Quote from: Cheema02 on May 12, 2025, 02:05:15 PM

Quote from: viljy on May 11, 2025, 05:05:34 PM

Not every value of money is subjective. A subjective value can be called a value that is valuable to a certain limited group of people. If we are talking about money, for example, the currency of a country has a subjective value for the citizens of that country. The value of a form of money for a limited period of time is also subjective (for example, the British pound has been the world currency for a century, that is, it was valuable to everyone for a limited time). Is there any form of money that is objectively valuable to everyone and always, that is, throughout the history of mankind? It's gold. Therefore, the value of gold is not in the eyes of the beholder, its value is objective, because gold is valuable for everyone and always. Is it logical?

Value of money is fundamentally subjective as it is shaped by human perception, trust and context. We prefer paper currency note as it has little intrinsic value, but still we accept it in exchange for good and services because we collectively belive in its worth. While Gold has a contrast value than money because it has been considered valuable for thousands of years not because it is useful in daily life but because people percieve it as rare and durable. During the time of financial instability we believe in industrial value of gold. Both money and gold highlight their subjective values, it depends on how much people are willing to trade for either money or gold. In the end, neither money nor gold has inherent value because their value lies in the belief shaped by our governments.

Yes, that's right... The question here is that even a subjective perception can turn into an objective one. In other words, if absolutely all people value gold, then this is an objective fact, not a subjective opinion. This is not a matter of principle, but rather terminology. Objective is something that exists regardless of people's opinions or preferences. Can the subjective become objective with universal acceptance, when the opinion about the value of gold is only the same for all people over the centuries?

Or I'll reformulate it this way. Does a subjective opinion turn into an objective one when there are no other subjective opinions? For example, bitcoin has a subjective value, because its value is different, for example, for Michael Saylor and Warren Buffett. It's valuable to one person, but not to the other. But I guess their opinions are the same on gold. If all of humanity consisted of the two of them, then the value of gold would be objective (because there are no other people or other opinions anymore), whereas the value of bitcoin would remain different for them, that is, subjective.