Money and Philosophy

[ethereallights]

Sounds like communism...

Modern man cannot live without money because human's by nature are "bad". Some people rise above greed and some are trapped in it's deadly undertow. If we were all born with the innate ability of only doing what's right then yeah, money is nothing, but sense we are born without the innate ability of only doing what's wrong and we must be taught what is culturally acceptable and what's not and to what degree everything is right and wrong, then we will never be without money. Some students never learn, especially when learning about life, and greed, materialism, etc. is all part of human nature...

 

[speed]

Now we've agreed money is indispensible to a properly working human society, let's talk about philosophy in relation to money. Has philosophy (apart from political economy) made a serious mistake by completely forsaking money? By replacing materialism and sensualism with logic, rationality, spiritual and platonic yearnings? In fact, every great philosopher, has by and large, turned their back on the usefulness of money and materialism. It's a constant bugaboo to philosophers isnt it? Philosophers even today, would rather die poor or assistant professors, than actively seek social material status. Hence, can money and philosophy exist? And if they cant, is this cause for concern for the future and usefullness of philosophy in our present society where money is the measure and arbiter of everything?

 

[Horus]

Money destroys philosophy. When people get money, they normally want more. Because they want more, they try to find more ways to get more money. As they start to run out of ways to make more money, they start to worry about themselves and how they can keep the money coming in. As they begin to grow desperate, because it does happen eventually, they use desperate means to get money. As they get more and more desperate, their methods of making money begin to become more evil and greedy. They become greedy, and start taking whatever they can, and they lose conciense. It's the same with Power.

Of course, there are exceptions, but in ths day and age, they'r not too common now, are they?

 

[NeverIsForever]

I believe that people *could* live free of money...however, it couldn't be accomplished without a cultural detox of sorts. As long as the average person is surrounded by media and values that feed the desire for wealth, nothing can realistically change imo

 

[Norsemaiden]

Now we've agreed money is indispensible to a properly working human society, let's talk about philosophy in relation to money. Has philosophy (apart from political economy) made a serious mistake by completely forsaking money? By replacing materialism and sensualism with logic, rationality, spiritual and platonic yearnings? In fact, every great philosopher, has by and large, turned their back on the usefulness of money and materialism. It's a constant bugaboo to philosophers isnt it? Philosophers even today, would rather die poor or assistant professors, than actively seek social material status. Hence, can money and philosophy exist? And if they cant, is this cause for concern for the future and usefullness of philosophy in our present society where money is the measure and arbiter of everything?

Yes, it is a cause for concern. There are ever fewer people who seem able to take a philosophical view of life and increasingly many who never examine their lives and are just drawn along by basic urges to satisfy themselves, in a decadent way. Materialism is central to this.

Money should ideally be seperated from materialism. Money should be no more than a tool to make society run more smoothly, rather than something to get so obsessed about that one becomes a "materialist" - defining one's very self by the greed for financial wealth.

 

[Mikobass]

Initial statement : It would be nice if money wasnt the sole decider of so many things in life--for americans especially.

My question : What do you mean "for american especially"? Why american more then anyone else?

 

[Horus]

Because Americans are the ones whom everyone 'round the world associates with spending so much money on vanity, and it's kinda true, considering the fact that we have these celebrities spending their money on cars, clothes, jewels, houses, and stuff that's really really unnecessary for their lives to go on. And these celebrities have people all over America trying to be just like them, and wanting to spend their money on all the same things as these celebrities are buying. I mean, look at tv shows like Cribs and many many others that are the most watched shows in America. That just goes to show how irresponsible Americans are with their money, and how those irresponsible Americans are teaching the youth of America to be just like that. That's why people associate conspicuous spending with America all the time.

 

[G-Master]

And these celebrities have people all over America trying to be just like them, and wanting to spend their money on all the same things.

I think you make a valid point. But, it's also in human nature to imitate. So, none of these shallow habits really surprise me. America, is simply a country that magnifies this nature in humanity, and exposes many of our fallible traits.
Most people find it difficult to be themselves, or to find themselves. It's easier to imitate, to attempt to identify with the society's ideal man/woman than it is to be original; to be authentic.

