go right now and get that book off the shelf so i can glean some elaborations.
Off
>the top of my head: I remain skeptical of the "functional" definition
of
>abstract labor brilliantly developed by Postone
becuase you think he makes abstract labour functional? to what? or do you mean something else?
, the treadmill effect in
>his proufound chapter "Dialectic of Labor and Time", and his embrace
of
>social movements.
becuase you think he goes to far, or goes at all, toward beleiving that labour is tainted? is that what you mean?
Of course his Sohn-Rethel inspired emphasis on the
>derivation of 'forms of thought' and apparently a priori notions from
the
>social relations of production strikes me as a very difficult
argument to
>sustain, but most expertly done.
sohn-rethel has not been enough read, or not enough amongst people i've spoken to, which might not be many at all, but why is this a problem? as much sohn-rethel as pashukanis was here, though the latter not referenced, or as far as i can recall. you have a problem with deriving forms of thought from the social relations of prodn? (i'm not sure about the a priori bit in that sentence) --- i ask not becasue i want to jump, but because i am not clear on what you mean.
>It's a great, great book.
yes it is.
angela