Page:Culture.vs.Copyright 01.pdf/100

itself and thus has no real value. The entire thing without a just one part can also be of no value.
Alpha: What if you miss part of a blueprint?
Beta: A blueprint does say something to you, any part of it. It has value; it always does. If you have just part of it, you can recreate it.
Alpha: You can restore a car too.
Beta: Yes, but a broken car has no value unless you use the car itself as a blueprint! You can retrieve some information from it! It’s another discrepancy!
Teacher: Can you flesh it out for us?
Beta: Well, . . . a broken thing having no physical value may still bear useful information . . .
Alpha: This was actually said already. Physical things derive their value from inscribed cultural phenomena.
Gamma: Yeah, that is right, but some physical objects can be used directly because of their physical features. Cultural phenomena in such cases help in the use of the objects’ physical abilities. In the case of a broken tool, it is the opposite: the tool itself serves as media first, as a bearer of information, then, in turn, it can be used to restore the tool to its physical abilities. . . . A broken tool cannot be used in its presumed function at all.
Delta: By the way, food does not necessarily get value from cultural use. It is mostly opposite: it is used because of its direct physical value.
Gamma: Ha ha ha, I would say cultural traits can very well make it less usable!
Teacher: Interesting. Does such a decrease happen to consumables only?
Beta: I think it relates . . . if this is about consumables. . . . They are supposed to be used up, so . . .
Gamma: Actually, that was said already. Culture may creates value in physical objects but can also destroy that value.
Kappa: I have another idea, . . . I don’t know whether it has anything to do with our topic or not.
Teacher: What is it?
Kappa: People can change something’s value by using something else.
Alpha: What do you mean?