|
The paradox of value (also known as the diamond–water paradox) is the apparent contradiction that, although water is on the whole more useful, in terms of survival, than diamonds, diamonds command a higher price in the market. The philosopher Adam Smith is often considered to be the classic presenter of this paradox, although it had already appeared as early as Plato's ''Euthydemus''. Nicolaus Copernicus, John Locke, John Law and others had previously tried to explain the disparity. ==Labor theory of value== (詳細は) for money or for one another, I shall now proceed to examine. These rules determine what may be called the relative or exchangeable value of goods. 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." The things which have the greatest value in use have frequently little or no value in exchange; on the contrary, those which have the greatest value in exchange have frequently little or no value in use. Nothing is more useful than water: but it will purchase scarcely anything; scarcely anything can be had in exchange for it. A diamond, on the contrary, has scarcely any use-value; but a very great quantity of other goods may frequently be had in exchange for it. Furthermore, he explained the value in exchange as being determined by labor: :The real price of every thing, what every thing really costs to the man who wants to acquire it, is the toil and trouble of acquiring it. Hence, Smith denied a necessary relationship between price and utility. Price on this view was related to a factor of production (namely, labor) and not to the point of view of the consumer.〔Dhamee, Yousuf(1996?), ( Adam Smith and the division of labour ) accessed 09/08/06〕 The best practical example of this is saffron - the most expensive spice - here much of its value derives from both the low yield from growing it and the disproportionate amount of labor required to extract it. Proponents of the labor theory of value saw that as the resolution of the paradox. The labor theory of value has lost popularity in mainstream economics and has been replaced by the theory of marginal utility. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「paradox of value」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|