| This question <64|64> overall <56|58> Luc: <456|80>. |
| Question 146: Why is it not possible that all Catholics are simultaneously popes? |
| [57] Luc: relative and equivalent forms of value This question is in direct reference to a metaphor given by Marx in his 1847 polemic against Proudhon, The Poverty of Philosophy. The metaphor is used to show the impossibility of direct exchangeability of commodities. |
| To prove that direct exchangeability is impossible, Marx shows the interdependence of relative and equivalent forms of value. The simple relative form of value of one commodity converts one other commodity into its equivalent, hence, the word simple. The expanded form of relative value is the expression of the value of one commodity in terms of all other commodities. This form allows multiple commodities be expressed in the form of other commodities. Finally, the universal equivalent is a particular commodity that is used to show relative values of world commodities expressed in terms of the particular commodity. |
| In the first or simple form, the two commodities are interchangeable (20 linens=1 coat or 20 coats=x linens). On the other hand, the problem of exchangeability surfaces when one attempts to switch the two commodities in the second or expanded form because only one commodity can expand its relative form and all other commodities are, with respect to it, equivalents. In the last form, world commodities have a general relative form of value and all commodities except one are excluded from the equivalent form. However, the particular commodity that is used as the universal equivalent can not be exchanged with the world commodities because then it could possibly be used relative to itself which would be impossible. For this reason, it is not possible that all Catholics are simultaneously popes. |
| Hans: You write: |
| The expanded form of relative value is the expression of the value of one commodity in terms of all other commodities. This form allows multiple commodities be expressed in the form of other commodities. |
| No, the other way round: it allows the same commodity to have multiple value expressions. It is exactly the weakness of the Expanded form that the value expressions of two different commodities are not identical. Marx writes in 156:2/o;V156:2/o: |
| the relative form of value of each commodity is an endless series of expressions of value which is different than the relative form of value of every other commodity. |
|
|
|||||