Abstract

Marx's "classical economics" concept with a clear connotation, denotation and with a certain "knowledge" related, which Western scholars in general, vague sense of the concept of using the fundamental heterogeneity. It is an analysis of boundary demarcation paradigm, explains Marx and bourgeois economics that exists between "knowledge" of the fracture, this analysis paradigm is Bou from Petty and the beginning of Jill Bell and the social structure of this determined by the movement of the structure, which is the "classical economics" where the concept of unique content. Foucault, who ignored the classical economics of the "structure" view from the "Labor" category starting, that Marx Ricardo amendments in the deepest knowledge in the West did not have a real discontinuity, which is not read Marx. " classical political economy, "the real meaning. Marxian concept of "classical economy", which is radically heterogeneous to the concept used by the western scholars in a general and ambiguous sense, has a definite connotation and extension and is related to a certain "episteme". It has demarcated an analytical paradigm, which is an investigation-started by William Petty and Boisguil lebert-of the social structure and the law of movement determined by this kind of structure and in which the characteristic connotation of "classical economy" lies, and expounded that there exists a rupture of " episteme "between economics of bourgeoisie and that of Marx. Some scholars such as Michel Foucault neglected the" structural "perspective of classical economy and departed from the category" labor "and therefore thought that Marxian revision of David Ricardo had not resulted to real discontinuity in the deepest layer of western knowledge. This is due to genuine misunderstanding of the authentic connotation of Marxian "classical political economy"