(March 22, 2015 at 4:53 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: You clearly don't know what the word "inherent" means.

The value that you are talking about is abstract and extrinsic -- that means it is applied from outside, and doesn't have material value outside of certain industrial and manufacturing processes.

You're welcome.

And even within the context of industry and manufacturing, the value of gold comes from its utility within those industries; it is a value placed upon if from outside. Hell, even considering the thousands of years of history that gold has had value that Huggy references, that value wasn't just inherent within the gold, the gold was valuable because it was scarce, because it was resilient as a metal, and easily fungible. Again, the value was placed upon gold due to the way it adheres to things humans within communities find valuable. It was a reaction between the attributes of gold and human perception, not simply because gold was gold.

Huggy's got this wrong backwards and forwards, so I guess we can chalk this up as another thing he doesn't understand and will not budge on.

I cannot believe this is even a debate. These theists think everything is intrinsically valuable. (enter GC to start making a case for the inherent value of cancer as one of Gods mysterious moral tools...)

Quote:Mr, wizzrd, FYI- Jesus FULFILLED/ accomplished the last sacrifice of the OT.

Hey, prof..FYI, jesus is just as much bullshit as the fucking easter bunny.

Thanks Mini, it's been addressed.

---

You wanna be worshipped? Just do this, and have your buddy's write a book that documents your prediction that you would be killed when you tried it...

http://youtu.be/tciBru32oDU

(March 22, 2015 at 5:42 pm)Esquilax Wrote: And even within the context of industry and manufacturing, the value of gold comes from its utility within those industries; it is a value placed upon if from outside. Hell, even considering the thousands of years of history that gold has had value that Huggy references, that value wasn't just inherent within the gold, the gold was valuable because it was scarce, because it was resilient as a metal, and easily fungible. Again, the value was placed upon gold due to the way it adheres to things humans within communities find valuable. It was a reaction between the attributes of gold and human perception, not simply because gold was gold.

Huggy's got this wrong backwards and forwards, so I guess we can chalk this up as another thing he doesn't understand and will not budge on.

Here is the bottom line, given a choice between $1000 dollars cash or Gold, which do you take?

(March 22, 2015 at 6:26 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Here is the bottom line, given a choice between $1000 dollars cash or Gold, which do you take?

I thought bottom lines were usually in some way relevant to the discussion at hand.

We were discussing where the objects get their value, after all. Nobody is disputing that gold has value, just your claim that gold has some real inherent value that fiat currency does not.

(March 22, 2015 at 6:33 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(March 22, 2015 at 6:26 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Here is the bottom line, given a choice between $1000 dollars cash or Gold, which do you take?

I thought bottom lines were usually in some way relevant to the discussion at hand.

We were discussing where the objects get their value, after all. Nobody is disputing that gold has value, just your claim that gold has some real inherent value that fiat currency does not.

Where did I claim that?

This is what I said.

Quote:Please explain what, exactly, makes a real dollar bill inherently more "valuable" than a monopoly dollar bill..

That's the only time I've used the term inherent.

(March 22, 2015 at 6:50 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Please explain what, exactly, makes a real dollar bill inherently more "valuable" than a monopoly dollar bill..

in·her·ent
inˈhirənt,inˈherənt/
adjective
existing in something as a permanent, essential, or characteristic attribute


Nothing. Literally nothing. If our economy took a shit, they would be worth the same. There's nothing permanent about that, buddy.

---

[edit] If mountain range the size of the everglades was discovered to be entirely made of gold, the value of gold would suffer as well. That's what they're talking about Huggy. There's nothing about Gold, or paintings, or Music, or anything else that is inherently value. Value is prescribed to objects, they're not valuable in principle.

(March 22, 2015 at 6:50 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Where did I claim that?

This is what I said.

Quote:Please explain what, exactly, makes a real dollar bill inherently more "valuable" than a monopoly dollar bill..

That's the only time I've used the term inherent.

So on the one hand, you think gold has value and you've argued for that thus far, on the other you're skeptical of the idea that fiat currency has any more value than monopoly money (read: none) and you're seriously trying to argue with me when I combine those two claims and come to the conclusion that you believe gold has some value that fiat currency does not?

Which is it, Huggy? Are you arguing over nothing, or do your positions here contradict?

Just say "my bad" and move on..