It is the nature of commodities that they do not satisfy any real need. Now, theat’s a puzzlement, but it does explain consumer behavior. Is “real need” to be contrasted with an imagined need? Neediness. Where does it come from?

However, from the economic perspective, commodities are defined as somewhat processed raw materials still waiting to be processed into something useful, sort of a good-in-waiting. So, Is it fair to classify commodities as frivolous, not serving any need but with some potential?

I wonder because the electronic media strike me as mostly frivolous and I would have to include this electronic diary.

Now, is frivolous commodification hyperbolic or reduntant? Is a frivolity a commodity or is the designation of a commodity frivolous? The sequence of agency is essential. Can one even have agency without sequence? If not, Then is commerce just an example of random churning without purpose? Is frivolous agitation the mother of invention? Like the wind blowing seed hither and yon? Which would make change, random motion, be the agent of creation. Planet earth was created via random eruptions of the molten core into the cold of space. How does a molten mass explode with enough force to be frozen into a solid? Random motion. An object in motion tends to stay in motion but acceleration is random?

Is a mass of gas an object? Vision says yes, but touch says no. Is physics constrained by the sense of sight? Is human cognition constricted by the dominion of the sense of sight? Would we be more perceptive if more of us were blind? We are born into the dominion of light. Is that a good thing? Plato equated coming into the light with intellect and understanding. He was wrong to equate the existence of the denizens of the hot, dark cave with ignorance. The fetus in the womb is not insensitive. Its auditory sensors, motion detectors and thermometer are all activated before its exit from the womb.