The Abstraction of Capital Versus the Abstraction of Money: The Hypothesis of a Debate Between K. Marx and A. Sohn-Rethel

The theory of real abstraction conceived by Alfred Sohn Rethel must be radically criticized. It expresses a vulgarly reductionist conception of the relation of the superstructure to the structure, according to which, for example, the Platonic theory of ideas would be a mere reflection of the function of money as a measure of exchange value in ancient Greece. The theory of money as "a priori in cash" must be criticized on the basis of Marx's indications that an economic determination, such as exchange value, finds its truest realization only in modern capitalist society (i.e. the "exchange value" as a consequent expression of "surplus value" and accumulation of capital). But it must also be criticized for a profound misunderstanding of the history of Athens and Greece, as well as of the history of ancient philosophy. All the great attention that Plato devoted to the world of techniques is in fact based, certainly not on exchange value, but on the value of use and the resulting division of labor. Plato's theory of ideas / techniques must be explained with the development of craftsmanship in an agricultural society and with the criticism of the monism of the "Being" of Eleatic philosophy. In this sense, Moshe Postone's critique of Sohn Rethel as the author of a radical historical anachronism must be confirmed, even if developing and deepening it.