Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T10:29:45.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Marx's Conception of Dialectical Contradiction in Commodity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2019

Arash Abazari
Arash Abazari*
Affiliation:
Sharif University of Technology Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), Tehran, [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

In this paper, I clarify the structure of dialectical contradiction in Marx in order to show how it is influenced by Hegel. To this aim, I focus on the only place where Marx systematically develops the concept of dialectical contradiction, namely, in his analysis of commodity in the first chapter of Capital. Here Marx claims that the commodity is the contradictory unity of use-value and exchange-value. To make this claim intelligible, I first discuss Hegel's conception of ‘the thing’ [Das Ding] in the Science of Logic and demonstrate how for Hegel ‘the thing’ is the contradictory unity of matter and form. With this Hegelian machinery, then, I turn to Marx to show how use-value and exchange-value constitute the matter and the form of commodity, and argue how they contradict each other.

Type
Research Article
Information
Hegel Bulletin , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , August 2021 , pp. 180 - 200
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Hegel Society of Great Britain 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bell, J. (2009), Capitalism and the Dialectic: The Uno-Sekine Approach to Marxian Political Economy. London: Pluto.Google Scholar
Bensaïd, D. (2002), Marx for Our Times: Adventures and Misadventures of a Critique. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Bordignon, M. (2012), ‘Contradiction or Non-contradiction? Hegel's Dialectic between Brandom and Priest’, Verifiche 41:1–3: 221–45.Google Scholar
Bordignon, M. (2017), ‘Hegel: A Dialetheist? Truth and Contradiction in Hegel's Logic’, Hegel Bulletin, doi:10.1017/hgl.2017.15.Google Scholar
Brandom, R. (2002), Tales of the Mighty Dead: Historical Essays in the Metaphysics of Intentionality. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, G. A. (1978), Karl Marx's Theory of History: a Defense. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Colletti, L. (1975), ‘Marxism and the Dialectic’, New Left Review I: 93.Google Scholar
de Boer, K. (2010), ‘Hegel's Account of Contradiction in the Science of Logic Reconsidered‘, Journal of the History of Philosophy 48:3: 345–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, J. (1985), Making Sense of Marx. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ficara, E. (2012), ‘Dialectic and Dialetheism’, History and Philosophy of Logic 34:1: 35–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Göhler, G. (1980), Die Reduktion der Dialektik durch Marx: Strukturveränderungen der dialektischen Entwicklungen in der Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.Google Scholar
Hartmann, N. (1923), Aristoteles und Hegel. Erfurt: Stenger.Google Scholar
Heinrich, M. (2009), Wie das Marxsche Kapital lesen? Stuttgart: Schmetterling.Google Scholar
Henrich, D. (1989), ‘Formen der Negation in Hegels Logik’, in Horstmann, R. P. (ed.), Seminar: Dialektik in der Philosophie Hegels. Suhrkamp: Frankfurt.Google Scholar
Hösle, V. (1998), Hegels System: Der Idealismus der Subjektivität und das Problem der Intersubjektivität. Hamburg: Meiner.Google Scholar
Houlgate, S. (2009), ‘Phenomenology and De Re Interpretation: A Critique of Brandom's Reading of Hegel’, International Journal of Philosophical Studies 17:1: 29–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houlgate, S. (2016), ‘Essence, Reflexion, and Immediacy in Hegel's Science of Logic‘, in Bauer, M. and Houlgate, S. (eds.), A Companion to Hegel. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Jaeschke, W. (1978), ‘Äußerliche Reflexion und immanente Reflexion. Eine Skizze der systematischen Geschichte des Reflexionsbegriffs in Hegels Logik-Entwürfen’, Hegel-Studien 13: 85–118.Google Scholar
Popper, K. (1940), ‘What is Dialectic?’, Mind 49:196: 403–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priest, G. (1990), ‘Dialectic and Dialetheic’, Science and Society 53: 388–415.Google Scholar
Priest, G. (2002), Beyond the Limits of Thought, second edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenthal, J. (1998), The Myth of Dialectics: Re-interpreting the Marx–Hegel Relation. London: MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sekine, T. (1997), An Outline of the Dialectic of Capital. Hampshire: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Smith, T. (1990), The Logic of Marx's Capital: Replies to Hegelian Criticisms. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Theunissen, M. (1978), Sein und Schein: die kritische Funktion der Hegelschen Logik. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Wolff, M. (1981), Der Begriff des Widerspruchs: eine Studie zur Dialektik Kants und Hegels. Königstein im Taunus: Hain.Google Scholar
Wolff, M. (1986), ‘Über Hegels Lehre vom Widerspruch’, in Henrich, D. (ed.), Probleme der Hegelschen Logik. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.Google Scholar