commodities more cheaply and more abundantly in relation to their competitors who continue to produce at the socially necessary labor-time and thus have to sell their commodities at the socially necessary average price . Producing more cheaply means the ability to sell more cheaply and this also means the capacity to sell more and to appropriate a greater segment of the market , and “ if [ the capitalist ] attains the object he is aiming at …[ and ] prices his goods only a small percentage lower than his competitors . He drives them [, i . e . his competitors ,] off the field , he wrests from them at least a part of their market , by underselling them ”[ 11 ]. In this regard , according to Marx , competition drive capitalists to everincreasingly produce below the average time periods set by the regulating mechanism of socially necessary labor-time .
Notwithstanding , this Marxist concept of a law-like mechanism , i . e . socially necessary labortime , regulating capitalist production , is predicated on the assumption that value , by Marx ’ s own definition , is only scientifically quantifiable labor-time and nothing else . For Marx , “ the substance of value [ is ] labor-time ”[ 12 ], specifically socially necessary labor-time , measured in scientifically exact quantities of time deemed socially necessary . However , is Marx correct in his definition ? Or has he missed the amplitude , multitude and magnitude of value , namely has Marx reduced the concept of value to the narrow confines of scientific measurement and by doing so , missed the importance , malleability and fluidity by which multi-dimensional value , informs , shapes and influences price , wage , profit , production , consumption , distribution and capitalism , in general .
Principally , Marx is correct when he argues that labor-power is the source value , but Marx fails to discern that labor-power is in fact the source of a specific type of value , namely scientific quantifiable value , which also means that labor-power is itself scientifically quantifiable akin to scientifically quantifiable value . For Marx , labor-power is a quantity of measurable labor-time applied to the coefficient measurement of socially necessary labor-time , which also means , that labor-power is in essence scientifically quantifiable as value , due to the fact that it manifests scientifically quantifiable value . Marx has reduced both the concept of value , and in the process , labor-power as well , to scientifically quantifiable measurements . In actuality , value is multi-varied , it can be both quantifiable and unquantifiable ; in addition , labor-power is multi-varied it can be both quantifiable and unquantifiable . By reducing and condensing value and labor-power to the rigors of the narrow limits of scientific quantification , Marx has missed a variety of socio-economic phenomena that escape scientific quantification and more or less can never be quantified , such as the importance of networking and / or position within the capitalist hiearchy etc . ( more will be said on this later in part 3 ). As a result , a reformulation and elaboration of value and labor-power is necessary , if a more comprehensive understanding of capitalism and the capitalist modes of production , consumption and distribution are to be developed , which both expands and progresses from Marx ’ s analysis and is in turn able to explain the vast array of socio-economic phenomena that cannot be explained via Marx ’ s labor theory of value , i . e ., the law of value .
First and foremost , a broader concept of labor-power is needed in order to encapsulate the variety of corporeal , incorporeal , physical and mental activities that enrich , influence and inform capitalist processes and more importantly value , which are outside scientific quantification . The best concept that encapsulates this variety and multiplicity is creative-power . It is in fact creative-power , which embodies labor-power within itself , that is , the source of value , both quantifiable value and unquantifiable value . Contrary to Marx , labor-power is only the source of a specific type of value , i . e ., scientific quantifiable value , while value , in general and par excellence , embodies scientific quantifiable value within itself , in a vast plethora of both quantifiable and unquantifiable values . More importantly , creative-power emanates from an insatiable drive for ownership / knowledge housed in human consciousness ; while , labor-power is a specific type of creative-power that specifically produces scientific quantifiable value when subjected to the rigors and artificial parameters of socially necessary labor-time . On the other hand , more broadly ,