[Junior]

Empiricism may raise its ugly head, but that still does not excuse one for making the case that "worth" is a property of an object, and hence objective. Height is a property of an object; it can be measured any number of ways and those measurements will coincide to a high degree. In the same way one may measure the width and depth of an object or determine its color. Two or more observers can make these measurements and find they agree. These properties are therefore "objective" in that they are intrinsic to the object and are perceived identically by observers.

However, worth cannot be measured in this way. What I may consider worthwhile, you might consider minor or even disregard altogether. This makes "worth" or "value" inherently within the eye of the beholder, and no two observers will agree on that value. This is a good thing, as it is the basis for all economic systems.

[exmarine]

Empiricism may raise its ugly head, but that still does not excuse one for making the case that "worth" is a property of an object, and hence objective.

You dodged the question - as usual. You are the one that said that value must be measured. How do you prove that empirically? You can't and you know it. Empiricism demands that all reality be observable or measurable and we both know you can't prove this proposition empirically. It's a dud. Why don't you just admit it what we already know? Empiricism doesn't work - it is insufficient to explain human reality. It was refuted long ago - you are still living in the 19th century (with Darwin). Come on - you can do it - admit it when you are wrong. You are busted.