It is due Professor J. B. Clark, since I discuss his theories here at length, to mention the fact that, owing to his absence from Columbia University during the year 1910-11, I have been unable to talk over my criticisms with him, and so may have misinterpreted him at points. Of course, there is a similar danger with reference to every other writer mentioned in the book, but the reader will not be likely to think, in the case of others, that the interpretations have been passed on by the writers discussed, in advance of publication. I must also mention here Professor H. J. Davenport, whose name occurs frequently in the following pages. Chiefly he has evoked criticism in this discussion, but it goes without saying that his _Value and Distribution_ is a most significant work in the history of economic theory, and my indebtedness to it will be manifest. THE AUTHOR. COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, May, 1911. ANALYTICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I. INTRODUCTION CHAPTER I PROBLEM AND PLAN OF PROCEDURE Social Value concept recently become important, chiefly in America, and primarily through the influence of Professor J. B. Clark--Value and "social marginal utility"--Relation of social-value theory to Austrian theory: Professor Clark's view; views of Boehm-Bawerk, Wieser, and Sax--Statement of the author's position: conceptions of social utility and social cost unsatisfactory, but social value concept a necessity for the validation of economic theory--Plan of procedure: study of logical requirements of valid value concept; failure of current theory to justify such a concept; cause of this failure in faulty psychology, epistemology, and sociology presupposed by current economic theory; reconstruction of these presuppositions; on the basis of the reconstruction, a positive theory of social value 3 PART II. CRITIQUE OF CURRENT VALUE THEORY CHAPTER II FORMAL AND LOGICAL ASPECTS OF THE VALUE CONCEPT Value as ideal, and value as market fact--Value as absolute, and value as relative--Value as quantity--Relation between quantity and quality--Relative conception of value involves a vicious circle, if treated as ultimate--Every "relative value" implies two absolute values--Ratios must have quantitative terms--But physical quantities cannot serve as these terms--Value and evaluation: confusion of the two responsible, in part, for doctrine of relativity--Value in current economic usage: value and wealth; money as a "measure of values" 13 CHAPTER III VALUE AND MARGINAL UTILITY