A Re-examination of the Labour Theory of Value in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

With the rapid development and widespread application of artificial intelligence technology, humanity has already entered the age of artificial intelligence. The arrival of the age of artificial intelligence has both propelled an overall leap in China’s productive forces and promoted profound changes in people’s ways of life. The acceleration of “machines replacing humans” and the expansion of “unmanned factories” have raised some new questions for Marx’s labour theory of value, such as: How does the age of artificial intelligence reshape labour? Does Marx’s labour theory of value still possess applicability in the age of artificial intelligence? How should Marx’s labour theory of value be put into practice in the age of artificial intelligence? Grounding ourselves in the fundamental positions of Marxism and actively responding to the theoretical and practical questions posed to Marx’s labour theory of value by the age of artificial intelligence is of great significance for upholding and developing Marx’s labour theory of value in the New Era.

随着人工智能技术的快速发展与广泛运用，人类已然步入人工智能时代。人工智能时代的到来，既推动了我国生产力的整体跃升，又促进了人们生活方式的深刻变革。“机器换人”的加速、“无人工厂”的扩张，给马克思的劳动价值论带来了一些新的质疑，诸如：人工智能时代如何重塑劳动？马克思劳动价值论在人工智能时代是否还具有适用性？人工智能时代如何践行马克思劳动价值论？立足马克思主义基本立场，主动回应人工智能时代给马克思劳动价值论提出的理论与实践之问，对于新时代坚持和发展马克思劳动价值论具有重要意义。

I. The Reshaping of Labour and the Transformation of Value in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

一、人工智能时代的劳动重塑与价值变迁

Historically, human society has successively experienced three scientific and technological revolutions, and each scientific and technological revolution greatly promoted the transformation and development of the economy and society. Artificial intelligence, as “a strategic technology leading this round of scientific and technological revolution and industrial transformation,”[1]1 The Chinese text cites a source as “[1](P119)”; the original source reference is not provided in the input, so it is reproduced as given.(P119) is increasingly integrated into all fields and the entire process of the economy and society, promoting changes, transformations, and upgrades in the modes of production and life, and pushing the world gradually from the post-industrial era into the age of artificial intelligence. Technological progress has brought about profound changes in the mode of labour, enabling new developments in the mode of value creation and the form of its realisation.

历史上，人类社会先后经历过三次科技革命，且每次科技革命都极大地促进了经济社会的转型发展。人工智能作为“引领这一轮科技革命和产业变革的战略性技术”，[1](P119)日益融入经济社会各领域全过程，推动生产生活方式的变化、变革和升级，促使世界从后工业时代逐渐进入人工智能时代。技术进步带来了劳动方式的深刻变化，使价值创造模式和实现形式获得新发展。

First, the age of artificial intelligence promotes the reshaping of labour. Artificial intelligence technology endows machines with “human-like” intelligence, and its effect on replacing human brainpower is even more pronounced. On the one hand, some “exclusively human posts” for information collection, transmission, simple processing, and feedback, such as telephone customer service, information retrieval, and cashier bookkeeping, are gradually being replaced by machines. On the other hand, artificial intelligence technology has created a batch of new occupations, such as AI trainers, and at the same time has given rise to a mode of labour combining humans and intelligent machines, bringing about epoch-making changes in the labour model.

第一，人工智能时代推动劳动重塑。人工智能技术使机器拥有“类人”的智慧，对于人的脑力替代作用更为明显。一方面，过去一些信息收集、传递、简单加工和反馈的“人类专属岗位”，如电话客服、信息检索、收银记账等工作逐渐被机器代替；另一方面，人工智能技术造就了如人工智能训练师等一批新职业，同时催生了人与智能机器相结合的劳动方式，使劳动模式发生划时代的变化。

First, the relationship between living labour and objectified labour becomes more complex. In the era of machine-based large-scale industry in which Marx lived, the distinction between living labour and objectified labour was clear, that is, there was a clear boundary between the consumption of the worker’s mental and physical energy and the consumption of the means of production. Workers, through their own mental and physical labour, used instruments of labour to process raw materials into labour products with use value, forming a complete production process. After the production process ended, living labour existed in a special form, namely objectified labour, in which part of the labour product was consumed as means of subsistence to replenish the worker’s mental and physical energy, while another part was preserved in the form of tools and materials to participate in the next labour process. Marx pointed out: “The product of labour is labour fixed in an object, it is the objectification of labour.”[2]2 The Chinese text cites Marx as “[2](P156-157)”; the original source reference is not provided in the input, so it is reproduced as given.(P156-157) The emergence of machines reduced the degree of dependence of production on living labour, increased the “labour-saving” effect, and created a certain “overlap” in the functions of living labour and objectified labour. The emergence of artificial intelligence has formed an automated production system dominated by intelligent machines. In application scenarios of artificial intelligence such as “smart workshops,” “security monitoring robots,” and “self-service cashier machines,” autonomous operation can be achieved almost without the participation of workers. With the development of artificial intelligence technology, artificial intelligence is showing a trend of gradually transitioning from weak AI to strong AI and from specialised AI to general AI, enabling it to undertake richer and more efficient work tasks, causing profound changes in the relationship between living labour and objectified labour, with the proportion of objectified labour in the two becoming increasingly larger.

