论文部分内容阅读
国外学者对马克思劳动价值论从分析方法、价值理论的时间性和价值的定义等方面进行了攻击,但实际上是对马克思分析方法和价值理论的误解或无知。国外学者用玉米等物品价值论取代劳动价值论是自相矛盾的;马克思对不同时期商品价值决定的机制分析,表明指责劳动价值论缺乏时间性的观点是站不住脚的;而通过虚构不同的价值定义的不一致性来否定劳动价值论也是没有说服力的。国外学者对马克思劳动价值论的责难并不能动摇其科学性。
Foreign scholars have attacked Marx’s labor theory of value from the aspects of analysis method, the timeliness of value theory and the definition of value, but in fact it is a misunderstanding or ignorance of Marx’s analysis method and value theory. It is self-contradictory that foreign scholars replaced the labor theory of value with the value theory of maize etc. Marx’s analysis on the mechanism of the decision of commodity value in different periods shows that it is untenable to criticize the theory that labor theory lacks timeliness. The inconsistency of the definition of value to negate the labor theory of value is also not convincing. Foreign scholars’ censure of Marx’s labor theory of value can not shake its scientific nature.