Why is Gold so valuable?

[Coito ergo sum]

No, it isn't. Intrinsic value means that something by its very nature has value. Intrinsically, nothing has any value. Value is somethings humans make up in their brains.

That's 24 carat contradictory codswallop.
Of course value is bestowed by humans. There are no prizes for stating the bleeding obvious.

But if you accept that, then it's obvious that some things are intrinsically valued by humans.

They aren't "intrinsically" valued by humans. They are "commonly" or "often" valued by humans, but that value is extrinsic to the thing itself. It's based on the circumstance. A man walking in the desert, weak and dying of thirst, would trade a bar of gold for a drink of water. A man sitting at home with plenty of water would not. The value is based on need, desire, circumstance, etc. It's completely subjective and every factor affecting value is extrinsic to the god.

Gold can be melted down, powdered, made into rings or death masks. But the GOLD has an intrinsic value to humans, irrespective of what it's made into. Same with diamonds.

It doesn't, though. Some humans value gold, but only because of factors extrinsic to the gold. The value is also not the same for all people, and some people don't give a crap about gold or diamonds. Some people wouldn't accept a diamond as a gift, because of the human rights issues, for example. To them, diamonds are worth nothing. Nothing inherent or by the nature of diamonds make them valuable - they are only valuable because people place an extrinsic value on them.

If you say intrinsically nothing has any value, you are saying nothing is valued by humans for what it is. That's just silly.

If you say that people valuing things for what they are means the things have intrinsic value, then pet rocks have "intrinsic" value, and so do beer can collections. But, of course, they don't. They only have extrinsic value - they have a value to someone. To the collector they may have sentimental or decorative value, and they may have an expected resale value. To another person they may have no value at all, and may be considered garbage. It's all subjective value placed on a thing, it is not inherent or innate value in and of itself.

[klr]

It doesn't, though. Some humans value gold, but only because of factors extrinsic to the gold. The value is also not the same for all people, and some people don't give a crap about gold or diamonds. Some people wouldn't accept a diamond as a gift, because of the human rights issues, for example. To them, diamonds are worth nothing. Nothing inherent or by the nature of diamonds make them valuable - they are only valuable because people place an extrinsic value on them.

Are you missing a "the" in the bolded sentence, because the meaning changes a lot if you are?

[Coito ergo sum]

It doesn't, though. Some humans value gold, but only because of factors extrinsic to the gold. The value is also not the same for all people, and some people don't give a crap about gold or diamonds. Some people wouldn't accept a diamond as a gift, because of the human rights issues, for example. To them, diamonds are worth nothing. Nothing inherent or by the nature of diamonds make them valuable - they are only valuable because people place an extrinsic value on them.

Are you missing a "the" in the bolded sentence, because the meaning changes a lot if you are?

I don't think it's missing anything.

But, how so?

[klr]

In which case - again - why does so much gold end up being hoarded? I go with Morticia's explanation above ...

Does it though? People invest in gold bonds, and banks traditionally invest in gold because it is so secure. But other than buying gold jewellery that they may 'hoard' in a jewellery box, do many people actually hoard gold for financial/status reasons?

According to wiki:

The consumption of gold produced in the world is about 50% in jewelry, 40% in investments, and 10% in industry.

It's not clear if consumption relates only gold that's been extracted recently, or to all gold that's ever been extracted.

[klr]

It doesn't, though. Some humans value gold, but only because of factors extrinsic to the gold. The value is also not the same for all people, and some people don't give a crap about gold or diamonds. Some people wouldn't accept a diamond as a gift, because of the human rights issues, for example. To them, diamonds are worth nothing. Nothing inherent or by the nature of diamonds make them valuable - they are only valuable because people place an extrinsic value on them.

Are you missing a "the" in the bolded sentence, because the meaning changes a lot if you are?

I don't think it's missing anything.

But, how so?

Because there are plenty of natural diamonds that might not have any sordid history attached to them (and just think of how many consumer goods and resources are the product of slave labour and who knows what else), to say nothing of synthetic diamonds.

If I see someone dropping a banknote unbeknownst to them, I'm likely to alert them/pick it up and give it back to them. But that doesn't mean I would treat all bank notes as so "valueless" that I would not want any of them.

[Coito ergo sum]

It doesn't, though. Some humans value gold, but only because of factors extrinsic to the gold. The value is also not the same for all people, and some people don't give a crap about gold or diamonds. Some people wouldn't accept a diamond as a gift, because of the human rights issues, for example. To them, diamonds are worth nothing. Nothing inherent or by the nature of diamonds make them valuable - they are only valuable because people place an extrinsic value on them.

Are you missing a "the" in the bolded sentence, because the meaning changes a lot if you are?

I don't think it's missing anything.

But, how so?

Because there are plenty of natural diamonds that might not have any sordid history attached to them (and just think of how many consumer goods and resources are the product of slave labour and who knows what else), to say nothing of synthetic diamonds.

And, thusly, they have no intrinsic value, only extrinsic value.

If I see someone dropping a banknote unbeknownst to them, I'm likely to alert them/pick it up and give it back to them. But that doesn't mean I would treat all bank notes as so "valueless" that I would not want any of them.

That's why banknotes have no intrinsic value. They only have a relative value, and a perceived value. They are just paper and ink, and they have the value people assign to them. To some folks, they are worthless. Hand a Kalahari Bushman a stack of 100 dollar bills, and you've given him some convenient toilet paper.

[klr]

It doesn't, though. Some humans value gold, but only because of factors extrinsic to the gold. The value is also not the same for all people, and some people don't give a crap about gold or diamonds. Some people wouldn't accept a diamond as a gift, because of the human rights issues, for example. To them, diamonds are worth nothing. Nothing inherent or by the nature of diamonds make them valuable - they are only valuable because people place an extrinsic value on them.

Are you missing a "the" in the bolded sentence, because the meaning changes a lot if you are?

I don't think it's missing anything.

But, how so?

Because there are plenty of natural diamonds that might not have any sordid history attached to them (and just think of how many consumer goods and resources are the product of slave labour and who knows what else), to say nothing of synthetic diamonds.

And, thusly, they have no intrinsic value, only extrinsic value.

If I see someone dropping a banknote unbeknownst to them, I'm likely to alert them/pick it up and give it back to them. But that doesn't mean I would treat all bank notes as so "valueless" that I would not want any of them.

That's why banknotes have no intrinsic value. They only have a relative value, and a perceived value. They are just paper and ink, and they have the value people assign to them. To some folks, they are worthless. Hand a Kalahari Bushman a stack of 100 dollar bills, and you've given him some convenient toilet paper.

I wasn't making any point vis-à-vis intrinsic v. extrinsic values. You're having that argument with other people at the moment, not with me.

[Coito ergo sum]

[
I wasn't making any point vis-à-vis intrinsic v. extrinsic values. You're having that argument with other people at the moment, not with me.

I was trying to figure out what it was you were on about.

[mistermack]

Coito, you're just taking the meanings of the words to a ridiculous level.
I'm not talking about people dying in the desert. I'm talking about real life. The real life that we all experience, not the crazy extremities of what is theoretically possible.
If you inhabit something different, then your understanding of the word "value" is different.
You might claim that a banknote has no intrinsic value.
Well it does in real life. The real life that virtually everybody lives.
It might have no intrinsic value to a horse, or tiger, but to the average human, it has.
The words only have their true meaning in their context.
There is no absolute meaning that applies to every being in the universe. Words are made by people, for people.

It shouldn't be hard to understand that the words I used, intrinsic value, were meant in the context of normal human life experience.

[Coito ergo sum]

Coito, you're just taking the meanings of the words to a ridiculous level.
I'm not talking about people dying in the desert. I'm talking about real life. The real life that we all experience, not the crazy extremities of what is theoretically possible.
If you inhabit something different, then your understanding of the word "value" is different.
You might claim that a banknote has no intrinsic value.
Well it does in real life. The real life that virtually everybody lives.
It might have no intrinsic value to a horse, or tiger, but to the average human, it has.
The words only have their true meaning in their context.
There is no absolute meaning that applies to every being in the universe. Words are made by people, for people.

It shouldn't be hard to understand that the words I used, intrinsic value, were meant in the context of normal human life experience.

I'm just using them according to what they mean. Why are you married to the word "intrinsic" in this situation?

I'm not talking about the crazy extremities of what is theoretically possible. I used an extreme example to make a point. The value of gold varies from thousands of dollars an ounce to $0, depending on who you ask, and when/where/why they are asked and their need or use for the substance. Gold is just a bunch of Au atoms. There is no "intrinsic" value. It has no more of an intrinsic value than quartz, rubies or ice cubes.

A banknote has VALUE in real life. It has no INTRINSIC value in real life. It's worth what it's worth to other people. A $1 buys a pack of gum over there in place X, but in play Y maybe gum costs more than $1. What's the "intrinisc" value of that piece of paper? At one time and place it is worth something, at another time and place it will be worth less or more, and at another time and place it will be worth nothing, and at each time and place it has a greater or lesser value depending on who you ask. To some people, money is something to hold onto and they value it highly. To others, it is fun to waste it and spend big money on essentially worthless things in order to get ego boosts or just have fun. It all depends on the person - the person.

[mistermack]

You're confusing the scientific meaning of a word with it's everyday meaning.
Like I said, words are not absolutes. You have to look at the context to get their meaning.
You can always find something to argue with, if you ignore context. It's not a very productive pastime.

[Coito ergo sum]

You're confusing the scientific meaning of a word with it's everyday meaning.
Like I said, words are not absolutes. You have to look at the context to get their meaning.
You can always find something to argue with, if you ignore context. It's not a very productive pastime.

Only, I didn't ignore the context. But, whatever.

[klr]

You're confusing the scientific meaning of a word with it's everyday meaning.
Like I said, words are not absolutes. You have to look at the context to get their meaning.
You can always find something to argue with, if you ignore context. It's not a very productive pastime.

I agree - and I don't often agree with MM.

This was meant as a discussion about why the likes of gold, diamonds, etc., seem to hold their value the way they do. I know what is meant by "intrinsic" in this context, even though it's far removed from the textbook definition. It's a form of shorthand if you will. Nor does it imply a permanent store of value or anything like that.

[Coito ergo sum]

Why not just say "value?"

[mistermack]

Why not just say "value?"

Well, for my part, going back to my original post, I was contrasting gold and diamond valuables to a daub of paint by Andy Warhol.
The gold and diamonds have a value, whether you admire the object, or not.
An intrinsic value, in the value of the materials, that can be realised anywhere in the world. The same materials were worth a fortune a thousand years ago, and are still worth a fortune now. That's intrinsic value in my book.
A Warhol has to be authenticated as genuine. A "perfect" copy is worth fuck all, no matter how good.
In a thousand years time, what will it be worth? It's value relies on modern taste, and authentication as genuine, it's at the whim of fashion.
I don't think I'm abusing the words to say that gold and diamonds have an intrinsic value, whereas the Warhol is very subjective.
.