pay please?

Happy_Killbot

@maxx Not necessarily, but it really depends more on the physiology of the beings in question. Our nature makes money useful to us, but for example, if the others were some sort of hive mind or swarm intelligence, money and trade may not be necessary. Another possibility is if that intelligence is not tied to the physical world in the same way we are, for example if they were intelligent in the way that computers are, (far fetched, but just stick with me here) if a lot of independent plants like beings who's path to intelligence was a sort of defense to other intelligence that could parasitically control others, these beings would be able to communicate but would not need resources and therefore money in the same way we do.

This being said, if they were anything like us and evolved from a stance of needing resources and trade for those resources, money is a likely natural construct.

MayCaesar

@Happy_Killbot made a very solid argument which I strongly agree with. We tend to think of other species in the Universe as being very alike to ourselves, but they do not have to be. There could be all kinds of life forms that defy our comprehension, such as intelligent clouds of gas, and it is difficult for us to imagine how their societies would be organised. If there would be societies at all; it is not too difficult to imagine extremely individualistic creatures that do not need each other and are happier living on their own, or hive mind species that are essentially one big decentralised creature. Such species would not need money, as they do not need to initiate consensual exchanges of resources.

In any resource exchange-based species developed far enough some form of currency is very likely to arise eventually. It is possible for a purely bartering-based society to exist, but for the purpose of efficiency it is likely to replace bartering with a currency-based economy eventually.

There is also a hypothesis (which I believe is very likely to be true) that all species eventually uplift themselves through technological evolution and become machines. A society of such machines would probably be strongly interconnected and, perhaps, would not need money to function. Its economy could be based on some form of voluntary collective production, as the machines can integrate themselves into a single processing network to make their labor more productive - while remaining individually free and independent. It is hard for us to imagine such economy right now, but who knows what technological evolution will enable?

RS_master

I would say it would have to otherwise it would be extinct or dying out. And I think it would have to be intelligent life to develop currency because after all currency is pretty hard to create. You also need to logically figure out that you contribute/work/help you earn which is a fair concept. Let us say there is a group called x. Y does not work but z does. Z gives food to the residents of x but y gives nothing. Y cannot just steal from the other residents because then the one who brings gets nothing and the one who brings nothing gets everything is not fair. Also for this it would be complicated electing a leader (they must have the knowledge of at least creating a language before currency).  

maxx

well, let us back up a minute' yes I agree that it requires intelligence to actually make money, yet the concept existed as trade originally. tribe a and tribe b would trade each other for items each would find rare. So how intelligent des one have to be to trade? it has been shown that certain crows and ravens will leave "gifts" to humans who leave food out for birds to eat. things such a marbles or buttons or even wrappers from food items.  is this trade? as well I also ask how far could a race progress simply upon trade alone, without the backing of money?@RS_master

AlofRI

I think they COULD have a system without money.
"Back in the day" many people lived without money, they "bartered" to get what they needed. It could still work with the right mentality and psychological outlook. Might be even better …. greed would be hard to come by. ;-)