Does this para make sense?

[DotheDamnTHing]

While the individual intensifies his effort to produce goods that are to be appropriated by another, these same goods are attributed a greater value, proportionally inverse to his (Marx, pg 60). Hence, the individual is subordinated to his product and the productive process, which determines his product. The product?s relation to the productive process is of necessity mediated by the individual, in that the individual determines its realization. Thus, the individual represents the nucleus between the productive process and the product. However, the productive process is inherently something that is not his realization. Consequently, the demands of the productive process cannot be the same as his self-interest, for there is no internal impetus to produce for the appropriation of another, other than remuneration; a process whereby the object of labor, the product, pays for the same labor (Marx, pg 67).

 

[DotheDamnTHing]

?

 

[Steve]

Originally posted by: DotheDamnTHing
While the individual intensifies his effort to produce goods that are to be appropriated by another, these same goods are attributed a greater value, proportionally inverse to his own(Marx, pg 60). Hence, the individual is subordinated to his product and the productive process, which determines his product. The product?s relation to the productive process is of necessity mediated by the individual, in that the individual determines its realization. Thus, the individual represents the nucleus between the productive process and the product. However, the productive process is inherently something that is not his realization. Consequently, the demands of the productive process cannot be the same as his self-interest, for there is no internal impetus to produce for the appropriation of another, other than remuneration; a process whereby the object of labor, the product, pays for the same labor (Marx, pg 67).

That's all I'd change.

 

[T3C]

Originally posted by: sm8000

Originally posted by: DotheDamnTHing
While the individual intensifies his effort to produce goods that are to be appropriated by another, these same goods are attributed a greater value, proportionally inverse to his own(Marx, pg 60). Hence, the individual is subordinated to his product and the productive process, which determines his product. The product?s relation to the productive process is of necessity mediated by the individual, in that the individual determines its realization. Thus, the individual represents the nucleus between the productive process and the product. However, the productive process is inherently something that is not his realization. Consequently, the demands of the productive process cannot be the same as his self-interest, for there is no internal impetus to produce for the appropriation of another, other than remuneration; a process whereby the object of labor, the product, pays for the same labor (Marx, pg 67).

That's all I'd change.

 

[HomeBrewerDude]

you need a better topic sentence. comes across as paraphrasing to me. put it in your own words. use language that is clearer. this might be a paragraph that is best written as two paragraphs.

 

[Whitecloak]

too many poly-syllabic words for me to comprehend.

 

[Literati]

I'd change...

"Hence, the individual is subordinated to his product and the productive process, which determines his product"

to

"Hence, the individual is subordinated to his product and the productive process, which determines his output"

And also what the others said.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: MantisFistMonk
I'd change...

"Hence, the individual is subordinated to his product and the productive process, which determines his product"

to

"Hence, the individual is subordinated to his product and the productive process, which determines his output"

And also what the others said.

agreed. too many uses of the same word in the original sentence.

 

[DotheDamnTHing]

the whole para is as follows:

Alienation, as present in liberal society, exists not only to deprive the individual of the ability to determine his world through his labor, but serves the insidious purpose of alienating the individual from his capability to determine ?our own good our own way?. While the individual intensifies his effort to produce goods that are to be appropriated by another, these same goods are attributed a greater value, proportionally inverse to his own (Marx, pg 60). Hence, the individual is subordinated to his product and the productive process, which determines his product. The product?s relation to the productive process is of necessity mediated by the individual, in that the individual determines its realization. Thus, the individual represents the nucleus between the productive process and the product. However, the productive process is inherently something that is not his realization. Consequently, the demands of the productive process cannot be the same as his self-interest, for there is no internal impetus to produce for the appropriation of another, other than remuneration; a process whereby the object of labor, the product, pays for the same labor through it sale (Marx, pg 67). As a result, the liberal state and society, dominated by capitalist relations, cannot provide for any form of ?liberty?, other than political, for they are fundamentally aligned against the individual?s ability to determine his ?own good his own way?.



im trying to outline the process of the alienation of the ability to determine our own good our own way

 

[Yossarian]

possibly the worst paragraph I have ever read.