These higher goods do not really come within the economic sphere. They
touch it only incidentally, their genesis and interaction belonging
mainly to a different kind of process, one in which ownership and
material exchange play a secondary part. The distinctively economic
commodities and values are those whose whole course of production is one
in which the factors are subject to legal ownership and controlled by a
money-seeking intelligence, so that the process is essentially
pecuniary. Thus we may say that ordinary typewriting is economic,
because it is a simple, standard service which is supplied in any
quantity according to demand. The work of a newspaper reporter is not
quite so clearly economic, because not so definitely standardized and
affording more room for intangible merits which pay cannot insure. And
when we come to magazine literature of the better sort we are in a field
where the process is for the most part non-pecuniary, depending, that
is, on an interplay of minds outside the market, the latter coming in
only to set its very questionable appraisal on the product. As to
literature in general, art, science, and religion, no one at all
conversant with the history of these things will claim that important
work in them has any close relation to pecuniary inducement. The
question whether the great man was rich and honored, like Rubens, or
worked in poverty and neglect, like Rembrandt in his later years, is of
only incidental interest in tracing the history of such achievement. The
ideals and disciplines which give birth to it are generated in
non-pecuniary tracts of thought and intercourse, and unless genius
actually starves, as it sometimes does, it fulfils its aim without much
regard to pay. I need hardly add that good judges have always held that
a moderate poverty was a condition favorable to intellectual and
spiritual achievement.
I would assign a very large and growing sphere to pecuniary valuation,
but we cannot be too clear in affirming that even at its best and
largest it can never be an adequate basis for general social
organization. It is an institution, like another, having important
functions but requiring, like all institutions, to be brought under
rational control by the aid of a comprehensive sociology, ethics, and
politics. It has no charter of autonomy, no right to exemption from
social control.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account