I think it's a sad trait, and at least for most people, is an inescapable one. America's society is a dangerous society, because money and materialism is the focal point. However, it's simply a trait inherent in most of humanity, so it's bound to arise in any nation.

 

[Mikobass]

And believe me, it's the same thing in Canada...

 

[Horus]

Most people find it difficult to be themselves, or to find themselves. It's easier to imitate, to attempt to identify with the society's ideal man/woman than it is to be original; to be authentic.

That's why people in my school see me as the "wierd kid". Because I've found myself.

 

[Silver Incubus]

Because Americans are the ones whom everyone 'round the world associates with spending so much money on vanity, and it's kinda true, considering the fact that we have these celebrities spending their money on cars, clothes, jewels, houses, and stuff that's really really unnecessary for their lives to go on. And these celebrities have people all over America trying to be just like them, and wanting to spend their money on all the same things as these celebrities are buying. I mean, look at tv shows like Cribs and many many others that are the most watched shows in America. That just goes to show how irresponsible Americans are with their money, and how those irresponsible Americans are teaching the youth of America to be just like that. That's why people associate conspicuous spending with America all the time.

This is a result of social engineering and here is a quote from the originator of spin(the nephew of Sigmund Freud)

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country."

--Edward Bernays, Propaganda (1928)

People with strong characters don't need trinkets to define who they are. they do it by their actions and words

 

[speed]

I think you make a valid point. But, it's also in human nature to imitate. So, none of these shallow habits really surprise me. America, is simply a country that magnifies this nature in humanity, and exposes many of our fallible traits.
Most people find it difficult to be themselves, or to find themselves. It's easier to imitate, to attempt to identify with the society's ideal man/woman than it is to be original; to be authentic.

I think it's a sad trait, and at least for most people, is an inescapable one. America's society is a dangerous society, because money and materialism is the focal point. However, it's simply a trait inherent in most of humanity, so it's bound to arise in any nation.

This is the big thing. I think its a universal human trait, and one that is so pervasive, it is only not found in a few eccentrics, philosophers, and persons who are so poor, such materialism is inconceivable.

 

[Norsemaiden]

If people have an idea of the afterlife as being a heavenly kingdom with gates made of pearl and lots of jewels everywhere, they surely must have to be materialistic. This presents an interesting contradiction: a spiritual belief in materialism (?)

"He measured its wall and it was 144 cubits thick, by man's measurement, which the angel was using. The wall was made of jasper, and the city of pure gold, as pure as glass. The foundations of the city walls were decorated with every kind of precious stone. The first foundation was jasper, the second sapphire, the third chalcedony, the fourth emerald, the fifth sardonyx, the sixth carnelian, the seventh chrysolite, the eighth beryl, the ninth topaz, the tenth chrysoprase, the eleventh jacinth, and the twelfth amethyst" (Rev.21:17-20)

"It had a great, high wall with twelve gates, and with twelve angels at the gates. On the gates were written the names of the twelve tribes of Israel. There were three gates on the east, three on the north, three on the south and three on the west. The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb... The twelve gates were twelve pearls, each gate made of a single pearl" (Rev.21:12-14, 21)

Christians are not supposed to collect wealth for themselves on Earth, yet they are obviously supposed to be seriously impressed by precious metal and jewels, according to the Bible - why else would Heaven be made of such things?

But then again, this is a Jewish Heaven (Jews who were converted to Christianity wrote of it). Jews are materialists aren't they? Does it say anything against materialism in the Talmud? (It says a lot in favour of materialism as far as I know).

Then there are ancient burials where people have had their valuables buried with them, in the hope that it will still be there in the next life.

 

[Demilich]

All this talk of a faith of materialism reminds me of the disgusting excesses of architecture, etc. shown in places of worship by most major world religions: Christianity, Judaism, Islam, even Buddhism, claim benevolence and proceed to blow their massive hordes of money on lavishly ornate, bejewelled buildings for ceremonial purposes, etc. Could this money not be going to help the millions upon millions of starving people in this world, be they followers of said faiths or not?

