[lbo-talk] law of value

[Rakesh Bhandari]

important response of course Wojtek. Note that I am not challenging 
at present law of non contradiction or law of excluded middle. 
Philosophy may well begin in Zeno's paradoxes. See Mazur The Paradox 
of Motion. I don't think Collier's def of immanent contradiction 
implies challenge to above laws. Perhaps you could tell us how you 
describe the two situations I have described as expressions of 
immanent contradictions.
Won't be able to respond till much later.
Yours, Rakesh

[WS:] Contradiction is a state of mind, not a state of reality.  There is
nothing contradictory in reality - only material existence of objects.  Some
of those objects may be annihilated by other objects under certain
circumstances - but that is not "contradiction" between these two kinds of
objects, but merely a transformation of material forms in accordance with
the laws of nature.

"Contradiction" enters the scene only when the human mind imbues the
material reality with the products of it sown imagination i.e. an idea
(mental product) that acts as the material cause i.e. force producing
material transformation.  Only then we can say that there is "contradiction"
in what materially exists i.e. inconsistency between certain material forms
and the idea that is believed to "cause" them.  But this is just a metaphor
used to describe the world - it means nothing more than the ideas that we us
to describe the world are not logically consistent with one another.

Stated differently, "contradiction: is an indicator of a fault in our
thinking about reality rather than a fault in the reality itself.
Consequently, if we encounter a "contradiction" we ought to change our
thinking rather than expect reality to change as a result of that
contradiction.  It is quite delusional to believe that the material world
revolves around the products of human mind.

Wojtek