| This question <32|30> overall <19|22> Pele: <1117|223>. graded B+ |
| Question 86: Use-value is the quality of the commodity, and exchange-value is its quantity. Right or wrong? |
| [20] Pele: In 127:4--128:1, Marx states: “As use-values, commodities are, above all, of different qualities; as exchange-values they can only be different quantities, and consequently do not contain and atom of use-value”. It is my observation that the question stated is a correct approximation of the statement provided. In direct reponse to the question, it is a “right” answer. |
| Hans: In the passage you are quoting, Marx tries to prove that value cannot come from use-value, because as values, commodities are one homogeneous mass, while as use-values they are a motley variety of different things. From being a homogeneous mass follows that quantitative differences are the only differences they are capable of. One can therefore say that as values, the quantities are in the foreground, while as use-values, the qualities are in the foreground. This is all one can say; it would be wrong to identify the value of a commodity with its quantity. As I said in [2005fa:94], quality and quantity are natural attributes of every product, but use-value and exchange-value are attributes only in a very specific kind of society. It would make more sense to identify the value of a commodity with the quantity of labor in the commodity. |
| Pele: Hmmm... |
| Okay, that makes sense. I was unsure on the length and scope expected for the answer, so that helps me to improve my next submission. |
| I am curious if the rules and expectations of Marx's “very specific kind of society” will be expressly stated or if they will remain an implied aspect to model he is creating. |
| Hans: The “very specific kind of society” I was talking about is capitalism. Marx's Capital is about capitalism, not socialism. The labor theory of value seems very fair at first glance, but Marx will show how the exchange of equivalents can coexist with class exploitation. |
|
|
|||||