Jim D. writes
> Eric N. writes: >I would go further. It could be argued that no "objective" measure of the level of productive forces > can exist. Presumably a productive force is considered productive because it leads to some good or service that > >people want and/or need. But, as Smith and Marx recognized, wants and needs are (partly) socially/historically > >determined.... < > I agree. I'm not sure I do. I think it would be possible in principle to come up with a mathematically rigorous definition of "the productive forces" in terms of the ability to produce arbitrary physical objects of a given information-theoretic complexity of structure, and then carry the analysis on from there. I realise that this is making information theory do an awful lot of work, but I'm not yet quite ready to give up on the separation of physical production from demand and exchange as an analytical tool. dd ___________________________________________________ Email Disclaimer This communication is for the attention of the named recipient only and should not be passed on to any other person. Information relating to any company or security, is for information purposes only and should not be interpreted as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security. The information on which this communication is based has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable, but we do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice. All e-mail messages, and associated attachments, are subject to interception and monitoring for lawful business purposes. ___________________________________________________
