5 ms·
This is an incredibly pointless statement. Nobody thinks that money isn't a contract. Calling everything a "social construct" -- or, rather, calling anything
by boringuser2 3y ago
This is an incredibly pointless statement.
Nobody thinks that money isn't a contract.
Calling everything a "social construct" -- or, rather, calling anything a social construct is meaningless. Everything is a social construct, even "I" as a concept.
- gamepsys 3y agoIs hydrogen a social construct? Is pi a social construct? Is the sun a social construct? I'm not completely sure about the answer to those questions, but they all derive meaning in a different way than money does. I think calling money a social construct just highlights that as far as mutually agreed upon meaning being focused on an abstract concept goes, money is pretty high on the list of having lots of meaning and being very abstract.
- boringuser2 3y agoYes, they are. Even something as minute as considering a collection of atoms an "element", i.e. organizing things into discrete clusters, is a social construct. The human brain has a CPU limit so it has to cluster things to interact meaningfully with material reality. Glimpsing beyond this is nearly impossible because it goes outside the bounds of our abilities, but you can scrape at it if you abstract it enough like I'm doing here.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- quickthrower2 3y agoI agree. I mean why else is someone doing a load of work for me just because I tapped a bit of plastic on a device?
- feedforward 3y agoIt's not pointless. Social constructs are social constructs. The aristocracy twists language to reify into things what are social constructs. For example the adjective rich. Which means people with money. Rich people being rich due to their relationship with pieces of paper is fetishism. They are people in a scheme of relations of production with others, namely, workers.