The generally accepted definition of a society is a group of people living together in an organized way. There are more things that go into it, but clearly a single person doesn’t qualify as a society. I would argue that general usage would also preclude super small groups of people, but that’s not core here.
What is core here is that you are arguing a straw man argument. All economies, large or small, exist as cultural constructs that mediate how the resources will be divided. The shape this takes is absolutely “made up” and we could decide at any moment to change how it functions.
Economies do not exist outside of culture and culture is constantly negotiated between those participating in it. Therefore, economies are absolutely made up and I believe it is you who does not understand economy.
The generally accepted definition of a society is a group of people living together in an organized way. There are more things that go into it, but clearly a single person doesn’t qualify as a society. I would argue that general usage would also preclude super small groups of people, but that’s not core here.
What is core here is that you are arguing a straw man argument. All economies, large or small, exist as cultural constructs that mediate how the resources will be divided. The shape this takes is absolutely “made up” and we could decide at any moment to change how it functions.
Economies do not exist outside of culture and culture is constantly negotiated between those participating in it. Therefore, economies are absolutely made up and I believe it is you who does not understand economy.
An economy exists, always. Ants have an economy.
How that economy is implemented is a social construct. The basic idea is not.
I do agree with you 100%, and what you are saying is what I was trying to communicate.
Either we both understand what economy is, or neither does.
However, one of us has a better command of the English language than the other, and the better one isn’t called Tuukka :)