Bernard Shaw's Remarkable Religion: A Faith That Fits the Facts
Bernard Shaw's Remarkable Religion: A Faith That Fits the Facts
Bernard Shaw's Remarkable Religion: A Faith That Fits the Facts
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
158 <strong>Bernard</strong> Shaw’s <strong>Remarkable</strong> <strong>Religion</strong><br />
jargon for “desirability” and represents an attempt to quantify what is<br />
essentially subjective. It also varies considerably according to circumstances.<br />
It refers to <strong>the</strong> amount an individual would be willing to pay for an<br />
item if <strong>the</strong>re were a choice between paying that price and doing without.<br />
You do not have to think about it much to realize that for most of us a<br />
gallon of unpoisoned water has far greater Utility than a flawless twentycaret<br />
diamond. Or at least it would if we did not have any water. If we<br />
already have an unlimited supply (or even a very large supply) <strong>the</strong> case is<br />
altered. If water is so plentiful that it can be had for <strong>the</strong> asking, its price<br />
(and in this technical sense, its Utility) is nothing. So <strong>the</strong>re really is no<br />
such a thing as a fixed, “intrinsic” value for anything, because desire for<br />
something varies as circumstances vary but certain things (like drinkable<br />
water) are more likely to have greater Utility than o<strong>the</strong>rs.<br />
Utility is <strong>the</strong> highest price you would pay if you had no o<strong>the</strong>r choice and<br />
is clearly a better indication of <strong>the</strong> importance of a commodity (or service)<br />
than is its price, but it is also fluid and variable. It varies not only between<br />
individuals but also from moment to moment for a single person. A loaf of<br />
bread has more Utility to a starving man than to <strong>the</strong> gentleman who has<br />
just gotten up from a huge Thanksgiving dinner. But once that starving<br />
man has devoured his first loaf of bread, <strong>the</strong> next will have less Utility and<br />
<strong>the</strong> one after that even less. If he keeps getting more bread, eventually<br />
even <strong>the</strong> (once) starving man will reach <strong>the</strong> point at which he cannot stand<br />
so much as to look at ano<strong>the</strong>r loaf of bread. It now has no Utility at all. And<br />
this change in <strong>the</strong> Utility of an item does not follow a smooth, continuous<br />
line. Think about what Utility a particular item, say an umbrella (to adapt<br />
an example Shaw uses), has for you. If it looks like rain, and you do not<br />
have one, you might be willing to pay, say, ten dollars for an umbrella. A<br />
second umbrella is much less attractive: you might give a dollar. It might<br />
be nice to have a spare. But a third one would not rate more than <strong>the</strong> smallest<br />
of small change—perhaps a nickel.<br />
Utility is exceedingly important because it is <strong>the</strong> basis of <strong>the</strong> “law of<br />
supply and demand” that <strong>the</strong> capitalist economists are always citing. To<br />
understand it is to understand that supply and demand is not <strong>the</strong> simple<br />
matter <strong>the</strong> capitalist would like us to imagine. I will illustrate with a purely<br />
hypo<strong>the</strong>tical example. Let us suppose that you are walking about town,<br />
doing weekly shopping, and you notice that it looks as though it might<br />
rain. So you head for <strong>the</strong> nearest mall to buy an umbrella and miraculously<br />
find <strong>the</strong>re are three umbrella stands that reflect <strong>the</strong> different Utilities<br />
that an umbrella might represent to you personally. One has a sign