2 Between Philosophy and Science: Marxian Social Economy as Critical Theory HANS-GEORG BACKHAUS Recently very unr debate ook place between representatives ‘of eons and Marxist theory. The only point of preemen: ws ‘tailed for the lack of ven the minimum of common ground upon ‘ih to conduct the dacuson Contemporary epatrology teed ‘he tm “ncommensuabilty to desribe such instances where feo ‘hori sem to lack any point of comparison. 'OF course such insommensurability is never foal. Indeed Joan Robinson fad set ont proce a synthesis of the neo-Riardian snd the Marvin approach. She 100, however, experienced rest ‘Etculties n coming to terms with the dacourse of Marist econo fn, who "facet cooperate in the ampertan tack oF anti ‘Marsan minology into a language. which sno longer open tothe ‘accusation of being unveligibe™~ an scusation which, a5 call 1803, Weksell leveled against “the “Hegelian” obscurity ~ 2nd ancit (Dunkel) of Das Kapa. Cleaty the motoalinoomprenen Sly’ of two theonvaystms, or the existence of two apparent nly parialy“ranshadle’ theoretical language mrtems, not & ‘ecent problem thrown up bythe atempled formalization ofcompet Ing. economic appreaches: trom ie very Inception the exlasre postin claimed by Capa mitted aginst sever Deng included ithe canon of economic doctine, Th 1923 Georg Lakdcs began © dscusion of this umesolved problematic, which vas ater taken up by Mareuse, Horkheimer. 2d Korth the crac sue i the postion of Marxian economy ‘in st ass Beoveen Piosophy and Science 55 ‘between the no extremes philosophy and scienes. By the process ‘Strstecion on tbe conus) spperats of “cigue™ and the Teustant selteriigue of ttddona! Mari, ciel Marxism ‘rlved, which, He Lakes o loger bald tho Manian ctgue a pobtial cconceny ‘as cas nine ange oer, bt at inde imental sence’ (Grundvlsenichaft) i an empatisseae: "tbe ‘Sapte onthe fteh charaer of comnodsier comprise the ‘hole of historical materia. but its precely the ‘ain 10 {otaty of te theo of potcal economy wich Engels aod Lenin {gvored,therehylnjng he ovation ofthe Lennie dogmatin {hon of Mane Tt was Horthcimer who fit attempted to cli the unique smetpoolopal satus of the Maran snige of pois! economy {n terms of ponion "betieenpiesophy and scene. For ths ‘ery reason he rew the disicion between teional and etal They a the ilerence Boween to ade of soenton, the Sst was grounded in the Dicaus de la methode, the second in the ‘Marsan erligue of plies econany’:* The prado inrmed fy postion of he ater earl nth fac tat om the one and, Marr’ eatigue of ecnomy oppenes prosophy ty insiting {bat kan coopomi, nota phlonphial yt, and moreover {hat psopy spe inh concep of conony* Ow he her band) howerer Be ilgue of economy is adamant epposed to “economy, spulating thatthe ea theory of society es ergue of economy. emits pilosopbial’# Prony because “piononhy Sppears in te concepts of economy’ ‘every single one Of theses ‘more tha an econo concept.” The carisaion and antfetion of the clam that these concepts ae ‘more than fest economic, ma a eligue of eonomisconepin the narow sense and ts Feitrodoes the problem of-ommensurabiliy, oan Retiasons apunem obously eles on pio prin: tac iis asuned thatthe eooceps of poll economy inthe sro sean ae ote approprine eject. But what ae he “things hemslves ard bows tposbleoreoch a pro aeeeeat ‘on the object of pital economy, ven tha, aftr nary «century ‘ot ongoing debt, esnoominethemetves hae tot been able ‘each an agreemeat on this pint? Pay: Jorn Rodinon helt her noted the profoundly prema charcer of exci Cn cpr money And thera ofiaters, commodities and purchasing Bower, rove themseves re hgh else concepts as soon 8 we erouy try to ee to gupe with them” Would Rot be wort6 Open Marsom considering wheter twas precisely this inomprehensilty’ which ‘Mars hen vew, when be characterised the ‘estegoris of bourgeois conomiin guteral deranged form (Kapil, 9.50)" ‘Wasi othe anercness ots er probleme whch forsee Mar to traalateeconomieconept ino ther conepts whkh were be mor’ than merely esac? Andis iso he fae ot ny transition of Man's eaneeps, which in erth would amoant to rewasition, Would hie the ery problem, whieh le to the evelopment of serial theory of éoopomie categoria the fist ice? The problem is that inci, and yet in tome sense Incompreheashe concept prove tobe sly apparent sich means, eineliple sso ‘Can tbe claimed hat the use ofthese apparent neg concept, that is speccally economic concept, hes stceeded in éstablahing econo theory ar scence? On the contrary, according to Joan Robinson academe economies became