Toward an anthropological theory of value: the false coin of our own dreams

By D. Graeber. 2001

1,259 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/aa1a2e30e2c50e5c671cea9c31c627eeaf39208f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

The Anthropology of Money and Finance: Between Ethnography and World History (2014, background): “David Graeber (2001, 2009, 2011), in a unique historical synthesis, links given an impersonal measure.”
Banking Nature? The Spectacular Financialisation of Environmental Conservation (2013, background): “…conservation is further rationalising human and nonhuman natures to conform to an economic system that privileges price over other values, and profit-oriented market exchanges over the distributive and sustainable logics of other economic systems (cf Büscher et al in press; Graeber 2001).”
Mutuality (2016, background): “As we now know, economic exchanges between persons evolved out of institutional systems of redistribution rather than the other way around (Graeber, 2001, 2011).”
Peer to Peer: The Commons Manifesto (2019, background): “Value as a term alone has no concrete meaning, but it is to be interpreted within a broader social whole (Graeber, 2001).”
Crisis, Value, and Hope: Rethinking the Economy (2014, background): “Much of this is addressed in exchange theory and the debate about the gift (Damon 1980; Godelier 1996; Graeber 2001; Gregory 1982, 1997; Mauss 2003 [1923–1924]; Munn 1992; Robbins and Akin 1999; Strathern 1988, 1992; Weiner 1980, 1992), and it is tied to the debate on money, special monies, scales…”
The Anthropology of Credit and Debt (2010, background): “While building on Munn’s idea that bodies with credit can move through spacetime and bodies in debt are constricted in this same realm, Graeber (2001) has added to this literature on bodies by illuminating the role of visible versus invisible bodily powers and adornment.”
The Social Life of Bitcoin (2018, background): “…specialist monetary literature will tell you, there is nothing unusual about this – all money is ‘virtual’ in the sense that it relies upon the series of claims and obligations in which it is embedded (see Dodd, 1994, 2014; Hart, 1986, 2001; Ingham, 1996, 2004; Graeber, 2001, 2011; Desan, 2014).”
The crisis seen from below, within, and against: from solidarity economy to food distribution cooperatives in Greece (2014, background): “…stated: ’we will educate him [the citizen] for his revolutionary task by giving him a sort of foretaste of all the advantages that the future society will be able to offer him…we will create a veritable arsenal of socialist capital in the midst of bourgeois capital’ (cited in Graeber 2001: 151).”
Blockchain and value systems in the sharing economy: The illustrative case of Backfeed (2017, background): “It becomes evident how a particular modality of production has organically transformed the perception of value, in the sense of defining meaningful action within a broader social totality (Graeber, 2001).”
It is value that brings universes into being (2013, background): “…flaws in his original formulation—as I have done myself in noting the slipperiness of Dumont’s notion of hierarchical “inclusion” (Graeber 1997: 704–5), or his odd insistence that all binary oppositions are always, necessarily based on a logic of marked and unmarked terms (Graeber 2001: 16–20).”
Democracy of Credit: Ownership and the Politics of Credit Access in Late Twentieth-Century America1 (2016, background): “The answers to these questions are far from obvious, and yet as David Graeber (2001, p. 227) emphasizes, whenever possible we ought “ to view practices and institutions in terms of their potentialities, to force on oneself a kind of pragmatic optimism.”
Moral economy: Rethinking a radical concept (2016, background): “…why some objects cannot be counted and are considered inalienable while others change value as they move across different regimes underscores a broader debate about the fuzzy boundaries between morality and market exchange (Gregory, 1982; Munn, 1992; Weiner, 1992; Strathern, 1988; Graeber, 2001).”