the ultimate standard of value-第2章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


value　is　to　be　determined。　According　to　this　theory；　value　arises　as　a　rule　　that　there　are　exceptions　is　expressly　emphasized　from　the　utility　of　goods；　not　however　from　some　abstract　and　ever…varying　usefulness　which　cannot　be　definitely　measured；　but　from　that　use　or　useful　employment　（Nutz　Verwendung）；　which　in　a　definite　concrete　case　is　dependent　upon　the　control　over　the　particular　good。　　　　　　Since　of　all　the　possible　useful　employments　to　which　the　good　may　be　put；　it　is　not　the　most　important；　but　the　least　important；　that　a　rational　being　would　dispense　with　first；　the　determining　utility　is　the　smallest　or　least　important　utility　among　all　the　useful　employments　to　which　a　good　may　be　put。　This　determine　its　value　and　is　called　the　marginal　utility。　　　　　　This　more　exact　form　of　the　use　theory　of　value　meets　in　a　clear　and　definite　way　the　objection　urged　against　the　older　〃use〃　theory　of　value；　namely；　that　free　goods；　no　matter　how　useful　they　may　be；　have　no　value。　The　answer　is；　that　since　thee　free　goods　exist　in　superabundant　quantities；　there　is　for　us　no　utility　dependent　upon　a　concrete　quantity　of　the　same；　as　a　single　glass　of　water　or　a　single　cubic　metre　of　air。　Their　marginal　utility　therefore　is　zero。　Again；　this　theory　of　marginal　utility　gives　us　the　basis　for　a　new　and　vigorous　attack　upon　the　cost　theory　of　value。　Considered　from　one　point　of　view；　the　cost　that　determines　the　value　of　any　product　represents　nothing　else　than　the　value　of　the　producers'　goods。　If　now；　as　we　are　compelled　to　do　in　a　scientific　investigation；　we　inquire　how　we　are　to　determine　the　value　of　these　producers'　goods；　we　find　that　this；　too；　in　the　last　resort　is　determined　by　marginal　utility。　The　cost　therefore　exercises；　as　it　were；　only　a　vice…regency。　It　cannot　be　denied　that　under　certain　circumstance　it　governs　the　value　of　certain　products；　but　it　is　itself；　at　least　in　most　cases；　governed　by　a　still　higher　ruler；　namely；　〃marginal　utility。〃　Cost；　therefore；　is　for　the　most　part　merely　a　province　in　the　general　kingdom　of　utility；　and　it　is　to　this　last　that　we　must　concede　the　position　of　the　universal　〃ultimate　standard　of　value。〃　This　proposition　was　first　placed　in　opposition　to　the　prevailing　classical　theory；　in　a　bold　and　uncompromising　way；　by　Jevons。　〃Value　depends　entirely　upon　utility〃；　this　writer　emphatically　declare　in　the　very。　beginning　of　his　great　work　on　〃The　Theory　of　Political　Economy。〃　This　proposition　has　since　found　even　clearer　and　more　exact　statement　at　the　hands　of　the　Austrian　Economists；　nor　have　we　even　yet　entirely　escaped　from　this　newest　phase　of　the　old　struggle　between　cost　and　utility　as　the　ultimate　determinants　of　value。　The　present　contest　is　notable；　not　merely　for　the　number　and　scientific　rank　of　those　who　are　parties　to　it；　among　whom　may　be　found　many　of　the　ablest　economists　of　all　countries；　but　also　because　of　the　extraordinary　variety　of　opinions　advanced。　Instead　of　two　opposing　conceptions；　we　find　a　whole　series　of　separate　and　seemingly　unrelated　opinions；　each　of　which　is　held　with　the　greatest　persistence。　　　　　　The　most　extreme　opinion　at　one　end　of　the　series　is　that　which　finds　statement　in　Jevons'　proposition；　that　〃value　depends　entirely　upon　utility。〃　It　must；　however；　be　added　that　while　Jevons　occasionally　give　statement　to　this　proposition　in　the　above　sweeping　and　uncompromising　terms；　yet　the　doctrine　as　expounded　by　him　contains　elements　which　necessarily　lead　to　a　limitation　of　this　proposition。　