This course has focused on a cross-cultural representation of value and exchange theory through the perspectives of Marcel Mauss, Bronislaw Malinowski, Pierre Bourdieu, Arjun Appadurai and David Graeber. While we have spent a great deal of time exploring specific exchange systems such as Kula and Potlatch, this essay will focus on the technical theories related to value construction and exchange. In order to accomplish this, I will ground the foundation of my paper in chapter two of Graeber’s work “Toward an Anthropological Theory of Value” and use this to thoroughly examine the ideas of Marx and Bourdieu in relation to commodity economies.
First, I will begin by depicting the argument made by Graeber throughout his work. Second, I will expand on Marx’s
…show more content…
While these theories contain very different viewpoints, they are all relevant to our anthropological understanding of value construction. Due to the importance of theory for constructing this essay there will be a heavy reliance on outside sources to construct my analysis. Included are the original works of Graeber and Mauss as well as other authors who are analyzing the work of Marx, Bourdieu, and alternate theories of value.
In his work, David Graeber critiques the theory of value and exchange through three different perspectives. He aims to contrast sociological, economical, and anthropological theories in order to emphasize the importance of cross-cultural theories to the discourse of value and exchange theory. Throughout his discussion in Chapter 2, Graeber utilizes the work of Karl Marx and Pierre Bourdieu to portray an economic standpoint to value discourse in contrast to Marcel Mauss and Annette Weiner’s theory of value and exchange through gift
As a sociologist we look at two different perspectives, there is structural functional perspective and the conflict perspective. Out of the two perspectives I agree with the conflict perspective more than I do the structural functional perspective, and I’m going to use this perspective throughout my paper. I choose this perspective because as much as we want society to be “fair” and it work smoothly, it just doesn’t. We have struggle for power and I believe there are the groups that are powerful and wealthy, and there are some groups that are the working class and struggle to make it. I also picked this perspective because in the book Nickel and Dimed, Ehrenreich gave up the power and wealth to struggle with the working class to show us how truly difficult it sometimes can be.
Fredrick Engels takes an historical materialist approach regarding the capitalist mode of production in a passage entitled Theoretical. Engels discusses the drastic separation between the bourgeoisie and proletarians as the feudal system shatters, allowing the notorious bourgeoisie to rein freely (Engels 292). This essay will begin by examining what historical materialism means and its connection to production and exchange, outlining the basic contradiction in capitalism according to Engels, as well as, analyzing the two contradictions that arise from the fundamental contradiction. Finally, the paper will conclude by demonstrating what Engels conceptualizes as the outcome of the historical development of capitalism, emphasizing how society can achieve this and what consequences will emerge if
Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) were sociologists who both existed throughout similar time periods of the 19th and early 20th centuries, resulting in both Marx, and Durkheim to be concerned about similar effects and impacts among society (Appelrouth and Edles: 20, 77). Marx’s main focus was on class distinctions among the bourgeoisie and proletariat, forces and relations of production, capital, surplus value, alienation, labour theory of value, exploitation and class consciousness (Appelrouth and Edles: 20). Whereas Durkheim’s main focus was on social facts, social solidarity – mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity, anomie, collective conscience, ritual, symbol, and collective representations (Appelrouth and Edles: 77). For the purpose of this essay, we will be focusing on the concerns that arised among Karl Marx and Émile Durkheim towards the benefits and dangers of modern capitalism. Marx and Durkheim’s concepts are comparable in the sense that Marx focuses on alienation and classes, which is similar to Durkheim’s concepts of anomie and the division of labour. The beginning of the Industrial Revolution and technological advances can be seen as a key factor that gave emergence to modern capitalism, as the economic system was based on private ownership, mass production, and increased profits, resulting in people to be separated based on class and the division of labour, later giving rise to alienation and anomie. In this essay, I will explore Karl Marx’s and Émile Durkheim’s evaluation of the benefits and dangers that came about with the rise of modern capitalism. Through these two theorists and sociologists, we can analyze, discuss, compare, critique, and come to understand how modern cap...
Echoing Karl Marx, Bourdieu (1986) posits that economic-capital has formed the foundation of social life and dictates people’s position within the social order (p.46-47). has the more powerful
Locke’s emphasis on the importance of the creation of exchange value as the basis of property is an important rupture from preceding theorizations of property. It exemplifies a change in philosophy of property law that is important to Capitalism. Indeed, the very definition of Capitalism is “a system in which goods and services, down to the most basic necessities of life, are produced for profitable exchange” (Wood 2). Noteworthy is that a century after Locke's Second Treatise, his ideas are expressed and developed by in Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations.
