Karl Marx focuses a great deal of attention on the use value and exchange value of commodities. A commodity is something that can be bought or sold (or perhaps even traded). They are typically associated with exchange value because that is what causes an item to be considered a commodity. Use value and exchange value, while they may seem one in the same on the surface, are in all actuality rather different.
The difference between use value and exchange value seems very minute, but it is in fact much larger when you delve into the concepts. According to Marx’s Commodities, use value is defined as “the utility of a thing” (2), which under closer examination means it is what you can get out of solely using an object. “Use-values become a reality only by use or consumption: they also constitute the substance of all wealth, whatever may be the social form of that wealth” (2). If an object is produced and not used, it has no use value because nothing is being done with it; it has no purpose. “A use-value, or useful article, therefore, has value only because human labour in the abstract has been embodied or materialized in it” (4). The fact that labor was put into the production of an object gives said object a use value; it was made for a purpose, whether it’s kept by the creator or sold for a profit. Once it’s sold for a profit, however, it gains exchange value.
Exchange value, according to Marx, has to do with the amount of labor necessary to produce an object. He believes that the more time and effort put into an object, the greater its exchange value because it took a longer amount of time to be produced. One example he uses is diamonds; “diamonds are of very rare occurrence on the earth’s surface, and hence their discovery costs, on average, a great deal of labour-time” (6). What Marx is saying is that the reasoning behind the price of diamonds being higher than other things is because it takes so much time and effort to find and cultivate them. “In general, the greater the productiveness of labour, the less is the labour-time required for the production of an article, the less is the amount of labour crystallized in that article, and the less is its value…” (6-7). He goes on to say that the less productive the labor is, the more time is required to produce a commodity, ultimately resulting in more labor being put forth into said commodity. Exchange value is also thought of as the value created in exchange.
A big deal should be made about the difference between use value and exchange value because they are very much so related. In Marx’s Exchange, he talks further about use values and exchange values, stating that “every owner of a commodity wishes to part with it in exchange only for those commodities whose use-value satisfies some want of his” (65). People wish to exchange commodities for profit (i.e.; money, other commodities) in order to fulfill a want or need. A person may create something that has little use value for them personally, but they can sell or trade it to someone who has a use for it, in exchange for something of use value to them. For example, one may grow corn and since they have full access to their corn whenever they need it, all of it may not be of use to them. Therefore, they can sell or trade it to someone who is in need of corn for something they need or money in order to satisfy that need.
The notion of use value and exchange value are very important in today’s society. They have their similarities in that they are both values, but they are different as well. Something with solely use value can easily become an item with exchange value if the manufacturer or owner decides to sell or trade it for something they are in greater need of. Items with just an exchange value can, in turn, become items with (only) use values; if someone obtains an item sold or traded to them which they will use, it gains use value for that individual.
The difference between use value and exchange value seems very minute, but it is in fact much larger when you delve into the concepts. According to Marx’s Commodities, use value is defined as “the utility of a thing” (2), which under closer examination means it is what you can get out of solely using an object. “Use-values become a reality only by use or consumption: they also constitute the substance of all wealth, whatever may be the social form of that wealth” (2). If an object is produced and not used, it has no use value because nothing is being done with it; it has no purpose. “A use-value, or useful article, therefore, has value only because human labour in the abstract has been embodied or materialized in it” (4). The fact that labor was put into the production of an object gives said object a use value; it was made for a purpose, whether it’s kept by the creator or sold for a profit. Once it’s sold for a profit, however, it gains exchange value.
Exchange value, according to Marx, has to do with the amount of labor necessary to produce an object. He believes that the more time and effort put into an object, the greater its exchange value because it took a longer amount of time to be produced. One example he uses is diamonds; “diamonds are of very rare occurrence on the earth’s surface, and hence their discovery costs, on average, a great deal of labour-time” (6). What Marx is saying is that the reasoning behind the price of diamonds being higher than other things is because it takes so much time and effort to find and cultivate them. “In general, the greater the productiveness of labour, the less is the labour-time required for the production of an article, the less is the amount of labour crystallized in that article, and the less is its value…” (6-7). He goes on to say that the less productive the labor is, the more time is required to produce a commodity, ultimately resulting in more labor being put forth into said commodity. Exchange value is also thought of as the value created in exchange.
A big deal should be made about the difference between use value and exchange value because they are very much so related. In Marx’s Exchange, he talks further about use values and exchange values, stating that “every owner of a commodity wishes to part with it in exchange only for those commodities whose use-value satisfies some want of his” (65). People wish to exchange commodities for profit (i.e.; money, other commodities) in order to fulfill a want or need. A person may create something that has little use value for them personally, but they can sell or trade it to someone who has a use for it, in exchange for something of use value to them. For example, one may grow corn and since they have full access to their corn whenever they need it, all of it may not be of use to them. Therefore, they can sell or trade it to someone who is in need of corn for something they need or money in order to satisfy that need.
The notion of use value and exchange value are very important in today’s society. They have their similarities in that they are both values, but they are different as well. Something with solely use value can easily become an item with exchange value if the manufacturer or owner decides to sell or trade it for something they are in greater need of. Items with just an exchange value can, in turn, become items with (only) use values; if someone obtains an item sold or traded to them which they will use, it gains use value for that individual.