{"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":118,"pdf_page":122,"physical_index":122,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"d965a8878e78aecb1712ca9a2cf9c8f2d7faf308fd25987598b96f1833e32833"},"chapter":"第三章劳工向何处去？","content":"正如亚瑟所指出的，马克思在这一段末尾用货币来解决矛盾，然而，“尽管货币肯定地把它所代表的劳动，从而通过反映，把一切商品所代表的劳动，假定为抽象的普遍劳动，但这种抽象仍然没有假定在交换之前。”在鲁宾之后，亚瑟得出结论，这个矛盾最好在生产过程本身解决，因此，普遍化的商品生产——已经永远是为交换而生产的生产—一是以“活劳动在交换之前被视为抽象的，正是因为它在交换中被视为抽象的”为前提的。93.这并不是说，在生产过程本身中，具体劳动时间实际上是作为抽象劳动时间实现的(只有交换行为才能实现这一点)，而是说，在这个过程中，具体劳动时间已经内在于抽象劳动时间。这种内在性通常被描述为对抽象劳动时间的“强制”和“管制”;它的代理人是工头和时钟。正是沿着这些思路，Bonefeld借鉴了RiccardoBellofiore的作品，将抽象劳动描述为一种真正的抽象，它将“价值的幽灵”投射回生产中，在那里，幽灵变成了吸血鬼，吸干了活劳动，把它变成了“时间的尸体”。94.交换关系是社会必要劳动时间的唯一保证，但是，“如果说有什么区别的话，资本关系中抽象劳动的构成比交换中抽象劳动的构成更为根本”95。因为只有劳动过程才有可能把“时间价值’的本体论基础”转化为社会必要劳动时间。\n\n如果由于劳动力的商品化，具体劳动是抽象劳动的内在，那么人的需要(行为的时间化和历史化的基础，由此产生的目的论目的，从而产生这种行为的统一性)就是资本的内在。在《资本论》第一卷第4章“资本的一般公式”中，马克思断言：“商品的简单流通……是达到流通之外的最终目的的手段，即占有使用价值，满足需要”，而“作为资本的货币流通本身就是目的，因为价值的增值只有在这种不断更新的运动中才会发生。96.这里有两种，而且是两种根本对立的需要概念，以及与它们一起起作用的目的论，确定它们之间的区别和关系，是下一章的主要任务之一。但是，什么必须\n\n92 Arthur, The New Dialectic and Marx's Capital, 46.\n\n93 Ibid. In effect, abstract labour as a form-determination of the living labour of the wage worker, and abstract labour as the dead labour objectified in a commodity, are the same thing, in the one case looked at as activity, in the other as its result.' Ibid.\n\n94 Bonefeld, Abstract labour: Against its nature and on its time’, 266. The expression time' s carcase' is a translation of die Verkörperung der Zeit’ , from the passage in The Poverty of Philosophy cited earlier (see footnotes 1 and 69 in this chapter). The embodiment of time' is a more literal translation.\n\n95 Arthur, The New Dialectic and Marx's Capital, 45.\n\n96 Marx, Capital 1, 253.\n\n118","previous_page":117,"next_page":119}