(12-31-2013, 12:00 AM)Adonai One Wrote: Money as a system implies attachment and a state of scarcity and unsatisifaction. When goods are so demanded that money is needed to account for said demand, there is a likelihood of imbalance.
As a tool it is neutral but its necessity is not so much. I highly doubt there are systems of 6-7 archetypes that have money that are balanced.
I don't understand what you meant with the archetypes. Do you want to say that the emergence of money implies certain conditions (scarcity, attachement,...) which make negative polatization more likely? The use of money is not the problem so to say, but the conditions which led to its emergence?