Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T01:41:23.323Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Labor “Embodied” In Smith's Labor-Commanded Measure: A “Rationally Reconstructed” Legend

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2009

Glenn Hueckel
Glenn Hueckel
Affiliation:
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Nearly a half-century has passed since Ronald Meek (1956, p. 63) warned us that Adam Smith's notion of the labor commanded by a commodity in the marketplace is to be understood not as an expression of the “substance” of value, varying “directly with the quantity of social labor used to produce” the object, but rather as nothing more than a unit of value measure with no fixed relationship to the labor “embodied” in production. It was this distinction that he sought to fix in our minds with his memorable image of the magnet. Indeed, it is more than three times as long since John Stuart Mill (1848, p. 568) conveyed the same distinction with his particularly apt metaphor of “the thermometer and the fire.” Further, it is now forty years since Mark Blaug (1959), reminding us of that distinction, returned our attention to Smith's use of his measure as an expression of potential productive capacity (a view advanced earlier yet by Hla Myint 1948, pp. 20–21 and by Meek 1956, p. 65), but one that conveys a subjective dimension as well. Yet in spite of a now widespread concurrence in this reading, the “legend” that Smith's concept of labor commanded is to be understood as expressing, in some way, price ratios proportional to ratios of labor embodied in production remains remarkably resilient.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , December 2000 , pp. 461 - 485
Copyright
Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bailey, Samuel. 1825. A Critical Dissertation on the Nature, Measure and Causes of Value. New York: Augustus M. Kelley, 1967.Google Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 1959. “Welfare Indices in The Wealth of Nations.” Southern Economic Journal 26 (10): 150–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 1990. “On the Historiography of Economics.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 12 (Spring): 27–37. In Mark Blaug, Not Only an Economist: Recent Essays. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 1997. Economic Theory in Retrospect, 5th edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 1999. “Misunderstanding Classical Economics: The Sraffian Interpretation of the Surplus Approach.” History of Political Economy 31 (Summer): 213–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boskin, Michael J., Dulberger, Ellen R., Gordon, Robert J. et al. , 1998. “Consumer Prices, the Consumer Price Index, and the Cost of Living.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 12 (Winter): 3–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewer, Anthony. 1995. “Rent and Profit in the Wealth of Nations.” Scottish Journal of Political Economy 42 (05): 183–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caravale, Giovanni. 1992. “Review of Adam Smith's Theory of Value and Distribution: A Reappraisal.” Southern Economic Journal 58 (04): 1123–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobb, Maurice. 1973. Theories of Value and Distribution since Adam Smith: Ideology and Economic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, Paul H. 1928. “Smith's Theory of Value and Distribution.” In John Maurice Clark, Paul H. Douglas, Jacob H. Hollander, et al., Adam Smith, 1776–1926: Lectures to Commemorate the Sesquicentennial of the Publication of the Wealth of Nations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
JrEkelund, Robert B. and Hébert, Robert F.. 1997. A History of Economic Theory and Method, 4th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Garegnani, Pierangelo. 1984. “Value and Distribution in the Classical Economists and Marx.” Oxford Economic Papers 36 (06): 291–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garegnani, Pierangelo. 1987. “Surplus Approach to Value and Distribution.” In Eatwell, John, Milgate, Murray, and Newman, Peter, eds., The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, vol. 4. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Haakonssen, Knud. 1981. The Science of a Legislator: The Natural Jurisprudence of David Hume and Adam Smith. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollander, Samuel. 1973. The Economics of Adam Smith. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hueckel, Glenn. 1998. “Smith's Uniform ‘Toil and Trouble’: A ‘Vain Subtlety’?” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 20 (05): 215–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hueckel, Glenn. 2000. “On ‘the Insurmountable Difficulties, Obscurity, and Embarrassment’ of Smith's Fifth Chapter.” History of Political Economy 32 (Summer): 317–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khalil, Elias L. 1991. “Adam Smith's Concept of Labor-Commanded: A Study in Misinterpretation.” New York Economic Review 21 (02): 34–49.Google Scholar
Kleer, Richard A. 1996. “The Decay of Trade: The Politics of Economic Theory in Eighteenth-Century Britain.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 18 (Fall): 319–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landreth, Harry, and Colander, David C.. 1994. History of Economic Thought, 3rd edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.Google Scholar
Malthus, Thomas Robert. 1823. The Measure of Value Stated and Illustrated. In The Works of Thomas Robert Malthus, vol. 7, edited by Wrigley, D. A. and Souden, David. London: William Pickering, 1986, pp. 179–221.Google Scholar
Meek, Ronald L. 1956. Studies in the Labour Theory of Value. London: Lawrence & Wishart.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1848. Principles of Political Economy, SirAshley, William, edition. Fairfield, New Jersey: Augustus M. Kelley, 1976.Google Scholar
Myint, Hla. 1948. Theories of Welfare Economics. London: Longmans Green and Co.Google Scholar
O'Donnell, Rory. 1990. Adam Smith's Theory of Value and Distribution: A Reappraisal. New York: St. Martin's Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rashid, Salim. 1998. The Myth of Adam Smith. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Ricardo, David. 1817. On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation. In The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, vol. 1, edited by Sraffa, Piero. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1951.Google Scholar
Rima, Ingrid Hahne. 1991. Development of Economic Analysis, 5th edition. Homewood, IL: Irwin.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1954. History of Economic Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Adam. 1776. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, 2 vols, edited by Campbell, R. H., Skinner, A. S., and Todd, W. B.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976.Google Scholar
Smith, Adam. 1978a. Lectures on Jurisprudence, edited by Meek, R. L., Raphael, D. D., and Stein, P. G.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Adam. 1978b. “‘Early Draft’ of Part of The Wealth of Nations.” In Adam Smith, Lectures on Jurisprudence, edited by Meek, R. L., Raphael, D. D., and Stein, P. G.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 562–81.Google Scholar
Spiegel, Henry William. 1983. The Growth of Economic Thought, revised and expanded edition. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Sraffa, Piero. 1960. Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities: Prelude to a Critique of Economic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sylos-Labini, P. 1976. “Competition: The Product Markets.” In Wilson, Thomas and Skinner, Andrew S., eds., The Market and the State: Essays in Honour of Adam Smith. Oxford: The Clarendon Press.Google Scholar