Anti-Concepts in Money | Keith Weiner 

Peoples choices to trade, eg, gold, pet rocks...

Do you really need to ask what makes gold more marketable than oil, wheat, or cotton?

@@luckyyewlandscaping5560 US schools indoctrinate, not educate.

@@luckyyewlandscaping5560 If chickens were money, how would you pay 1.5 chickens? It could get messy....

@@TeaParty1776 there is a reason why chickens aren't the most marketable good lol

How would you know you are speeding up the clock?

@@matthewstroud4294 The second hand of the clock moves at one degree per second. If I speed up the clock the second hand still moves at one degree per second. You change the speed and the rate time proceeds simultaneously and you get no hard definition of speed. It is all circular. I have a gut feeling about how fast time goes by. If you take any physical formula and change time so that it proceed double or triple the current rate , nothing changes. Time is just like any phenomena and it is inexplicable. Just like the color Red or Blue or the smell of garlic. Since space is defined by shooting light at mirrors and timing the round trip, space is also defined by time. So you can't even define distance unless you just use a circular definition.

Nonsense. Time is defined and measured by motion. A relation of the motion between two or more local objects with respect to each other and their place. From whence comes your idea of time defined by speed? Secondly, putting together (1.) abstractions that denotes relationships and (2) ostensive properties of entities as though they belong in the same category is just unbelievable! Where do you get the circular reasoning claim from? -"if you speed up the clock then use that to measure speed then the velocity will decrease."(!!!!??????) WHAT!? What's this nonsense? Meaning, the calibration of an apparatus used in measurement determines and dictates how the object being measured actually acts. So if we set a weight scale to -440lb, then everyone will end up being weightless. So all obese people only have to calibrate their weight scale to negative 100s, they'll lose weight fast. Your reasoning is inane to put it politely, excuse my French. Finally, words alone are sufficient in explaining concepts and abstractions. Words alone are sufficient in explaining Logic. Stop with this anti-conceptual thinking.

​@@Eutychus. I know exactly what I am talking about. If you double the speed of a clock , then the time it shows will proceed and always be twice of that a normal clocks shows. So using this clock and plugging this time into an equation d = vt + (1/2)at^2 Your distance travelled will remain the same but since t is now proceeding twice as fast, then the speed v much be half. So yes your speed must decrease. Why are you having trouble with this ??? Time is defined in terms of objects moving, Like the second had on the clock or the electrons inside a microchip. These moving parts have a speed to them. So time is defined ultimately in terms of moving things with speeds. Speed is defined in terms of time. So it is completely circular. Also distance is ultimately crystalized and limited by the speed of light. To measure the distance to the moon , you can't use a tape measure. There is a mirror left on the moon by Apollo and a laser is bounced off this mirror and the round trip is timed to get the distance. But to get the actual speed of light they had to know a distance and time the round trip for the light to get it's speed. This is where the problem starts because no one can measure any distance without a tape measure and the atoms in the tape are all communicating and signals travelling within the tape measure at less than the speed of light but the electrons in the tape still bounce off each other by exchanging photons. So ultimately the length of the tape is determined by photons and that is light. So yes you get another circular argument. Einstein admitted that the speed of light is unknown. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pTn6Ewhb27k.html Time appears to us subjectively to proceed at a certain rate. The word "rate" implies a speed. So time itself in defined in terms of the speed of something. Roger Penrose wrote on this and time itself is dependent on mass. If there is no mass then time doesn't exist, it is another dimension of space. Now we have mass everywhere so time is proceeding as a certain rate but in the future when all matter has decayed and all black holes have evaporated, there will be nothing left to build a clock with. So time won't exist and since space geometry depends on the time it takes light to go from A to B, then space won't exist either.

@@jeffbguarino Do you really believe all that waffle?

Every single gramatically correct clause has some kind subject or object being differentiated in some sense from another subject or object. But that doesn't make any gramatically correct proposition a valid definition of anything. For instance, suppose we define unicorn as "a horse with a single horn". That could be a valid concept within a fantasy novel. But it would be an anti-concept in the context of zoology, because there "the horse" (the equus ferus caballus) by definition does not have any horns at all. In that case, despite being a gramatically correct definition, the very differentia is being denied by the genus, so the actual meaning of the word is rendered null. Acording to your definition, if i go to the market and try to pay my groceries with silver coins, the cashier HAS to accept them because those coins are an excellent medium of exchange, so they are money. You are omitting the "generally accepted" part of the definition. That's what makes it an anti-concept in the context of economy.

Incoherent garble

@@PoLanka65 Ok. this is better. I left that part out because the claim was there wasn't a genus or differentia. There IS. I agree that the generally accepted phrase is problematic, but that is only because it is vague. There's a reason why it's generally accepted. Fill that in and the definition is fine.