inporerded by ht ‘eft take Mart sono a ence fd lf ow nate Of apparent diotesation Thi “pf state’ "he re of ‘efsal o engage wih the questions which ave een posed by Mar = {ths auesement core, thon the no Sob lense demand forthe esublahment of sconmenterble bast the vo conceptual syxema cannot be met by meas of 4 tatltion, which would ‘rcesunly lead to level of fondant deren. ‘The Subjective-Objective Twofold Character of Society A the foreftont of Adocn's work is "ocey' asthe uty of subject and objec instead of the “established terms fupertoctute aad ase or infasroctue, which neces “riiie” the "deduction of Sdeoloies, that thei ‘erivatin rm stustural laws ike the Fetish arate of commodities, the ‘proton paeudat.” Tas he makes ‘he clan thats soca a rubjest and voit a object are the see fd yet na these’ ™ ‘Society as Object Soda Objectivity What Adorno calls soil “objectivity” isthe ‘generic tem fora telations, isitatios, and foros in which humane st" that i, lawfully regulated forces and iatonal conditions, which are alway Benen Philoophy and Seence 7 sleeady preopposed by the ation ofan indvidul. The “ondame- tal ie pros (rapende Lebensprocest) of sey Is alvays econ fom’ ica rales the question of whether the Theory of sce inany wey actualy tne from economics The anwar a= sort it sles socal theory ia economics only imofar ait police Eeopomie inthe narrow sense then deals with a cast, Sith someting whichis alresdy reed that, acepts at face rue the mechani of developed sodety based upon exchange ‘The ditincive feature of the theory of soaety, onthe contrary, Uhntit dedees the established form of economizing (Wich fe) withthe former presupposes Te cateova difeence from tadisonal Marssm then consis fn the fart hat for Crit Theory, following Lakies the modes of Prodiction do not co ipa comtute a base for the socalled Siperstacare, The teas base’ and “bjectiviy” are bere cia anlogons b ist nature economy exabsbes tel according 95 tem laws a second ature’, intra stegard ofthe needs and Wrshes of idvidals and imposes iuelf behind their tacks’. The Ullerene Between the object of Uadtional theory, that of the ature secnces in prt, and he objet of cetel theory fan be made lea in the flowing manner. Society i not merely bjt, bu at the same time subject Ie autonomy (Figngee2l- ‘hte tas paradoical Society sony ‘objective insofar as ans ‘pecs’ is “een subjectivity isnot tanspareat™ toi. However, nat proceeds behind te bck ofthe sobecs the spraiaddul Totaly of vor (uerinividuetle Gesamarbet), whic Adar also {erm the loners the epitome of boar in peeeral’. But onl ‘one determinate frm ofthis universal presen Usell atthe sme tine, as objectivity, thai the form o “abst uiversalty’, which ‘buen dominates the particule Society as Subject. ‘society subjective in that it refers back to the human beings which form it, bcase it only exists and reproduces Realty wartae ot the Tater. This toality doesnot ead ie of ts own above and beyond that it gahere fgether and what i consis of" Objecity “Tenles fll ony through indviaak’, everthing is ‘medated by “Snsiouses Seon from this print of iw, the base egues the Sopestocure’ tin need of indiduls Who act acording (0Ey pen Marsssm intentions. Society can be conceived in idealistic tems “the ugrerate content of both human consciousness and the wom SSous, sndean asic be deemed inteligbe, Subjective eons tnd hermenewtos therefore seem 19 Bethe appropiate way of ining eos to jt And yot no particule subjeative mode of tear wil allow adequate acess fo the ‘bjecive mechanism of society’: the autonomy ofthe domain of economy in patel, and the rexbtance of is concepts to raooalty, sue 10 show the unui of subjeaivim. tis objectity which constutes the fabjostve modes of condact inthe fet instance! Tins Adorno holds subjective economies 10 be "ideological «claim whi it indicated bya lance atthe work of Pareto wo Spits ‘sce a nothing other thas the average value of individual modes of rac- ton’ ach an account sways already presupposes jetty asthe ‘ery notion of anonym forces and bet for, ‘The Transtormation of Economie Theory int Critica Theory” Subject Objet Dike and Base Supersructore Model (aly by postings subjec-object dae atte cone proper ofthe economic proces whic ie dleccl insofar subject and object "are the same and yet not the same’ docs it become rutclepy clear that and how Max tanslorms economic theory into era! thon’ 1s now taneparent for the fet time how in econo theory, as form of waditonal theory, the nied ebjec-bject ‘pls mo an object and subject. Since economic theory is unable 1 