MARGINAL UTILITY THEORY OF VALUE IS A FUCKING JOKE

i'm not that user. i'm just saying the marginal utility theory doesn't actually use any measurement to measure happiness, it's literally all theorycrafting that makes zero real world sense.

well, with recent advances in neuropsychology I think they very well could.

have fun strapping customers into some technocratic matrix torture device after they buy some bread so you can measure their happiness

Lol they can do it much less invasively

Lol. no. Measuring the mere exchange of chemicals wont measure happiness itself, how do you know that one person isn't experiencing a happiness more intense than you could imagine with less? You can't verify or examine their internal experience.

>measuring the mere exchange of chemicals won't measure happiness itself
>you can't verify or examine their internal experience
literally the entire field of neuropsychology would like to disagree with you, friend. That's literally what the field is about, verifying an internal experience by linking it to physical things, such as signal molecule concentrations and neuron activity. I'll give you that it isn't perfect, but then again no system is. The current system by which neuropsychologists measure emotion is very accurate, but if you don't believe in their methods i suggest you take that up with the neuroscientists.

>The doctrines of marginalism and the Marginal Revolution are often interpreted as somehow a response to Marxist economics. However the first volume of Das Kapital was not published until July 1867, after the works of Jevons, Menger, and Walras were written or well under way (In 1874 Walras published Éléments d'économie politique pure and Carl Menger published Principles of Economics in 1871) ; and Marx was still a relatively minor figure when these works were completed. It is unlikely that any of them knew anything of him. (On the other hand, Hayek or Bartley has suggested that Marx, voraciously reading at the British Museum, may have come across the works of one or more of these figures, and that his inability to formulate a viable critique may account for his failure to complete any further volumes of Kapital before his death
Commie status: BTFO

>Hayek
lmao

>obscure theorists x had no reason to know obscure theorist y, that's just silly but obscure theorist y was not doubt perplexed with what he probably read about obscure theorist x. It's the only explanation!

every theory of value that doesn't concern itself with the nature of production is of course a joke.

marginal utility in and of itself is however a great tool.

What about production of artificial scarcity?

>he doesn't know marginalism uses utility ordinally not cardinally

You can't say X gives me 14 happinesses and Y gives me 15 happinesses, but you can say X is my first choice over Y.

Economic choices aren't strictly ordinal though.

You could have a sandwich for $5 or caviar for $100. Clearly the caviar is more desirable, but it's also more expensive. It turns out you have something more desirable than caviar for the same $95, but you still need to purchase lunch. Then you start assembling different groups of things you can buy. Caviar vs sandwich and $95 of coke, or sandwich and an XL coke, etc.

Then in a market based society, people make choices based on market prices. People will skip things that may give them the marginal utility because they think, that's a fucking rip-off.

ASSOCIATED WITH, it is not happiness, when you smoke crack, you release dopamine, but can you say that that is preferable to having a healthy relationship with another human being?
Happiness and utility are ambiguous terms that are use by a theory which field does not even contemplate. Marginal utility theory is not even scientific, it can hardly be considered a theory since it's use concept that are not explained by it and it's significance are derived from common sense, without method or critic.

Psychology suggest that this kind of hyperrational behavior is not normal for a human. Marketing suggest this also, which are the sciences that actually study this.

>commerce degree
>can confirm it is a joke
Hey guys, I studied theology. I can confirm evolution is a hoax

>marginal theory of value was a revolution because it solved the diamond water paradox! That's why it's superior to anything else.
>okay I guess I'll read about that
>hurrr why is water cheaper than diamonds?!? you can't explain that

Wtf, how is this a paradox? Imagine a society where water was as expensive as diamonds and diamonds were as cheap as bottled water It would collapse pretty much immediately Mad Max style.

Water is a basic component of sustained life and there for all economic activity. It's priced in to any purchase automatically because you're paying for workers not to die. This is like asking why base construction materials are cheaper than the assembled house. It couldn't be any other way.

How the fuck does mainstream economics get away with being this stupid? Is there something I'm missing?

Psychology would dictate that many choices are irrational and non-ordinal as well. Like when you buy something then have buyers remorse and wish you bought the other thing.

I have no idea, because LTV has an explanation for water/diamond too. It's that a diamond on average takes more labor to mine than something that literally falls from the sky.

As someone with a degree in economics, I gave up trying to argue with Marxists a long time ago. They are secular theists and no proof will ever be enough to invalidate their panacea worldview

Marginal utility and Marx's theories don't really have anything to do with eachother, Value in Marxism and Value in Marginal are entirely different things.

Also TSSI.