William Stanley Jevons Teoria wartości EN

8/2/2019 William Stanley Jevons Teoria wartoci EN

1/10

PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION

THEcon tents of th e following pages can hardly m eetwith ready acceptance among those who regard theScience of Political Economy as having alreadyacquired a nearly perfect form. I believe it is gener-al ly supposed that Adam Smith laid the foundationsof this science; that Malthus, Anderson, and Senioradded important doctrines ; t h a t Ricardo systematisedth e whole ; and, f inally, th a t Mr. J. S. Mill filled inth e details and completely expounded this branch ofknowledge. Mr. Mill ap pe ars t o hav e had a similarno tion; for h e dist inct ly asserts t h a t there wasnothing in the Laws of Value which remained forhimself or an y future w riter t o clear up. Dou btlessit is difficult t o help feeling th a t opinions ado ptedand confirmed by such eminent men have muchweight of probability in their favour. Y et , in th eoth er sciences this w eight of au th or ity has no tbeen allowed to restrict th e free eia m ina tio n ofnew opinions and theories ; and it has often been

Y


2/10

vi THE THEORY OF POLITICAL ECONOMY

ult imately proved that author i ty was on the wrongside.

There are many portions of Economical doctrinewhirh appear to me as scientific in form as they areconsonant with facts. I would especially mentionth e Theories of Population and R en t, th e lat te r atheory of a distinctly mathem atical cha racter, whichseems t o give a clue t o th e correct mode of tre ati ngth e whole science. H ad Mr. Mill con tented himselfw ith asserting th e unquestionable tr u th of th e Lawsof Supply and Demand, I should have agreed withhim. As founded upon facts, those laws cann ot beshaken by any theory ; but i t does not thereforefollow t h a t ou r conception of Va lue is perfect an dfinal. O ther generally accepted doctrines havealw aj7s appeared t o me pure ly delusive, especiallyth e so-called Wage F un d Theory. This theo ry pre-tend s t o give a solution of th e ma in problem of th escience-to determ ine t h e wages of la b o u r; ye t, onclose examination, its conclusion is found to be amere truism, namely, that the average rate of wagesis found by dividing the whole amount appropriatedto the payment of wages by the number of thosebetween whom it is divided. Some other supposedconclusions of th e science are of a less harm lesscharacter, as, for instance, those regarding the ad-vantage of exchange (see the section on " The G ainby Exchange," p. 142).In th is work I have a t tempted to t rea t Economyas a Calculus of Pleasure and Pa in , an d have


3/10

CHAPTER IINT RODUCT ION

THE Science of Political Economy rests upon a fewnotions of an apparently simple character. Utility,wealth, value, commodity, labour, land, capital, arethe elements of the subject; and whoever has athorough comprehension of their nature must possessor be soon able to acquire a knowledge of thewhole science. As almost every economic writer hasremarked, it is in treating the simple elements thatwe require the most care and precision, since the leasterror of conception must vitiate all our deductions.Accordingly, I have devoted the following pages toan investigation of the conditions and relations of theabove-named notions.

Repeated reflection and inquiry have led me tothe somewhat novel opinion, that va lue dependsentire1 up on util i ty. Prevailing opinions makelabour rather than utility the origin of value ; andthere are even those who distinctly assert that labouris the cause of value. I show, on the contrary, thatwe have only to trace out carefully the natural laws

B


4/10

2 THE THEORY OF POLITICAL E CO NO M Y CHAP.of the variation of utility, as depending upon thequantity of commodity in our possession, in order toar rive a t a satisfactory theory of exchange, of whichthe ordinary laws of supply and demand are a neces-sary consequence. This theory is in harmony withfacts; and, whenever there is any apparent reasonfor the belief that labour is the cause of value, weobtain an explanation of th e reason. Labour isfound often t o de termine value, b u t o nly in an in-direct manner, by varying the degree of utility ofth e com modity thro ug h an increase or limitation ofthe supply.These views are not put forward in a hasty orill-considered manner. All th e chief points of t l ~ etheory were sketched out ten years ago ; but theywere then published only in the form of a briefpaper communicated to the Statistical or EconomicSection of the British Association at the CambridgeMeeting, which took place in the year 2862. A stillbriefer abstract of that paper was inserted in theReport of the Meeting,' and the paper itself was notpr inted u nt i l Jun e 1866. ' Since writing th a t paper,I have, over an d over again, questioned th e tr u th ofmy own notions, b u t w itho ut ever finding an y reasonto doubt their substantial correctness.

