Confidence in gold is based on inborn feelings and instincts (which are fixed and universal), while confidence in Bitcoin is purely rational and based on functions attributed to it (which can be called off). Without them it is useless. In this way it is no different from any other fiat money out there, as I said previously. Gold, on the other hand, is loved for what it is, in and of itself, not for what people set it to do. You are bringing forth concepts which are irrelevant to the question and trying to challenge what I have already at first made clear and then set aside as irrelevant...
Namely, the origin of value, subjective vs objective
Yes, this is the crux of what I am saying. You are not born valuing gold. It is a learned trait. There is nothing natural or instinctual about it.
So you are saying that everyone is being taught what is beautiful and what is ugly? Now tell me what
universally bootstrapped gold in the first place (the issue of primary cause) if this is a learned trait as you say, in all those ancient civilizations divided by oceans and deserts, who had access to it...
Was it the same person (Doctor) Who taught them to love gold?
Surely a baby won't love gold more than any other glittery stone. I wonder where you got the idea from that the valuation of gold could be somehow genetically.
In places where gold was very common it was only loved because of it's special color, for example the aztecs were wondering why these crazy hispanics were to crazy about that metal. And if suddenly half of earth would turn into gold then surely you would not assume that we would still see it as a valuable metal. It always depends on if it is useful for production, art, jewelry or similar things. Gold can serve that purpose and has a value because of that.