一是活劳动与物化劳动的关系更为复杂。在马克思生活的机器大工业时代，活劳动与物化劳动的区分是明确的，即劳动者脑力和体力的消耗与生产资料的消耗之间存在着清晰的界线。劳动者通过自身的脑力劳动和体力劳动，利用劳动工具将原材料加工成具有使用价值的劳动产品，形成环节完整的生产流程。生产过程结束后，活劳动以一种特殊形式即物化劳动存在，其中，劳动产品的一部分作为生活资料被消费，用以补充劳动者的脑力和体力，另一部分则以工具和材料等形式保存下来，参与下一次劳动。马克思指出：“劳动的产品是固定在某个对象中的、物化的劳动，这就是劳动的对象化。”[2](P156-157)机器的出现使生产对于活劳动的依赖程度减弱，“省力”效果增加，活劳动与物化劳动的功能则出现了一定的“重叠”。人工智能的出现形成了以智能机器为主导的自动运行生产系统，在诸如“智能车间”“安保监控机器人”“自助收取款结账机”等人工智能的应用场景下，几乎可以实现无须劳动者参与的自主运行。随着人工智能技术的发展，人工智能出现逐渐从弱人工智能向强人工智能、专用人工智能向通用人工智能转变的趋势，能够承担更为丰富、更为高效的工作任务，使活劳动与物化劳动的关系发生深刻变化，物化劳动在二者中所占比例越来越大。

Second, data and new forms of digital labour have emerged. In the age of artificial intelligence, the emergence of the digital economy form, empowered by artificial intelligence technology, marks digital labour as a new form of labour. Digital labour refers to the process in which digital workers use labour tools such as mobile phone terminals, tablets, and computers to process and handle raw data, producing digital products and services with use value. As a new labour form formed in the age of artificial intelligence, the emergence of the new form of digital labour conforms to the inevitable trend of the development of human society. In this context, data, as an important factor of production, is a variety of information obtained by digital workers after collecting, organising, and analysing raw data. Production units use this to significantly reduce costs, improve production efficiency, and enhance the scientific nature of decision-making. In the production mode of data factorisation and technological digitalisation, the object of labour is no longer a tangible physical carrier but highly abstracted data information. The generation, collection, and organisation of data provide raw materials for artificial intelligence’s computation, analysis, decision-making, and self-learning, ultimately realising the “automatic” decision-making of machines, constituting the operational logic of digital labour. A large number of workers have left traditional industries, and in the upstream of production, they transform concrete product performance into digitalised operating procedures through forms such as research and development and programming. Labour products are gradually shifting from material forms to non-material forms, with virtual goods and virtual services increasingly becoming new labour products. These non-material labour products can not only be transmitted and shared more efficiently but are also easily digitalised and automated.

二是数据与数字劳动新形态得以产生。人工智能时代，人工智能技术加持下的数字经济形态的产生，标志着数字劳动成为新的劳动形式。数字劳动是指数字劳动者运用手机终端、平板电脑、计算机等劳动工具，对原始数据进行加工、处理，生产出具有使用价值的数字产品与服务的过程。作为人工智能时代形成的一种新的劳动形态，数字劳动新形态的产生符合人类社会发展的必然趋势。在这一背景下，数据作为重要的生产要素，是数字劳动者在对原始数据进行收集、整理和分析后得出的多种多样的信息，生产单位借此大幅降低成本、提高生产效率、提高决策的科学性。在数据要素化和技术数字化的生产模式中，劳动对象不再是有形的现实载体，而是经过高度抽象化的数据信息。数据的产生、收集、整理为人工智能提供计算、分析、决策和自我学习的原料，最终实现机器的“自动”决策，构成数字劳动的运转逻辑。大量劳动者从传统行业脱离，在生产上游通过研发、编程等形式将具象化的产品性能转化为数字化的操作程序。劳动产品从物质形态逐渐向非物质形态转变，虚拟商品和虚拟服务日益成为新的劳动产品，这些非物质形态的劳动产品既可以更高效地传递和共享，也易于被数字化和自动化处理。

Third, the extension of labour time and space. Artificial intelligence technology has a certain impact on the temporal and spatial conditions of labour. From the perspective of labour time, on the one hand, artificial intelligence causes an extension of labour time. As early as the era of machine-based large-scale industry, Marx discovered that machines even became “the most powerful means of lengthening the working day beyond all natural limits.”[3]3 The Chinese text cites Marx as “[3](P463)”; the original source reference is not provided in the input, so it is reproduced as given.(P463) At the present stage, artificial intelligence has penetrated all aspects of human work and life. Its continuous 24-hour usability allows workers to flexibly use more fragmented time, blurring the boundary between workers’ working time and leisure time. Although artificial intelligence has greatly improved production efficiency, modern workers have not enjoyed leisure; on the contrary, labour time is continuously extended. On the other hand, artificial intelligence extends the total duration of labour. The design purpose of artificial intelligence is to serve production practice. Only the entire process of artificial intelligence from algorithm writing and model creation to its application in practice can be called a complete labour process, which is equivalent to adding the labour link of designing and training artificial intelligence models to the original production process. Since artificial intelligence can replace some specific functions of living labour, a large amount of living labour is transferred to the upstream of production, that is, to links such as data preparation, model building, model evaluation, and behaviour training for artificial intelligence products. Therefore, the increase in total labour time creates a large time interval between the transfer of living labour and the output of products, resulting in a delayed effect of living labour, which easily creates the illusion that living labour does not participate in production labour. From the perspective of labour space, labour space is continuously extended. The value-creation environment for more workers has shifted from factory assembly lines to offices, and workers can also use virtual reality technology to work in a new spatial dimension. The extension of labour space has realised the transformation from workers being present to “unmanned labour,” which can also create the illusion that no workers are needed to participate in labour.

三是劳动时间延长和空间延伸。人工智能技术对于劳动的时空条件造成一定的冲击。从劳动的时间层面来看，一方面，人工智能造成劳动时间的延长。早在机器大工业时代，马克思就发现了机器甚至成为“把工作日延长到超过一切自然界限的最有力的手段”。[3](P463)现阶段，人工智能已渗透到人类工作和生活的方方面面，其24小时不间断的持续使用性使劳动者可以灵活运用更多碎片化的时间，使劳动者的工作时间与闲暇时间的界限日益模糊。尽管人工智能极大提升了生产效率，但是现代劳动者并没有享受闲暇，相反劳动时间不断延长。另一方面，人工智能使劳动的总体时长延长。人工智能的设计目的在于服务生产实践，人工智能从算法编写、模型创制到运用于实践的整个过程才能称得上完整的劳动过程，相当于在原有的生产过程中增添了设计、训练人工智能模型的劳动环节。由于人工智能可以替代部分活劳动的具体功能，使得大量活劳动转移至生产上游，即人工智能产品的数据准备、模型建立、模型评估、行为训练等环节。因此，劳动总时长的增加使活劳动转移与产品产出之间存在较大的时间间隔，形成活劳动延迟生效的结果，容易产生活劳动不参与生产劳动的错觉。从劳动的空间来看，劳动空间不断延伸，更多劳动者的价值创造环境从工厂流水线转变为办公室，劳动者亦可运用虚拟现实技术在一个新的空间维度进行工作。劳动空间的延伸实现了劳动者在场向“无人化劳动”的转变，也会造成无须劳动者参与劳动的假象。

Second, the age of artificial intelligence promotes the transformation of value. The significant substitution effect[4]4 The Chinese text cites a source as “[4]”; the original source reference is not provided in the input, so it is reproduced as given. that artificial intelligence machines exhibit on human labour brings about enormous changes in the realisation of value. Artificial intelligence prompts a further increase in the organic composition of capital, a further reduction in the value of individual commodities, and a transformation in the mode of value realisation.

