Department of Sociology, University of Essex, UK.
Br J Sociol. 2012 Sep;63(3):430-50. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-4446.2012.01418.x.
This article re-reads Marx's account of the commodity as a socio-natural entity. In doing so, it re-evaluates the status of the political (as opposed to questions of political economy) in Marx's analysis and also reads his argument in light of Actor-Network-Theory's call for the thingness of things to be taken seriously. The paper argues that there is a complex duality to the commodity as it is always comprised of both use-value and exchange-value and hence as both 'natural' and 'social'. It is pointed out that the usual translation of words with the root 'gesellschaft-' as 'social' is unhelpful and that a better term would be 'societal', as this enables Marx, and us, to re-approach the very distinction between the natural, the societal and the social. Marx's notion of 'value as equivalence' is then outlined and it is argued that this crucial stage in his account is often passed over. Value as equivalence is not a mere social production but relies upon the expression of the use-value of one thing in another. This leads to the third move which is an outline of the importance of value-form and social form. It is argued that it is this formation of a commodity (comprising both the natural and the social) which is the key both to understanding it as a specific historical entity as well as offering a powerful, non-reductive, account of the natural, social, material and historical character of things. Overall, the article attempts to develop a novel conception of natural-social commodities which does not premise either side of this dyad and so might help social theorists to talk of real things whilst avoiding charges of essentialism and reductionism as well as possible Latourian critiques of over-generalization.
这篇文章重新解读了马克思对商品作为社会自然实体的论述。在这样做的过程中,它重新评估了政治(与政治经济学问题相对)在马克思分析中的地位,并且根据行动者网络理论(Actor-Network-Theory)的呼吁,认真对待事物的物性,重新阅读了他的论点。本文认为,商品具有复杂的双重性,因为它总是由使用价值和交换价值组成,因此既是“自然的”,又是“社会的”。文章指出,将带有词根“gesellschaft-”的词通常译为“社会的”是无益的,更好的术语应该是“社会的”(societal),因为这使马克思和我们能够重新接近自然、社会和社会之间的区别。然后概述了马克思的“价值等同”概念,并认为他的论述中这一关键阶段经常被忽视。价值等同不是单纯的社会生产,而是依赖于一种事物的使用价值在另一种事物中的表达。这导致了第三个论点,即价值形式和社会形式的重要性概述。文章认为,正是商品的这种形成(既包含自然又包含社会)既是理解它作为一种特定历史实体的关键,也是对事物的自然、社会、物质和历史特征的有力、非还原的解释。总的来说,本文试图发展一种新的自然-社会商品概念,不预设这个对偶关系的任何一方,因此可能有助于社会理论家在避免本质主义和还原主义的指控以及拉图尔可能的过度概括批评的同时,谈论真实的事物。