My Groups Progress Through Inquiry

Throughout working on this inquiry project, both of my group members and I have been exploring different avenues of this topic. Each of us were assigned specific questions that we were to try and answer about our topic, through our individual research. During this process we have all been realizing just how difficult it is to find sources and concrete research on this topic. Given the fact that our main question is “what would the world be like without money?” is a hypothetical question, research on this topic is limited. Even with these constraints, I believe my group and I are doing a great job so far evaluating the possibilities and picking apart this topic.

Ellana’s job in in this inquiry process is evaluating the questions: Psychology between owing someone something, why as humans do we need to be paid back? And was there a turning a point for money to come into existence? One thing I’ve noticed since reading Ellana’s posts is that she has a great line of clear thinking that goes into her writing, you can really she the definitive avenues she choses to go down throughout her research and writing. There is a great amount of detail she presents and lots of intriguing questions she asks to further her writing process. So far, I think she is doing a great job with her part of this inquiry project. One suggestion I might have for her is to explore different areas of thinking, try and piece things that seem unrelated to the topic into new directions of her writing.

Larissa’s job in this inquiry process is evaluating the questions: How did currency develop in cultures? And how did bartering turn into currency? One thing I’ve noticed since reading Larissa’s posts was how great her research is and how much she is able to relate things from her sources into answering her specified inquiry questions. However, I am beginning to realize a narrowing of the topic instead of a broadening. I realize this is because she has the challenging job of taking fact based material and trying to turn it into something more abstract or create a new line of thinking while still remaining on topic and within the confines of her specified questions. She has given great detail so far in her writing and I feel like if she could continue this same way of writing while branching out a little more, she could accomplish a lot through her writing on this topic. One word of advice I would give to her would be to not to be scared to go completely out of range in her research from what she has been typically sticking to At this point our questions will be changing no matter how hard we try and that’s okay. It will allow for more opportunities and knowledge on exploring different angles of this theoretical society and its true potential.


Could the World Function Optimally Without Money?

One thing that is extremely influential in today’s society is money. Many times people’s entire lives depend on it and the success of their careers to bring in as much money as possible. But just imagine what the world would be like it without it. Would the world turn to madness and have to structure or economy? Or would we function off of trade and favors out of generosity and the willingness to help others?

Personally, I believe the world really would be a better place if money never developed. I believe that most people who do some of the hardest most taxing job often get less appreciation and get paid much less than those in positions of less taxing jobs. It’s just the way our society has developed. Due to the high interest in more material things in life and the need for so many jobs in the electronic or technological field of advancement, a lot of times people forget about the “little people” who keep the rest of the world running like it’s supposed to. Maybe our world shouldn’t rely so much on these advancements. I’m not saying they never should’ve developed, but I don’t agree with how high of a demand our society has for these things. Like cell phones. I love my phone, but one time I went an entire summer without a cellphone and instead of working at my moms graphic design office answering phones, I volunteered at a children’s center and helped with daycare and keeping the facility clean. Its jobs like that and other manual labor jobs that should be among the most important. And not having my phone for that entire summer was honestly kind of refreshing.

There are many different opinions on this particular subject, on man in a post I read says “…society would split itself into various Groups/Sects based on Profession and then there would be exchange of Raw Material, Grocery, Clothe, Precisions Stones and Goods…. It would be a world that would justify certain social inequalities that exist today…” One thing we could identify here is “social inequalities”; what are these social inequalities? Are these in terms of recognition for hard work? Funding for more unnecessary projects rather than necessary projects? For example, would the farmers and construction workers success tower over the computer IT guys, or the founders of programs such as Microsoft or Apple, or maybe ever cellphone companies?

One thing that could be left up to dispute in this statement however, is “society would split itself into various Groups/Sects based on Profession”. How do we know that would actually happen? Would people break off into groups based on what they are already doing or would they instead break away and try accepting and learning new skills given this new opportunity in society? Would they maybe experience something new in light of being able to have greater and easier access to being able to lean a new profession? This statement isn’t really absolute, there is no actual way to predict how people would react in terms of productivity when it comes to a huge societal change.

A man named Richard Luster claims “Our technology is now at a level where we can comfortably provide for everyone without the need for hard labor… We don’t need money to build machines, we can just build them. Tasks that can’t be automated can be rotated among a populace who would be more than happy to dedicate a small portion of their time to a community that sustains them.” One term to evaluate here is “comfortable provide” a lot of times in our society, what one person believes to be “comfortable living” may not necessarily be the same thing for another. Due to the extreme differences in income and lifestyles of our society it would most likely be hard for people to agree upon a common standard of what “comfortable living” is. People are always going to have varying standards and desires for their way of living.

One statement that could raise question or add complication to the general idea is “…rotated among a populace who would be more than happy to dedicate a small portion of their time to a community that sustains them.” Would people really be that easily persuaded and motivated to work for free or just for the good of society? Would there have to be other compensation or incentive given for people to actually get up and out and work and do their necessary jobs? Would a trade system have to be put forth in order to maintain a natural balance of what does what and who is owed what?

In general, the idea of a world without money could potentially be an amazing and easier way of living. It could allow people to do more of the jobs they want to do instead of the ones they feel they “need” to do because of the income it brings. However, there are many aspects of living in a society like this that would have to be handled and carefully accessed to create a specific set of rules or a system for exchange and trade in order to keep order within the society. I believe there is much potential for a society with such values and standards, it would just require extreme enforcement.