What do you think?
Rate this book
Theories of Surplus-Value #1
Artı-Değer Teorileri
Karl Marx'ın Theorien über den Mehrwert (1862-63) adlı yapıtının birinci kitabını, Yurdakul Fincancı İngilizcesinden (Theories of Surplus Value, part 1, Lawrence and Wishart, London 1969, Translated by Emile Burns, Edited by S. Ryazanskaya) dilimize çevirdi ve kitap, Fransızcasıyla (Théories sur la plus-value, tome 1, Editions Sociales, Paris 1974, Publiées sous la responsibilité de Gilbert Badia) karşılaştırıldıktan sonra Artı-Değer Teorileri, Birinci Kitap adı ile, Sol Yayınları tarafından, Kasım 1998 tarihinde, Ankara'da Şahin Matbaası'nda bastırıldı.
- GenresNonfictionPhilosophy
424 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1956
1 person is currently reading
154 people want to read
About the author
Karl Marx
3,280 books6,626 followersWith the help of Friedrich Engels, German philosopher and revolutionary Karl Marx wrote
The Communist Manifesto
(1848) and
Das Kapital
(1867-1894), works, which explain historical development in terms of the interaction of contradictory economic forces, form many regimes, and profoundly influenced the social sciences.
German social theorist Friedrich Engels collaborated with Karl Marx on The Communist Manifesto in 1848 and on numerous other works.
Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin in London opposed Communism of Karl Marx with his antithetical anarchy.
Works of Jacques Martin Barzun include Darwin, Marx, Wagner (1941).
The Prussian kingdom introduced a prohibition on Jews, practicing law; in response, a man converted to Protestantism and shortly afterward fathered Karl Marx.
Marx began co-operating with Bruno Bauer on editing Philosophy of Religion of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (see Democritus and Epicurus), doctoral thesis, also engaged Marx, who completed it in 1841. People described the controversial essay as "a daring and original piece... in which Marx set out to show that theology must yield to the superior wisdom." Marx decided to submit his thesis not to the particularly conservative professors at the University of Berlin but instead to the more liberal faculty of University of Jena, which for his contributed key theory awarded his Philosophiae Doctor in April 1841. Marx and Bauer, both atheists, in March 1841 began plans for a journal, entitled Archiv des Atheismus (Atheistic Archives), which never came to fruition.
Marx edited the newspaper Vorwärts! in 1844 in Paris. The urging of the Prussian government from France banished and expelled Marx in absentia; he then studied in Brussels. He joined the league in 1847 and published.
Marx participated the failure of 1848 and afterward eventually wound in London. Marx, a foreigner, corresponded for several publications of United States.
He came in three volumes. Marx organized the International and the social democratic party.
Marx in a letter to C. Schmidt once quipped, "All I know is that I am not a Marxist," as Warren Allen Smith related in Who's Who in Hell .
People describe Marx, who most figured among humans. They typically cite Marx with Émile Durkheim and Max Weber, the principal modern architects.
Bertrand Russell later remarked of non-religious Marx, "His belief that there is a cosmic ... called dialectical materialism, which governs ... independently of human volitions, is mere mythology" ( Portraits from Memory , 1956).
More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bi...
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/...
http://www.historyguide.org/intellect...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic...
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/...
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/t...
German social theorist Friedrich Engels collaborated with Karl Marx on The Communist Manifesto in 1848 and on numerous other works.
Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin in London opposed Communism of Karl Marx with his antithetical anarchy.
Works of Jacques Martin Barzun include Darwin, Marx, Wagner (1941).
The Prussian kingdom introduced a prohibition on Jews, practicing law; in response, a man converted to Protestantism and shortly afterward fathered Karl Marx.
Marx began co-operating with Bruno Bauer on editing Philosophy of Religion of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (see Democritus and Epicurus), doctoral thesis, also engaged Marx, who completed it in 1841. People described the controversial essay as "a daring and original piece... in which Marx set out to show that theology must yield to the superior wisdom." Marx decided to submit his thesis not to the particularly conservative professors at the University of Berlin but instead to the more liberal faculty of University of Jena, which for his contributed key theory awarded his Philosophiae Doctor in April 1841. Marx and Bauer, both atheists, in March 1841 began plans for a journal, entitled Archiv des Atheismus (Atheistic Archives), which never came to fruition.
