Construct · 2 fields · 5 citations

Where does good collide?

One name. Different field. Different construct. One map.

● jingle · one word, two constructs Nearest construct by meaningcommoditycompare the meanings
How to read this

Every construct on the map is compared with every other by the meaning of its definitions, and the closest one is surfaced here. The nearest construct to good is commodity.

Hold this as a prompt, not a verdict. Two constructs sitting close in meaning is a reason to read them side by side and decide for yourself whether they are one idea under two names. It is not proof that they are. Compare the meanings in the Collider.

good2 CONSTRUCTSThe good (ethics)PLATO · FORM OF THE GOODEconomic goodSMITH · ECONOMIC GOOD

Spokes are fields; dashed arcs are shared lineage. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.

1776Economic good1903The good (ethics)
2026

Drag to watch the word get claimed. Each field appears at the publication date of the earliest source cited for it. Tap a year to see which.

Philosophy and ethics

The central object of ethics, what is worth pursuing

In philosophy the good is the central object of ethics: what is worth pursuing, choiceworthy, or valuable in itself. Plato's Republic (ca. 380 BCE) placed the Form of the Good at the summit of reality, the source of truth and being that makes other things knowable and worth wanting, and Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics (ca. 340 BCE) recast the good as the end at which every action aims, culminating in a well-lived human life. Moore's 1903 Principia Ethica argued that good is a simple, indefinable property and that reducing it to any natural fact commits what he called the naturalistic fallacy. The referent here is a normative property of ends and actions, argued over rather than bought or sold, and it is not a commodity traded in a market or the goodness ascribed to a creator.[1][2][3]

Unit
A choiceworthy end, or a good-making property of an action or state of affairs
Recovery means
Not applicable
Measured by
Argued for by ethical reasoning and analysis of concepts rather than measured, and weighed against competing accounts of what is good

Economics

A commodity or service that satisfies a want

In economics a good is a commodity or service that satisfies a want and can be exchanged, the basic object over which production and consumption are defined. Adam Smith's 1776 An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations analysed goods through their value in use and their value in exchange, and the division of labour that produces them. Samuelson's 1954 The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure separated private goods, where one person's consumption uses a unit up, from public goods, which are non-rival and non-excludable so that many can consume the same unit at once. The referent is a scarce, allocable object of exchange counted in quantities and prices, unrelated to a moral end pursued in ethics or the goodness ascribed to God in theology.[4][5]

Unit
A single unit of a tradable commodity or service, scaled by quantity and price
Recovery means
Not applicable
Measured by
Quantified by output, consumption, and price, and classified by rivalry and excludability into private and public goods

Next

Run it through the Collider, or take the citations with you.

See how good sits against neighbouring constructs in the Collider, or export every reference on this page in one click.

Open in ColliderExport BibTeXReport this collision

Nearby collisions

value6 fields · 12 citationsjingle · one name, six constructscommodity3 fields · 3 citationsjingle · one word, three constructsutility3 fields · 3 citationsjingle · one word, three constructs

References

  1. Plato. (1992). Republic (G. M. A. Grube, Trans.; C. D. C. Reeve, Rev.). Hackett. (Original work published ca. 380 BCE)
  2. Aristotle. (1999). Nicomachean ethics (T. Irwin, Trans.; 2nd ed.). Hackett. (Original work published ca. 340 BCE)
  3. Moore, G. E. (1903). Principia ethica. Cambridge University Press.
  4. Smith, A. (1776). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. W. Strahan and T. Cadell.
  5. Samuelson, P. A. (1954). The pure theory of public expenditure. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 36(4), 387–389. https://doi.org/10.2307/1925895

Cited on this page?

Confirm your construct, or correct us.

If your work is cited behind one of these entries, you know better than we do whether we captured the meaning right. Confirm it, suggest an edit, or dispute it, and your name goes on the entry as an author who has checked it, linked to your ORCID.

Claim your construct