mediate the two i simply onllstes between them. When the objeto theory i determined ins specie subjecr-objec character, ‘then ti in tor necessitates ertique of Marni -econonish's the imajr fling f which i not to underestimate the fnportance of Economics, Butt take iin too narrow 9 sens’ Teale 0 lose Sight of the “oginary intention of ersping the whole Simul taneously the base superstucturemodel turns out tobe a sale Population, a fact which i stil unrecopised by valger Markst thought. The stagnation of methodological tefection slong with the upsurge ofthe pycholopeal (inerestenpeychoogich) aad neha Ist sessment of ideological formations mest be put down fo this popular implication of compler mental srctue, The abt (ities taenmeinee Besse Phosophy and Science 2 ete mode must not merelybe replaced by anew one, Nevertheless, the superipositon af the baesapestructre model by the subject. fobjectsruture vases some terminological problems, which we can begin o elucidate ty the flowing diagram. A more comprebeasve chematiton weald, amongst ater things, cl forthe iteration of the wniversalpartila chotomy, which occurs fequenty ‘hrowghout Adorno's work ay in at Pond rh be yt [intimin | painacemnane iow eng "| reser Na! eee sro Sere — ae atone Pisin imnting! [Minette (an Fa a om net Patna tn De ne) Contec 1s lear at at sight tat the econo subjectadjoce schema cuts right sere the clesal dls of matter and spin an the ‘algar Marist baee-vpersrucare model. I might Seem bizare to Open Marxism fest sgh tht excosirely abst, radtonally ‘ment tems ae ascribed to the ealm of the objet, tat te mate doen ss its tational conned, and that comely materal fac, i rartzle the rstons f potion, ae teed ete sbjecine Senin. te ha en mash god werk writen on th ic, esl smelter to he relevant tecture, not fast the metho werk of Leo Koter, sho, flowing Laks, and belly indepc “en of the authors of Crit Theay produced some inporant work on this isu. One pot hich Kafer strc ne and tne 2gain, is esential oa covet understanding ofthe above sem, ‘haste ject and objet Joao stay opps cach ter bat ter are eat pin a ongoing proce of be anerson of subjetviy into object, and ce versa proce Which eral represents the most snc form of case of occ > “Theres esetaly moshing enigma he thong ss the the “stanpoit of pola economy” a standpoint of aeady reset phenomena’ (endpunks der een Phinomene) cal st ater wi an at cago rar fom fhe Sat ot empics” were "smal ior from the heavens ether than being evlopd or eres Ths su wt of Su) a of Rico, ofthe sje aro the objective vale teers such tha when contoted wih is ojeeno the ‘tena het erent ino iiss Actaly Mary does ot ctae the dctins of exhange ale propounded by ce subjects {bout heres of valein ay may they a ot ven enone Schama ht bot col of thought we equaly guy of “eons te concert of nae al ht thy bt py noon of exchange ves category. Everything binges 00 ‘jen hat ot standin efeothemanne teaser ground {S135} of val, eat ite sunt ground of ts eaten, and Sect ace I exes teen When the Rain agree afer an ‘nchangg meat of vals" he remppons te ‘ales whose measure he sti that be assumes et exten. whist the question for Maris te genes of ae tel (13155). On he contrary Rat indir tothe form sec ovale uv, ut beaar natura (290), He ores ht vals, ‘hich gua valu ae at som prouced by tddal ae {everest to be ndertod se anal pees? (KIN) The basis Concepts poieal enemy, andi wenion of 1 bouton ofo Open Marsism value, ae inadequate to the tak of evining this "genes of vale, Tor which reson Marc har resoure fo other consseratons ouside ff the domain of polteal economy, in order to capture is inet ‘dona. This becomes apparent where Marx deciles, far a 1 ow fo theft ime in fvour of he labour theory of vue me replace the, words ‘plvate. propery’ by ‘valve once again, the pasage reads: when one speaks of vale, itis thought this bs to do with a ‘ning outside of snd apart rom humsn beings. When ose speaks of labour, it koown tat this has Greely to do wits Duman Being, To ask the uetion foes ae way & ready 10 have savered vmin ‘Ws this hough which in my opision constites the beginning of te Marian labour theory of value, For fone sects wae 2 Salve of eapial, han i transpires that by Wis og, Which exits ‘outside of ua beings, but neverteless produced by te human ‘Species, Marx could only have meant the eater or ‘commercial Bes" of the valve of eapal, ip osher words its subjectcharace, ‘Win is new inthis ace way of aking the ol question concerning the esence of “sealth ae residing outside of mankind and os being Independent of i (PSH), consists inthe fet thet vue bee ‘usted forthe fst time in is mode of being namely i being Ss Place, and thus sige the same situs a hose oter forms of ‘he ebjeceation of hush esentil frees, ame the platonic, ‘ntotheologcl eas. Iwas thus a neseeary and oasient move {oi mate ase of Feuetbech's notion of the "ota effectivity of Toankind’ (PS78), of mans “gener sety and essential forces! [S6) to Sear up the unsolved problem of the asi economist, ‘hat st soply him with the poo! tthe aboot theory of value] (PS: the “otal effecuviy” becomes the socal totality of iabour thd the objected forme of sppearance’(KI/70) wich belong 0 the meaning of ot effectivity is thereby not Sgniantyskered but merely specied. The dispute berween the competing economic ‘Theories of Yalu Teall wie. aida the ex-ecosomic Chieron of wheliec-te vnderying principles of these Cheon, ttlty and abou, can at te tame tne vere as « ground of {olanaton forthe value's residing ‘uted of human beng for ts ‘Tein displaced, in shor, forte particular Torm™ The eps of the insert SRS Benson Philosophy and Sclence a ‘cory of economy must be enlarged in onder to ground the more harrow donain of economies. To the original ecenamie problem of the cootew and size of vue faded the further problem of ie ‘deranged ‘orm’, in nde to ge a coherent slution to the former. [Ara osu of thi procedure i taspies thatthe prinapes of ‘bjective ale theory use and sarlty~are ot adequate to grasp the inter! ground” ofthe mere existence of abstract, absolute ‘objective sake Only the princi of lsbour ean be developed in Such awa a o explain the extenceof value ae the ebectiextion ofthe gente forces of mankin. The economic prinepes ae thus [rounded tough what Marx in 184 termed the ose moments ff Hegelar dialects (PSS). Marrs bss thovht, hither ignored by all eomomiss, is chat human beings coatont their ow generic forces, tha thee “colecve forces’ (GAS1) oF socal forces (9823) aan autonomous, allen being, This hough clas i the concepion ofthe autonomous totality of soil capital sa sea total subject, which abatractr Sef from the weal and woe of Individual sbjaes andi iniferent’ to them. Ie govering ight reigns “ove the owaers themseies’ (P48) Only tow docs the resning ef what Marx cals the “sellmovement” of autonomy of Spit and with tte meaning of the le of hs ater work, become fly lear. The soare of thie new departure Feuerbach concept ofthe objetiied pene force, “The Toe Attitudes ofthe Economie Subject ‘Towards Benomie Objects ‘Any meaniefa disusion ofthe Marian revoluionising” (BA) of social economy, of hit “int attempt a applying he dlc ‘method to Polite! Economy” (D202; Enplh nthe vigil) ust be conduced inthe context of the two tational attempts {0 secesfly conceptualise te problems of economic objet The Economic Obect onthe Level of Tndtonat Subject be Dtsm ‘There have been numerous attempts a Geeman philosophical era lure to temativ the economic problem othe context of the general problem ofvalue Mar Sebeler, A. Mcinong, H. Vaihinge, and Rickert amongst others. Alltheeatemps to rasp cronomic objets “as things hvested with vale" have fale. Heldegper makes tas@ Open Morse problem expt and femiy ote the “obscurity ofthis structure of Ffvesitare nth vauc, without, however, Being abe to solve the ‘le: hat docs valve mean oatlogali? How are we to charac Terize thie nvesting” and Beng invested?” ‘Cerny he string poi of ese fad atts is the tact assumption of te subjective theory of rahe ere formulated by Schumpeter ‘ales must Ive See a comune, the word is to meso anything at all. Neverbees, on the same page he Umitngy formulates the antthess, namely tht purchasing power iSto be understood ae abeiact power over goods Ia general” We have to bearin mind that we ae eaing bere with objective value’, wich, gua vale, however, war supposed tO be lost n Tn such a maner the prevaag theory hops bithely between cexitences a” and ‘outde conciousness, here subjective, there ‘Sbjetve, always forgeting the one when i switches to te other ‘The investing of value, that ithe investing of objective with subjective vale, whereby the former mist embody an present the later remains category focomprebeeible~ whe in Maraan tera means tat cannot be rsped rom the ‘andpet ofits form’ one insists tht vale vei 8 conscoumes~ whatever that means ~ then one negates thelr sterial existence. Hon Oe ter hand, one ates ther objective bing “outside of conscious tes and ints onthe strength ofthe characteritcs as exchange" tr ‘purchasing power Bence onthe paradoxical existence of an kono elton of things amongst