The Rational Optimist by Matt Ridley
The book opens with a photograph of a stone hand ax and a computer mouse. Both fit the human hand. The stone tool was made by one person for their own use. Thousands of people made the mouse and no one of them knew how.
Finding a quotable quote is a challenge because all 359 pages are exciting and pithy. This is an antidote to the ever-popular doomsaying. Pessimism has been an easy sale for hundreds of years. Predictions for the end of the world transcend religion and take on mathematical precision during the very Industrial Revolution that disproved the claims.
The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves
by Matt Ridley (Harper, 2010).
“If this goes on…” by 2030, China will need more paper than Earth produces… we will run out of petroleum (of course)… we will be crowded, starved, polluted, ignorant; and the few survivors will be poorer than dirt to the end of their days. True enough, says Ridley. But the big “if” never obtains because the world is constantly changing, improving, getting better. “If this goes on…” fails because “this” never “goes on” but in fact is altered by something unexpected. Yes, there are dark ages, plagues, famines, and wars, but generally, since the invention of trade about 18,000 years ago, our lives have gotten exponentially better. Taking a word from Austrian economics, Ridley calls this “the great catallaxy.”
From the petroleum for the plastic to the software driver, each person did one thing; and it comes to you in exchange for the one thing you know how to do. The maker of the hand ax enjoyed nothing they did not get for themselves. (Among homo erectus including Neanderthal, it seems that both males and females hunted by the same methods.) The hunter-gather was limited to their own production – and so could not consume very much. We enjoy unlimited access to the productive work of others. Each of us has, in effect, hundreds of servants; and would be the envy of any warrior, peasant, chief, or king for our cheap, easy, and sanitary lives.
Each chapter begins with a graphic showing the exponential improvement in life span, health, prosperity, and invention. Another one shows the hyperbolic fall in homicides and yet another shows the dramatic decline in US deaths by water-borne diseases. Ridley examines barter and trade (“the manufacture of trust”), the agricultural revolution, urbanization, and the invention of invention. Each turn of the page overturns a common assumption. Just for instance, shopping for locally produced food more often results in less efficient use of petroleum; and, of course, it penalizes farmers in poor countries.
Ridley supports his claims with citations found at the back and linked to the page on which the assertion is made or fact is asserted. That said, it is important to keep your calculator handy.
The prolific Viscount Matt Ridley has several blogs. Here is his biography on his "Rational Optimist" site:
http://www.rationaloptimist.com/biograph...
Finding a quotable quote is a challenge because all 359 pages are exciting and pithy. This is an antidote to the ever-popular doomsaying. Pessimism has been an easy sale for hundreds of years. Predictions for the end of the world transcend religion and take on mathematical precision during the very Industrial Revolution that disproved the claims.
The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves
by Matt Ridley (Harper, 2010).
“If this goes on…” by 2030, China will need more paper than Earth produces… we will run out of petroleum (of course)… we will be crowded, starved, polluted, ignorant; and the few survivors will be poorer than dirt to the end of their days. True enough, says Ridley. But the big “if” never obtains because the world is constantly changing, improving, getting better. “If this goes on…” fails because “this” never “goes on” but in fact is altered by something unexpected. Yes, there are dark ages, plagues, famines, and wars, but generally, since the invention of trade about 18,000 years ago, our lives have gotten exponentially better. Taking a word from Austrian economics, Ridley calls this “the great catallaxy.”
From the petroleum for the plastic to the software driver, each person did one thing; and it comes to you in exchange for the one thing you know how to do. The maker of the hand ax enjoyed nothing they did not get for themselves. (Among homo erectus including Neanderthal, it seems that both males and females hunted by the same methods.) The hunter-gather was limited to their own production – and so could not consume very much. We enjoy unlimited access to the productive work of others. Each of us has, in effect, hundreds of servants; and would be the envy of any warrior, peasant, chief, or king for our cheap, easy, and sanitary lives.
Each chapter begins with a graphic showing the exponential improvement in life span, health, prosperity, and invention. Another one shows the hyperbolic fall in homicides and yet another shows the dramatic decline in US deaths by water-borne diseases. Ridley examines barter and trade (“the manufacture of trust”), the agricultural revolution, urbanization, and the invention of invention. Each turn of the page overturns a common assumption. Just for instance, shopping for locally produced food more often results in less efficient use of petroleum; and, of course, it penalizes farmers in poor countries.
Ridley supports his claims with citations found at the back and linked to the page on which the assertion is made or fact is asserted. That said, it is important to keep your calculator handy.
The prolific Viscount Matt Ridley has several blogs. Here is his biography on his "Rational Optimist" site:
http://www.rationaloptimist.com/biograph...
