Skip to main content

Locke Part 2

 In our first post on Locke, we talked about his examination of the concepts of ideas and sensations in Locke's thinking and the passive mind that copies or reflects external reality.  Locke talked of value as being reflected as the external “use-value” of an item or object being outside of a person.  At the same time, Locke talks of idea as being the internal sensation or reflection of that use value.  Again, it is important to note that these ideas as reflected in use values will be the same for all individuals using reason.  


From this point forward, Commons talks of moving from value to valuing.  The verb valuing means that the human person is the interpretation and reinterpretation  of those items of use value.  Human beings think forward about what can be done with the objects. This the key reference to the valuing process that will be crucial to Commons project.


Commons also makes reference to the fact that Locke can’t deal with the concept of power.  He could only view power through the concept of moving physical objects.  For Commons , power is the reality that a human being choose between options.  The choice is a reflection of power in that situation and a reflection of the Will.  Commons is typically capitalizing the word Will because I think he wants us to understand the importance of that concept in his development of economic theory.


A long quote from Commons here, “Had he (Locke) applied his experimental instead of the introspective method to psychology, as he and his contemporaries had applied it to physics, then, instead of following a physical analogy for his explanation of the will, he might have observed that the Will—his idea of Power—is a process of repeatedly choosing and acting upon the best alternative actually accessible at the time. These alternatives are also continually changing in their activity, their meanings, and their relative importance. Nothing like this occurs in physics, optics, or astronomy. Converted into terms of Will, his meaning of Power is a functional relation between the whole of the living body and the external world, wherein the Will is itself a process of choosing between different degrees of power over the world and other people, according to those meanings and valuings which are the relative importance attributed to the available alternatives.”  (pg. 19, IE)


Here, Commons is talking about a dynamic process where the human being is processing external information and turning that input through the valuing process into thoughts and sensations with an orientation towards future moves.  Further, we can see that this valuing and choosing process may be altered over time and place in a dynamic motion.


Commons talks further about this process of dynamic choice, “This functional concept of a choice involves, indeed, also a physical process, but one entirely different from that of the science of physics. It involves, in one and the same act, the threefold dimension of performance, avoidance, and forbearance: performance, the exertion of physical or economic power in one direction; avoidance, the rejection of the next best alternative performance; and forbearance, the choice of a lower as against a higher degree of power in the actual performance.” (pg. 19, IE)


Overall, we see that Commons had a sophisticated theory, playing off of some of the ideas of John Locke in this case, of how human cognition took in information and used that information in a dynamic process to make decisions about choices and the use of power. This will be a critical foundation for much of Commons theory of institutional economics.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Commons Futurity pg.526-528

Commons Futurity VII. The Margin for Profit pg 526-528  In this section, Commons turns to thinking about a specific aspect of modern banker capitalism addressing the question of profit's role in the economy. He starts with some terminology regarding profit share - the share of national income that goes to profit earners and the profit margin - the dynamic aspect that drives a going concern forward. We then move into another set of terms that are rate of profit and profit yield.  The rate of profit is related to the par value of stock and yield is related to market value of stock or outstanding equity. The social question to Commons is what the role of profit in keeping the overall economy and does society or community pay too much or too little for this service. Economists have long thought about the role of profits in driving the economy up or down.  Commons believes there are profit share theories and profit margin theories as two diction categories in economic thinking...

Commons Futurity pg. 510-526 VI. The Transactional System of Money and Value

VI. The Transactional System of Money and Value  The overall objective of this section is to understand money and its role and relationship to economic value in the institutional economics of John R. Commons. Commons writes that, "It is because Value is a two-dimensional concept (omitting futurity)—with two different causations, the one being the scarcity-value, or price, determined by supply and demand, the other being the greater or smaller output of use-value which will be created in the labor process that follows the transaction. " (Commons, pg. 517, 1934). The point here is again Commons is fighting against what he observes are the limits of other definitions of economic value such as simply individual utility or the classical case of exchange value only.   In this section, Commons make an important move on pages 520 and 521. He states that for a thing to be objective it needs to be independent of any objective will as opposed to other competing definitions. He will ...

Commons commenting on Marx and Proudhoun

Commons provides a short discussion to contrast Karl Marx (communism) and Pierre Joseph Proudhon (anarchism) in Institutional Economics.  His point in writing about these two authors is to continue to flesh out the idea of theory of efficiency versus an economic theory of value. This is section eight in the chapter of efficiency and scarcity pages 366 to 378.  Commons wants us to understand that Ricardo and later Marx led us to a theory of efficiency and not a theory of value.  This is not in itself a negative as a theory of efficiency is important to Commons. However, Commons wants us to understand that a theory of efficiency as espoused by Ricardo and Marx is only half the story of a theory of value.  Marx is the real part of the story in this section with some attention paid to Proudhon. As usual, Commons points out both the advanced and faults in the various thinkers he is addressing. Marx, Commons writes, did improve on Ricardo and others by replacing a subjec...