Marx edited the newspaper Vorwärts! in 1844 in Paris. The urging of the Prussian government from France banished and expelled Marx in absentia; he then studied in Brussels. He joined the league in 1847 and published.
Marx participated the failure of 1848 and afterward eventually wound in London. Marx, a foreigner, corresponded for several publications of United States.
He came in three volumes. Marx organized the International and the social democratic party.
Marx in a letter to C. Schmidt once quipped, "All I know is that I am not a Marxist," as Warren Allen Smith related in Who's Who in Hell .
People describe Marx, who most figured among humans. They typically cite Marx with Émile Durkheim and Max Weber, the principal modern architects.
Bertrand Russell later remarked of non-religious Marx, "His belief that there is a cosmic ... called dialectical materialism, which governs ... independently of human volitions, is mere mythology" ( Portraits from Memory , 1956).
More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bi...
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/...
http://www.historyguide.org/intellect...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic...
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/...
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/t...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
June 18, 2016
Many good reviews of Capital I-III can be seen on Goodreads, but far fewer for Theories of Surplus Value; a few added remarks about this book may be in order.
This edition, the Progress Publishers reprint of the Dietz Verlag version, comes in three volumes. The preface to volume I explains the need for a version of the book that follows Marx's original outline and contains all his notes. The original 1910 version, edited by Karl Kautsky, has generated controversy since its publication. The preface discusses this in some detail and reaches a rather bracing verdict:
The complete disregard of Marx's table of contents, the arbitrary and incorrect arrangement of the manuscript material, the objectivist titles which avoid the class essence of the conceptions criticised by Marx, the obscuring of the fundamental antithesis between Marx's economic teaching and the whole bourgeois political economy, the removal of a number of passages containing important theses of revolutionary Marxism, from which Kautsky more and more departed -- all this suggests that what we have here is not only gross violations of the elementary requirements of a scientific edition, but also the direct falsification of Marxism.
Yikes. How accurate is this? I'll take that up in a moment. More immediately, finding any version of this book took effort and much of what I located was costly. This was what I finally settled on. Capital IV, as Dietz Verlag subtitles it, is built from Marx's research notes. Most of the material has already been taken up in Capital I-III, so this is an easy read for anyone who finished those three tomes.
It's easy because it consists mostly of discussion, not theory; it's a bonus because Marx walks readers once again through the more intricate ideas in Capital. If Capital I-III can be called a dialectical development of the topic, this work may be considered the historical materialist side of that same development. Marx uses only non-socialist, bourgeois sources and follows a familiar pattern of quoting a certain author first, then developing his own ideas in the commentary that follows.
The value here lies in the more extended treatment he gives certain topics. At one point, for example, Marx poses the question: How can net revenue purchase the entire gross product of a certain year? Readers will remember this from the second and third volumes of Capital, but now he goes over it again in a different way. That significantly helped my understanding of Department I and Department II. Yes, I could have gone back over my highlighting, but Marx's discussion here was a far more efficient way to fix the big picture in my mind, and easier as well.
With reference to the remarks in the preface, I did come across two startling quotations in this first volume that fit the description of revolutionary, to say the least. One had no commentary by Marx. In neither case did the ideas feed directly into the technical discussion of capitalism in volumes I-III. One can see how Kautsky might have justified leaving them out. On the other hand, the exact arrangement of the notes is crucial to seeing how Marx's methodology works. A chronological ordering of the discussion would make it impossible to see Marx in action.
The first volume of this work contains a 34-page preface and 380 pages of the source material, with an appendix, an index and footnotes taking up the remaining pages. I got so much out of these notes that I hope to take up the remaining two volumes. This book added greatly to my understanding of the first three volumes of Capital.
