Of The Fatal Inconsistencies In Saifedean Ammous' Bitcoin Standard (https://github.com/jalToorey/IdealMoney/wiki/Of-The-Fatal-Inconsistencies-In-Saifedean-Ammous'-Bitcoin-Standard)
In this essay I use the perspective and intention of Szabonian deconstruction, as well as our insights from doing the same with Mises Regression theorem, to highlight Saifedean Ammous’ nefarious use and wrapping of academic scholars work notably including Mises, Hayek, and Nash as well as implicitly Szabo and Satoshi.
Further I highlight that Saifedean's account of how money originated and how moneyness originates in objects is based on an anthropologically inconsistent argument with reference to Jo Walton, “The analogy between Bitcoin and Yapese stone money is based on proposed commonalities that are inaccurate, ill-defined, and/or trivial.“
This essay then gives an example of how nefarious constructions can be ‘un-wrapped’ using Szabonian Deconstruction (properly framed inquiries) and it lays the beginning of my attempt to usefully frame an inquiry into the historical and cultural evolution of objects humanity has used as money as AND money-LIKE things (ie such proto-money, credit, wealth storage etc.).
Posted by jaltoorey
1 Comment
tldr: In Mises school of thought, to which Saifedean constantly cites, Mises rejects “empirical” based arguments. This might seem strange but Mises system doesn’t allow for reality or nature to disprove his logical deductions. Saifedean’s ENTIRE argument relies on historical observation after historical observation to draw out the important features of money which he then ascribes to bitcoin-in order to say bitcoin is the best money ever.
Mises rejects this kinda of argument and Saifedean cites Mises the whole way. In fact by Mises account bitcoin isn’t and can’t be money…even if its demonstrably used as money!
Saifedean’s argument is thus inconsistent with the sources he cites.