Missed Carrol's remark first time around. What do you make of this
bit from the Grundrisse?
"Money is therefore not only an object, but is the object of greed.
It is essentially auri sacra fames. Greed as such, as a particular
form of the drive, i.e. as distinct from the craving for a particular
kind of wealth, e.g. for clothes, weapons, jewels, women, wine etc.,
is possible only when general wealth, wealth as such, has become
individualized in a particular thing, i.e. as soon as money is
posited in its third quality. Money is therefore not only the object
but also the fountainhead of greed.... Hedonism in the abstract
presupposes an object which possesses all pleasures in potentiality."
Doug
===
Very Aristotelian. Wouldn't it perhaps be more accurate to say that
hedonism presupposes an object which mediates the transition from potential
to actual pleasure[s] in systems of generalized commodity production? So
that in addition to money being "the face of the boss", money is the flip
side of [or perhaps competitor with] the law, which also mediates the
production of pleasure[s]?
Ian
What page #?
