| This question <567|589> overall <575|577> Eagle: <575|758>. |
| Question 189: Explain in your own words the meaning of the sentence: “Although gold and silver are not by nature money, money is by nature gold and silver.” |
| [576] Eagle: Gold and silver have other use values than being used for a method of exchange, like money is. They can be used for various other things. Also, they don't have a consistent value to all people. A pound of gold could be worth $100 to one person and $150 to another. In money, one dollar is always worth exactly one dollar. Money is by nature gold and silver because, as Marx puts it, it is “capable of quantitative differentiation”, “divisible at will”, and it is “possible to assemble it again from its component parts”. |
| Hans: You are still using the subjective concept of value! |
| [576] Eagle: (datestring)Wed, 15 Mar 1995 06:36:52 -0700 (MST)(/datestring) Gold and Silver also have a use value to some people. They are also used as building materials and materials of possession, such as jewelry. Money can't be used for either of these purposes. |
| Hans: With respect to use value, it is correct to speak about use value “to some people”. But the value of something, in Marx's terminology, is a social given, it is not correct to speak of the value of something “to” someone. This is what I meant by the subjective concept of value. |
| Regarding the question, your answer is formulated in such a way that I am still wondering whether you mean the right thing. |
|
|
|||||