PZ Myers. 2005 Dec 28. What's the monetary value of a delusion?. <http://pharyngula.org/index/weblog/whats_the_monetary_value_of_a_delusion/>. Accessed 2006 Feb 13.
Posted on M00o93H7pQ09L8X1t49cHY01Z5j4TT91fGfr on Wednesday, December 28, 2005
What's the monetary value of a delusion?
So the bun shaped like Mother Teresa was stolen. I'm wondering how the police report this kind of thing—misdemeanor, felony, major heist? It's an old piece of stale bread that would, in a rational world, be tossed out in the trash. Do the delusions of its owner add value to it?
-
I think it looks more like Shrek with his ears eaten off.
#: Posted by on 12/28 at 02:51 PM
-
I don't see a face at all. It is supposed to be her face, right? (Heh.) Maybe the thief didn't see the resemblance, either. Maybe the person who stole it was just hungry, and homeless. Now, that would be a real tribute to Mother Theresa, in my opinion.
#: Posted by Kristine Harley on 12/28 at 03:06 PM
-
The closest thing to a rational theory of valuation is economics, and according to that, it's worth whatever the market will pay for it. The delusions of its owner probably don't help much, but the delusions of prospective buyers can make it as valuable as they think it is.
#: Posted by on 12/28 at 03:06 PM
-
Mother Teresa? Don't you think it's a lot more like this guy? (The one in the middle, not quite safe for work...)
http://www.ralf-koenig.de/en/drawings/scrib10.html
PS: I got confirmation word "probe", strange are the way's of theLordChance. DS#: Posted by on 12/28 at 03:15 PM -
<i>Do the delusions of its owner add value to it?</em>
Emm, well, they might, actually. Intrinsically, the Mother Teresa Bun is worth whatver any small piece of stale pastry is worth, i.e., approaching nil. But then, the intrinsic value of (say) van Gogh's 'Sunflowers' isn't much more -- it's whatever the value of a couple of sticks and a bit of oilstained old cloth is. In each case, the material value is nothing (or virtually nothing), and the vast majority of the actually obtainable value inheres solely in whatever people are willing to pay for the thing. This notion is especially obvious when we're talking about artworks (and I suppose we could call the Portrait of Mother Teresa in Baked Grain-Derived Modelling Medium an artwork, in the broadest sense -- found art, if you will); but a lot of economists would say that's the only true measure of the value of anything.
In fact, the owner in this case (a Jew and hence unlikely to think the bun looked like the dead nun thanks to a miracle) probably thought the thing nothing more then a curiosity (indeed, he might have been displaying it only out of a sense of postmodern ironic hipness). But let's assume arguendo that he really did believe the bun looked as it did because of the direct intervention of the almighty. If the bun has no value, that is not because he is delusional, but because nobody else shares his delusion. If sufficent numbers of other people shared the delusion, and shared it to a sufficiently strong degree, the bun might well be worth quite a lot (one could easily find out by putting it on the block at eBay). He'd still be delusional; he'd just be a deluded person with a valuable asset.#: Posted by Mrs Tilton on 12/28 at 03:23 PM -
"Maybe the person who stole it was just hungry, and homeless. Now, that would be a real tribute to Mother Theresa, in my opinion."
No, in order for this to be a tribute to her, the homeless guy would have to stay hungry and enjoy his suffering.#: Posted by on 12/28 at 03:36 PM -
According to evolutionary theory, stale bread should have a selective pressure towards resembling religious figures since otherwise it gets tossed out in the trash.
But if that's true, then why do we still have stale bread that doesn't resemble religious figures?
Answer that, you smarty-pants Darwinists!#: Posted by on 12/28 at 03:36 PM -
Now, now Patrick, don't go around and shatter peoples' illusions about Mother Theresa (who I consider a pretty vile person, becuase of her principle stance of people having to suffer).
#: Posted by on 12/28 at 03:38 PM
-
The cost of a delusion? Last I heard, it was something like $177 million a day for the delusion in Iraq.
#: Posted by on 12/28 at 03:38 PM
-
Oh, some delusions can be agreed upon by enough people to create tremendous "value."
Several paintings by Picasso rank among the most expensive paintings in the world. On May 4, 2004 Picasso's painting Garçon à la pipe was sold for USD $104 million at Sotheby's, thus establishing a new price record (see also List of most expensive paintings). From answers.com
#: Posted by jinx on 12/28 at 03:41 PM -
What's gold worth?
