| This question <1951|1940> overall <1878|1897> Avatar: <1658|146>. graded A– |
| Question 158: Marx says that the human labor accumulated in the coat is not visible in the coat. Is this not obviously wrong? Everybody who sees a coat knows that it is a product of human labor, this coat would not exist without the human labor that produced it. |
| [1883] Avatar: True, the coat would not exist without the human labor that produced it and the labor power that made the coat can be seen in its use-value, but the human labor accumulated in the coat is invisible. |
| Human labor-power is expended in the production of a coat, but human labor is what is congealed in the coat. The useful labor (labor power) that went into making to coat can be seen in the use-value of the coat, but the useful labor is latent (dead) because it can not be gotten back from the coat. The accumulated value that gives the coat value is the abstract labor that is represented by the coat. The object (the coat) made from linen is a representation of the value of linen. The value of the linen had to be given up to produce the coat and the value of the linen is then represented by the coat. |
| Further, the relationship that Marx makes between the linen and the coat is interesting. He says that they are “kindred” and come from the same breed. I wonder if this example is drawn from the saying about two people who are similar in nature being “cut from the same cloth” or if Marx's example is the source that saying comes from. Either way, it is interesting because it give a sort of human character to the linen and the coat. |
| Hans: Yes, this is the right answer. Although the coat is made of labor, and labor generates value, the use-value of the coat does not contain an atom of value material, as Marx says. One might say the abstract labor does not generate the use-value of the coat but its exchange-value. |
| Everything in your answer makes sense except for the following passage, which is going in an entirely wrong direction: |
| The object (the coat) made from linen is a representation of the value of linen. The value of the linen had to be given up to produce the coat and the value of the linen is then represented by the coat. |
| You are making the mistake which I warned against in [73]. This possibly had a bad influence on the very next homework submission, [1897], which made the same mistake. And I had to duck your grade although it is overall an excellent answer; this will teach me a lesson regarding mandatory sentencing. |
| Final Grading Note by Hans: Always interesting, thoughtful, original, challenging contributions. I also liked it very much that you directly engaged the other participants in serious but polite debate. |
|
|
|||||