| This question <214|214> overall <213|217> BonzoIsGod: <110|735>. graded A– |
| Question 134: How does Marx's statement in 138:2/o that a commodity's value material “does not contain a single atom of physical matter” relate to his other statement in 177:3-4 that “no chemist has ever discovered exchange-value in pearl or diamond.” Do they say the same thing or something different? |
| [214] BonzoIsGod: Commodity Value and Exchange-Value. Marx's statements are related in that both are asserting that a commodity's value and exchange-value are not tangible items. “That so and so much abstract labor was used up in the production of the linen is not evident from its use-value” (Ehrbar, 72). It is a principle of society that one cannot reach out and touch or scientifically discover the value of an item. It is understood what an item's value is, based on society's practices. |
| Hans: The value of an item cannot be determined up to 3 decimal places as its weight etc. But a Marxist would still say it can be investigated scientifically. Even if social science does not look like physics, it nevertheless deserves the name of “science.” |
|
|
|||||