 

[Lord SteveO]

I think there's a thin line between making your church a tribute to your god and simply being greedy and raking in the cash just to spoil yourselves.
The Vatican has tonnes of money and treasure, most of which it never lets anyone see or access, this is ridiculous as it is simple greed. But having a nice church is not quite as bad IMO.
It's when a religion begins to horde their treasures and cash simply to own it for no reason that it get bad. The Vatican has gone way off the mark now, they don't need the money or treasure, but they don't let anyone see or use it for good.
That is ridiculous for a religion which is apparently benevolent to the poor etc.

 

[3200]

If people have an idea of the afterlife as being a heavenly kingdom with gates made of pearl and lots of jewels everywhere, they surely must have to be materialistic. This presents an interesting contradiction: a spiritual belief in materialism (?)

"He measured its wall and it was 144 cubits thick, by man's measurement, which the angel was using. The wall was made of jasper, and the city of pure gold, as pure as glass. The foundations of the city walls were decorated with every kind of precious stone. The first foundation was jasper, the second sapphire, the third chalcedony, the fourth emerald, the fifth sardonyx, the sixth carnelian, the seventh chrysolite, the eighth beryl, the ninth topaz, the tenth chrysoprase, the eleventh jacinth, and the twelfth amethyst" (Rev.21:17-20)

"It had a great, high wall with twelve gates, and with twelve angels at the gates. On the gates were written the names of the twelve tribes of Israel. There were three gates on the east, three on the north, three on the south and three on the west. The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb... The twelve gates were twelve pearls, each gate made of a single pearl" (Rev.21:12-14, 21)

Christians are not supposed to collect wealth for themselves on Earth, yet they are obviously supposed to be seriously impressed by precious metal and jewels, according to the Bible - why else would Heaven be made of such things?

But then again, this is a Jewish Heaven (Jews who were converted to Christianity wrote of it). Jews are materialists aren't they? Does it say anything against materialism in the Talmud? (It says a lot in favour of materialism as far as I know).

Then there are ancient burials where people have had their valuables buried with them, in the hope that it will still be there in the next life.

The diminsions and "jewels" listed in those biblical texts have been misread for centuries due to the suppression of sacred gematria and geomancy. Gnostics like Jesus knew these truths well and practiced them... we can see where it got him.

To understand the meaning of those text I would like to suggest a book called "The Diminsions of Paradise" By John Michell

The romans took over, corrupted and twisted the truths and real meanings of those sacred texts and wiped out any and all who knew the truth. They created the bible... starting under the rule of Nero (who happened to be the son of Herod and the "self Proclaimed Antichrist"). I know it sounds like a crazy theory... but truth is stranger than fiction more often than not.

I have studied these things for almost 20 years now. Anything you read in the bible was compiled under the rule of the same peple who crucified Jesus and murdered the deciples. It was their original grab for money and power using fear of eternal damnation that started this whole greedy society, born of lies, murder and deciet to begin with. It has simply carried on over the years and developed into the spiritually devolved state of the world today. It is by no stretch of the imagination true, that society has become the biggest and most spiritually dangerous monster of all times.

 

[speed]

The diminsions and "jewels" listed in those biblical texts have been misread for centuries due to the suppression of sacred gematria and geomancy. Gnostics like Jesus knew these truths well and practiced them... we can see where it got him.

To understand the meaning of those text I would like to suggest a book called "The Diminsions of Paradise" By John Michell

The romans took over, corrupted and twisted the truths and real meanings of those sacred texts and wiped out any and all who knew the truth. They created the bible... starting under the rule of Nero (who happened to be the son of Herod and the "self Proclaimed Antichrist"). I know it sounds like a crazy theory... but truth is stranger than fiction more often than not.

I have studied these things for almost 20 years now. Anything you read in the bible was compiled under the rule of the same peple who crucified Jesus and murdered the deciples. It was their original grab for money and power using fear of eternal damnation that started this whole greedy society, born of lies, murder and deciet to begin with. It has simply carried on over the years and developed into the spiritually devolved state of the world today. It is by no stretch of the imagination true, that society has become the biggest and most spiritually dangerous monster of all times.

