The Supremacy of Value in Societal Structuration: A Critique of Economic Determinism in Marxist Discourse

Introduction

The idea that capitalism reduces all human relationships to economic exchange is a common interpretation of Marxist theory. However, this perspective assumes that economic logic is the defining structure of society, shaping all aspects of human life. This essay argues that the inverse is true: economic structures are not the root cause of value assignments but rather a manifestation of an inherent human tendency to evaluate and negotiate value. As such, capitalism—and economic systems more broadly—are reflections of deeper utilitarian principles that societies apply across various domains, including human health and ethical decision-making. By examining cases such as medical triage systems and treatment decisions, we can see that value assignment operates independently of strict monetary logic. This perspective challenges deterministic Marxist interpretations and provides a framework for understanding economic structures as extensions of human valuation rather than primary forces shaping human behavior.

Value as a Fundamental Human Principle

Humans have always assigned value, long before formal economies emerged. The earliest hunter-gatherer societies functioned on systems of reciprocal exchange, where goods and services were traded based on necessity rather than strict profit motives. Anthropologists like Marcel Mauss have highlighted the prevalence of gift economies, in which the assignment of value was tied not to immediate economic return but to social cohesion and relational stability. Even in modern capitalist societies, these forms of non-monetary valuation persist—whether in family structures, social favors, or even corporate environments where worker satisfaction and well-being are valued alongside financial metrics.

This broader conception of value contradicts the Marxist claim that capitalism fundamentally distorts human relationships by imposing a monetary structure on them. Rather, capitalism, like any other economic system, is an extension of how humans have always navigated value assignment. The commodification of labor and goods does not originate from capitalism but is simply its most formalized expression. The tendency to exchange, to compare worth, and to prioritize based on perceived benefit is an inherent part of human cognition and social organization.

Furthermore, value systems extend beyond material exchange and economic considerations. Communities have historically upheld moral and ethical codes that shape interactions, often prioritizing justice, duty, or cultural significance over monetary calculations. The existence of these structures indicates that while capitalism may institutionalize exchange mechanisms, it does not invent the human impulse to negotiate worth.

The Role of Utilitarian Principles in Value Assignment

The structuration of institutions within societies embodies a profound principle of valuation that transcends mere economic considerations. Among the most compelling counterarguments to a strictly Marxist economic determinism is the manner in which societies conceptualize healthcare and medical ethics. While the provision of healthcare necessarily operates within an economic framework, its core ethical imperatives are predominantly utilitarian, reflecting a prioritization of well-being over profit.

A salient illustration of this principle is triage, a medical protocol wherein treatment priority is determined based on how urgent the situation is and the chances of survival. At first glance, this might seem like an economic decision—using limited resources efficiently. But if we look closer, we see that the real reason is a fundamental belief in the value of human life, not just money. This reveals that the underpinning logic is not dictated by monetary exchange but by an entrenched societal recognition of life as an axiological absolute.

Even within neoliberal capitalist economies, physicians routinely administer treatments to patients with exceedingly low survival probabilities, despite the ostensibly irrational economic cost. This practice underscores a broader ethical consensus that life holds an intrinsic worth irreducible to financial calculus. Were economic rationality the sole determinant, we would anticipate a universal implementation of rigid cost-benefit analyses governing medical interventions—yet this is demonstrably not the case. Even privatized healthcare systems impose ethical constraints that ensure a baseline of care irrespective of immediate financial viability.

The Case Against Marxist Economic Determinism

Marx’s critique of capitalism presupposes that economic structures are hegemonic forces that dictate the contours of societal values and interactions. Yet, if this were wholly accurate, we would observe an unyielding economic reductionism in all spheres of decision-making, particularly in sectors that engage directly with human welfare. The persistent precedence of non-economic considerations—as exemplified in social policy, medical ethics, and humanitarian interventions—suggests that valuation is an autonomous cognitive and social construct, not merely an appendage of economic imperatives.

For example, the allocation of public funds for healthcare services to support terminally ill patients, despite the minimal economic return, contradicts the notion that capitalist logic governs all institutional priorities. If financial considerations alone dictated societal action, these expenditures would be deemed inefficient and consequently abandoned. Instead, such decisions underscore the societal consensus that human dignity and collective welfare operate as independent axiological constructs, existing beyond the dominion of capital.

Furthermore, state policies on education, legal rights, and environmental conservation often reflect a similar trend. Investments in public education, for instance, are not immediately profitable but are sustained because of a collective agreement on their long-term societal benefits. Similarly, legal protections against exploitation or environmental degradation persist despite economic arguments that deregulation could maximize profit. These instances reveal that capitalism functions within a broader matrix of ethical, cultural, and social values that mitigate pure financial determinism.

The Exchange of Value Beyond Monetary Metrics

A crucial extension of this argument is the recognition that exchange value is an inherent anthropological trait, predating and existing independently of capitalist structures. In medical settings, for instance, when a patient with a 5% probability of survival is given extensive treatment, a complex network of value assessments is at play—ranging from the patient’s intrinsic will to live to the medical community’s ethical obligations and societal expectations. This dynamic belies the assumption that all exchanges are reducible to monetary quantification.

Even within capitalist societies, allocation of resources is frequently driven by considerations that supersede immediate financial gains. Governments, for instance, continue to invest in public health initiatives, education, and infrastructure, not solely because of their economic utility, but because these institutions are deemed integral to societal function and stability. The notion that capitalism inherently commodifies all aspects of life disregards these fundamental human exchanges, which persist across economic models.

The Synthesis of Economic and Non-Economic Values

A society that integrates multiple dimensions of value—including ethical, social, and economic factors—exemplifies a more holistic and resilient societal model. When state actors allocate substantial financial resources toward life-extending medical treatments despite minimal economic feasibility, it signals a recognition of human life as an end in itself rather than merely a means to an economic outcome. Similarly, policies emphasizing worker well-being, ecological sustainability, and intergenerational equity reflect a broader paradigm in which economic rationale coexists with ethical imperatives.

This reality serves as a robust critique of strict Marxist economic determinism. Were capitalism purely a mechanism for maximizing financial efficiency, its structures would be far more ruthless in their cost-cutting measures, particularly in welfare sectors. Instead, we observe a continuous interplay between economic imperatives and non-monetary values, suggesting that monetary logic is a derivative of, rather than a foundation for, human valuation structures.

Conclusion

Economic systems do not create human valuation; they structure and formalize it. Marxist critiques often assume that capitalism imposes a commodified logic onto all relationships, but in reality, value precedes economic calculation. As demonstrated in medical, legal, and social frameworks, societies continuously integrate ethical and utilitarian considerations beyond financial imperatives.

By recognizing that economic logic is secondary to deeper, pre-existing valuation systems, we arrive at a clearer understanding of capitalism—not as an all-consuming structure, but as a framework that operates within broader social, ethical, and cultural considerations. This challenges the notion that economic determinism fully defines social relations and instead presents a more nuanced vision of how value operates across human history and institutions.