This is an incredibly pointless statement.
Nobody thinks that money isn't a contract.
Calling everything a "social construct" -- or, rather, calling anything a social construct is meaningless. Everything is a social construct, even "I" as a concept.
Nobody thinks that money isn't a contract.
Calling everything a "social construct" -- or, rather, calling anything a social construct is meaningless. Everything is a social construct, even "I" as a concept.
I'm not completely sure about the answer to those questions, but they all derive meaning in a different way than money does. I think calling money a social construct just highlights that as far as mutually agreed upon meaning being focused on an abstract concept goes, money is pretty high on the list of having lots of meaning and being very abstract.
Even something as minute as considering a collection of atoms an "element", i.e. organizing things into discrete clusters, is a social construct.
The human brain has a CPU limit so it has to cluster things to interact meaningfully with material reality.
Glimpsing beyond this is nearly impossible because it goes outside the bounds of our abilities, but you can scrape at it if you abstract it enough like I'm doing here.
For example the adjective rich. Which means people with money. Rich people being rich due to their relationship with pieces of paper is fetishism.
They are people in a scheme of relations of production with others, namely, workers.