#: Posted by Chris Clarke on 12/28 at 03:51 PM
-
I think I found where the thief put it <a href="http://www.kurtknoll.com/fungv17.jpg>right here</a>
mmmm tree fungus.#: Posted by on 12/28 at 03:52 PM -
Shatter away, Patrick, since that bun, dating from 1996, was coated in shellac! And the homeless guy would be stealing from the hand that doesn't really feed him... I was being sarcastic (and making a joke about eating a different body part). Yes, I know a few dark things about Mother Theresa, for instance, her associations with right-wing dictators.
#: Posted by Kristine Harley on 12/28 at 04:05 PM
-
I have seen the bun! Even as an athiest, I was profoundly moved by the shellacked pastry, and the letter from Mother Teresa's convent asking that the bun not be used for personal gain.
Seriously, the coffee shop is just off campus - the joy of this bun is in the irony, like watching bad movies.#: Posted by Chuko on 12/28 at 04:23 PM -
shorter jinx:
I do no like the Picasso.
So thees means that hees paintings, they are no good, eh?
Therefore, peeples that like hees paingtings, they are the deluded, no?
Short answer: no.
so.#: Posted by on 12/28 at 04:28 PM -
Miraculous or not, it would be cool to find a cinnamon bun that looked like Charles Darwin. Or PZ Myers. Dressed as Mother Theresa. In a pirate suit.
#: Posted by on 12/28 at 04:53 PM
-
It's a lot easier to see if you look at this:
http://www.indiana.edu/~jkkteach/P335/nunbun.html
But, to me, it looks more like Dopey than a nun.#: Posted by on 12/28 at 04:59 PM -
Since the bun resembles a profile by virtue of misalignment in folding and uneven distribution of it's tasty cinnamon filling (two reproducible manufacturing defects), my question is:
Why wasn't the shop selling "Replicas of the famous Mother Teresa Bun" complete with letters of authenticity, on Ebay?
They could have moved any non-Teresaesque buns as "silhouette rolls" in the store.
And the comparison to Picasso isn't valid. The bun was a product of chance convergence of manufacturing errors. A painting is a product of goal-oriented effort.
Equating the two is like saying a lottery-winner and a entrepreneur-millionaire are both the same sort of person just because their bank accounts match.#: Posted by on 12/28 at 05:01 PM -
It blows my mind that people not only see things like this (mostly the religious types), but let alone get obsessed over them.
I guess that's why icons are such a powerful draw.#: Posted by Tobin on 12/28 at 05:05 PM -
I think the "nun bun" thing was tongue-in-cheek since the very beginning. I mean, it really looks like a caricature of the famous nun... not as solemn as a "true" manifestation would have to be.
#: Posted by on 12/28 at 05:25 PM
-
My idea is that the bun WAS Mother Theresa. She was reincarnated as a donut as a judgment on her life as a human.
#: Posted by on 12/28 at 06:56 PM
-
I would like to concur with what Mrs. Tilson said above. My impression watching the owner on Olbermann was that he viewed it as just being a little oddity that, if it brought people to his little coffee shop and tourists to the town, was not hurting anyone. He said that the "nun bun" brought a lot of people to the town and even credited it with "revitalizing" the town's tourism. How much of that is true, I don't know, but there's absolutely no indication that the owner harbors any delusions about some intrinsic holiness or miraculousness in the pastry.
#: Posted by on 12/28 at 07:03 PM
-
I am reminded of Elton John's tribute song on the death of Mutha Teresa. 'Sandals in the Bin'.
(Congratulations to Elton on his recent marriage btw.)#: Posted by on 12/28 at 07:54 PM -
You missed the one about the ten-year-old piece of cheese on toast with a bite taken out, that bears an uncanny nonresemblance to the virgin Mary. (And how does anybody know what she looks like anyway?)
#: Posted by Ophelia Benson on 12/28 at 08:26 PM
-
Basic economics... What adds value to anything, is people's willingness to pay for it. A piece of stale bread is worth as much as you can get any sucker to cough up for it on e-Bay.
So, get out the wonder bread and a soldering iron, and make a picture of Elvis.
-jcr#: Posted by on 12/28 at 09:20 PM -
I hope I'm not taking this more seriously than it deserves, but for purposes of the level of larceny the "fair market value" of the stolen property is normally used. Typically, the higher the value of the property stolen, the higher level of the crime. All property -- stuff -- is presumed to have at least nominal value. Stealing items of only nominal value is usually called "petit" larceny. Petit larceny also applies when the value of the property stolen is more than nominal but fairly low (below, say, $1,000). Thefts of property of more substantial value are usually called "grand" larceny (a higher-level crime than petit larceny).