Ahem, there is a conspiracy theory section to the philosopher forum. Most of what you write is easily refutable; but I dont see the value in expending energy in doing so. This claim that the bible was somehow influenced by Nero (and that Nero was the son of Herod) is patently ridiculous, and shows you have a cursory understanding of history other than the book you mention.

 

[dargormudshark]

"So you think that money is the root of all evil?" said Francisco d'Anconia. "Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can't exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?

"When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears not all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a token of honor—your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money, Is this what you consider evil?

"Have you ever looked for the root of production? Take a look at an electric generator and dare tell yourself that it was created by the muscular effort of unthinking brutes. Try to grow a seed of wheat without the knowledge left to you by men who had to discover it for the first time. Try to obtain your food by means of nothing but physical motions—and you'll learn that man's mind is the root of all the goods produced and of all the wealth that has ever existed on earth.

"But you say that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak? What strength do you mean? It is not the strength of guns or muscles. Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think. Then is money made by the man who invents a motor at the expense of those who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made—before it can be looted or mooched—made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability. An honest man is one who knows that he can't consume more than he has produced.'

"To trade by means of money is the code of the men of good will. Money rests on the axiom that every man is the owner of his mind and his effort. Money allows no power to prescribe the value of your effort except the voluntary choice of the man who is willing to trade you his effort in return. Money permits you to obtain for your goods and your labor that which they are worth to the men who buy them, but no more. Money permits no deals except those to mutual benefit by the unforced judgment of the traders. Money demands of you the recognition that men must work for their own benefit, not for their own injury, for their gain, not their loss—the recognition that they are not beasts of burden, born to carry the weight of your misery—that you must offer them values, not wounds—that the common bond among men is not the exchange of suffering, but the exchange of goods. Money demands that you sell, not your weakness to men's stupidity, but your talent to their reason; it demands that you buy, not the shoddiest they offer, but the best that your money can find. And when men live by trade—with reason, not force, as their final arbiter—it is the best product that wins, the best performance, the man of best judgment and highest ability—and the degree of a man's productiveness is the degree of his reward. This is the code of existence whose tool and symbol is money. Is this what you consider evil?

"But money is only a tool. It will take you wherever you wish, but it will not replace you as the driver. It will give you the means for the satisfaction of your desires, but it will not provide you with desires. Money is the scourge of the men who attempt to reverse the law of causality—the men who seek to replace the mind by seizing the products of the mind.

"Money will not purchase happiness for the man who has no concept of what he wants: money will not give him a code of values, if he's evaded the knowledge of what to value, and it will not provide him with a purpose, if he's evaded the choice of what to seek. Money will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or respect for the incompetent. The man who attempts to purchase the brains of his superiors to serve him, with his money replacing his judgment, ends up by becoming the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered: that no man may be smaller than his money. Is this the reason why you call it evil?

"Only the man who does not need it, is fit to inherit wealth—the man who would make his own fortune no matter where he started. If an heir is equal to his money, it serves him; if not, it destroys him. But you look on and you cry that money corrupted him. Did it? Or did he corrupt his money? Do not envy a worthless heir; his wealth is not yours and you would have done no better with it. Do not think that it should have been distributed among you; loading the world with fifty parasites instead of one, would not bring back the dead virtue which was the fortune. Money is a living power that dies without its root. Money will not serve the mind that cannot match it. Is this the reason why you call it evil?

"Money is your means of survival. The verdict you pronounce upon the source of your livelihood is the verdict you pronounce upon your life. If the source is corrupt, you have damned your own existence. Did you get your money by fraud? By pandering to men's vices or men's stupidity? By catering to fools, in the hope of getting more than your ability deserves? By lowering your standards? By doing work you despise for purchasers you scorn? If so, then your money will not give you a moment's or a penny's worth of joy. Then all the things you buy will become, not a tribute to you, but a reproach; not an achievement, but a reminder of shame. Then you'll scream that money is evil. Evil, because it would not pinch-hit for your self-respect? Evil, because it would not let you enjoy your depravity? Is this the root of your hatred of money?

