Originally posted by Kidicious
To get more of it. Value is good. I believe I said that, and then you started telling me that you don't accept my idea of value. It's not my idea. Give the credit to Adam Smith maybe, or probably someone who came before him. There is only one 'value' that is appropriate to the context of our discussion.
To get more of it. Value is good. I believe I said that, and then you started telling me that you don't accept my idea of value. It's not my idea. Give the credit to Adam Smith maybe, or probably someone who came before him. There is only one 'value' that is appropriate to the context of our discussion.
That we can get more of anything isn't a reason to, if you'll excuse the pun, value it. We can increase the product of the budget deficit and the number of codfish in the North Sea, but that doesn't mean it's a meaningful number.
Value is good? Why? If I have two stone chisels, the one made by a human stoneworker - and thus, according to the labour theory of value, has had value infused into it - and the other formed by freak accident, there is no certainty that the former is better. What I, as the user of the chisels, value is purely its utility to me. Looking at my metaphical chisels, I'm feeling strongly tempted to say that value is a function of how desireable an object is to me; the essence of the capitalist notion.
Comment