But what FC claims is that it’s not just a description, but an explanation…
It describes the existence of individual entities, each defined by the act of valuing and self-valuing. An important thing to grasp here (which I think you are having trouble with) is that self-valuing is subordinate to valuing. Entities self-value as a result of valuing. First, there is a need to value, a valuing principle. Out of that need springs self-valuing, as the entity needs to be a coherent whole, or a distinct something, to efficiently value and gain profit from that act of valuing.
Okay. So first, there is a need to value—no valuing yet. But in order to value, an entity has to value itself. So in order to value, it has to value… How is this not circular?
This is why existene has shape, why things are things instead of a confused mass of whatever. It is because we value it, and value each self-valuing thing as a thing. We value them as self-valuing because what we observe is the concentrated efforts, or valuing, of a single thing. An atom values the energy around it in a way that translates into our valuing it as an atom, so with the electrons, the molecules and a chainsaw.
So we value it as valuing, not as self-valuing…