This edition, the Progress Publishers reprint of the Dietz Verlag version, comes in three volumes. The preface to volume I explains the need for a version of the book that follows Marx's original outline and contains all his notes. The original 1910 version, edited by Karl Kautsky, has generated controversy since its publication. The preface discusses this in some detail and reaches a rather bracing verdict:
The complete disregard of Marx's table of contents, the arbitrary and incorrect arrangement of the manuscript material, the objectivist titles which avoid the class essence of the conceptions criticised by Marx, the obscuring of the fundamental antithesis between Marx's economic teaching and the whole bourgeois political economy, the removal of a number of passages containing important theses of revolutionary Marxism, from which Kautsky more and more departed -- all this suggests that what we have here is not only gross violations of the elementary requirements of a scientific edition, but also the direct falsification of Marxism.
Yikes. How accurate is this? I'll take that up in a moment. More immediately, finding any version of this book took effort and much of what I located was costly. This was what I finally settled on. Capital IV, as Dietz Verlag subtitles it, is built from Marx's research notes. Most of the material has already been taken up in Capital I-III, so this is an easy read for anyone who finished those three tomes.
It's easy because it consists mostly of discussion, not theory; it's a bonus because Marx walks readers once again through the more intricate ideas in Capital. If Capital I-III can be called a dialectical development of the topic, this work may be considered the historical materialist side of that same development. Marx uses only non-socialist, bourgeois sources and follows a familiar pattern of quoting a certain author first, then developing his own ideas in the commentary that follows.
The value here lies in the more extended treatment he gives certain topics. At one point, for example, Marx poses the question: How can net revenue purchase the entire gross product of a certain year? Readers will remember this from the second and third volumes of Capital, but now he goes over it again in a different way. That significantly helped my understanding of Department I and Department II. Yes, I could have gone back over my highlighting, but Marx's discussion here was a far more efficient way to fix the big picture in my mind, and easier as well.
With reference to the remarks in the preface, I did come across two startling quotations in this first volume that fit the description of revolutionary, to say the least. One had no commentary by Marx. In neither case did the ideas feed directly into the technical discussion of capitalism in volumes I-III. One can see how Kautsky might have justified leaving them out. On the other hand, the exact arrangement of the notes is crucial to seeing how Marx's methodology works. A chronological ordering of the discussion would make it impossible to see Marx in action.
The first volume of this work contains a 34-page preface and 380 pages of the source material, with an appendix, an index and footnotes taking up the remaining pages. I got so much out of these notes that I hope to take up the remaining two volumes. This book added greatly to my understanding of the first three volumes of Capital.
August 15, 2021
Marx finally learns how to write, and uses this new found talent to wipe the floor with Capitalist classical economists.
January 11, 2026
I was conflicted over whether I should give this a four or a five stars… mainly because this book being written in a very odd way;
At first, you think Marx is just telling you what others’ thought (that is, other political economists) - aka creating a historical/literary analysis.
But a significant amount of the book is dedicated to stating whether or not said person agreed with Marx’s conceptions - which he pretty explicitly states to be ‘scientifically correct‘. The result is at times strange: Marx states that X author had the wrong view because of something very general about their times (they lived in France, and agricultural country), but does not give us much in the way of an actual background for said author (who were they?) or how he knows that their viewpoint was ‘wrong’. It is very obvious that some conception of science/truth is jumping around in the shadows of this book, but we never get to see it!
At the same time though, there is so much interesting stuff here - from the different theories, to slowing down and taking Marx’s comments piece by piece, you learn a lot about what a lot of people believed in the past. Of course, today’s intellectual world is so different, but maybe why this book was so fun - you see a snapshot into a past series of debates.
In short, I would recommend reading this book.
At first, you think Marx is just telling you what others’ thought (that is, other political economists) - aka creating a historical/literary analysis.
But a significant amount of the book is dedicated to stating whether or not said person agreed with Marx’s conceptions - which he pretty explicitly states to be ‘scientifically correct‘. The result is at times strange: Marx states that X author had the wrong view because of something very general about their times (they lived in France, and agricultural country), but does not give us much in the way of an actual background for said author (who were they?) or how he knows that their viewpoint was ‘wrong’. It is very obvious that some conception of science/truth is jumping around in the shadows of this book, but we never get to see it!
At the same time though, there is so much interesting stuff here - from the different theories, to slowing down and taking Marx’s comments piece by piece, you learn a lot about what a lot of people believed in the past. Of course, today’s intellectual world is so different, but maybe why this book was so fun - you see a snapshot into a past series of debates.
In short, I would recommend reading this book.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews