Tuesday, 26 May 2026

Strange Entities II: Money — The Monster That Exists Because We Believe In It

Money appears ordinary.

People use it every day.

They earn it.

Spend it.

Save it.

Borrow it.

Lose it.

It seems as concrete and obvious as any object could be.

Yet a peculiar question emerges:

What exactly is money?

The question initially appears easy.

One points to coins.

Banknotes.

Numbers in bank accounts.

Digital records.

But difficulties appear almost immediately.

Coins can cease being money.

Paper itself possesses little intrinsic value.

Digital balances have no obvious physical form at all.

And yet money continues existing.

The object begins slipping away.

The object trap

Object-thinking attempts a familiar solution.

Perhaps money simply is the material carrying it.

Perhaps money is:

  • gold
  • paper
  • numbers
  • tokens

Yet the difficulties rapidly multiply.

Gold can become jewellery.

Paper can become waste.

Numbers can disappear from one system and appear in another.

Different forms continually replace one another.

And still people insist:

It is money.

The supposedly stable object again becomes difficult to locate.

Its material form keeps changing while its organisational effects remain.

The monster appears

Money begins behaving strangely.

People alter their lives because of it.

Entire systems reorganise around it.

Its disappearance can produce crises.

Its movement can reshape societies.

Yet money itself possesses no stable body.

It can exist as paper.

As metal.

As electronic records.

As expectations.

As obligations.

As promises.

The same monster keeps changing its skin.

Worse still, money appears to depend upon collective participation.

If enough people cease treating it as money, its power changes dramatically.

The monster seems to exist because people collectively act as though it exists.

Object-thinking begins looking uneasy.

The relational turn

Suppose the puzzle does not begin with money.

Suppose it begins with the expectation that existence requires self-contained objects.

Then something changes.

Money no longer appears as a mysterious substance hidden inside coins or accounts.

Money becomes visible as an ongoing organisation of relations.

Expectations.

Practices.

Institutions.

Trust.

Legal systems.

Collective activities.

Symbolic distinctions.

None alone constitutes money.

Yet through their ongoing organisation something remarkably stable emerges.

Money exists.

But it exists differently.

Not as a thing beneath relations.

As a continuing organisation within relations.

The revelation

And something curious now becomes visible.

People often describe money as "only a social construction," as though this somehow makes it less real.

Yet mountains also require ongoing relational conditions.

Languages require ongoing relational conditions.

Nations require ongoing relational conditions.

Reality was never divided into:

real things

and

invented things.

The distinction itself quietly begins dissolving.

Money was not the strange entity.

The strange assumption was that reality must always look like an object.

The monster reveals the hidden expectation.

And more monsters are waiting.

Strange Entities I: Nations — The Monster With No Body

Some entities are difficult to locate.

Nations are one such entity.

They appear obvious.

People speak of nations continually.

Nations declare war.

Nations negotiate treaties.

Nations establish laws.

Nations possess histories.

The existence of nations appears unquestionable.

Yet a peculiar difficulty emerges almost immediately:

Where exactly is the nation?

One can point to people.

One can point to buildings.

One can point to landscapes.

One can point to governments.

But none of these appears identical with the nation itself.

The nation seems to exist.

Yet it also seems difficult to locate.

The object trap

Object-thinking immediately attempts a solution.

Perhaps the nation simply is one of its components.

Perhaps it is:

  • a territory
  • a population
  • a government
  • a culture
  • an ethnicity

Yet difficulties immediately appear.

Territories change.

Populations change.

Governments change.

Cultures transform.

Generations pass.

And yet people still say:

It is the same nation.

The supposedly stable object begins becoming strangely elusive.

The more one searches for the thing itself, the more it seems to move elsewhere.

The monster appears

The nation begins behaving strangely.

It can survive despite replacing nearly all its components.

It can motivate sacrifice.

It can shape identities.

It can organise activity.

It can acquire histories and futures.

People act in relation to it as though it possesses reality.

Yet it possesses no obvious body.

The nation appears neither imaginary nor materially self-contained.

It begins looking monstrous.

Not because it is unreal.

Because it behaves unlike ordinary objects.

The relational turn

Suppose the problem does not begin with the nation.

Suppose the problem begins with assuming that existence requires objecthood.

Then the puzzle shifts.

The nation no longer appears as a mysterious thing hiding behind its components.

The nation appears as an ongoing organisation of relations.

Practices.

Institutions.

Narratives.

Memories.

Symbols.

Legal systems.

Collective activities.

None alone constitutes the nation.

Yet through their ongoing organisation, relatively stable patterns emerge.

The nation exists.

But it exists differently.

Not as a hidden object beneath relations.

As a continuing organisation within relations.

The revelation

And suddenly something curious becomes visible.

The nation was not strange.

The assumption was strange.

Because object-thinking quietly expected:

if something exists, it must exist as a self-contained thing.

The nation simply refused to cooperate.

The monster reveals the hidden assumption.

And perhaps that was the point all along.

Because more monsters are waiting.