56 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: ]
Would you help me get into poetry please? I've been fascinated with poetry after reading a little bit of The Book of Disquiet. I like stuff that has that really dense poetic language, the metaphorical language. I remember writing my own poetry before, when I was very disturbed and going through depression, it was visual metaphors were coming out of my sub conscious mind and I didn't know what I was going to write, but I just wrote and I was amazed at what came out about 2 or 3 times in my life. I like that sort of poetry, which is very abstract. I'm also a big pessimist, love dark philosophical stuff, horror, but I also love beauty, extreme beauty. Idk if prose poetry would necessarily always be better, but I have yet to find any of that rhyme and meter poetry that really sounded good to me.
42 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: ]
Has someone read Marx's capital?
I'm really stuck so I hope someone can help me out:
Marx talks about exchange value ( for example 1 coat = 2 hammers which means that there is something that 1 coat and 2 hammers have in common, for they are exchangeable, and this common thing is labor which means that the amount of labor-time socially necessary to produce 1 coat, is equal to the amount of labor-time socially necessary to produce 2 hammers.
In the form commodity A = commodity B ( 1 coat = 2 hammers), commodity A is the relative value-form and commodity B is the equivalent form.
At a certain point, Marx talks in a polemic way about the mercantilists, the people who believe that the equivalent form (commodity B) determines the value of the relative use value (commodity B) and Marx says that this is completely ridiculous and laughable and he puts it like this: 1 coat (commodity A) is equal to 2 hammers (commodity B) but also equal to 2 pants (commodity C), 4 shirts (commodity D) and so on, and so on. So we see here that the relative use value (1 coat/commodity A) doesn't change, but the equivalent form does: the equivalent form is 2 hammers OR 4 shirts OR 2 pants. This means that the relative value-form determines the size of value of commodity B and not the other way around.
So here comes the problem:
When the the amount of labor-time socially necessary to produce commodity B increases, because of extern factors, the value of B increases too, for there is more labor-time necessary to produce comodity B and the labor-time socially necessary determines the value.
But because the value of commodity B (2 hammers) increases, the value of commodity A decreases:
the initial form:
1 coat = 2 hammers
current form, after the increased value of commodity B:
1 coat= 1 hammer
So the value of commodity A decreased, because of commodity B, which means that the equivalent form CAN determine the value of the relative value-form, right?
Help me out!
21 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: ]
How can you tell whether or not a book is poorly written? People say pic related is written very well, and I can see how, but would not have been able to make that judgement on my own as I thought nothing of the writing as I was reading the book. People also say that A Song of Ice and Fire is poorly written, but again, unless I see a specific passage singled out to be bad, I wouldn't know if it was poorly written.