第二，人工智能时代推动价值变迁。人工智能机器对人类劳动所展现出的显著的替代效应[4]带来了价值实现的巨大变化。人工智能促使资本有机构成进一步提高，单位商品的价值量进一步降低，价值实现方式发生转变。

First, the organic composition of capital rises. The technical composition determines the value composition, and the value composition reflects the technical composition. Marx collectively referred to the two concepts of value composition and technical composition and their interactive relationship as the organic composition of capital. As productive forces improve and production technology continuously advances, the means of production used per unit of labor increase, causing the value of constant capital to rise relatively and the value of variable capital to fall relatively, thereby raising the organic composition of capital. A rise in the organic composition of capital means that the variable capital used to pay workers’ wages will continuously shrink, workers’ income levels will decline, and some workers, such as industrial workers, will face the crisis of competing with artificial intelligence for jobs, forming a large industrial reserve army, placing workers in a more disadvantageous position.

一是资本有机构成提高。技术构成决定价值构成，价值构成反映技术构成，马克思将价值构成和技术构成两个概念及其相互作用关系统称为资本的有机构成。随着生产力的提升、生产技术的不断提高，单位劳动量所使用的生产资料越来越多，导致不变资本的价值量相对不断增加、可变资本的价值量相对不断减少，资本有机构成提高。资本有机构成提高意味着用于支付劳动者工资的可变资本将不断缩小，劳动者的收入水平下降，部分劳动者如产业工人等面临着与人工智能竞争工作岗位的危机，形成数量庞大的产业后备军，劳动者将处于更不利的地位。

Second, the unit value of commodities decreases. Although use value and value are the two factors of a commodity, and use value is the material carrier of value, the two do not change entirely in the same direction. As productive forces improve, under the premise that the use value contained in a unit commodity remains basically unchanged, the time required to produce a unit commodity decreases, leading to a decline in the value contained in a unit commodity. The application of artificial intelligence technology significantly enhances labor productivity, shortening the socially necessary labor time required to produce a unit commodity, thereby causing a marked decline in the unit value of commodities. Therefore, in the age of artificial intelligence, use value and value exhibit a reverse movement, revealing the trend under the impetus of science and technology of human labor gradually being replaced by advanced means of production. This has also led some people to question the labor theory of value.

二是单位商品价值量减少。尽管使用价值和价值是商品的二因素，使用价值是价值的物质载体，但两者并非完全同向变化。随着生产力的提升，在单位商品所蕴含的使用价值基本不变的前提下，生产单位商品所需的时间减少，导致单位商品所含有的价值量下降。人工智能技术的应用对劳动生产率有着明显的提升作用，生产单位商品所需要的社会必要劳动时间缩短，从而造成单位商品价值量明显下降。因此，人工智能时代，使用价值与价值体现为逆向运动，揭示了在科学技术推动下人类劳动逐渐被先进生产工具所替代的趋势，也因此引发了一些人对劳动价值论的质疑。

Third, the mode of value realization changes. Marx pointed out regarding the exchange process between commodities and money: “The exchange of commodities makes them relate to each other as values and realize themselves as values.” [3]3 The Chinese text cites Marx as “[3](P463)”; the original source reference is not provided in the input, so it is reproduced as given.(P104) Artificial intelligence technology permeates the value realization process of commodities, exerting an important influence on the commodity exchange link. Traditional commodity transactions mainly take place in physical venues such as markets and shops, and commodity exchange must pay material and time costs. Digital platforms, using artificial intelligence technology, can gradually shape “non-present” transaction scenarios and can also precisely match supply and demand through algorithmic recommendations, saving time and energy for both buyers and sellers, shortening the transaction cycle, and making transactions more transparent. In the age of artificial intelligence, productivity has greatly increased, and the popularization of smart payments and digital currencies has gradually freed the form of money from the constraints of material form, making it increasingly abstract and symbolic.

三是价值实现方式发生变化。马克思就商品与货币的交换过程指出：“商品交换使商品彼此作为价值发生关系并作为价值来实现。”[3](P104)人工智能技术渗透商品的价值实现过程，对商品交换环节产生重要影响。传统的商品交易主要是在市场、店铺等实体场所进行的，商品交换必须支付物质和时间成本。而数字平台利用人工智能技术可以逐步塑造“不在场”的交易场景，还能以算法推荐的方式精准匹配供需，为买卖双方节省时间和精力，缩短了交易周期，使交易更加透明化。在人工智能时代，生产力大幅提高，智能支付和数字货币的普及使得货币形态逐渐摆脱了物质形态的束缚，日益抽象化、符号化。

II. Clarifying the Understanding of Marx’s Labor Theory of Value in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

二、人工智能时代马克思劳动价值论的认识澄清

In the age of artificial intelligence, the widespread application of intelligent technology has greatly changed the mode of production, prominently manifested in the replacement of workers by artificial intelligence in multiple production fields. Marx’s labor theory of value faces theoretical and practical challenges. Around the uniqueness of the source of value, the subject status of workers, and the closely related nature of capital, some questioning voices have emerged. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify how to understand and interpret Marx’s labor theory of value in the age of artificial intelligence.

