Ludwig von Mises: Procedural Intervention on the Discussion of Value Theory

This brief intervention, originally published in discussion proceedings in 1933, proposes an agenda for debating value theory. Mises argues that the discussion should confront the doctrines most influential in contemporary Germany. His contribution concerns the priorities of the debate; it identifies the questions to be addressed without developing substantive answers.

Das Wichtigste, was wir hier zu behandeln haben, müßte, wie ich glaube, die Gegenüberstellung der subjektivistischen Wertlehre gegenüber jenen beiden Wertlehren sein, die heute die größte Verbreitung gerade in Deutschland haben, das ist auf der einen Seite die Casselsche Lehre und die Frage, ob eine Behandlung der Preistheorie ohne Wertlehre möglich ist, und auf der anderen Seite der Spannsche Universalismus, der doch in einem Buche verbreitet ist, das eine Auflagezahl erreicht hat, mit der sich kein sozialwissenschaftliches Werk der letzten Jahrzehnte messen kann.

English translation: The most important matter we have to address here should, I believe, be the confrontation of subjectivist value theory with those two theories of value that currently enjoy the widest circulation, particularly in Germany: on the one hand, Cassel’s doctrine and the question whether it is possible to treat price theory without value theory; and on the other hand, Spann’s universalism, which is disseminated in a book whose print run no work in the social sciences of recent decades can match.

The proposed comparison has two distinct grounds. Cassel raises a theoretical question about whether price theory can dispense with value theory. Spann’s universalism demands attention because of its exceptional circulation, as Mises characterizes it. Popularity is not offered as proof of validity, but as a reason for making a doctrine an explicit interlocutor.

Ich glaube, wenn wir nicht eine Auseinandersetzung mit Cassel und Spann in den Vordergrund stellen, haben wir Dinge behandelt, die, sagen wir vom augenblicklichen Standpunkt der Diskussion, in Deutschland heute nicht aktuell sind.

English translation: I believe that if we do not put a critical engagement with Cassel and Spann at the forefront, we have dealt with matters that, let us say, from the present standpoint of the discussion, are not topical in Germany today.

The closing sentence turns the proposed comparison into a criterion of relevance. Mises asks the participants to orient their discussion toward the current German intellectual situation. The passage’s significance lies in this procedural move: subjectivist value theory should be examined through direct engagement with prominent alternatives, rather than through questions detached from the immediate controversy.