条件。价值[Wert]，可以被描述为“一定比例的可交换性”12，是社会关系的自我中介基础。正如我们将要考察的那样，它是由“社会必要劳动时间”决定的，但如果不把它也理解为交换决定的基础，它就什么也不是。资本主义生产已经永远是为交换而生产，因此，交换关系必须同时被理解为构成价值并作为价值的表现形式。13\n\n然而，任何关于资本和劳动范畴之间关系的讨论都必须关注一个特定的交换，这个交换与作为双重构成和表达价值的交换关系是一致的，但是，考虑到被交换的内容，它既是资本生产过程的前提，又是资本生产过程的结果。\n\n10 Marx, Kapital 1, 88 (Capital 1, 166-67). The products of labour’ which men and women bring into relation with each other should also, crucially, be understood as these very same men and women. 11 Marx, Capital 1, 142. Emphasis added.\n\n12 See Tony Smith, Hegel, Marx and the Comprehension of Capitalism' , in Marx's Capital and Hegel's Logic: A Reexamination, ed. Fred Moseley and Tony Smith (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2014), 29.\n\n13 Christopher J. Arthur, The New Dialectic and Marx's Capital (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2004), 96.\n\n102","previous_page":101,"next_page":103}