人工智能时代，智能技术的广泛应用极大改变了生产方式，突出表现为人工智能在多个生产领域对于劳动者的取代，马克思劳动价值论受到理论和现实的挑战。围绕价值源泉的唯一性、劳动者的主体地位以及与此密切相关的资本属性，产生了一些质疑的声音。因此，有必要对人工智能时代如何认识理解马克思劳动价值论进行澄清。

First, clarifying the understanding of the issue of the uniqueness of the source of value. The question of where value comes from is the core issue of Marx’s labor theory of value. Labor is the source of all wealth and the sole source of value. Marx pointed out, “There exists an accumulated labor, which calls this labor capital,” and “Capital, this thing, because it contains auxiliary resources, can increase the productivity of living labor by hundreds or thousands of times.” [5]5 Marx, *Value, Price and Profit* (Chinese edition), Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1964.(P80) Living labor is labor in which the living capacity for labor functions. It is not only the sole source of creating value but also the sole source of creating surplus value. This thesis is the fundamental foothold of Marx’s labor theory of value and the key to unraveling where surplus value comes from. As long as the thesis that living labor is the sole source of value holds, the fact that surplus value is created by the labor of wage workers cannot be obscured.

第一，关于价值源泉唯一性问题的认识澄清。价值从何而来的问题是马克思劳动价值论的核心问题。劳动是一切财富的源泉，是价值的唯一源泉。马克思指出，“存在着一种积蓄的劳动，它把这种劳动叫做资本”，“资本这种东西，由于里面包含有辅助的资源，可以使活劳动的生产率增加几百倍、几千倍”。[5](P80)活劳动就是活的劳动能力发挥作用的劳动，它不仅是创造价值的唯一源泉，而且是创造剩余价值的唯一源泉。这一论断是马克思劳动价值论的根本立足点，也是破解剩余价值从何而来的关键所在。只要活劳动是价值的唯一来源的论断成立，剩余价值由雇佣劳动者的劳动创造这一事实就不会被掩盖。

In the mid-to-late 19th century, living labor mainly referred to the physical labor expended by industrial workers in the process of machine-based large-scale industrial production. However, with the development of productive forces, especially with the continuous application of intelligent technology, voices questioning the labor theory of value have persisted in Western academia. For example, the Italian autonomist school, represented by Boudan, denies the role of material labor, arguing that today’s value creation comes from intelligence, invention, and creative labor. [6]6 Paolo Virno and Michael Hardt, eds., *Radical Thought in Italy: A Potential Politics*, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996.(P55) Some scholars also believe that the knowledge theory of value can replace and falsify the labor theory of value. [7]7 See, for example, the works of Daniel Bell and other post-industrial society theorists. The reason for this is that in the age of artificial intelligence, smart factories hardly require workers to participate directly in the production process, creating the illusion of living labor “leaving the scene,” thus leading to the misunderstanding that “living labor is no longer necessary for commodity production and is no longer the sole source of value.”

在19世纪中后期，活劳动主要指的是在机器大工业生产过程中产业工人所付出的体力劳动。但随着生产力的发展，特别是随着智能技术的不断应用，西方学界对劳动价值论的质疑之声不断，比如以博当为代表的意大利自治主义学派否认物质劳动的作用，认为当今的价值创造来源于智力、发明和创造性劳动。[6](P55)还有部分学者认为知识价值论可以替代和证伪劳动价值论。[7]究其原因，是因为在人工智能时代，智能工厂几乎不需要劳动者参与直接生产过程，从而造成活劳动“离场”的错觉，以致引起“活劳动不再是商品生产的必需、不再是价值唯一源泉”的认识误区。

In fact, Marx always examined the production process from an abstract, holistic perspective, rather than seeking the source of value from some specific form of labor. Marx pointed out, “Labor is a totality, a combination of various kinds of labor,” [8]8 Marx, *Grundrisse* (Chinese edition), Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1980.(P120) and labor cannot be seen as the affair of a single worker; even if it is seen as the affair of the totality of workers, it can only be viewed from the combination of labor independent of each individual worker. “This labor, in its material unity, is subordinate to the machine, to the material unity of fixed capital.” [8]8 Marx, *Grundrisse* (Chinese edition), Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1980.(P120) Marx’s above thesis mainly includes two layers of meaning: first, individual labor cannot be separated from total labor; it should be observed and analyzed as a whole; second, that living labor is the sole source of value is not manifested as living labor’s dominant position in labor. Therefore, when examining the production process in the age of artificial intelligence, one cannot treat the unmanned factory as an isolated existence; instead, multiple processes such as the research and development of artificial intelligence, the assembly and maintenance of factories, and the transportation and sale of products should be included in the scope of investigation. It is precisely in these upstream and downstream links that the consumption of living labor adds value to products. Although artificial intelligence occupies an absolutely dominant position in this process, and living labor is merely auxiliary or even absent, one cannot equate artificial intelligence machines with value. Some scholars believe that the core of this debate lies in whether materialized labor and science and technology can create value on their own, and facts prove that neither materialized labor nor science and technology detached from living labor can create value independently. Therefore, adhering to the monism of living labor as value is necessary. [9]9 See, for example, the works of Chinese Marxist economists such as Wei Xinghua on the labor theory of value. Even if we enter a highly intelligent and automated age of artificial intelligence, production still cannot exclude the participation of the living labor element; on the contrary, the technical content and complexity required of living labor are higher, and the value multiplication effect of complex labor is more pronounced.

事实上，马克思对于生产过程的考察，总是从一种抽象的、整体的视角进行，而并非从某种具体劳动中探寻价值的来源。马克思指出，“劳动是一个总体，是各种劳动的结合体”，[8](P120)不能将劳动看作是单个工人的事情，即使将其看作是工人整体的事，也只能从独立于每个工人的劳动结合体来看待。“这种劳动就其物质的统一来说，则从属于机器的，固定资本的物的统一。”[8](P120)马克思的上述论断主要包括两层含义：一是不能将单个劳动与总体劳动割裂开来，应将其作为一个整体进行观察、剖析；二是活劳动是价值的唯一来源并不体现为活劳动在劳动中的主导地位。因此，考察人工智能时代生产过程时，不能将无人工厂当作孤立的存在，而要将人工智能的研发、工厂的组装维修、产品运输销售等多个流程纳入考察范围，正是在这些上下游环节中，活劳动的消耗为产品增添了价值。尽管人工智能在这一过程中占据绝对主导的地位，活劳动仅仅为辅助甚至不在场，但也不能将人工智能机器与价值画上等号。有学者认为这一争论的核心在于物化劳动和科学技术能否自行创造价值，而事实证明脱离活劳动的物化劳动和科学技术都无法独自创造价值，因此，坚持活劳动价值一元论是必要的。[9]即使进入高度智能化和自动化的人工智能时代，生产依然无法排除活劳动要素的参与，相反对于活劳动的技术含量和复杂程度要求更高，复杂劳动的价值倍乘效应更加明显。

