The Way the World Works II

Last Fall on October 27, 2009 I wrote Part I of this series. This Part II tries to explain another aspect of The Way the World Works.

To understand how human societies are structured, or should be structured, and how they change with time, we need to consider what human beings in their rational dimensions are trying to do, or accomplish.

The World at its deepest, most fundamental level exists in states and changes with time according to a principle of optimizing some End over all possible paths. For classical motions of physical bodies, that is the Principle of Least Action, where for all possible paths, the chosen one is that one with the Least Action ("Action" is a combination of kinetic and potential energy). For classical electrodynamic fields and gravitational fields, a similar Principle exists from which one can derive the State of Nature and its time evolution. And for quantum physics, the states of nature are those that produce the maximum probability amplitude when all paths (real and virtual) are summed with complex number phases that are the classical action.

For human actions, Aristotle in his great work, Nichomachean Ethics, showed that human beings act to maximize their happiness. And also the State, comprised of all humans in a community, would maximize the sum of all human happiness in it. A person has various means to increase his happiness: wealth, pleasure, honor, children, family unity, friends, charity, etc. All those are means to the End, which is happiness: For no one seeks happiness for the sake of something else. People do seek wealth, perhaps thinking it will increase their happiness, or pleasure, or honor, or security and happiness for their children, or for their friends, or security and continuity for their family, or do works of charity for others. All those rational (and instinctive) actions are means for maximize a generalized happiness.

In the same work, Aristotle shows that various "goods" (in the sense of that which is good) are points of excellence between extremes. These are the moral virtues of prudence, temperance , courage and justice. For example, courage is the habitual choice of a state between the extremes of cowardice and foolhardiness. The point of excellence depends on the facts of each situation, which a truly courageous person learns with training. [NOTE: this concept connects to Part I of this series noted above.] Again, social custom for these virtues applies a principal of optimization.

Modern economic theory also uses a principal of optimization: a vague term called "utility" is maximized by people in their rational choices; for firms, profit is maximized.

And consider how a serious rational decision is made by a thinking person: he/she would contemplate the future course of events and paths and alternatives, real and simply possible ones; and then choose the "best" one for him. Best in what way ? Most wealth ? Nope, many actions contradict that rule. Most honor ? Nope, again, many counter examples exist. To me, Aristotle was right: a thinking person choose that action, or path that seems to maximize his happiness. Of course, he might err. The future is often unknowable and not all facts are known when a decision must be made.

At the next level, a community would, or should, seek to maximize the happiness of all people in it.

But that's the subject of a coming blog post where I will use all this to propose how one can sketch out a consistent political and economic philosophy with these principles and what a State implementing it would look like.

As a teaser, I will herewith state that my prior thinking that a Populist Libertarian philosophy was correct was wrong and that it must be modified. This is an personal example of why one must keep reading and questioning one's ideas. Reading one book [Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics] made me realize I had made a fundamental error: my prior thinking for the correct political and economic philosophy was maximizing a Means, viz. freedom, not an End, viz., happiness. Those are connected but are NOT the same.

Obama

I did not watch his speech. These State of the Union speeches have become exercises in mass propaganda. I will read accounts to find out if anything new or interesting was said.

Word of the Day

"Vulpine" - adjective [$10]
Vulpine means 1. of or like a fox; 2. crafty, cunning
Sentence: Odysseus in the Homeric epics had a vulpine nature that was both celebrated and condemned.

Chavez = Mussolini

A potential big problem in this hemisphere is Hugo Chavez, the tyrant of Venezuela. The correct historical model for understanding his antics is Benito Mussolini. As Mussolini did almost 100 years ago in Italy, Chavez manipulates the "masses" to get power. He doesn't care about the people at all; all he cares about is his own power. He's ruthless and a cunning liar, as was Mussolini. And he's likes to be a showman to get attention, as did Mussolini.

Don't believe all that Allied World War II propaganda denigrating Mussolini as a buffoon. He was a very, very dangerous person who did great evil. Adolf Hitler is famously quoted as saying that he owed everything to Mussolini, who showed how a small determined group could seize power and retain power. In that sense, Mussolini is partly responsible for begetting all the evils of Nazism.

Now we have Hugo Chavez as a 21st century Mussolini in our own hemisphere. He's having big economic problems, mostly of his own doing. What can we now expect ?

He needs a war to mobilize support and militarize his nation even more. Otherwise, the economic problems might lead to him losing power. That's all he cares about, himself.

Don't ignore this tyrant's bluster over Columbia. He clearly wants a war with Columbia to either conquer it to loot or simply to create more nationalist fervor in Venezuela that he can use to retain power.

So far, Obama has been firm, ignoring his threats and lies, while arming and helping Columbia. He needs to be very wary and keep some military assets in reserve to help if Chavez does a surprise raid ... or more.

Markets

The Green-Red rule prompted me to close out the call option speculation early yesterday for a small loss. No big deal - I hit the ball well, but Ms. Market caught my line drive. I'll keep my bat ready for another good pitch.

Ruling Classes

I am disgusted with all this press fawning over the views of "one of the world's richest men" over matters they know little about. I just heard Blabberg interview a Saudi prince about China. sheesh, what crap! Ditto re interviewing Soros or Gates or Buffet about anything except their primary expertise. This is a problem with the ruling classes - they want to tell everyone how to live and what to do. To the Rich & Powerful: Shut up and spend your money on something useful and good for humanity.

Word of the Day

"Occlude" - verb, transitive [$10]
Occlude means 1. to stop up or close (pores or a surface), obstruct (a passage); 2. (Chemistry) absorb and retain (gasses or impurities).
Sentence: Any implementation of populist libertarian philosophy would occlude the power of the ruling classes. In colloquial terms, go ahead and earn money, but don't try to become an aristocracy and don't tell the common man how to live.