Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 6.djvu/867

 REVIEWS 853

The first part of the book is devoted to a discussion of value. The advocates of the marginal utility theory as well as those who attempt to explain value on the basis of difficulty of attainment, scarcity, etc., will all find something in support of their respective theories ; but value cannot rest on desires and feelings alone, says the author; it can only be deflected from the great channel of exchange which constitutes an intermediate world between desires and satisfac- tion. Exchange the author regards as a manifestation of reciprocal action, and it is wide enough in its scope to include such things as love and play. Feelings and exchange therefore furnish the ultimate basis of value. The philosophy of money rests upon the idea of the value of money, which is the highest expression or summit of eco- nomic value. This explains the necessity of entering into an elabo- rate analysis of the phenomena of value. Value is characterized as an "epigone" of price.

Money may be defined as the abstract value of wealth, and as the independent representation of the relations arising out of exchangea- bility ; and, as the expression of exchangeability, money is the most "unindividualized" conception of our practical world. Money is fun- gible. It is more than that. It is "fungibility of things in person." Under a system of barter, price-relations are more fixed ; under a sys- tem of money exchanges they are variable ; and the supply of money stands in a certain relation to variations in price.

It has been said that value must be measured by something that possesses value : length by length, weight by weight, etc. Must money, in order to perform its functions, have value in itself, or may it be a mere symbol ? These two divergent lines of reasoning the author dis- cusses. It is true, he says, that two things qualitatively different can- not be measured, but certain proportions can be established between things qualitatively different. In its early history it was essential that the money material should possess value, but as time went on a gradual separation of functional and intrinsic values took place. This move- ment rests upon deep-seated cultural tendencies. Professor Simmel gives illustrations to show that when a certain commodity is used as money, its commodity use is not taken into consideration ; and he finally demonstrates the psychological possibility of using valueless substances as money. He adheres to a modified quantity theory in which the value of the fraction does not represent the value of a par- ticular good, and the terms of which (numerator and denominator) are affected by the rapidity of circulation and the goods actually on the