Reports of Sections, p. 158.Journal of the Statistical Society, vol. xxix. p. 282.


5/10

IV THEORY O F EXCHANGE 161drinking, or opium-eating, is not in itself always

may come to be regarded as immoral, ifin a considerable proportion of cases i t leads t o ex-cessive and disastrous results. But this quest ionevidently leads us into a class of subjects which couldnot be appropriately discussed in this work treatingof pure economic theory.

The O rig in of ValueThe preceding pages con tain, if I am not mis taken,

an explanation of the nature of value which will ,for the most part, harmonise with previous viewsupon th e subject. Ricardo has stated, l ike most oth ereconomists, that utility is absolutely essential tovalue ; b u t t h a t " possessing utility, commoditiesderive their exchangeable value from two sources :from the ir scarcity, an d from th e q u an tit y of labourrequired to obtain them." ' Senior, again , has adm ir-ably defined wealth, or objects possessing value, as" hose things, and those thin gs only, which are tran s-ferable, are lim ited in sup ply , an d are directly or in-direc tly productive of pleasure or prev en tive of pain."Speaking only of th in gs which are transferable, orcapable of being passed from hand t o ha nd , we findthat two of the clearest definitions of value recogniseuti l ity an d scarc i ty as th e essential qualit ies. B u tthe moment that we dis t inguish between the tota lutility of a mass of commodity and the degree of

Principles of Political Eco~aomyand Taxation, 3rd e d , P. 2.M


6/10

162 THE THEORY OF POLITICAL ECONOMY CHAP.utility of different portions, we may say that it isscarcity which prevents the fall in the final degreeof utility. Bread has th e almost infinite u til ity ofmaintaining life, an d when i t becomes a question oflife or death, a small quantity of food exceeds invalue all oth er things. B ut when we enjoy ourord inary supplies of food, a loaf of bread has li tt levalue, because th e utility of an add itional loaf is small,our appetites being satiated by our customary meals.

I have pointed out the excessive ambiguity ofthe word Value, and the apparent impossibility ofusing i t safely. W hen intended t o express th e merefact of certain articles exchanging in a particularratio, I hav e proposed t o substitute th e unequivocalexpression-ratio of exchange. B u t I am inclined tobelieve th a t a ratio is not th e meaning which m ostpersons att ac h t o th e word Value. There is a certa insense of esteem or desirableness, which we may havew ith regard t o a thin g ap art from an y distinct con-sciousness of th e ra tio i n which i t would exchange forother things. I may suggest th a t th is distinct feelingof value is probably identical with the final degree ofutility. W hile Adam S mith's often-quoted value i nuse is th e to tal utility of a commodity t o us, th e valuei n exchange is defined by th e terrnina l u tility, th eremaining desire which we or others have for possess-ing more.

There remains th e question of labour as an elementof value. Economists ha ve no t been w an ting whoput forward labour as the cause of value, asserting


7/10

I V THEORY OF EXCHANGE '63that all objects derive their value from the fact thatlabour has been expended on them; and it is thusimplied, if not stated, that value will be proportionalto labour. Th is is a doctrine which cannot stan d fora m om ent, being directly opposed to facts. Ricardodisposes of such an opinion when he says : ' " Thereare some commodities, the value of which is deter-mined by their scarc ity alone. No labour can increasethe quantity of such goods, and therefore their valuecannot be lowered by a n increased supply. Somerare statues and pictures, scarce books and coins,wines of a peculiar qualib;-, which can be made onlyfrom grapes grown on a particular soil, of which th er eis a very limited quantity, are all of this description.Their value is wholly independent of the quantityof labour originally necessary t o the m , an dvaries with the varying wealth and inclinations ofthose who are desirous to possess them."