2013 Print. Marx, Karl. The 'Masurian'. The 'Mas Engels, Friedrich. And Engels, Friedrich.
During the nineteenth century, Karl Marx and Max Weber were two of the most influential sociologists. Both of them tried to explain social change taking place in a society at that time. On the one hand, their views are very different, but on the other hand, they had many similarities.
Karl Marx, the preface to the second edition, “The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte,” written December 1851-1852, translated by Saul K. Padover, proofed by Alek Blain, 2006.
In his work, Marx presents the amount of power exchange-values impose upon the economy, as he states “As use-values, commodities are, above all, of different qualities, but as exchange-values they are merely different quantities, and consequently do not contain an atom of use-values” (Marx 54). It is with this analysis that Marx is able to present the link between labor and the productions that result from a worker 's dedication. As a result, it becomes evident that exchange-values possess an extraordinary amount of influence with regards to the worth of an object and a worker’s salary. However, this worth changes with time and depends on the usefulness of the product. This is especially made evident when analyzing the twenty-first century business world. In 2015 a report by Sorensen was published, discussing the role of exchange-values in the American economic-system. Thus, demonstrating the neglect of use-values, while highlighting the power of exchange-value as Sorensen writes, “Most
To Marx, history d... ... middle of paper ... ... 67 Jon Elster, Making sense of Marx, Cambridge University press 1985 C.Slaughter, Marxism and the class struggle, New Park Publications LTD 1975 Tony Bilton, Kevin Bonnett, Pip Jones etc.. Introductory Sociology 4th edition, Palgrave Macmillan 2002 Gregor McLennan, The Story of Sociology Ken Morrison, Marx Durkheim Weber, Sage publications LTD 1995 Fulcher&Scott, Sociology 2nd edition, Oxford university press 2003 --------------------------------------------------------------------- [1] German Ideology, pp.8-13 [2] Karl Marx: Selected Writings in Sociology and Social Philosophy, p.150, Pelican books 1963 [3] ibid, p107 [4] Karl Marx: Selected Writings in Sociology and Social Philosophy, p.177, Pelican books 1963 [5] Essential writings of Karl Marx; p176; Panther Books Ltd ,1967
Under this course of dialogue, Marx’s work is seen as speculations and possible reasons for certain patterns seen over history, but it concretes the idea of these patterns in such a way that they are finite and do not lend themselves to change or modification.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Karl Marx both had the similar notion that property was the root of inequality, even though they both lived in different eras. Rousseau, who lived during the 18th century, was a staunch proponent of the idea that property gave rise to inequality, due to its unequal distribution. Similarly, Marx, who lived during the 19th century, contended that property gave rise to inequality because it created a class conflict between that of the upper class bourgeoisie, and the working class proletariat. However, for Rousseau, there was an underlying force that gave rise to property and that was amour propre. In simplest terms, amour propre is the vanity and self-love that leads one to seek personal gain, even if it may be at the expense of others (Rousseau 63). Rousseau argued that amour propre and private property were the sources of inequality because they drove man away from his natural state where he was equal amongst others.
False consciousness refers to the manner in which material, political and recognized practices in entrepreneurial culture deceive the public. False consciousness is resulting from the Marxist belief which recognizes a state of mind of a person or an assembly of individuals who don’t comprehend their class interests. A number of people who are academically affiliated with the Marxist practice trace the notions’ foundation to a philosophy initially established by Marx, well-known as commodity fetishism. Commodity fetishism is the notion that societies place a worth on merchandises separately from those they intrinsically have. For instance, a diamond, as soon as it grew into a commodity, is not merely a rock with the properties of a rock but in its place an object that individual’s value and respect as if the rock possessed some in-built supremacy which brands it altered and further valued than all other rocks. False consciousness possesses the properties of an illusion, a failure to apprehend an impartial realism autonomous of the observer.
In many societies and times, we have observed the exchange of goods and services, and as civilizations advanced, even the development of currency and more sophisticated systems of exchange. Everything has a price and is given in exchange for something else––that is, barring a seemingly glaring exception: the gift. One might surmise that presents are given out of love or the goodness of one’s heart, but in The Gift, French sociologist Marcel Mauss (1950) asserts that
As a matter of fact, his teachings can definitely be applied to today’s society. This paper will give a summary of Marx’s political philosophy. It will also discuss a contemporary issue: the current economic crisis— and how Marx believed racism played a crucial role in it. Finally, through the lens he has developed, I will explain how Marx would analyze this issue and how one can argue that it spurred the current movement known as Occupy Wall Street. Karl Marx was a German philosopher and political theorist.