Earlier quoted context omitted.
If economic value is defined through markets, how then does one argue against markets' ability to assign value? What words should be used other than value?
Typical words for this include “monopoly/monopsony”, “regulatory capture”, and “necessity goods”. There are others, too, but they generally don’t apply to creative outputs.
While those words are used to critique market failings, none of then are necessarily about the value of something independent of market efficiency. They always assume that the market assigns value correctly as long as you just avoid monopolies. They start with the assumption that markets work at assigning value for all things.
How does a market determine cultural value. What is the value of a priceless family heirloom? What is the value of human connections? How do you communicate these thoughts without first assuming that markets correctly assign value?