Second, clarifying the understanding of the issue of the subject status of workers. Marx pointed out: “Labor is, first of all, a process between man and nature, a process in which man, through his own activity, mediates, regulates, and controls the material exchange between himself and nature.” [3]3 The Chinese text cites Marx as “[3](P463)”; the original source reference is not provided in the input, so it is reproduced as given.(P207-208) The prerequisite for labor is the interaction between man and nature; thus, in the labor process, the worker has a subject status. In his labor theory of value, Marx fully affirmed the subject status of workers, emphasized the important role of workers in promoting socio-economic development, and criticized the exploitation of workers by capital and the alienation of workers by machine production under the capitalist mode of production.

第二，关于劳动者主体地位问题的认识澄清。马克思指出：“劳动首先是人和自然之间的过程，是人以自身的活动来中介、调整和控制人和自然之间的物质变换的过程。”[3](P207-208)劳动的前提是人与自然的互动，因而在劳动过程中劳动者具有主体地位。马克思在劳动价值论中充分肯定了劳动者的主体地位，强调劳动者推动社会经济发展的重要作用，批判了在资本主义生产方式下资本对劳动者的剥削以及机器生产对劳动者的异化现象。

Constrained by doubts about living labor being the sole source of value, the status of workers in the labor process appears even more ambiguous. If non-material labor such as knowledge, intelligence, and invention could independently become a source of value, then workers engaged in material labor would find it difficult to establish a foothold. Especially since artificial intelligence, a crystallization of knowledge and intelligence, has a relatively obvious substitution effect on workers. Artificial intelligence technology endows machines with certain “superhuman” intellectual attributes. From AlphaGo defeating Go world champion Lee Sedol to the emergence of ChatGPT, individual humans in specific fields have found it difficult to compete with artificial intelligence. Therefore, whether humans will be replaced by machines in the future and whether workers can still occupy a subject status has sparked widespread social discussion.

囿于对活劳动是价值唯一源泉的质疑，劳动者在劳动过程中的地位显得更为模糊。假如知识、智力、发明等非物质劳动能够独立成为价值的来源，那么，从事物质劳动的劳动者将难以找到立足点。尤其是人工智能这种知识和智能的结晶对劳动者有着较为明显的替代作用，人工智能技术赋予了机器某些“超人类”的智慧属性，从AlphaGo击败围棋世界冠军李世石再到ChatGPT的横空出世，个体人类在特定领域已经难以与人工智能抗衡。因此，在未来人是否会被机器取代，劳动者是否还能占有主体地位，引起社会的广泛讨论。

Although the scenario in which some laborers are squeezed out of the labor market by artificial intelligence is real, it cannot be inferred from this that artificial intelligence can replace the subject status of laborers. On the one hand, artificial intelligence has not transcended Marx’s theory of the machine system; it remains a “technical existent” of human labor. Marx once discussed machines: “They are the products of human industry, natural material transformed into organs of the human will over nature, or of the human will’s activity in nature.” [8]8 Marx, *Grundrisse* (Chinese edition), Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1980. (P198) [10]10 Marx, Karl. *Grundrisse der Kritik der politischen Ökonomie* (1857–1858). The citation refers to the Chinese edition, *Zhengzhi jingxue pipan dagang* (Renmin Chubanshe, 1995), p. 198. The passage discusses machines as organs of the human will. Viewed from the history of AI’s development, although AI technology has shifted from imitating the physiological structure of the human brain to imitating the learning behavior of the human brain, in the final analysis AI remains “the organ of the human brain created by the human hand,” [8]8 Marx, *Grundrisse* (Chinese edition), Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1980. (P198) an extension of human intelligence in nature. Consequently, objectified AI still cannot be separated from subjectified humanity; it can only become an advanced tool and means for humans to transform nature. On the other hand, AI cannot completely dispense with the human factor; it is itself a product of labor. Marx pointed out, “The simple elements of the labor process are: purposeful activity or labor itself, the object of labor, and the instruments of labor.” [3]3 The Chinese text cites Marx as “[3](P463)”; the original source reference is not provided in the input, so it is reproduced as given. (P208) Purposefulness is a necessary attribute of labor. The starting point of labor lies not only in obtaining what is needed to meet the demands of production and exchange, but also in obtaining what is needed to meet the demands of consumption, and even in obtaining what is needed to meet the demands of human development. No matter how advanced AI becomes, it cannot replace human will in creating demand for labor or in helping people achieve their goals through a series of instructions. From this perspective, even if it only provides the purposefulness of labor and the final enjoyment of the fruits of labor, the laborer still plays an irreplaceable subject role in the labor process.

尽管部分劳动者被人工智能排挤出劳动市场的情景真实存在，但不能因此推断人工智能可以取代劳动者的主体地位。一方面，人工智能并未超越马克思的机器体系理论，依然是人类劳动的“技术存在物”。马克思曾对机器展开过论述：“它们是人的产业劳动的产物，是转化为人的意志驾驭自然界的器官或者说在自然界实现人的意志的器官的自然物质。”[8](P198)从人工智能的发展历史来看，尽管人工智能技术从模仿人脑的生理结构转变为模仿人脑的学习行为，但归根结底人工智能依然是“人的手创造出来的人脑的器官”，[8](P198)是人的智能在自然界的延伸。因而，对象化的人工智能仍然无法脱离主体化的人类，只能成为人改造自然的先进工具和手段。另一方面，人工智能无法完全抛开人的因素，它本身就是劳动的产物。马克思指出，“劳动过程的简单要素是：有目的的活动或劳动本身，劳动对象和劳动资料”。[3](P208)合目的性是劳动的必要属性，劳动的出发点不仅在于要获得满足生产、交换的需求，而且要获得满足消费的需求，甚至要获得满足人的发展的需求。哪怕是再发达的人工智能也无法代替人的意志为劳动创造需求，通过一系列指令帮助人达到目的。从这一点看，哪怕仅是提供劳动的目的性和最终享受劳动成果，劳动者在劳动过程中依然起到不可替代的主体作用。

