Talk:Social evolution of money

How Can This Be More Neutral?

Money is an invention of the human mind. The creation of money is made possible because human beings have the capacity to accord value to symbols."

Umm, what about when money is not just a symbol? Money always starts out as commodity money. Otherwise who would accept it? Money starts out originally as just indirect exchange. A guy trades his sheep for wheat *not* because he wants the wheat, but because he wants fish and the fish guy likes wheat. That wheat is being used as money. I could agree that money is an invention in the sense that someone at some point came up with this idea of trading for something he didn't really want in order to use it as an intermediary good. But it's clear that's not the sense you meant it. You're trying to say money is imaginary, symbolic, an abstract consruct. That is your point of view. But.... it's your point of view. Not everyone's, like not mine for instance. See the problem? Novel-Technology 12:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

When cows are traded for wheat it is a simple exchange of physical objects that are both desirable. But when any commodity is accepted as a medium for carrying out multiple exchanges, this commodity becomes a symbol of value to the human mind of what else can be obtained in exchange for it. Symbolism is a power of human imagination. Granted, in the case you and I have cited, that symbolism is only one step away from reality. But through history we see that gradually the symbol becomes more and more divorced from the original object it represented. That is only possible because of the power of human mind to accord value to something that it does not inherently possess. Taken to its logical conclusion, today we delight to log on to a webbased bank account and see a larger number as the account balance. That number is purely a symbol for the capacity to exchange. It do not think it is a question of point of view. It is a basic reality of the mind. This becomes evident when in exchange for a hard days labor you receive some hundred dollar bills and are later told that they are worthless counterfeits. So long as you thought they were real, they had symbolic value to you. The moment you think or imagine they are not real. They lose all value. In fact, even if the notes are real, if you or those you would like to pay them to think they are unreal makes the valueless in your eyes. That is because the bills are only symbols.Garryjacobs 18:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

You seem to have not understood the most important point. This symbology stuff... it's *your* Point Of View. POV. See the problem?

Anyway to address your concern, yes humans use symbols. Great. But I do not think that is the defining characteristic of money. Let's say you don't use cows as money. Saying "I have five cows" is still just as abstract and symbol-fied as "I have five ounces of gold" or "I have five fiat nothings". You can still do complex and symbolic things like say "I have a rate of return of .25 cows per annum" even though the cows are not money. Do you now better understand my POINT OF VIEW?

"When cows are traded for wheat it is a simple exchange of physical objects that are both desirable. But when any commodity is accepted as a medium for carrying out multiple exchanges, this commodity becomes a symbol of value to the human mind of what else can be obtained in exchange for it." I just don't accept that. Money becomes money only because it is an item that is valued. When money is made fiat, that connection is loosened and finally severed, but that does not always happen. In some societies, especially before the invention of paper money, the money used continued to be a "physical object" that was desirable in and of itself for hundreds of years at a time.Novel-Technology 00:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Opening section

The opening looks like arse. It really needs a lot of improvement. It looks like it was written by someone with an agenda against money and written for aliens to read. "Human beings" and such, I can just imagine a group of green aliens reading this and snickering to themselves "silly humans". JayKeaton (talk) 05:13, 22 February 2008 (UTC)