[OPE-L:5000] Re: ideal vs real value

Gerald Levy (glevy@pratt.edu)
Tue, 13 May 1997 16:51:22 -0700 (PDT)

[ show plain text ]

I'm afraid I only have time now to partially respond to Chai-on's

> Chai-on: The term "realization" might cause you to imagine something unreal
> (= something non-existent) is realized.

I think the point about "realization" is that prior to exchange, value
only exists as possibility (or what you call below "potential value"),
i.e. products have been produced (really!; that is, they really exist _as
products_), and therefore have a *material* form, but for products to
fully become commodities and have value, they must have a use-value and
an exchange value and it is the act of exchange which validates (or does
not validate) products _as commodities_.

> Some potential value is
> realized as value by the exchange, this is Marx's concept.

(see above).

> "Ideal value"?
> Please, why do we have to use the awkward word, "ideal value", which does
> not appear in Marx's writings? I should say, potential non-value or
> potential value intead. <snip>
> Chai-on: It was value, not ideal value. Ideal value is your invention, not
> Marx's.<snip>

See Mike L's [4874].

> May I?

May you what?

If the brevity of this response is unsatisfactory, please tell me what
specific points you would like me to respond further to.

In solidarity, Jerry