范文1：The impact of money on values
Money has become an essential element of modern life and an important symbol of human being's drive. But from the point of view of philosophical ontology, money can be regarded as one of the most difficult to define and dazzle in nature, society and human economic phenomena.
According to Marx, the development of money originated from the form of commodity value, which is connected with the activities of human production, division of labor and exchange. “The widening and deepening of the exchange of the historical process, the nature of the commodity in the latent use of value and values of the opposite development.” In order to trade, the need for this pair to stand on the outside, which requires a separate form of commodity value, the need to continue to exist until the goods are divided into goods and currencies such as the dual and eventually achieved this form. It can be seen that with the conversion of the labor product to the commodity, the commodity is converted to the currency in the same degree. ”
It can be seen from this passage that money is a special commodity that acts as a general equivalent in the course of exchange. In terms of the relationship between the commodity value and the general labor time, the essence of money is the object and materialization of the human general working time. In terms of the role of currency in circulation, money can be marked and symbolized by something relatively worthless, such as paper money. Therefore, the essence of money can be regarded as the symbolic value, that is to characterize the general human labor symbol and symbol. While the general human labor is a certain mode of production on the basis of the social nature, so the currency can not only be understood as a simple symbol, behind the symbol also hides the relationship between people. From this point of view, the essence of money is a kind of production relations, is the form of things to express people's own production relations. With the help of money, people show and compare the labor they produce. Money has not only become a medium for people to exchange Labor products, but also a carrier of social relations in which people compare labor and exchange labor.
From a philosophical point of view, the value of money is the satisfaction of money for people to exchange needs. In the early days of human history, shells, livestock, cloth, gold and silver and precious metals all served as currency. These objects, as ordinary goods, have the same use value as all goods are inherent in their own natural attributes. However, when they are branded as the title of money, they are given a unique social function that serves as the equivalent of all other commodities. This shows that money essentially has a unique aura of value. For the sake of convenience, when we make money in the form of physical existence, as a kind of various meanings are called the material value of money, and the monetary nature of the unique social function-as a Suphung to facilitate people to exchange this meaning, called the function of currency value.
By this definition, money is a mixture of both material value and functional value. The value of materiality is the basis of its functional value, while the functional value is the most fundamental value of money. The history of money generation has taught us that the reason people need money is simply to facilitate exchange, which is the greatest value of money for mankind. Well, when social productivity improves, in order to facilitate exchange, people must put higher demands on the currency when the scale and type of exchange are expanding and the exchange has become the people's daily life behavior, so that the currency has to cancel its special use value as the kind, so as to make it be free and better in the exchange of both sides. In this regard, the west of the United States said: "The role of money in the accumulation of value of the more important, it is less necessary to be linked to physical entities." ...... Only in the sense that the material factor retreats, the currency is really the currency. " This means that in order to ensure the perfection of the monetary functional value, the currency best fades away from the material shell and becomes a pure symbol which does not take the material as the carrier.
The change of money from physical entity to functional symbol does not mean that money becomes "worthless". Because the value of money is not in what it is, but in the ultimate purpose it serves. So the West-American sums up the currency: "The dual nature of money-it is a concrete, measured physical entity, at the same time, it has its own significance depends on the complete dissolution of the physical nature of the movement and function, the process-derived from the fact that money is the materialization of exchange between people, is an embodiment of pure function.”
The evolution of money contains corresponding values. Through the above analysis, we find that the evolution of money along with the corresponding values change. If the behavior of barter Exchange is the result of individual intention interaction, then the exchange behavior of currency as the medium is no longer the result of personal intention communication. When exchanging goods in the medium of currency, the buyers and sellers are separated. The communication between the buyer and seller is no longer direct, but by means of a third party, the currency. Then the third party, the currency, must be able to represent both the buyer and the seller. When the exchange is limited to a narrow range, people may find their common needs, the receptive things temporarily in a certain range of currency. However, when the exchange of a certain extent, has become a social process, people in order to achieve their own goal is to eliminate certain tendencies of individuals, to achieve a collective intent, common recognition of something as a medium of exchange, to ensure that each exchange links unimpeded. As a result, when a person sells an item, it is not an item, but a "keepsake" that can "buy other items, which are recognized by everyone". In this way, money becomes a promise, a possibility, and a possibility for other quantitative values.
In this sense, the emergence of money not only means that the real market, but also the emergence of credit, and contains the right to respect the exchange of others and the establishment of the trade with its corresponding ethics. Obviously, as a kind of "collective intention" widely accepted by market participants, the currency itself is a kind of social contract, a knot bearing the credit relationship and a system carrier to coordinate the relationship between market participants and the countries. It is based on personal trust between the state and the individual. When a person accepts and uses money, especially symbolic currency, it also means that he is regarded as "human" and respects the rights of others. The converse also means that he sees himself as a "man", a person of more or less honesty and moral endowment. In short, the emergence, existence and use of money, in itself, means that the existence of some cooperative relations between people, means that some kind of credit relationship and moral requirements, has a certain value implication.
The intrinsic structure of values and their material and social foundations. When it comes to values, it is necessary to make a statement about the values first. Here, values and values are two different concepts. Value refers to the fundamental attitude and the fundamental view of the relationship between man and nature, man and society. It is at the same level as the world outlook, epistemology and historical view. The value concept is the judgment or judgment system of the subject to the meaning and function of the object-oriented world under the guidance of the values. Different values reflect the values of the subject from different angles, and the values are embodied in a series of values. Therefore, the inspection of values must be inseparable from the study of the value concept. The impact of money on values is also achieved through a series of changes in values. Based on the above analysis, we can try to make a simple generalization of the internal mechanism of the values. Marx has made it clear that the most fundamental characteristic of human being is the free and conscious activity of human beings. That is, people are not as passive as animals to adapt to the natural world, but the dynamic transformation of nature, to create a suitable for their own material information. In this process, a series of values reflecting the relationship between man and nature, which reflects the meaning and function of nature to the subject, is the first level of values. Marx also summed up the process of human utilization of nature and transformation of nature as productive forces. Therefore, productivity is the material basis for the formation and development of values. The first review of the values should be traced back to the productivity level.