The mere fact th a t there are many things, such asrare ancient books, coins, antiquities, etc., which h avehigh values, and which are absolutely incapable ofproduction now, disperses the notion that valuedepends on lahour. Eve n those things which areproducible in an y q ua nt ity b y labour seldom exchangeexactly at the corresponding value^.^ The market

' On the Prinei~lt.~:f Political Economy and Taxation, 3rd ed.,1821, p. 2.Mr. W. L. Salgant, in his Recent Politicul Economy, avo, London,1867, p. 99, states t h a t contracts have been made to manufacture theEnfield Rifle, of identically the mnle pattern, a t prices ranging from70s. each down to 20s.~r even lower. The wages of the workmen


8/10

164 THE THEORY OF POLITICAL ECONOMY C H A P .

price of corn, cotton, iron, an d most other things is,in th e p revalent theories of value, allowed to fluctua teabove or below its n atu ral or cost value. There may,again, be any discrepancy between the quantity oflabour spent upon an object an d th e value ultima telyat taching to i t . A great undertaking like th e G reatW estern Railway, or th e Thames Tunnel, may embodya v ast am ount of labour, b u t i ts value depends entirelyupon the num ber of persons who find i t useful. If nouse could be found for the G rea t Ea s t e rn steamship,it s value would be n i l , except for th e ut ility of someof i t s materials.' On th e other hand , a successfulundertaking, which happens to possess great utility,may have a value, for a time at least, far exceedingw ha t has been spen t upon it, as in th e case of th e[first] A tlan tic Cable. The fact is, t h a t labour oncespent ha s n o inJluence o n the fu tu re va lue o f a n yar t i c l e : i t is gone and lost for ever. I n comm ercebygones are for ever bygones; and we are alwayssta rtin g clear a t each mom ent, judging th e values ofthings w ith a view t o future utility. Ind ustr y isessentially prospective, not retrospective ; and seldomvaried froxu 40s. or 50s. down to 15s. a week. Such an instancerenders it obvious that it is scarcity which governs value, and thatit is the value of the produce which det ern ~in es the wages of th eproducers.

1 T hi s statem ent has been justified by th e fact. The Great Easternsteamship, bu ilt to the design of Brunel a nd Russell ill i 858, with sixmasts and a displacement of 32 ,16 0 tons, proved a white elephan t,being irremediably slow for passenger traffic, and too great in draf tand general unwieldiness for cargo. She was sold two or three years;&go fo r he r value as old iron, an d b roken u p a t O1asgow.-[Ed.]


9/10

I V THEORY O F EXCHANGE I 65d ie s the result of a ny un dertak ing exactly coincide

the first intentions of its promoters.~ u though labour is never the cause of value,

it is in a large proportion of cases the determining,ircurnstance, an d in th e following way :- V a l u edepends so lely o n the j n a l degree o f u t i l it y . H o wca n we v a r y th i s degree of u t i l i t y ?-By ha v ing moreor less of the com mo dity to consume. A n d how shallwe get m ore or less o f i t ?-By spendin,g m or e o r lesslabour inobtaining a supply . According t o th is view,then , there are tw o steps between labour and value.Labour affects supply, and sup ply affects th e degreeof utility, which governs value, or the ratio of ex-change. I n order th a t the re m ay be no possiblemistake about th is all-im portan t series of relations, Iwill re-state it in a tabular form, as follows :-

Cost of product ion determines su p pl y ;S u p p ly de terminesJ ina1 degree of ut i l i t y ;Fi na l degree of u t i l i t y de termines value .

B ut i t is easy t o go too far in considering labouras the regulator of value ; it is equally to be rernem-bered th a t labour is itself of unequal value. Ricardo ,by a violent assumption, founded his theory of valueon quantities of labour considered as one uniformthing. H e was aware t h a t labour differs infinitelyin quality and efficiency, so th a t each kin d is moreOr less scarce, an d is consequently paid a t a higher0' lower ra te of wages. H e regarded these differencesas disturbing circunlstances which would hav e t o be


10/10

166 THE THEORY OF POLITICAL ECONOMY CHAP. IVallowed for; but his theory rests on the assumedequa lity of labour. This theory rests on a whollydifferent ground. I hold labour to be essentiallyvariable,so th a t its value must be determined by thevalue of the produce, not the value of the produce bythat of the labour. I hold it to be impossible tocompare h priori th e productive powers of a n av vy ,a carpenter, an iron-puddler, a schoolmaster, and abarrister. Accordingly, i t will be found t h a t no t oneof my equations represents a comparison between oneman's labour and another's. The equa tion, if ther e isone a t all, is between th e same person in tw o o r moredifferent occupations. The subject is one in whichcomplicated action and reaction takes place, andwhich we must defer u n til afte r we have described,i n the next chapter, the Theory of Labour.

William Stanley Jevons Teoria wartości EN

Documents

Transcript of William Stanley Jevons Teoria wartości EN