themscoes (TSI), dea oe eyes their beng in a conscousnes The prevaling eoric {ntory knows no way out of ths muna ‘Te Esonomle Objet on the Love! of Philosophie Dist. ‘The insoluble nature ofthe problem of vale, which for Hetegae is “Eategorally iat to ep” on the Teel of subjec-object dual: {smb unequivocally ated by thowe who put his dust as sch in ueston:Flloving Hegel, this can besten in Georg Simmel’ "The Philwophy of Monay, abd under te seis of Hegel, Simone {in Johann Georg Hamaan,* we find particulary paring example Of this in the work of Brono Liebrucs> For him the so called ‘pulosophy of reflection’, which i tll hindered by subect-obeet, Ralsm, wil rever know what money i One ean find dialectal ‘leteminations of sommadity aed money not ony Simael but so {nar oughly be lis tat the prose x commodity soled = seuss nee pesmaceaareze Beoveen Philosophy and Siece ® Pardcvlaity, universality’ (G111). Furthermece, this commodity as *enuouspenenuosting aro cut what Lebo cals 8 teal ideal, an “objet transcending objec (dbegepenstn. ‘cher Gegesand), in opposition tothe postive objects of natura ‘iene, BUt as and mow importaty te particular sat the same time’ unvetal, which to say that the problem of universality recurs in the economic domain in the shme fachion ash Was formulated by Hegel, ats, thatthe difrence between the eal andthe ‘ideal wort has tobe letaly negate. In Marr's words “iis as if long wih and spar rom lon, tiger, hars and all fsnimals =. there dso existed the anima, the nda incaration of the whee atimal Kingdom, Such 9 pateler ira universal Tn this eve he exstingpartclar, the "eal, is ‘opposite, ics universal, the “abetecton’ of the animal 25 such ‘Money is interpreted as th economic paradox ofan existing uve. salor an exiting aboacin. This exaty what f meant whee it Slsimed that money s abstact value snd tt thi abstraction sists 1 seems that withthe Jestion ofthe object cl economy as ‘supraobjective' or ‘real’, the bridges back to economies have finy been Burned. One gance at the televant herture jst por {o the 1960, however, sees to show that not just dalertcal Blilosophers, but aso the majority of the economic theonsts of Imoney have all equally deszibed the eubject matter money iis ‘ulosophical’ manner. Tae for example one othe mos prominent money theoriss of the pariod, who otherwise. deals oly. with ‘quadtatve iter It seems tha ia those days paradox could be ‘te comeedy pointed out and yet tested in searcely more than Conc, aphotate manner J the sign for money, however paradoical this might seem, auras economic ale brooght tel appearances Food fortougt for sy who we nth pe of aaron oy ples renunciation of ety, 0d who ele to rant Wha ‘abuse any Kind of exisenee * Something which ssc on more common ems ie hohe orsbjetv, iat the came ine an enor common puranee Sonutag sjeave, someting which ot thought Healy Slime wo be asc in elt Trt ten fay on te ngage, ‘hich Joan Robinson allogsto be nsompabeose the enue ‘otonly of Marian eos. bt ofr Tey lit oe eerro Open Marco the cate thatthe empiial notion of reality (ond hence that of Dhilonophy of selection) eo nivelypresuppsed by Joan Robinson hain geueel by quanittive economies, neces cotaas within Iike feason why thie ‘ype of esmomiss wil ever know ‘what Imoney fa commodity or capil? How ean such economics even ezin meaniglully to dacse the relationship between theory and tcusiy, model and realy, when it Bus sleedy dogmatically leded that te economic eats not abstract, because, aecording fo the empl epistemology towhcht subse, soc in abst ton could ot exe? ‘The Eeanomie Object nthe Fam of otorence Otte Phoanphice Economie Dacre ‘The moat powetfl objection to the second sade i obviously that itis incapable of completing is own program: tis uneeathow cea ‘ceed in giving a genetic account of the economic eters. ust swith Hegel aot to mention Shnuel and Liebrcks ~ we lean othing of any signieance about the category of capital, which emai, a6 i for Hegel, am orginary pheaomenon with the Status ofa Platons Ide” When it comes fo the ease of the category Dt value, Hope seems incapable af sping his owe major insight. ‘namely tat every immediacy S edited: stead of being abe erie value as the objecsBestion of the subject, be drans on ‘pial matters ‘With Hepes with economics the extence of a Seri of exchange vale i always already presposed, and with. itthe world of he soil sich “he ransormation of Heges deco snentnopologieonomi dect Riker inn asthe objection of secomsdouses he mans tsi of conony soul be conssve’ of he obectieatons of Seat subject