Third, a clarification of the understanding of the attribute of capital. When examining machine production, Marx proposed, “After entering the production process of capital, the instruments of labor undergo various changes in form, and their final form is the machine, or more precisely, the automatic system of machinery.” [8]8 Marx, *Grundrisse* (Chinese edition), Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1980. (P184) Marx believed that the development process of machines is closely linked to the production process of capital; capital causes the means of production to evolve into the form of machinery, gradually advancing in the direction of production automation.

第三，关于资本属性问题的认识澄清。马克思在考察机器生产时提出，“加入资本的生产过程以后，劳动资料经历了各种不同的形态变化，它的最后的形态是机器，或者更确切些说，是自动的机器体系”。[8](P184)马克思认为，机器的发展过程与资本的生产过程有着密切的联系，资本使生产资料演化为机器形式，逐步向生产自动化的方向演进。

The application of AI represents a higher stage of capital production. Its enormous effect in enhancing production efficiency can continuously enrich society’s material wealth. By partially replacing human labor, machines gradually liberate people from heavy labor, making their lives more prosperous and free. Based on this real-world transformation, techno-accelerationists emphasize using the effects of the digital technology revolution to reconstruct post-capitalism, thereby restructuring the relationship between intelligent algorithms, digital automation technology, and capital, so as to construct a political assemblage of algorithmic automation that transcends capital accumulation and exploitation. [10]10 Marx, Karl. *Grundrisse der Kritik der politischen Ökonomie* (1857–1858). The citation refers to the Chinese edition, *Zhengzhi jingxue pipan dagang* (Renmin Chubanshe, 1995), p. 198. The passage discusses machines as organs of the human will. They attempt to use digital technology represented by AI to rescue the various crises of capitalist society. Techno-accelerationists believe that AI technology can accelerate the rate of capital valorization and solve many of society’s development problems, thus regarding AI as a technology that compensates for the negative effects of capital. The above view is clearly biased and must be clarified.

人工智能的应用体现了资本生产的更高级阶段，它对于生产效率的巨大提升作用，可以不断丰富社会物质财富。通过对人类劳动的部分替代，机器逐渐把人从繁重的劳动中解放出来，使人的生活更加富裕和自由。基于现实中的这一巨变，技术加速主义者强调，要利用数字技术革命效应重建后资本主义，以重构智能算法、数字自动化技术与资本的关系，从而建构一种超越资本积累和剥削的算法自动化的政治集合，[10]试图用以人工智能为代表的数字技术挽救资本主义社会的种种危机。技术加速主义者认为，人工智能技术能够加快资本的增殖速度，解决社会诸多发展问题，从而将人工智能视为弥补资本负面作用的技术。上述观点具有明确的偏颇性，必须予以澄清。

On the one hand, AI strengthens the positive role of capital. With the assistance of AI, high-quality development led by technological innovation gradually takes shape. Intelligent planning can make resource allocation more rational, making the links of production, distribution, exchange, and consumption smoother and tighter. Moreover, the leap in productive forces can, to a certain extent, solve many current social problems. From this perspective, the application of AI technology promotes the rapid development of capital and has a positive impact. On the other hand, the negative effects caused by the rapid valorization of capital cannot be ignored. First, AI intensifies the opposition between capital and labor. Marx noted that the mission of machinery in the production process of capital “became a form of capital hostile to labor.” [8]8 Marx, *Grundrisse* (Chinese edition), Beijing: People’s Publishing House, 1980. (P300) The emergence of AI further consolidates the rule of capital, continuously weakening the initiative of laborers in labor, turning them into the “nerve endings” of the intelligent network. No individual laborer is any longer irreplaceable; they can only obtain labor opportunities by reducing their own labor costs. Second, AI intensifies the monopoly of capital. AI technology greatly enhances the competitiveness of enterprises. Dominant enterprises quickly achieve a monopoly position in the market through methods such as “free” and “subsidized” offerings, and consolidate their monopoly position through technological monopoly, data monopoly, platform monopoly, and other means. Third, AI intensifies the exploitation of capital. AI cannot eliminate the exploitative nature of capital; it only makes the act of exploitation more concealed. In the age of AI, due to the temporal and spatial integration of information production and workers’ lives, the exchange of labor power by digital laborers becomes very concealed. [11]11 This refers to the phenomenon where users of digital platforms, through their unpaid activities (e.g., providing data, training algorithms), contribute to value creation for the platform company, a form of exploitation Marx analyzed as the extraction of surplus value from unwaged labor. A large number of platform users exchange their own data in the form of free application experiences, training and refining AI models while using the products. This “non-wage labor” allows platform companies using AI to obtain high profits, becoming an important source for them to extract surplus value.

一方面，人工智能强化了资本的积极作用。在人工智能的辅助下，以技术创新为主导的高质量发展逐渐形成，智能规划可以使资源配置更为合理，生产、分配、交换、消费各个环节衔接更为流畅紧密，且生产力的跃升也能在一定程度上解决当前存在的不少社会问题。从这一角度来看，人工智能技术的应用推动了资本的快速发展，具有积极影响。另一方面，资本快速增殖所造成的负面影响不容忽视。一是人工智能加剧资本与劳动的对立。马克思注意到机器在资本生产过程中的使命“成了与劳动相敌对的资本形式”。[8](P300)人工智能的出现会进一步巩固资本的统治，不断削弱劳动者在劳动中的主动性，使其成为智能网络的“神经末梢”，任何劳动个体不再具备不可替代性，只能以降低自身劳动成本的形式换取劳动机会。二是人工智能加剧资本的垄断。人工智能技术会极大提高企业的竞争力，优势企业以“免费”“补贴”等方式迅速在市场中占据垄断地位，且通过技术垄断、数据垄断、平台垄断等方式巩固其垄断地位。三是人工智能加剧资本的剥削。人工智能无法消除资本的剥削性质，只是将剥削行为变得更加隐蔽。在人工智能时代，由于信息生产和劳动者生活之间存在时空融合，数字劳动者的劳动力交换行为变得十分隐蔽。[11]大量平台用户以免费应用体验的形式交换了自身的数据，在使用产品的同时也在培养和训练人工智能模型。这种“非雇佣劳动”让使用人工智能的平台公司获得高额利润，成为它们攫取剩余价值的重要来源。

