what does this mean?

The domination of use of value by exchange value thus realises and duplicates the tendencies of enlightened reason: as enlightened rationality occludes ends- oriented rationality, so capitalist production occludes production for use; and as enlightened rationality subsumes particulars under universalist production subsumes the use value of things under exchange value.

Here's my take (but I am not a social scientist): Most people consider the value of something to be what it can be traded or exchanged for, either money or other goods (as opposed to how useful it is). This is confirms the way of thinking that was proposed by philosophers during what we know as, "the Enlightenment"; an age dominated by the use of reason to solve problems. This would suggest that a type of thinking proposed by Max Weber, called "goal-oriented rationality" is not valid in this case. Therefore, in a capitalist society, we don't make things to use them, we make them for their 'value'. .... I'm not totally clear on the last sentence, but take a look at universalist principles. It seems to say that the universalist way of looking at things is merely a part of the 'reasoning' way of looking at things, so the value of things purely for their usefulness is but one part of the overall value we attribute to things. Any social scientists out there?
02 March 2011
Add an answer Cancel reply

Similar questions