Determining fair market value is sometimes easy. Property stolen from stores is usually valued at retail. In other cases, valuing property is more difficult, but the process is similar to how an appraiser would value any property: You identify the pertinent market and ask what the item would likely -- realistically -- sell for in that market. If there is no market, or the property stolen is essentially unsaleable, then it has only nominal value and the crime is petit larceny. Likewise if the FMV simply cannot be determined with any precision. "Sentimental" value does not usually count. So the "delusions of the owner" have no effect. (However, there are sometimes statutes which address thefts of particular kinds of property. For example, the theft of a credit card might be defined as grand larceny even though the value of the card itself is nominal, or similarly the theft of a pet might be a higher level of larceny than the pure market value of the animal would otherwise support. It is possible -- but I don't know -- that there could be statutes setting particular levels of seriousness for the theft of "religious" objects.)
For a "curiosity" such as this bun, there may (or may not) be a market value which can be determined. One might, for example, seek to discover if other, similar, artifacts have been bought and sold and at what levels. (Checking eBay, for example.) Mrs. Tilton is on-track with her analogy to art objects.
Fair market value is a "fact." There is a FMV or their isn't, and the FMV of an object is determinable (within a range) or it isn't. While the delusions of the owner may not affect FMV, if "delusions" result in people being willing to pay more than the intrinsic value for an object, that would count.
Phillip Johnson's textbook on criminal law would probably have more on this....#: Posted by on 12/28 at 09:37 PM -
Instead of discussing Mount Rushmore, why don't IDists discuss Mother-Teresa-in-a-bun?
#: Posted by Arun on 12/28 at 10:10 PM
-
The nun bun is the discovery of a friend of mine. It's making fun of the "holy images in baked goods" phenomena.
Don't get your huffyness in a huff, PZ. It's a joke by folks who see more of the humor in it than you seem to!#: Posted by on 12/28 at 10:23 PM -
I want a frying pan with the Playboy Bunny logo on the surface. Now that would be evidence of a worthy deity!
#: Posted by John Wilkins on 12/29 at 01:30 AM
-
Personally, I find Lenin's face in Phil Plait's shower curtain a much more convincing miracle. The question is, Who sent it? Maybe Marx was Right...
#: Posted by on 12/29 at 03:55 AM
-
I paid $10 for a ba-KING pan with an acrylic portrait of Elvis on it. Was the portrait the work of intelligent design or a mediocre artist? Was my purchase of this work an example of my very bad taste or, since I am a practicing Presleytarian, an example of my worship of the King? I need to know and for anyone who can answer these questions I say: Thank you, thank you very much.
#: Posted by on 12/29 at 05:25 AM
-
The monetary value of an object may be estimated by its replacement value. Since the magic properties of the bun are irreplaceable, the bun is invaluable. Infinite number of dollars.
Or am I wrong? If I replace the bun with an identical looking artifact and it exerts the original bun´s magic, then the value of the physical object is that of solid waste. Negative, since you have to pay to get it properly disposed.#: Posted by on 12/29 at 05:26 AM -
Supply and Demand, baby! If the supply of idiots is high, demand for silly crap will be subsequently high.
#: Posted by Mike Nilsen on 12/29 at 09:26 AM
-
Valuing the nun bun is easy compared to the real philosophical question of the age, which comes up frequently in my business: Can you steal a free newspaper?
If you take one, obviously not.
But if you take the whole stack?#: Posted by on 12/29 at 01:22 PM -
Harry, if you take the paper to wrap fish, or if you cannot read, you are stealing it. Now, how much are you willing to give for the nun bun?
#: Posted by on 12/29 at 02:16 PM
-
An authenticated one? All I have.
#: Posted by on 12/29 at 04:12 PM
-
I was a regular at the Nun Bun's coffeehouse back when the whole thing went down. The guys behind the whole thing were very funny local theater folk who worked there. Think about it: The face of Mother Theresa appears to you on a cinnamon roll. And yet time after time in skeptical venues it gets trotted out as an example of credulity.
I, a skeptic to the core, think the Nun Bun was very, very valuable.#: Posted by on 12/30 at 02:00 AM -
Nun Bun done run. Heh.
#: Posted by The Countess on 12/30 at 08:04 AM
-
I think it looks like Abe Vigoda wearing a knit cap.
#: Posted by The Countess on 12/30 at 08:09 AM
-
And each blasphemer quite escape with the fun,
Because the insult's not on man, but the bun?#: Posted by on 12/30 at 10:07 AM -
Do the delusions of its owner add value to it?
Yes. My mother had, for many years, a number of worthless, to any objective observer, pieces of "art". But to her, they were precious, and she proudly displayed them on the kitchen fridge.#: Posted by arensb on 12/31 at 10:11 PM