The　addition　of　these　necessary；　though　not　highly　important　limitations；　give　us　the　doctrine　as　taught　by　the　Austrian　economists。（1*）　They；　therefore；　stand　next　to　Jevons　in　the　series　of　opinions。　Their　position　is　that　cost　does　not　officiate　as　the　original　and　ultimate　determinant　of　value；　except　in　a　comparatively　limited　number　of　unimportant　cases。（2*）　The　great　majority　of　value　phenomena　are　subject　to　the　dominion　of　utility。　This　dominion　is　exercised　in　some　cases　directly；　but　in　a　still　greater　number　of　cases　indirectly。　When　exercised　indirectly　the　value　is；　of　course；　first　determined　by　certain　costs；　but　closer　analysis　shows　that　these　costs　are　themselves　determined　by　utility。　　　　　　At　the　other　extreme　end　of　the　series；　we　find　the　eminent　Danish　economist；　Scharling；　who　would　establish　cost　（under　the　title　of　〃difficulties　of　attainment〃）　as　the　sole　ruler　over　the　entire　domain　of　value；　over　value　in　use；　as　well　as　over　value　in　exchange；　over　the　value　of　freely　reproducible　goods；　as　well　as　over　the　value　of　scarcity　goods。（3*）　　　　　Quite　close　to　Scharling；　who　is　a　very　pronounced　opponent　of　the　theory　of　marginal　utility；　we　find　the　acute　American　thinker；　J。B。　Clark；　who　is　a　no　less　decided　adherent　of　that　theory。　This　illustrates　how　strangely　confused　the　controversy　has　become。　Clark　also　make　cost　the　general　and　ultimate　〃standard　of　value；〃　though　in　a　different　sense　from　Scharling。　According　to　Clark；　the　final　and　determining　condition　is　the　amount　of　personal　fatigue；　pain　or　disutility　which　is　imposed　upon　the　laborer　by　the　last　and　most　fatiguing　increment　of　his　day's　work。（4*）　　　　　　Somewhat　nearer　the　middle　of　our　series；　though　still　not　far　from　the　cost　end；　we　find　those　writers　who；　with　certain　modifications；　uphold　the　old　classical　theory。　It　is　here　that　we　find　the　learned　and　contentious　Dietzel；（5*）　of　Bonn；　who　so　divide　the　field　of　value　that　the　value　of　scarcity　goods　is　determined　by　utility；　while　the　value　of　freely　reproducible　goods　is　determined　by　the　cost。　His　position　differs　from　the　classical　theory；　in　that　he　divide　the　domain　of　value　in　use　between　utility　and　cost；　in　the　same　way　that　he　divide　the　domain　of　value　in　exchange。　The　classical　theory；　on　the　other　hand；　puts　the　use　value　entirely　under　the　dominion　of　utility。　Quite　close　to　Dietzel；　we　find　the　Italian　economist；　Achille　Loria；　and　the　able　American　defender　of　the　classical　school；　Professor　Macvane。　The　latter　has　recently　attacked　the　position　of　the　Austrian　economists；　in　two　polemical　papers　of　great　acuteness。　His　interpretation　of　the　Austrian　theory；　however；　is　not　always　accurate；　nor　always　free　from　polemic　exaggeration。　His　chief　objection　is　that　their　conception　of　cost　as　〃a　sum　of　producer's　goods　possessing　value〃　is　obsolete　and　untenable。　He　holds　that　the　only　genuine　economic　cost　of　production　is　labor　and　abstinence　（more　correctly；　waiting）；　which；　in　the　case　of　freely　reproducible　goods；　are　the　final　and　entirely　independent　regulators　of　value。（6*）　　　　　Where　opinions　vary　so　widely　from　one　another；　some　one　is　usually　found　who　will　take　a　middle　course；　hoping　to　find　a　solution　for　the　problem　in　the　golden　mean。　This　mission　of　conciliation　has　been　undertaken　in　this　case　by　no　less　eminent　economists　than　Professor　Marshall；　of　Cambridge；（7*）　and　Professor　Edgeworth；　of　Oxford。（8*）　Both　of　these　writers　incline　toward　the　theory　of　marginal　utility；　but　have　perched　themselves　very　nicely　upon　the　middle　round　of　the　ladder；　from　which　vantage…ground　they　send　forth　gentle　blame　and　conciliating　applause　to　both　parties　in　the　discussion。　Jevons　and　the　Austrian　e