Re: [OPE] value-form theory redux

From: Philip Dunn <>
Date: Sat Mar 14 2009 - 10:23:17 EDT

On Sat, 2009-03-14 at 14:41 +0100, Dave Zachariah wrote:
> Philip Dunn wrote:
> >
> > Let me clarify also. I did not misread. Use-values can never acquire the
> > property of value. They can become the material bearers of commodities.
> > The idea is that use-values and commodities are different entities.
> >
> Philip, replace all my references to 'use-value' with 'goods and
> services', which is what I mean: Goods and services acquire the property
> of commensurability in societies.
> I don't want terminology to obstruct the substantive issue.
This is going to be difficult. Replacing your references to 'use-value'
with 'goods and services' makes zero difference to what I was saying.
This issue is not terminological.

Consider a statue made of bronze. The bronze has the property of being
metal. The statue does not have this property. It can be said to be made
of metal. The statue has the property of having been created by Phidias.
The bronze does not.

A loaf of bread as a use-value has a crust but no value. As the loaf
commodity it has value but no crust.

ope mailing list
Received on Sat Mar 14 10:24:29 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 31 2009 - 00:00:03 EDT