Topic: Is there such a thing as absolute value? - page 2. (Read 8167 times)
Science is NOT absolute. Mathematics... yes, within itself :-)
All concepts are referenced in terms of other concepts. Kind of like the way that all words in the dictionary are defined using other words in the dictionary. There is no absolute anything! Value, morality, meaning, truth, identity.
There are absolutes. Science. Mathematics.
All concepts are referenced in terms of other concepts. Kind of like the way that all words in the dictionary are defined using other words in the dictionary. There is no absolute anything! Value, morality, meaning, truth, identity.
How many apples for a cow? What about oranges? How many bitcoins for another day to live?
Jeez, I'm getting poetic, philosophical and... subjective?
Jeez, I'm getting poetic, philosophical and... subjective?
isn't that what the big mac index is for?
http://www.economist.com/node/17257797?story_id=17257797
sadly mcdonalds won't sell food directly for bitcoins, so the only way to measure the BTC value in burgers is through conversion to another currency first.
http://www.economist.com/node/17257797?story_id=17257797
sadly mcdonalds won't sell food directly for bitcoins, so the only way to measure the BTC value in burgers is through conversion to another currency first.
The concept of value you are probably referring to is purely subjective and therefore I think no absolute value can be defined.
Philosophically no.
Practically, some things behave like they have absolute value because there is such broad consensus regarding their usefulness.
Why do I get the impression that some people think that saying something has subjective value means its less important and saying it has objective or absolute value makes it more important? For me it would be the other way around if objective/absolute value even existed. Subjective value is not a less important value, its the only one, but if something else existed, subjective value would be the most important because its what we humans need and want. What can be more important than that? What kind of value could be more important than subjective value if some other type of value existed?
you mean humans need oxygen, that's why its subjectively valuable for humans
We all need some, less or more equal, amount of oxygen.
The concept of value you are probably referring to is purely subjective and therefore I think no absolute value can be defined.
Philosophically no.
Practically, some things behave like they have absolute value because there is such broad consensus regarding their usefulness.
No clear answer? Seriously?
How about these answers?
Yes, it will always have some subjective value as long as humans exists. Its imposible for anything to have objective value. For something to have objective value it needs to have value independently from humans. Its imposible, because by definition value is what we value, its subjective.
How about these answers?
What a wonderfully complex question! Tomes have been written, with no clear answer... The only absolute truth is that everything is relative
Value is inherently subjective.
Fixed that for ya.
That's what I meant; brain fart.
Value is inherently subjective.
Fixed that for ya.
Value is inherently objective.
I donno... we might be able to create a unit of ... I won't say value, maybe worth would be a better word, defined as the chemicals required to keep one human alive for 1 day. This would be constant, at so many pounds of O2, so many mL of Water, and various amounts of macro and micro nutrients.
As previously stated, though, once we had this constant, everything else would then shift in relation to it.
Sounds too anthropocentric for my taste.As previously stated, though, once we had this constant, everything else would then shift in relation to it.
Seeing as how humanity is the only thing (on this planet, at least) that worries about value, I don't see that as being an issue. Unless you know something I don't?
As for variance, Yes, and age will be a major (possibly the largest) factor. It should still be possible to make an average for the adult human.
If we're looking for a 'Planck constant' of value, it's not happening. There is no one thing upon which we can base our calculations of relative value on, because nobody values anything equally at all times. Especially if you expand beyond anthropocentric definitions.
Sorry I had just woken up when I wrote that post, what I said made no sense.
Sure it has some subjective value, but food or water will always be needed until science alters our metabolism, so there will always be some value to it.
Sure it has some subjective value, but food or water will always be needed until science alters our metabolism, so there will always be some value to it.
Yes, it will always have some subjective value as long as humans exists. Its imposible for anything to have objective value. For something to have objective value it needs to have value independently from humans. Its imposible, because by definition value is what we value, its subjective.
Food has only temporary value as well. I just showed you that at some point food was less valued than a car.
The farmer and his entire family will always need food, for the rest of his life at steady 4 to 12 hour intervals, and if he was too hungry to drive his daughter might just as well have died.
