| |
[107] Sinatra: I agree that the statement “a table is a table” is a false one in
that case. The money you had to spend on the table purchase was obtained
through some sort of labour( I hope,to make this thing simple) and now to
validate that labour in social terms, you are looking to exchange it.
The way in which the value of your labour is to express it through the
use value of the commodity for which you will exchange it, the table in
this case. If the only use value for a table that you held important was
to eat of it, than indeed, a table is a table in every case. But as
Message [92] mentioned, other use-value facts come into play, size, color,
durability, etc. If your only concerns were size and ability to eat off
it, all tables of the same size, no matter material or color, would be
equal expressions of value. What you really desire, or at least will
accept, in exchange for the labour power you expend, will be the
determining factor on whether a table is indeed just a table. |
|