III. The Practice of Marx’s Labor Theory of Value in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

三、工智能时代马克思劳动价值论的践行

As discussed above, the rapid development of AI technology and its widespread application in the field of production have changed the content and form of social production labor, affecting the process of value production and realization, and posing significant challenges to Marx’s labor theory of value. At the same time, with its powerful labor capacity, AI liberates humans from heavy and tedious mechanical labor, providing impetus and space for humans to engage in other occupations, and bringing new opportunities for upholding and developing Marx’s labor theory of value. Therefore, it is necessary to actively respond to the opportunities and challenges that the age of AI brings to Marx’s labor theory of value, using the method of dialectical materialism and a perspective of historical development.

如前所述，人工智能技术的快速发展及其在生产领域的广泛应用，改变了社会生产劳动的内容和形式，影响着价值的生产和实现过程，使马克思劳动价值论面临巨大的挑战。与此同时，人工智能凭借其强大的劳动能力，将人类从繁重枯燥的机械劳动中解放出来，为人类从事其他职业提供动力与空间，给坚持和发展马克思劳动价值论带来新的机遇。因此，要以唯物辩证的方法、历史发展的眼光，积极应对人工智能时代给马克思劳动价值论带来的机遇和挑战。

First, adhere to the monism of living labor as the source of value while keeping pace with the times. The application of AI technology, although making unmanned production possible, still requires laborers to maintain the smooth flow of the production, distribution, exchange, and consumption links of labor products. This also confirms that the emergence of AI has not turned the category of value into a historical concept. It is undeniable that the factors of production currently participating in value creation are undergoing tremendous changes. The important role of non-material forms of factors of production, such as technology and data, in production labor is constantly becoming prominent. [12]12 This refers to the increasing role of non-material factors of production, such as technology and data, in the contemporary economy, which some argue challenges the classical labor theory of value. However, from the perspective of each factor of production, the emergence of every factor of production is inseparable from conscious human labor. Consequently, the claim that AI will replace human living labor collapses of its own accord. Living labor remains the sole source of the value of commodities, and Marx’s labor theory of value remains the scientific guide for the age of AI. On the one hand, the important role of labor must be emphasized. The emergence of AI technology does not mean that labor is useless; on the contrary, AI technology promotes the renewal and iteration of labor. High and new technology replaces and eliminates past simple, repetitive, low-tech labor, and creates new demands for complex, high-tech labor. With the help of AI, humans can achieve labor of high difficulty, high technology, and high value content, thereby fundamentally improving labor efficiency and greatly enriching material wealth. On the other hand, the understanding of the concept of living labor must be deepened. The development of productive forces in the age of AI has caused many changes in the forms of living labor, giving rise to new categories of labor such as digital labor. Starting from the current conditions of productive forces, it is necessary to analyze the new phenomena of real economic development and enrich the theoretical connotation of the concept of living labor, thereby enhancing the applicability of Marx’s labor theory of value.

第一，与时俱进地坚持活劳动价值一元论。人工智能技术的应用，尽管使无人化生产成为可能，但是依然需要劳动者维持劳动产品的生产、分配、交换和消费各环节的畅通，这也印证了人工智能的出现并没有使价值范畴成为历史概念。不可否认的是，当前参与价值创造的生产要素正发生着巨大的变化，技术、数据等非物质形态的生产要素在生产劳动中的重要作用不断凸显。[12]但从各个生产要素来看，每一种生产要素的产生都离不开人类有意识的劳动。因而，人工智能将取代人类活劳动的主张不攻自破，活劳动依然是创造商品价值的唯一源泉，马克思劳动价值论依然是人工智能时代的科学指南。一方面，要重视劳动的重要作用。人工智能技术的产生并不意味着劳动无用论，相反，人工智能技术促进了劳动的更新迭代。高新技术取代和淘汰了过去简单、重复的低技术含量劳动，对复杂的高技术含量劳动提出了新的需求。借助人工智能，人类可以实现高难度、高技术、高价值含量的劳动，从而从根本上提高劳动效率，极大丰富物质财富。另一方面，要深化对于活劳动概念的理解。人工智能时代生产力的发展使活劳动的形式发生了诸多变化，产生了数字劳动等新的劳动范畴。应从当前的生产力条件出发，剖析现实经济发展的新现象，丰富活劳动概念的理论内涵，从而增强马克思劳动价值论的适用性。

Second, unwaveringly uphold the principal position of laborers. In the various debates on the labor theory of value in the age of artificial intelligence, the core issue is whether AI can replace human labor and where laborers should go. Marx’s labor theory of value points out the principal position of laborers in the production process, embodying a value orientation that is people-centered and seeks liberation for laborers. Adhering to the people-centered value orientation is the key to straightening out the relationship between AI and laborers. Xi Jinping pointed out: “Developing AI will provide important support for China to build a modern economic system and achieve high-quality development, and will provide important guarantees for improving people’s livelihoods.” [1]1 The Chinese text cites a source as “[1](P119)”; the original source reference is not provided in the input, so it is reproduced as given.(P140) The ultimate goal of AI development is not to replace humans, but to better serve humanity. In the New Era, the focus must be placed on meeting the people’s ever-growing needs for a better life. On the one hand, the subjective role of laborers must be brought into play. First, the key role of talent in technological innovation should be highlighted, with efforts focused on cultivating innovative laborers, channeling the labor force into innovative industries, and making laborers an important force driving technological innovation and development. Second, to meet the requirements of the AI era, AI education should be strengthened, forming an integrated intelligent education system from primary school to university, improving people’s ability to learn and master AI, and thereby fundamentally enhancing the comparative advantage of laborers relative to AI. On the other hand, the all-round development of people must be promoted. First, AI technology should be used well, striving to free laborers from heavy work and provide conditions for realizing people’s all-round development. Second, the opportunities brought by the AI era should be seized, with attention paid to and measures taken to promote the development of laborers, such as expanding the “occupational map” of the New Era and encouraging laborers to choose careers with development prospects, so as to reconstruct laborers’ production and lifestyle with the goal of people’s all-round development.