Just because I currently value a bitcoin as worth more than 5 breads does not mean bitcoin is more valuable as a commodity. Bitcoin has no value for most people in the world.
I will always need bread, even if my internet access is cut off or there is a massive shortage of electricity, I'll manage without bitcoin.
However, you or I can't manage without bread or other food. We can manage without bitcoins. Hence bitcoin has subjective value (up to market to decide) but food is always worth *something*.
If fuel runs out globally, cars become worthless. If there is an attack on electricity networks, all gadgets become useless.
But food can't become useless as long as someone is alive.
Do you realize you are justifying that food has subjective value? You are saying that food is valuable to humans because we need it. That is the exact definition of subjective value.
Hugo, I agree with you that food has objective value. It is a necessary component of human life, but depending on the supply and demand of certain foods, the prices might change, but there will always be demand, unless we kill ourselves off. It's more objective than subjective, imo.
Im saying that all value is subjective, including the food value.
Objective value means that its value is independent of the needs and wants of humans. That its value is inherent, not dependent on any human.
For me its obvious that is imposible. Value will always come from the needs and wants of humans, therefore is subjective.
Sorry I had just woken up when I wrote that post, what I said made no sense.
Sure it has some subjective value, but food or water will always be needed until science alters our metabolism, so there will always be some value to it.
I am believe that theme discussed in this thread -
http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=11614.msg168372#msg168372
Was close enough to current thread, to mention about it.
http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=11614.msg168372#msg168372
Was close enough to current thread, to mention about it.
Food has only temporary value as well. I just showed you that at some point food was less valued than a car.
The farmer and his entire family will always need food, for the rest of his life at steady 4 to 12 hour intervals, and if he was too hungry to drive his daughter might just as well have died.
Just because I currently value a bitcoin as worth more than 5 breads does not mean bitcoin is more valuable as a commodity. Bitcoin has no value for most people in the world.
I will always need bread, even if my internet access is cut off or there is a massive shortage of electricity, I'll manage without bitcoin.
However, you or I can't manage without bread or other food. We can manage without bitcoins. Hence bitcoin has subjective value (up to market to decide) but food is always worth *something*.
If fuel runs out globally, cars become worthless. If there is an attack on electricity networks, all gadgets become useless.
But food can't become useless as long as someone is alive.
Do you realize you are justifying that food has subjective value? You are saying that food is valuable to humans because we need it. That is the exact definition of subjective value.
Hugo, I agree with you that food has objective value. It is a necessary component of human life, but depending on the supply and demand of certain foods, the prices might change, but there will always be demand, unless we kill ourselves off. It's more objective than subjective, imo.
Im saying that all value is subjective, including the food value.
Objective value means that its value is independent of the needs and wants of humans. That its value is inherent, not dependent on any human.
For me its obvious that is imposible. Value will always come from the needs and wants of humans, therefore is subjective.
Food has only temporary value as well. I just showed you that at some point food was less valued than a car.
The farmer and his entire family will always need food, for the rest of his life at steady 4 to 12 hour intervals, and if he was too hungry to drive his daughter might just as well have died.
Just because I currently value a bitcoin as worth more than 5 breads does not mean bitcoin is more valuable as a commodity. Bitcoin has no value for most people in the world.
I will always need bread, even if my internet access is cut off or there is a massive shortage of electricity, I'll manage without bitcoin.
However, you or I can't manage without bread or other food. We can manage without bitcoins. Hence bitcoin has subjective value (up to market to decide) but food is always worth *something*.
If fuel runs out globally, cars become worthless. If there is an attack on electricity networks, all gadgets become useless.
But food can't become useless as long as someone is alive.
Do you realize you are justifying that food has subjective value? You are saying that food is valuable to humans because we need it. That is the exact definition of subjective value.
Hugo, I agree with you that food has objective value. It is a necessary component of human life, but depending on the supply and demand of certain foods, the prices might change, but there will always be demand, unless we kill ourselves off. It's more objective than subjective, imo.
Jump to: