SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (James C.W. Ahiakpor)
Date:
Sun Dec 31 08:48:55 2006
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (20 lines)
Fred Foldvary wrote: "The more universal axiom is that of Carl Menger   
(Principles of Economics, 1871), that values are subjective."  
  
We've been over this territory before, but in case Fred has forgotten,   
the subjectivity of values did not originate with Carl Menger, as many   
'Austrians' I know tend to suggest.  This is what Adam Smith had in mind   
when he explained that "The word VALUE, it is to be observed, has two   
different meanings, and sometimes expresses the utility of some   
particular object, and sometimes the power of purchasing other goods   
which the possession of that object conveys.  The one may be called   
'value in use;' the other, 'value in exchange.'" (WN, 1: 32).  And this   
is why Smith wisely focused on explaining value in exchange or market   
prices.  The other classics knew as much.  
  
Of course, the subjectivity of values or utility of objects can be found   
in the works of the Greeks, particularly Xenophon and Protagoras, before   
Aristotle.   
  
James Ahiakpor  

ATOM RSS1 RSS2