ar what Feurbach tems gener fore which ov eeene tinction the cece force of bout By ‘procating ow epucly hunny wien bas (U2) thee Teves reread bak to ei pound, the sma bein ttre casts oberon won (128), tnt ay an {he postive moments of the Hyetan der’ e ave, that 10 Sey th progam ofthe desu of he lensed detention ot ‘BF muna! worl (P58), te deacon ofthe economies ances “eling pat om and outie of mankind of the et ‘Rerhou of prone siveralnto he sujet Bemeer Philosophy and Science ro ‘Tis teasformation renders redundant the cli that there actually exss a pinal material source ofall values, Sach snother ‘ontology mould be a supertous aon tothe doctrine of tar and ‘Sopestrucure, which neither in need of ew ht philosophy, sore « Wdlarchawang, This doctrine i suiceseuly and excusvely ‘rounded in critque of economy, Fer mor important than the young Man's meals isthe ‘ought that wil from here on form the bass ct hs Mes work ‘ume the thought that “all asonomie categorie [seul] deve ‘ped from the to fats’ (S21) saherent fo the tension ie the esc os an of ete pe a Eentzadctnn between the ‘objective msafestaonso¢ pave oy erty on one fnet=apdtsectve-enseace™= labo ae ‘Eectiity= onthe other Al etegories of economics would on ths account beuaderstood a developed expression’ ofthe ea pincr. ‘Sal foundation or factors “The terminus ad quem of his developments capital, whic can be shown by as Being understood early ar 18st he completed Imstfesttion af pvate propery (P33). Numerous ‘less important Aeteaninatbos are telelopealy directed towards the laters het “faliment. From ehe fst stance tis the vale of capital which con asthe authentic, coosunmate vale, of wich the exchenge ale of elsscal economy is but an "undeveloped manifestation The concetion ofa development of value i he sense ofa negtie ‘eeolgy ~ Mats ses inthe ‘completed, objective manifestation of Diva proserty the completion of ie dossnation over human Deings (P13) that point of dference wheve be part company with the model theory of economy aed fst establishes his theory at ‘ontgueo! pla! economy. Hence the thoaght whic fons the basis of thisconcepton is already estabished i 844; the ater Work merely develop thi ea fuer, ‘he reau ofwadtionl problems regerding he cnttation of fundamental concep inte phlosophceconome dialectics Iti finalsection lt ue resale upon the content of thie. ‘We began vith the prom of whether contemporary economics o¢ Marian ctonomics had developed a terminology mhish wis adequate fits object. It teanspzed that academic economics comes Unsuck, because emits nthe shackles of the train le of the subject qua res cogitne and the abject gut rt exensa Economics sano ratonll artiulte what means to cla that6 pen Maris an absact pover of Sapo ‘bound to conece’ goodsin which iP reid But cena even oe tito. plsophy abd Epierolny ths ines oa i goose remains, Hees ‘sword an ‘score sracture which eresy comprehensible ‘5 vecpry. Tis Lind of economic therfore pets hat a the Scieconomicdomae-Yeaity ar ompeey ferent meaning Rattan postvely develop ae hgh Tesco the ats sequel eres the data ofthe subject object duaion, Yet lect one theory em ether ein the sntonomy o thse objet nor ie 3 genetic acount of hem a produc of obectfestion Marrs anal of forms is an ital ep As deci, snc i determines te geereforcr of sexe), bet than sclfancioussy, mr mbes The soncepial abject {ijt chon now retro te ifrene berween the uma ‘tc hat a nde monic 2 ang ape on onc and nature gs howene, sso possbletofind the aon Sppleato of tee tne Mark and above all in Adore, the Bet of reuten eptemolopea messin Ti shown ‘Sac carcteruaten of the sconome category aan “biete {ormt hough (L30) Aton port he sates expe eso ‘Sim ot ova abou abject on™ "Tse fonma ace therefore sel mel secs a8 mere thought, oe someting ect jee rather. ate both, Now ila esc fentre of Hep concept of apt at pint tivays sbjesive jet.” However the objective moment of ih unty 1s the final analy shown to be 8 preduc of the fection of elronstoumes, 0d nota of the sje inte ‘Sue of ell lou om ne to ors ofthe sbjecobjet esc terpenes a quunion which romans anlar this dy the ueston hus not fa teen psd. Conny we san here oer no more that few elimina” considerations and oncetel claneatons, leading {Goardsan understanding of what Marval is "daecoea method tf devlopment (BIS) whch be never pat cova in wring. is Roun Gat Engh searched te enpabad mores im aa Ot Marv planned vs abo Dat (13). ther only Adorno has methodology adumbrated the 0b tems which ths question opens apy above all a hs eS Solon and Emil Research and inthe ‘World