Font Size: a A A

A Study Of Marxist Productive Labor Theory

Posted on:2006-08-09Degree:DoctorType:Dissertation
Country:ChinaCandidate:Y L KouFull Text:PDF
GTID:1119360155975879Subject:Political economy
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
As an important component part of Marxist Political Economy, the Productive Labor Theory plays a crucial role in his whole theoretical system. However, it has now become a big and long-standing theoretical problem of political economy, causing endless debates and controversies in the field of economics, which is due to two reasons. First, Marx raised the issue of productive labor when he was explaining and criticizing other people's ideas, therefore he himself did not give a comprehensive and thorough expounding of the theory. Secondly, Marx's true meaning has been misunderstood and misinterpreted by later economists for lack of a complete and accurate understanding of the essence of Marxist Productive Labor Theory.Heated discussions were held during the 50s, 60s, 80s, and 90s of last century over the Productive Labor Theory among the academic circles in China, focusing mostly on the classification of socialist Productive Labor and giving rise to three schools of thought, namely, the Wide School, the Middle School and the Narrow School. There have been so many intense debates, divergent viewpoints and research papers written on the topic of Productive Labor that it has become a major theoretical issue in the world of economics at home and abroad.Solving the problem of productive labor has both theoretical and practical significance. On the one hand, like the two sides of a coin and similar to cost and profit, productive labor and capital are concepts in a pair. They can develop and explain each other. On the other hand, the relationship between productive labor and modern industrial division and modern national economic accounting is also a major theoretical and practical problem in need of elucidation. Most economists of our country have attempted to solve the problem of modern industrial division and modern national economic accounting from the views of general productive labor, which the author of this dissertation deems as a completely mistaken way of thinking.After a thorough and systematic study of all the exposition of Adam Smith and Marx on the Productive Labor Theory, the author holds that the discussions and researches on this important issue in the field of economic theories at home andabroad are feared to be going off the track. Therefore the author takes Productive Labor Theory as the topic of this doctoral dissertation, hoping to provide a new perspective in finding a solution to this tough and long-standing problem that has been obsessing the economists for years.This thesis consists of four parts. The first part reviews Marx's criticism and inheritance of his predecessors' ideas on the Productive Labor Theory. This mainly includes his criticism of the views of mercantilist and physiocracy economists before Adam Smith, his comments on Adam Smith's productive labor theories, and his criticism of the vulgar economists after Adam Smith. The second part studies Marx's own explanation and elaboration on the Productive Labor Theory, including those in Volume 49 and the appendices of Book One, Volume 26 of the Complete Works of Marx and Engels, written between 1863 and 1865. The author also puts forward the Service Value Theory after studying the Service Theory of Marx. At the end of this part, the author gives a summary to the Productive Labor Theory of Marx and proposes the non-equivalence of value-producing labor and productive labor and the three "Irrelevance" theorems. In the third part of the dissertation, the author examines Marx's Productive Field Division Theory before putting forward the classification standards for material production fields and non-material ones, the inner division of material production fields and the inner division of non-material production fields. The Theory of the Three Divisions of Industry is criticized. The last part gives reviews and the author's brief comments on the research history of and major debates over Marxist Productive Labor Theory, including-not only the productive labor theories of the "Wide School", the "Narrow School", the "Middle School", but also those of contemporary Western scholars and such domestic scholars as He Liancheng, Lu Lijun, Bai Baoli and Li Tieying.The innovative ideas in this doctoral dissertation are as follows:1. The long-standing controversies over the Productive Labor Theory are mainly caused by the inability to understand Adam Smith's ideas correctly. In fact, Adam Smith has two definitions on Productive Labor, the first one referring to the labor for producing capital in the capitalist sphere of production of material objects, and the second referring to that for the production of commodities in the same sphere.2. Marxist Productive Labor Theory is created on the basis of criticizing, inheriting and developing the ideas of Adam Smith concerning this theory. Marx also has two definitions for Productive Labor. The first one is the labor for producing capital underthe capitalist mode of production, that is, Capitalist Labor. The second definition refers to the labor for producing capital in the capitalist sphere of production of material objects, which can be regarded as Capitalist Labor in the sphere of production of material objects.3. Employed Labor is the key to Marxist division of Productive Labor and Unproductive Labor. Both Productive Labor and Unproductive Labor are employed labor. The premises for differentiating the two types of labor are the selling of labor rather than that of commodities. The Productive Labor Theory of Marx can be illustrated by the following equations:Employed Labor = First Type Productive Labor + First Type Unproductive Labor Employed Labor= Second Type Productive Labor + Second Type Unproductive Labor4. Marx did not put forward the so-called "General Productive Labor" category. Our misunderstandings for Marx's Productive Labor Theory over the years are the consequences of this misreading. Hence the three "Irrelevance" theorems:(1) Productive Labor Theory is irrelevant to Labor Value Theory;(2) Productive Labor Theory is irrelevant to the National Economic Accounting Theory;(3) Productive Labor Theory is irrelevant to the Theory of the Three Divisions of Industry.Finally, the dissertation also probes into Marx's theories on the divisions of the sphere of labor and the sphere of production.
Keywords/Search Tags:General Productive Labor, Employed Labor, First Type Productive Labor, Second Type Productive Labor, Value of Service Theory, Value of Labor Theory, National Economic Accounting Theory, Theory of the Three Divisions of Industry
PDF Full Text Request
Related items