Comments on: Production and Appropriation http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2007/02/21/739/ faults | sins | abuses Sun, 07 Sep 2008 13:46:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: mike http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2007/02/21/739/#comment-65433 mike Tue, 27 Feb 2007 01:57:32 +0000 http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2007/02/21/739/#comment-65433 You're very likely right, Donna. I know Latour only by what the few comp bloggers talking about him have said, and it's sounding more and more like I need to read his recent one on the social. And I'm being myopic in looking at a labor theory of value as the only possible alternative. Here's a question: what I get from Benkler is an understanding the importance of motivation in transactions of value -- and in fact, that's part of my CCCC presentation; the evolution of motivation as spur to economic activity from Smith to Benkler, and its link to the question: why write? The odd recent listserv comment <a href="http://collinvsblog.net/archives/2007/02/_i_guess_im_more.html" rel="nofollow">Collin refers to</a> presumes one rationale. There are others. But do we need to talk about motivation to talk about value? Not necessarily -- and I wonder if talking about motivation pushes me closer towards the commodifying impulse rather than helping me move away from it. You’re very likely right, Donna. I know Latour only by what the few comp bloggers talking about him have said, and it’s sounding more and more like I need to read his recent one on the social. And I’m being myopic in looking at a labor theory of value as the only possible alternative. Here’s a question: what I get from Benkler is an understanding the importance of motivation in transactions of value — and in fact, that’s part of my CCCC presentation; the evolution of motivation as spur to economic activity from Smith to Benkler, and its link to the question: why write? The odd recent listserv comment Collin refers to presumes one rationale. There are others. But do we need to talk about motivation to talk about value? Not necessarily — and I wonder if talking about motivation pushes me closer towards the commodifying impulse rather than helping me move away from it.

]]> By: Donna http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2007/02/21/739/#comment-65161 Donna Sat, 24 Feb 2007 20:52:39 +0000 http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2007/02/21/739/#comment-65161 It's true that it seems to be consumer-oriented, but there's also a circulation, network logic there. I'm totally flying by the seat of my pants here, having not read as much alternative economic theory as you have, but I'm wondering if a social logic a la Latour would yield a different way of seeing it--and I'm wondering what a different way of seeing it would yield? That is, can information itself necessarily adhere to a labor theory of value if (as Lefevre argued years ago) invention is a social act, something that is something like a by-product of sociality? And if it can't, what does that mean for arguments of value? Just thinking aloud with you... It’s true that it seems to be consumer-oriented, but there’s also a circulation, network logic there. I’m totally flying by the seat of my pants here, having not read as much alternative economic theory as you have, but I’m wondering if a social logic a la Latour would yield a different way of seeing it–and I’m wondering what a different way of seeing it would yield? That is, can information itself necessarily adhere to a labor theory of value if (as Lefevre argued years ago) invention is a social act, something that is something like a by-product of sociality? And if it can’t, what does that mean for arguments of value?

Just thinking aloud with you…

]]> By: jenn http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2007/02/21/739/#comment-64873 jenn Fri, 23 Feb 2007 02:20:45 +0000 http://www.vitia.org/wordpress/2007/02/21/739/#comment-64873 Well then I look forward to hearing your answer in NYC:) Well then I look forward to hearing your answer in NYC:)

]]>