Many of the currencies in the world at present are not tied to the gold standards or anything substantial. The US Dollar is one example.
Thus the real value of any currencies is merely the worth of the paper it is printed on or the metal that is used to represent it.
Therefore a US Dollar [or any other similar dollar that do not has a gold standard] does not exist as a real thing.
Agree?
Even though a US Dollar does not exist, it is nevertheless traded objectively.
This objectivity is based on the inter-subjective consensus of trust which exist amongst those who participate within this currency framework.
This is proof that objectivity is merely intersubjectivity, i.e. intersubjective consensus.
The above can be used as an analogy to show that even the objectivity of the physical empirical world is based on inter-subjective consensus of trust which exist amongst those who participate within the empirical reality framework.
In this case those who participate are inevitably all normal* human beings who shared the same basis DNA in working conditions.
exclude the seriously brain damage.
In this case of objectivity as intersubjectivity within empirical reality, instead of paper or metal pieces to represent the currency, we have various physical elements in combination to give us a sense of objective empirical reality.
What is held as objective reality is thus merely intersubjective trust and there is no real ontological reality of any real ultimate substance or God.
Point is, objectivity is ultimately inter-subjectivity.
The gold standard doesn’t make the slightest bit of difference to the reality or otherwise of a dollar. A dollar is an abstraction, unless it refers to the piece of paper that is used to represent the abstraction. However, the value of the piece of paper is more than that of a different, unprinted paper, by virtue of it being a representation of a dollar.
But this is a bad example to highlight the difference between objective and intersubjective, because value is intersubjective.
You’re confusing knowledge/consensus of events with events themselves. If someone were to punch you on the nose, and everyone were to agree that they didn’t, they would not be found guilty or punished for it. But your nose would still be bleeding.
If everyone were to agree that the capital of France is Lyons, not Paris, then Lyons would be the capital. But if everyone were to agree that Amsterdam was at the same altitude as Kathmandu, it would still be prone to flooding.
This is the distinction you need to argue against. Facts we can be wrong about, depending on something external, we call objective. Facts that become true by virtue of their being held, such as the meaning and use of a word or the value of a dollar (or gold), are intersubjective.
objective = that which is/happens is independent of what we think (gravity)
inter-subjective = that which is/happens is dependent on what we think (Paris is the capital of France)
subjective = that which is/happens is dependent on what I think (I like vanilla ice cream)
Objective does not require any thinking minds, inter-subjective requires the agreement of minds, and subjective only requires one mind.
This is the source of confusion : we can observe objective events. We can only make the observation by using our minds. However, those events did not require our minds order to happen. Occurrence and observation of occurrence are two different events.
I am sure in some parallel universe people use monopoly money as valued money and valued money here as gaming money. Lol
Ever see a gambler go out and waste their valued money then cry when they lose it? It’s entertainment with something that the majority place value on. If the majority didn’t place value on it people wouldn’t cry when they lose. Ever see someone cry when they lose a monopoly game? Not really, because it’s all fun and games. No value on that paper. Which is why people shouldn’t put value on the paper that’s used right now.
Honestly. Imagine if intelligent life forms ever came to Earth and saw us playing with money and placing value on paper… they’d call us fucking idiots then take off in their ships.
Because the system we have now promotes greed. Which is the core of almost everything horrible that has been happening and happens.
Oh, let’s go to war… not to display our strength, not because you’re terrible people but because we want your resources and we want to benefit!
I realize I may seem ignorant on this topic, but I still don’t understand why dollars need to be backed up by gold…
I mean, when we exchange money with each other, how many times is gold even involved in the process? For example: when we go to the store and buy groceries, we just exchange dollar bills…Gold isn’t even on our minds.
Imagine if gold suddenly disappeared, would that effect how we go about our business on a day-to-day basis? Would it really matter in our minds, when we go to the store to buy food? Would the cashier look at the money any differently?
Does cash, really, need to be backed up, or is that theory a load of BS?
If I tell a child there are unicorns in the wood, and as a result they choose to go there and fall and break their arm, does that make unicorns objectively real?
If my dislike of sprouts causes me to leave a room, does that make my subjective opinion objective?
Is this about money or existence? ??? Back when I was in school, we were taught that our dollars were legal tradeable IOUs. I owe you this much gold originally, now, Its a guaranteed government IOU. That is why they are also called notes.
Disagree with the word ‘thus’. It implies there’s some connection between the first statement and the second, where there is none.
To continue with that theme, I think the common-sense observation is that trees exist in a way that dollars don’t, and I don’t see where you’ve explained that they are the same so much as asserted it.
Because pure gold is a rarity… What is not to get.
For example imagine if dragons were real and their eggs were a rarity. People would create a currency based off their rarity because they’re a rare resource… Gold is a rare resource, it’s harder to find than iron and all of the other metals except a few. Silver is under gold.
Same with diamonds. They’re hardest to find… And they’re also expensive as hell.
This is why the govt/banks are not allowed to just print money after money… Because it is supposed to represent how much gold/silver we have. If it didn’t people would just print their own money and everyone would be rich wouldn’t they? There would be no lining of being able to know how much there should/needs to be.
Back in ancient times people had coins, metal coins as currency. Rome and what not.
People could still print their money even when it is backed up by gold…If the government doesn’t find out about it, then they can easily get away with it.
Having money backed up by gold is just making shit worse.
If it wasn’t backed up by gold, then we could print ourselves out of national debt!
