How the Document Reflects or Challenges the Assumptions in which it was produced The document presented in this essay reflects on various assumptions that led to the treatise on the new money. For instance, it is assumed that moral injustices were highly being experienced in Europe between 1300 and 1600AD. As a result, there were significant shortages of money in Europe; hence, most of the treasuries were exhausted. Following such situations, various rulers tried to develop ways of solving problems related to money shortages. These assumptions were challenged by the debasing of money. This strategy was to be conducted in two ways. At the outset, it was assumed that doubling its value doubled its value thereby ensuring greater profits. Secondly, the strategy involved minting new money from pure copper without adding silver to their weights. This step was taken to ensure that the royal owners benefitted by a larger margin (more than two-thirds). As situations worsened, most rulers either recalled the money or destroyed it. The debasement of silver and gold money led to the generation of more profits thereby covering the losses that arose from the use of low-value copper. A decree to recall new money was put in place to ensure that the owners were well compensated. A publication of the money treatise was also put in place. At this moment, the treatise was created to solve the money crises for the royal owners at the time of compensation (Juan de Mariana, 2002). Specific Arguments concerning the Nature of Money At the outset, the value is seen in the intrinsic nature that is derived from its metal and weight. These two aspects are added to the cost of labor and minting processes. The extrinsic value is concerned with the laws governing its legality and those entitled to the prescription of its worth. The intrinsic aspect of money lies in a matter whereby the materials are obtained from gold, silver, and copper. The form of money is based on the coining of the materials (Juan de Mariana, 2002). Another major argument that is evident is the knowledge content on the nature of money that determines how it can be easily distinguished. Most people can distinguish the bulkiness of materials used to make money. Many people are unaware of whether the money is made of pure gold, silver, or a mixture of other metals. Also, a few people know about the value of the gold or silver used to make the alloys for making money (Juan de Mariana, 2002). The poor understanding of the nature of money can lead to fraud and fictions in the market setup. The profit made by the prince or those in authorities is higher than the natural intrinsic value of the materials or metal that makes the money. Indeed, there is an inconsistency like the real concept of money. The appraisal of money made of silver is seen to be higher than copper. It should be worth higher by a smaller percentage (Juan de Mariana, 2002). A problem can occur where people cannot be stopped from debasing new money in the hope of making higher profits. Upon the discovery of the frauds and fictions, they can end up collapsing; hence, the royals who benefit from the opposing people can end up earning nothing (Juan de Mariana, 2002). I suggest that a specific percentage of value that is considered favorable to the public should be added to the price of the metal when making money. This minimal percentage increases in value due to the labor incurred in minting besides the overall expenses incurred i