Spit nd Natural Eston’ chapter o his Negave Daft ny estnation, four central thought san be drown oat whieh eee tou thie Receotoneectosuiosesss Beoween Phosophy and Science " fame: () Adamo i to my knowledge the only asbor to have thematic whst Man. ims the “olece susan CKLT) of onomig saegaies, (2) In Adorao prtya of te ee” of Society, the subjecne-objrtve characte ofthe categories ft of A ete fo the Hopela concep of spt ad the tadtooal fbject objet date (9 Adorno’ ew of ‘coceps «Whi the objec has ofl as hat whic the obec inelf rans to be (8 The conception of ‘dpi ition” Thee perape a fit central thought of eq slevane fo the phlosphiccconome protematc, which annotbe broached here the Gyramic characte ‘Stacia economic catego "None of thn ve msorthemes wee sce by wha is kxown asthe snd Geman Dapte > Meso. he ‘Potvsnacoel, whieh insted for so macy years. This is andaloussbove al Beense the ‘onary essay Adar indaed nthe pubation of The Postvsm Dispute in Geman Socioloy *Socoogy and Empivial Research ‘sot uimos importance hee. The tlre to address thee es symptomatic of te boo spon the problems ofthe consiton of ‘baal econony which Adomo rsd wth eapet to Mare ‘Adorno formulates the etal problem i the follwing passage fromhisesay . vee ay that there is somthin conceptual aboot soil realy is oC lantamount to being an dealer Temas that there something Shick hols way ie the thing fel. the ct of xchange implies the rection of =. goods «to someting abstract, not to something in any way mater a the tatona Sense ofthis world... change vale, which unlike weave s merely something thougt, reigns over. need, luson ” Felgns ovat ality. A the same tie his luion What este“ somthing oneal oe of le ferent from wat ofthe nturalsleces, where any pert ‘lements canbe reduced p their common features Abstract value, which for Adorno ithe central ractue of ale! or negative objec’ is thus on the one hand subjective — ‘omehing merely thought’ ~ and onthe other hand objective ~ that ‘what most fea "concepuahity that holds eway tn the thing ‘acetyl in lf ssc Vale is otev, objective and yet alco sion, tats, subjective, is produc of sein 48 Open Marxism constiouness and ot an Urpenomenon, i isnot «prior, and Sern oe nature. Tr suddenly becores eye cear that we have wescended iin atc object atom ~ we te here ely fetecng (0 the ‘O°Sz relation inthe Gagram = when the question wes of Whether SSosractguanties shoud be mtbuted to the sebjecve & the ojective side of reality. The natural sent may sad the natural ‘SCotmoney and cpr thts he may aan pape or machns bathe wil evr dacover tht abarac) aloe Tecfoe valve Thus be someting thought or someting bjecve. The exnomist Gn the olber han searches inca’ anspor, sore’, striction, predacton’ messuemeat forth ery some ‘Bing which “inves iv physica objec therefore anno. be a {jueton of somehing tought, something subjesive, Dut rather of ‘Sinethngextramenta anda ti sense objec "The umesolved methodologcal problems wich bear upon the trainonal subject bot elton =the O-S2 elation ithe agra ‘Nir lepon, They calminae i he question of whether and of bow ‘ne car come upaith'a concept ovale fo Which every ecomst ‘Soul un, cgndles of whether befalls the emp of subjective Srabjecne value thong, © exen of nep-Ricardantn. No doubt Man id make soca el or is wn theory. He speaks exit tine ‘univena chaste of vale’, which ong to convadt te Tnateral tence in. determinate commodity (BLO). When he forer sipalater that simple ale" 'abueacte from concrete teonomic Wetermiatons = from the concept of capa ~ these Scores lear tat he canot be tig ost the dnt ale tiie lasour theory, bt rater of he Kind of ale whic ene has in inden one wes sth caposions a4 aleeeervow of Malu reason ete “And we do actually diferente betwee abstac) vale on the cone hang, and work or wsefcarey on th ober. Wok is Work 8d fot vale, and vie vera, Conseguealy there most be certain {eauresef vale which eveyone ates witout beng avare a Economics has ever totems come to ferme wih ths Mant reproather Ticads for example mh "ot developiag the diferet moments nthe corepel determination of al sing that these ‘cur merely afc inhi work (216), “i ideal qoeton mst sow be tured gust Marx Rims ‘where does Re sceeed in dong what he demands from Riad? Thus qutonT task pot th mow serous fa ia Man's work Beoween Philosophy and Science » He is gh 19 call fr the development ofan “bjectve concept’ of ‘ale, fora Totaly ofmoment and for univer chrarteration ‘of wave, Bu the Work he handed over to us all far hor of foal and remsine but a fragment. Like Adorao, Mam