• @MotoAsh
    link
    -58 months ago

    It disseminates the idea and dilutes the worth, because worth is tied to scarcity.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      148 months ago

      And I think that’s our primary point of disagreement. I don’t care how scarce something is.

      In fact not quite 30min ago, I flushed something unique down the toilet because it was worthless to me. While the toilet I flush it with, is worth quite a lot to me, even though it’s very common and and found everywhere in my country. In fact if it was scarce, even unique, it might be entirely worthless.

      • @MotoAsh
        link
        -58 months ago

        You can disagree all you want but value is absolutely and always associated with (at least perceived) scarcity.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          68 months ago

          Only sometimes. Not always. The value of many things comes with commonality. Social media for example would be worthless for only one person.

        • southsamurai
          link
          fedilink
          38 months ago

          I think this is a matter of terminology.

          You’re talking monetary value/worth only. They’re talking about value and worth in a broader sense.

          • @MotoAsh
            link
            -38 months ago

            Even there, something gets MORE worth when it’s used again, even to sit on a shelf and look pretty.

            • southsamurai
              link
              fedilink
              28 months ago

              That, my homie, is a matter of perspective. Things can have value/worth without that as well. It ascribes value a weight based on usage rather than money. Which is fine! Value is relatively relative ;)

              Things can have value/worth without a connection to a human’s perception of that thing. It gets pretty nebulous and woo-woo, but the principle is valid.

              I guess what I’m also saying is that utilitarian thinking isn’t the only way to approach the discussion. But I’m also saying that utilitarian thinking is a valid part of the discussion. But when it comes down to utilitarian versus non utilitarian, it isn’t a discussion, it’s an argument about being right. Which is what the thread turned into towards the end.