| This question <113|113> overall <108|110> SF: <48|168>. |
| Exam Question 74: Give economic, not philosophical reasons why a commodity must appear as what it is (use your own words). |
| [109] SF: A commodity must appear socially as a commodity To review, the definition of a commodity requires it to have both a use value and an exchange value. If a substance lacks either of the above, it cannot be a commodity because it cannot be exchanged. For example, if a substance lacks an exchange value, it has no method of relating its value to the value of other, differing products. If there is to be no exchange then an exchange value is not required, and it is not a commodity. Obviously, a substance without a use value cannot be exchanged since it must first be produced (i.e. concrete human labor expended in the process of making or simply acquiring it, thus giving it a use value) before it can be exchanged. |
| Since the use value is really an individual valuation and the exchange value a social valuation, in order for a commodity to be exchanged, there must be a way to translate one into the other. The use value, being created by the concrete labor of the maker, must be able to relate itself to the abstract pool of labor in society. This requires an exchange value, which is simply the social terms of trade between two different use values. Just as any useful product must have a use value, so must any product produced for exchange have both a use value and an exchange value. Thus a commodity, which is a product produced for exchange, must have the social form of a commodity, that being a use value and an exchange value. |
| Hans: See my message [113]. |
|
|
|||||