摘要：
在马克思看来, 李嘉图所处的资本主义时期的生产方式尚未成熟, 资本主义经济关系仍被视作为一种永恒、自然的形式, 资本主义生产条件下的商品价值量与商品价值本质之间的矛盾亦尚未得到合理解决.主要归结为:其一, 李嘉图站在资本主义阶级的立场去理解劳动价值论, 并将其单纯划为自然范畴.其二, 李嘉图未能细分商品质的需要以满足人的需要为条件, 以及没有强调人的生命价值.其三, 李嘉图没有很好的厘清抽象劳动概念甚至忽视了抽象劳动.马克思创立了科学的劳动二重性理论, 确立了劳动者的主体性地位, 明确了价值实体概念及价值规律, 并着重研究商品价值形式中质的规定性, 这是对李嘉图的劳动价值论的超越.%In Marx's view, the mode of production in the capitalist period that Ricardo was in is not yet mature, for the capitalist economic relations were still taken then as an eternal and natural form and there was no reasonable resolution to the contradiction between the quantity and quality of commodity value under the capitalist production conditions. In short, Ricardo stands in the position of the capitalist class to understand the theory of labor value thus classifying it as a natural category. Secondly, Ricardo fails to subdivide the demand of the commodity quality to meet the needs of the people and lays less stress on the value of human life. Thirdly, Ricardo does not clarify the concept of abstract labor and even neglect the abstract labor. Theorizing the two-fold character of labor scientifically, Marx establishes the subjective status of laborers, explicits the substance of value and the law of value, and focuses on the study of the qualitative character of commodity value, which is beyond Ricardo's labor theory of value.