"Money will always remain an effect and refuse to replace you as the cause. Money is the product of virtue, but it will not give you virtue and it will not redeem your vices. Money will not give you the unearned, neither in matter nor in spirit. Is this the root of your hatred of money?

"Or did you say it's the love of money that's the root of all evil? To love a thing is to know and love its nature. To love money is to know and love the fact that money is the creation of the best power within you, and your passkey to trade your effort for the effort of the best among men. It's the person who would sell his soul for a nickel, who is loudest in proclaiming his hatred of money—and he has good reason to hate it. The lovers of money are willing to work for it. They know they are able to deserve it.

"Let me give you a tip on a clue to men's characters: the man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it.

"Run for your life from any man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper's bell of an approaching looter. So long as men live together on earth and need means to deal with one another—their only substitute, if they abandon money, is the muzzle of a gun.

"But money demands of you the highest virtues, if you wish to make it or to keep it. Men who have no courage, pride or self-esteem, men who have no moral sense of their right to their money and are not willing to defend it as they defend their life, men who apologize for being rich—will not remain rich for long. They are the natural bait for the swarms of looters that stay under rocks for centuries, but come crawling out at the first smell of a man who begs to be forgiven for the guilt of owning wealth. They will hasten to relieve him of the guilt—and of his life, as he deserves.

"Then you will see the rise of the men of the double standard—the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money—the men who are the hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law—men who use force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims—then money becomes its creators' avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they've passed a law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest at production, but to those most ruthless at brutality. When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.

"Do you wish to know whether that day is coming? Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society's virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion—when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing—when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors—when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you—when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice—you may know that your society is doomed. Money is so noble a medium that is does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-property, half-loot.

"Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men's protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced. Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it bounces, marked, 'Account overdrawn.'

"When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, 'Who is destroying the world? You are.

"You stand in the midst of the greatest achievements of the greatest productive civilization and you wonder why it's crumbling around you, while you're damning its life-blood—money. You look upon money as the savages did before you, and you wonder why the jungle is creeping back to the edge of your cities. Throughout men's history, money was always seized by looters of one brand or another, whose names changed, but whose method remained the same: to seize wealth by force and to keep the producers bound, demeaned, defamed, deprived of honor. That phrase about the evil of money, which you mouth with such righteous recklessness, comes from a time when wealth was produced by the labor of slaves—slaves who repeated the motions once discovered by somebody's mind and left unimproved for centuries. So long as production was ruled by force, and wealth was obtained by conquest, there was little to conquer, Yet through all the centuries of stagnation and starvation, men exalted the looters, as aristocrats of the sword, as aristocrats of birth, as aristocrats of the bureau, and despised the producers, as slaves, as traders, as shopkeepers—as industrialists.

"To the glory of mankind, there was, for the first and only time in history, a country of money—and I have no higher, more reverent tribute to pay to America, for this means: a country of reason, justice, freedom, production, achievement. For the first time, man's mind and money were set free, and there were no fortunes-by-conquest, but only fortunes-by-work, and instead of swordsmen and slaves, there appeared the real maker of wealth, the greatest worker, the highest type of human being—the self-made man—the American industrialist.

"If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose—because it contains all the others—the fact that they were the people who created the phrase 'to make money.' No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity—to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted of obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created. The words 'to make money' hold the essence of human morality.

"Yet these were the words for which Americans were denounced by the rotted cultures of the looters' continents. Now the looters' credo has brought you to regard your proudest achievements as a hallmark of shame, your prosperity as guilt, your greatest men, the industrialists, as blackguards, and your magnificent factories as the product and property of muscular labor, the labor of whip-driven slaves, like the pyramids of Egypt. The rotter who simpers that he sees no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the whip, ought to learn the difference on his own hide— as, I think, he will.

"Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips and guns—or dollars. Take your choice—there is no other—and your time is running out."