>quality of workmanship. >I find the mechanism's complexity and delicacy beautiful. The way I see it these are just self-deceptive rationalizations. You don't

>quality of workmanship. >I find the mechanism's complexity and delicacy beautiful. The way I see it these are just self-deceptive rationalizations. You don't need to __own__ an expensive or complicated mechanism to "appreciate it". It's enough for it to exist in the world. I appreciate the ingenuity of ITER, I don't want to own it. Also, it can be argued that pointless mechanical complexity (mechanical watches are truly pointless today) is immoral profligate decadence, and misallocation of human labor. Some grand complication watches cost obscene money. >I find its ability to keep time through purely mechanical rather than digital processes fascinating The price ceiling for a well crafted relatively complicated mechanical watch minus the status, prestige etc is $1000, and automatic mechanical Seikos start from around $100. Doesn't explain the $7000 for cheapest steel Rolex, or most watches interesting to an average watch nerd. >when I am 80 years old and I can give it to my son Modern quartz watches can also do that, and won't require any part swapping due to wear. >You conflate "rational" with "utilitarian" or "practical" rational is defined as "based on sensible practical reasons rather than emotions" in MacMillan dictionary for example.