第二，毫不动摇地坚持劳动者的主体地位。在关于人工智能时代劳动价值论的各种争论中，核心问题是人工智能能否取代人类劳动、劳动者该何去何从。马克思劳动价值论指明了劳动者在生产过程中的主体地位，蕴含着以人民为中心、为劳动者寻求解放的价值取向。坚持以人民为中心的价值取向，是理顺人工智能与劳动者关系的关键所在。习近平指出：“发展人工智能，将为我国构建现代化经济体系、实现高质量发展提供重要支撑，为民生改善提供重要保障。”[1](P140)人工智能发展的最终目的不是为了取代人类，而是要更好服务人类，在新时代则是要将落脚点放到满足人民日益增长的美好生活需要上。一方面，要发挥好劳动者的主体性作用。一是要突出人才在技术创新中的关键作用，着力培养创新型劳动者，让劳动者群体向创新型行业流入，让劳动者成为推动技术创新发展的重要力量。二是要适应人工智能时代的要求，加强人工智能教育，形成大中小学一体化的智能教育体系，提高人们学习和掌握人工智能的能力，进而从根本上提高劳动者相对于人工智能的比较优势。另一方面，要推动人的全面发展。一是要用好人工智能技术，努力将劳动者从繁重的工作中解放出来，为实现人的全面发展提供条件。二是要抓住人工智能时代带来的机遇，重视并采取措施推动劳动者发展，如拓展新时代“职业版图”、 鼓励劳动者选择有发展前景的职业等，以人的全面发展为目标重构劳动者的生产生活方式。

Third, dialectically understand the interaction between capital and AI technology. When AI technology is combined with capital, capital becomes the driver of AI technology development, while AI technology becomes the driver of capital expansion; the two drive each other. In a technological innovation model dominated by capital, AI technology has achieved rapid progress and development. However, excessively rapid technological progress, lacking corresponding institutional safeguards, may have negative impacts on human society. Under the dominance of the logic of capital, AI becomes a means to intensify the exploitation of laborers, gain market monopoly status, and maximize capital accumulation, triggering more intense contradictions between capital and laborers. This enlightens and requires us to adhere to the guidance of Marx’s labor theory of value, grasp the dual role of capital in AI technology, curb the disorderly expansion of capital through institutional forms, and ensure the healthy development of AI technology. Specifically, first, China’s basic economic system must be upheld. Regulating the development of capital within the framework of the basic economic system is the fundamental means to curb the disorderly expansion of capital. AI must be made to return to its essence as a tool for improving labor productivity, serving the construction of a high-level socialist market economy system and the improvement of people’s living standards, and finding the correct positioning of AI. Second, fair distribution must be ensured. The use of AI must be prevented from widening the gap between rich and poor, balancing income levels among different laborers, and promoting labor equality through fair treatment. The income distribution system must be deepened, the proportion of labor remuneration in primary distribution increased, the minimum income standard gradually raised, and efforts made to narrow income gaps between urban and rural areas, regions, and industries, so as to promote fair labor treatment. Third, the regulatory mechanism must be improved. Strict anti-monopoly measures must be taken to break the monopoly position of large AI enterprises. The legal norms for the classified protection of data information must be accelerated and improved, a policy and regulatory system adapted to the characteristics of digital platforms must be constructed, equal emphasis must be placed on encouraging technological innovation and promoting technology for good, and unfair competition practices such as algorithm abuse must be regulated according to law, effectively safeguarding consumers’ rights and interests in market transactions. (Huang He, a doctoral student at the School of Marxism, Wuhan University, also made important contributions to this article.)

第三，辩证认识资本与人工智能技术之间的相互作用。当人工智能技术与资本相结合时，资本成为人工智能技术发展的推动者，而人工智能技术则是资本扩张的推动者，二者相互推动。在以资本为主导的技术创新模式中，人工智能技术得到飞速的进步和发展，但是，过快的技术进步因缺少相应的制度保障，有可能对人类社会造成负面影响。在资本逻辑主导下，人工智能成为加强对劳动者剥削、获取市场垄断地位、追求资本增殖最大化的手段，引发资本与劳动者之间更加激烈的矛盾。这启示并要求我们坚持以马克思劳动价值论为指导，把握好资本对于人工智能技术的双重作用，以制度形式遏制资本无序扩张，确保人工智能技术健康发展。具体地说，一是要坚持我国的基本经济制度。在基本经济制度的框架下规范资本的发展是遏制资本无序扩张的根本手段。要使人工智能重新回归促进劳动生产率的工具的本质，服务于建设高水平社会主义市场经济体制和提升人民生活水平，找准人工智能的定位。二是要保障分配公平。要防止对人工智能的运用造成贫富悬殊扩大，平衡不同劳动者之间的收入水平，以待遇公平促进劳动平等。要深化收入分配制度改革，提高劳动报酬在初次分配中的比重，逐步提高最低收入标准，努力缩小城乡、区域、行业的收入差距，推动劳动待遇公平。三是要健全监管机制。要采取严格的反垄断措施，打破大型人工智能企业的垄断地位。加快完善数据信息分类保护的法律规范，构建与数字平台特征相适应的政策法规体系，坚持鼓励技术创新与推动技术向善并重，依法规制算法滥用等不正当竞争行为，有效维护消费者在市场交易中的权益。（武汉大学马克思主义学院博士研究生黄合对本文亦有重要贡献）

(Author’s brief introduction: Li Nan, Professor and Doctoral Supervisor, School of Marxism, Wuhan University)

（作者简介：李楠，武汉大学马克思主义学院教授、博士生导师）

Online editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心