| This question <62|64> overall <62|64> Ayn: <324-12|96>. |
| Question 75: Why can commodities not express their values in their own use values? |
| [63] Ayn: Why Commodities cannot express value in their use value The definition of a commodity is the combination of a “natural form and a value-form.” The commodity itself is an embodiment of a natural value, its natural use value derived from its materials, and it is also a representation of the value-form, the labor derived value. |
| The definition of commodity requires that it have a double form: the congelation of both abstract and concrete labor. The concrete labor is that which actually transforms the use-values of the materials into an exchangeable form. However, it is the abstract labor which allows the commodities to relate to one another on the market, namely, to “speak” to one another. The concrete labor, each task being fundamentally different, must be reduced to its most common denominator: human labor power in a socially necessary form. Then, by abstracting labor, it can be measured against other commodities embodiments of different types of labor. Thus, by abstracting labor, it is easier to measure commmodity value against value. |
| The different use values of commodities are so basically different that it is not possible to realize the differences between them on the market if use value is the only measurement of value. Therefore, it must needs be that the common form of value between all commodities be the expression of the value: the concrete, transformed to abstract, labor; it is not possible for use value to be the expression because of the fundamentally different natures of use values. |
| Hans: See message [68] where I go through your submission in detail. |
|
|
|||||