| |
[56] Gza: use-value debate. i think everyone has good arguments about the whole
debate of whether use is constructed in the
utilization of an object or if use-value exists
independent of actual use. however, i think that Marx
isn't necessarily drawing a dichotomy between the
constructionalist camp and the ontological advocates.
instead he starts his argument by suggesting that
use-value can only be realized when a physical
commodity is in hand and is thus utilized, a type of
constructionalism that suggests that use-value is in a
way made through use. However, is argument then
progresses by arguing that whenever someone uses
something, the action of use presupposes a value that
would logically have to preexist the initial use, or
else why would the person pick up the object and try
to use it. in a way Marx seems to offer a type of
permutation between the binary schools of thought. it
seems that we would all have to agree that things
exist on some level, the question comes down to
whether essence precedes existence or existence
preceding essence. based on our linguistic frame of
understanding, which is somewhat limited, logically i
have to assume that essence/things and therefore
use-value precedes or comes before the ability to use. |
|