From: gerald_a_levy (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Dec 19 2002 - 08:25:17 EST
Re Michael E's : (see following excerpts from your post) 1. If the finished product before it has been sold and put to use whether it be a toothbrush or a ship _is_ potentially a toothbrush or a ship, and; 2. If the tradition of favoring activity over potential is a prejudice and that dynamis is a genuine mode of being; 3. Then, doesn't it necessarily follow (in contradiction to the last excerpt below) that value potentially exists prior to the act of commodity exchange and that this is a genuine mode of being of value? In solidarity, Jerry ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// > The finished product, a toothbrush or a ship, before it is put to use > still _is_ potentially toothbrush or a ship. But the potential mode of > being (_dynamei_) is different from the mode of being called _energeia_, > literally: at-workness. > The tradition has always favoured the mode of being of at-workness > (actuality) over potentiality, but this seems to be a prejudice. To see > that _dynamis_ is a genuine mode of being, just consider that a > toothbrush has the potential for being used for brushing teeth, but not > for sailing on the seas, whereas a ship has the potential for sailing on > the seas but not for brushing teeth. > The commodity's value > _is_ in the relation of exchange, either potentially or actually -- it > is not 'inherent' in the commodity like a kind of "crystal". Value is, > either potentially or actually, the act of abstract association > (_koinonia_) in commodity exchange, i.e. specific kind of social > relation.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Dec 20 2002 - 00:00:00 EST