Question 1 What did Marx mean with his formu - University of Utah

U of Utah Econ 5080 2005fa 31
person wanted to get a corn, in this case, they exchanged cow with corn. Each of them has a
greater utility and happier when exchanging cow by corn.
Finally, I believe that exchange-value of a commodity should not be derived from its usevalues
as Marx put it. We could know that what Marx meant by saying “accidental” and
“Purely relative” have something to do with huge number of forces in the market conditions.
Hans: You seem to have language difficulties which prevent you from understanding the question asked. This is
also true for your [158].
Next Message by Mjk is [158].
Question 55 is 47 in 2001fa, 48 in 2002fa, 50 in 2003fa, 55 in 2004fa, 66 in 2007SP, 66
in 2007fa, 67 in 2008fa, 69 in 2009fa, 70 in 2010fa, and 77 in 2012fa:
Question 55 Why does Marx write in 127:1 “the valid exchange-values,” instead of simply
“the exchange-values”?
[36] Thugtorious: content A form 90% (As Submitted:) The answer to this
Use-values which affect the relations of question is relatively simple, and explained
production. The answer to this question is very thoroughly by both Marx and Hans.
Marx says “the valid exchange-values” instead
of just “exchange values” in this pas-
relatively simple, and explained very thorsage because there are enumerated exchangeoughly
by both Marx and Hans. Marx says values for one commodity, not just one
set quantitative amount for which it is ex-
“the valid exchange-values” instead of just changed. The example given is “one-quarter
of wheat” has an exchange-value equiva-
“exchange values” in this passage because lent to x amount of shoe polish, y amount
of silk, and z amount of gold; all qualita-
there are numerous exchange-values for a tively different amounts with one-quarter of
given commodity, not just one set quantita- wheat remaining the same. They are all intive
amount for which it is exchanged. The
example given, one-quarter of wheat, has
an exchange-value equivalent to x amount
of shoe polish, y amount of silk, and z
amount of gold; all qualitatively different
amounts with one-quarter of wheat remaining
the same. They are all interchangeable
with each other.
terchangable with each other.
I believe that Marx was very careful in
his word selection while writing Das Kapital,
and this is a prime example. If he would
I believe that Marx was very careful in have wrote simply “exchange values,” a lay-
his word selection while writing Das Kapmen reader might interpret that as one quanital,
and this is a prime example. If he titative amount that defines a commodities
would have written simply “exchange val- exchange value regardless of the commodues,”
a layperson reader might interpret that ity with which it is to be traded. However,
as one quantitative amount that defines a with this foresight, he chose to write “all
32 2005fa Econ 5080 U of Utah
valid exchange values” because he recog-
commodity’s exchange value regardless of nized the possible misinterpretation. Each
the commodity with which it is to be traded. of the previously mentioned commodities
are all traded at differing amounts for a quar-
However, with this foresight, he chose to ter of wheat, but they are all the same in
write “all valid exchange values” because he magnitude. As Hans says: they represent
recognized the possible misinterpretation. “all the other exchanges that would have
Each of the previously mentioned commodi- been possible but did not happen” (Hans, p
ties are all traded at differing amounts for a 51).
quarter of wheat, but they are all the same
in magnitude. As Hans says: they represent
“all the other exchanges that would have
been possible but did not happen” (Hans, p
51).
Hans: Marx did not explain thoroughly what the formulation “valid” means; and my interpretation in the Annotations
is only one of many possibilities. Now I am inclined to think that Marx threw the adjective “valid” into
this sentence to emphasize that these exchange-values are a social expression of something despite the fact that the
individual traders do not choose them, but they are given to them by the market. These are the exchange proportions
which they find as the valid market proportions.
A few editorial corrections were necessary to make your text acceptable. Only small things, nothing which you
couldn’t have done yourself. My edited version is in the left column, and your original in the right. I subtracted 10
percent from the grade point number for the formal flaws of your answer; i.e. your grade point is not 4.0 but 3.6.
Message [36] referenced by [2007SP:282]. Next Message by Thugtorious is [37].
Question 56 is 277 in 1996sp, 67 in 2007fa, 68 in 2008SP, 68 in 2008fa, 71 in 2009fa,
and 72 in 2010fa:
Question 56 First give Marx’s arguments how one can come to the conclusion that exchangevalue
is not something inherent in the commodity. Then reproduce, in your own words,
Marx’s rebuttal that, despite these arguments, exchange-value seems to be something inherent
to the commodity after all.
[62] Kowski: graded A Exchange Value. Marx describes how one could conclude that
exchange value is not an inherent characteristic of a commodity. Because goods can be exchanged
at varying amounts, times, and places — things that are external to the commodity
itself and are constantly changing, — the exchange value seems to come from these external
conditions of the exchanges and are, as Marx puts it, ‘accidental’ and ‘purely relative’.
While it is easy to understand how one can reach the conclusion that exchange value is not
an intrinsic characteristic of a commodity based on these arguments, Marx counters with
another argument claiming that exchange value is actually inherent in a commodity. Every
transaction that takes place trades an amount of something for an amount of something
else. While the amounts of each good are different, they are equal in worth. This equality
in worth depending on the goods being traded shows that the exchange value is inherent in
each commodity. The exchange value cannot be expressed unless the commodity is known,
thus it is inherent.
Hans: Excellent answer.
Question 57 is 68 in 2007fa and 69 in 2008fa: