I would like argue a point stated repeatedly, in what plays a big part in economics as it’s understood today; that what humans value, is subjective, and so, that means all value is subjective.
Author: Lee Roesner
Not.
I would argue the point, that these are two very different things: that there is “real” value in the world, that is outside the subjective value of human beings, that does not change with time, and then, there is what we “think” is valuable.
The article is flawed on so many levels.
Judging by the responses below the article you are not alone in that thought. ;)
I agree with dan above but have to say that the article makes a lot more sense from an economical standpoint than a general philosophical one.
He assumes that "cause and effect are not subjective whatsoever, and to the contrary, are mathematically absolute," and that sounds hilarious at first, but maybe this article is meant to be more practical.