Value, psychological and marxist

Chris Burford cburford at
Sun Jul 9 23:01:57 MDT 1995

Hello Seamus,

I was glad you came back on Value, psychological and marxist, on
Friday 7th. But if you were seeking to communicate
specifically with me I regret I have to
report that handshaking has not occurred between your modem and

I was wondering if someone else would pick up your reply
because I am out of my depth in this type of discourse, yet it seems
an important connection.

I have two specific problems.

1) in a text in which 80% of the concepts or the names are
unfamiliar to me your number of typos becomes a problem, and
creates noise on the line at an impracticable level. I counted
only 6 sentences which did not have typos. The problem then is
if I don't understand a sentence, have a missed something or is it
an accident.

2) I need you to be clearer about whether we have understood
each other or not. I had written

> In such discourse I think you are describing the social matrix, that
> is the matrix of the society as a whole, and arguing that language is
> a sub-set of that. If so I buy that argument.

You appeared to be commenting on this when you wrote

What is imporant in a nut shell is that subjects
do not exist in a social matrix, the social matrix (the already operable
feild of social meaning, of signs) the feild of the other constitutes or
produces subjects at its intercese.

I don't understand this and I don't know if my problem is with the ideas
or whether there are one or more mistakes in the text, or
whether you are being polite in the way you say you think I am wrong.
Can you be clearer please?

Sorry if I sound a bit desperate to understand you.

Chris B.

     --- from list marxism at ---


More information about the Marxism mailing list