Metaphysical Economics I: Terms

For our discussion of metaphysical economics, let us define common terms.

Actor
A human being possessing potential.

Potential
Potential is the capacity an actor has to exert himself and his resources toward fulfilling an existential need. Absent any facilities, an actor's potential is limited to time and native ability.

Need
Need, in the metaphysical-economics sense of the word, is anything an actor feels is something he might want to have or experience. A need could be dinner, or a need could be a Ferrari. A need could be "practical," which is to say, something that directly contributes to an actor's survival, such as the need for water or not to starve or freeze to death. A need could also be "aspirational," which is to say something that an actor feels contributes positively to his life but is not necessary for his survival, such as a nice car, the ability to paint well, or a long walk on the beach.

Facility
A facility is anything required beyond time and native ability required to accomplish any task. A facility could be a hand tool, a functional infrastructure, or a good education. For example, if you want to cut down a tree, you might employ an axe, which facilitates cutting down a tree. If you wanted to communicate with someone over a long distance, you might use the facility of a phone. A facility can also be inventory, since its utility only exists in its ability to accomplish a need. A facility owned by any actor becomes part of that actor's potential.

Utility
Utility is that subjective quality of worth that describes anything's ability to fulfill a need. Utility is only ever comparative and personal.

Value Contract
In essence, a value contract is an agreement an actor makes either with himself or others actors in order to fulfill a need. A value contract always contains clauses referring to potential, need, and utility. An example of a value contract would look like this: Rick has a need to eat. There are berries across the field from Rick's house. Rick is currently at rest. The utility of rest is less than his need to eat, so he chooses to pursue eating rather than continuing to rest. Rick has enough potential (which is time and native ability) to walk across the field and pick some berries. The berries have a higher utility than resting, so rick is willing to spend his potential to fulfill his most pressing need, eating.

Value Contracts between two actors might look like this: Rick needs a melon. Lucy has a melon. Lucy, realizing her melon holds a high degree of utility for Rick, offers to give him a melon (a facility of product) if Rick will cut her lawn. For Lucy, a mowed lawn offers more utility than her melon. Rick has a lawnmower (a tool facility) and accepts the utility of saving his potential for anything other than a melon is lower than the utility of the melon. Rick agrees to use his potential to cut Lucy's lawn in order to gain the utility of Lucy's melon. Lucy is willing to give up her facility of product because the utility of a mowed lawn is higher than the utility of the melon according to Lucy's need for a mowed lawn. Rick mows Lucy's lawn and gets a melon.

Practically any human action can be explained through the use of a value contract.

As we discuss these concepts, I would like to add more terms to the list. Please keep in mind these terms are entirely of my own choosing and definition.

I think there might be a better term for someone doing something with or without cooperation. I think "action" makes more sense to describe what you are getting at, instead of "Value Contract". Since action is necessarily done in accordance to what is valuable to a person, whether by cooperation or individually, it would make more sense to me to call this "Action". However, I understand that we are creating definitions that we determine, so whatever it ends up being called, I get it.