4 ms·
As a historical deterministic, he doesn't believe in or account for risk. The labor necessary to create an object needs to include all the failed attempts to c
by MarkPNeyer 9y ago
As a historical deterministic, he doesn't believe in or account for risk.
The labor necessary to create an object needs to include all the failed attempts to create objects. If you're a determinist, risk loses meaning, and thus capital seems to serve no purpose.
- wwweston 9y agoInteresting and plausible criticism. I suspect it's not accurate to characterize Marx as a total determinist either in a sociopolitical sense (I think his "inevitable victory" rhetoric is largely cheerleading and IIRC he acknowledges class warfare could end badly for everybody) or an economic sense, where his observations and criticisms about economic dynamics are no more deterministic than any other economic model (and in fact derived from accepted models). But I honestly haven't thought much about whether he fully appreciates the risk-bearing role of capital and that seems like an interesting insight worth exploring. You know of any texts/places where people discuss that?