The way we determine whether something is or subjective is whether it's mediated by people (authorities) or disintermediated. Mathematics and the scientific method, as well as my direct experience of the world (qualia) are not mediated. There might be something wrong with my filters, but they are my filters, not the construct of Descartes's demon. The academy might facilitate access to information and techniques, but at the end of the day they deal in facts and objective reality. That's why most mathematicians are Platonists.

Economics is nothing like that, it's a social science without any of the rigour of the hard sciences or the depth of mathematics or computer science. Bitcoin was invented by the field of computer science and information theory - we know their names. Economics has been polluted by centuries of powerful politicians, institutions, and ideologies. Its where we get "revealed preferences" and MMT and Malthusianism and Marxism. You think that all of the bad ideas out of economics have been left in the past? No, it's rotten to the core.

If economics had anything to say about bitcoin then all of the early hodlers would be dominated by economists.

The value proposition of bitcoin is not mediated by authorities, it's objectively true. Bitcoiners value bitcoin because it's objectively valuable. Its generated by a level of certainty that doesn't exist in the social sciences.

The truth is that proof of work is why anything produced by human beings is stable, and the description of proof of work is a description of those 4 principles.