The definition of gold as material being of abstract wealth also expresses its specific function in the organism of the capitalist formation and not in the consciousness of the theoretician or practical worker, by any means. The abstract' in this sense is by no means the product and result of thinking. This fact is just as little dependent on thinking as the circumstance that 'the abstract law of multiplying exists only for plants and animals'. This objective interpretation of the category of the abstract is spearheaded against all kinds of neo-Kantian logic and epistemology which oppose, in a crudely metaphysical way, 'pure forms of thought' to forms of objective reality. For these schools in logic, 'the abstract' is only a form of thought, whereas 'the concrete', a form of a sensually given image.
Abstraction decreases the content and extends the volume.
It has been polished in dozens of editions and has become generally accepted among philosophers in capitalist countries. That is certainly no proof of its correctness. A 'concrete concept' is reduced by these definitions to 'designating' the sensually contemplated individual things, to a mere sign, or symbol. In other words, 'the concrete' is only nominally present in thought, only in the capacity of the 'designating name'. On the other hand, .'the concrete' is made into a synonym of uninterpreted, indefinite 'sensual givenness'.