hinsell ‘Seman the working ou f concept which the thing has of isl” {ati a objective concept. Otherwise i Would not make Sese to ‘hin tht the “uriveal characteris’ of value shuld contradict {hair maval existence’. tis only the tension setup beeen those fo poles mich can legitimate the ‘dalecten method of develop tment in he fist pace, And insofar a8 objective value theory i he ‘nly one which can talk of an exiting univer, of someting ‘oupse, ae what most fal, itt possible to bold that 4 ontedicion can indeed exist between the immanent concept of & ‘hing and the thing sel. This thes les behind Mare ‘daeccal Imethod of development, which he practiced in exeno io the CGrandvise That he sock Sly t his principle is eident above all there he feentites the mode of existence” of money fom ite faneton ss world money, such that ti only in i ater fnetion st sword meney thats mode of existence (R136) adequate ti oncep. The same prince can be showa at work io hs testment ‘tone i foncton ae treasure’ or ac means ofthe preservation ff value, wen he claims there r 8 comraction between the Sjanttatne limite andthe limilessess of money’ (K/e7) Ins Similar pusage from the 1859 work Toward a Critgue of Poliical Economy itt even more evident that Maris tsuning an objectve once vale: “The quantitative lit of exchange Value conte: iss te uattative universality, The eatent 10 vbich fe mo0ey] ‘is i accardance with is concept as exchange vals. depends oo the amount of exchange vale” (3109). Again in the fourth cheper ‘of Capt when he characters amounts of epi ale ied fexpresiows of exchange vale’ (K1/168), H aoundanly clear that fe agun as an objective concept of val in mind, "And pet there tno doubt tha compared to the Grinds, the crginal meaning of the "method of decal developmeat” as indled The possbity of constructing ths method ais original {orm thus depends upon a satsactory resolution ofthe problem of the universal character of vale’0 (Open Marcon Notes (EN = Trantor! Note) 1. G.Goemann, Den, Paice Okonome? (Fankers am Mal, S97Phpp 2.25, 2 Jou Robin, “Die Arteria ab aealtices Syste in: ret and Wha (Wen, 1977.35 3p. 38 3. Awe ‘Uber Wer, Repl wd Rene, 189) (Asen 108) 4B Doin, Werke B22. Aus (Newwie, 197, 7p, 84 384 ap Franken MKS. - 6, Mtiothemen Reohe Thor (Frankf am Ms, 186) 0 9H Maree opp. id 1.1 Redmon, ‘Dotter der Wrnchafowinerchaf (Machen, 158), ‘Numi in press dene the volume aed page of ery Engels Weraupabe (Ea-erin). K kap (Capa), = Tein {keen Mebreer Theones Sore Vue), > Parr de ‘konomachphiosophiche Marte (Patan recone hs Se mcg (Bn) 8 = Gb “a Kap On ‘Cent, tes eed by H. Samba, (Eas Beta, 1985) MEGA NirlbngetsGermanegete, (Ent Boin). G = Crndrise ser it der polachon kono (as et, 19). 12, Rotinen, Die Abetrwerthone opp. M6 3, Theodor W Adorn, “Geummote Scien 8 (rank. M, 197,» 58. 18 Chet pI Sea: IV. Adro Sxblogice Eu tet Pinter ar Serehng rant 0), 9 1, Ts Adorno, Getamoele Soho, B.. 316 18, Onc p58 1B. Ops pp 0, 29,57. 2h 6B 2 Gonlcaaheorat (Neve, 162) 9-28 22 MH ope, vol Tp. 1 BL. Roey, “sche und Die Zar Method der ie: chor Cuchihaberanng” Hamburg, 15), p19. Se rer 2% e = Beaweer Philosophy and Science 1 ‘TN he term crear hee wed for the Geman, inne, ich ol ko be fenced by entroent ory Sons 0 Ops p23 So furtemae Suniaw Wary (peadoay for [te Kote) Die Wisma vom der etree 180) pS St arya pip 1 Schumpeter ‘Dar Wen wad der Hospi der theoeichen ‘etonaltonamie’ ctw pat) (Be, 1970), pp 4, 2, 37. Seb “TN: the exprenion wied here gopensidadicher Schein is deberately Coovadia. Schein mex ton somblance sd appear, *~ IR the tm sti fe Cb cas ed GAVE. Meg Pre polach Stee’ ed. by G. Gable (Frese! Bertin p24 ‘A. Amann, Obj und Gunde der Theoretic Nation i 2a pit (Ui, 2). 6. I" Robison, Doerner irahanseaha. p16 (TN: the (Germ prev Kgl) MEGA isp. 0 Tarot, ‘Berean bere Bldg nd Vern der Reicha? (Eas Beri, 98), pp. 1H 156,10, 27 Suga om it ee Coed ptichn Don fie Eas Bern ID), 9.213 ha Sur Mil, "nie ngelne Pb der polcien Ohana’ (Grkdu, 975, p15 HL Nie, "Das Prolen ere’ in “Welwinchfices ‘Arch 039 38 Seng opmengeehe Asie ig 184) “Arcs ar Sovawneachf ond Soup, vt Steph BA Adeao, Gammel Seren vo 8, 8 MEGA tps exper! T3919; 188; KING ‘Te foowing tbe wor tazaltins of Hegel and Mir, we tee Hererng 8 Geen, meh peje nee ofaeus|goxd UL «6 SenoHOHI 3) St yo ps am a3 Honesty vonanpenuy THAN WANIEN aqeis 3s leg ey 40 Woy 843 puke UORNY}SUOD [2190S & ieee ‘sead0 14 ou enpios egg ose ‘e145 to enn posal oon ‘1 -€(as6t‘Boaepny) ceo pm peD. HTS “ese voae econ) Fo “peng sn Ba, onan pga pe sumone we sg 89 (Gat asaugnn) 2 Por ws, HBP Se were 4909 9 2