> In Lacanian-Zizekian terms, one might say that relative prices are the
Symbolic order (the order of language only through which we can effectively,
though indirectly & imperfectly, relate to one another) and that individual
needs & desires are the Real which we would always miss should we attempt to
take cognizance of them directly through conscious & collective planning.
Ahem. Pointing out that it takes a Lacanian-Zizekian perspective to say that relative prices are pieces of communication is... ummm... a little bit of overkill. And the symbolic has little to do with effective communication, and a lot more to do with ineffective communication, but this would lead us down to an entire linguistic theory which, I'm sure, you'd end up dismissing as "mere psychobable." Whatever. My concern is this: "and that individual needs & desires are the Real which we would always miss should we attempt to take cognizance of them directly through conscious & collective planning." Desire is always always always part of the symbolic. Lacan, nowhere, talks about the desire of the Real, or Real desire. It just isn't there in Lacan, anywhere. Needs, sure, needs go with the Real - but probably not the kind of needs you are talking about which, I would imagine, have more to do with need interpretations & representations than anything else. The need for shelter is a interpretive need, one the kind of need that Gadamer and Habermas debated in the late 60s and 70s in their infamous critical theory vs hermeneutics scandal (with psychoanalysis as the bedprize). In any event, need, in Lacan, functions more like the id in Freud - this kind of surging uninformed impulse. Which has very little to do with relative prices.
ken