I think Kaila was thinking about Trade Secrets, which generally inhibit the progress of technology, but certainly can help the company with the trade secret.
In my State, Western Australia, we have the usual roads, schools, airports, etc. of good quality, taxes are high, there is big State and Federal debt.
Five hours to our north is Singapore where they have roads etc. the schools and airports I know to be of top rank. Among the differences are,
1. Singapore has low taxes, and 2. positive net worth, not net debt.
(Confirm - government is a net investor, not a net borrower!)
They have a President, a mainly ceremonial position on the European style but with a special task, to oversee the national reserve investment fund, the President has the duty and power to reject profligate government bills. A previous President made a complaint, having the duty to protect the fund, he wanted to know how big it was. He asked Treasury, the answer was- Request declined, your job is to make sure it is not squandered, you do not need to know the size. That information is limited to Treasury who know what their job is and they do it.
The system appears to work well. It breaks the rules about transparency we think are important. How does it work? It could be linked to a part of the Confucian ethic - personal integrity, this means you delegate and trust to respected and competent officials who will perform their duties in the same way supervised or observed or not. The senior people in the Singapore public service are well paid, there could be a saving from not having to double up on checking supervising watching and spying on good people.
I cannot see it working here, but worth a thought.
For the so-called authorities it is not so easy.
They can look at any of the global temperature graphs and see a flat line from ~1997 to now. Yet human industrial activity has not flatlined, CO2 emissions continue. China makes solar panels to sell to us but build many and large coal power stations for their own needs, Germany is switching back to coal after realizing that solar and wind cost big money but produce negligible power. The organizations previously called scientific but which are now political, may well worship their models which cannot be used for anything else being so hopelessly wrong and poor at matching nature.
What they do is-
step up the rhetoric, call what was 60% certain to be now 80% certain, and they call for contrary opinions to be ignored or suppressed, and
concoct even more far fetched fantasies, my favorite is the story that
from year 1997, the heat has gone directly to the ocean depths where it cannot be measured or detected.
A blind eye is turned to the well known observed and quantified variations and patterns in radiation emitted by the sun.
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
If one starts from a premise that God made mankind and imbued him with free-will so that he is able to choose between good and evil then it follows that absolute proof would not be provided.
The Ten Commandments antedate capitalism by 5000 years. They nonetheless have a lot to do with trade and commerce, being a fragment of the Code of Hamurabi. Marriage is all about property - in every society. Commandments One through Ten: "Thou shalt not break a contract."
What is a COVENANT? What is the Ark of the Covenant? What was God's Promise to Noah? What was the deal that Jesus offered: "Whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish, but shall have everlasting life." It is a bargain, an open offer to the public, like a tradesman's Welcome Mat.
Personally, I do not believe that the universe had a creator, but culturally, I understand and appreciate bountiful fruit of the the deep roots of Sumeria.
To condemn them for not being "capitalists" is to condemn them for not having Newtonian mechanics.
Find "Ayn Rand's Letter to Reverend Dudley." (It was an eBay item years ago and widely argued within Objectivist circles. Some denied its authenticity, but it stood up.) Rand said that Christianity was the first religion concerned with improving the individual. I think that that may be arguable: Buddhism has the same concern. Also, Confucianism is ambiguously a "religion" and a "philosophy." All of that is a quibble.
What remains essential is that Ayn Rand challenged 2500 years of tradition, in ethics, of course, but more deeply in epistemology and metaphysics.
I have had personal experiences - in so-called ESP, for instance - that I cannot prove to another (skeptical) person. They remain true to me. I cannot deny them. So, if someone has "experienced" God I have to accept what they say about that as being true for them - and unprovable to me.
On the other hand... I have measured the acceleration due to gravity, as have millions of high school and college students in basic physics courses. It is knowable, repeatable, testable, teachable, and transferrable. It is not arguable. Religion is arguable because no standard of proof exists.
You might be one heck of a nice guy; and Torquemada might have been a real jerk. Neither of those meets the standard of objective knowledge. And for Ayn
Rand, that was the crux of the problem:
"I am not primarily an advocate of capitalism, but of egoism; and I am not primarily an advocate of egoism, but of reason. If one recognizes the supremacy of reason and applies it consistently, all the rest follows." -- Ayn Rand.
It is important to differentiate the Dark Ages from the Middle Ages. The bright line separating them was the reign of Charlemagne. Objectively not much had changed, but subjectively, their WORLD VIEW had. Alcuin of York was an advisor to Karl der Grosse. Adelbard of Bath, Gebert of Aurilliac (who studied under the Moors and brought learning to the West) became Pope Sylvester II.
The Number One Problem in Christian liturgy is Easter: reconciling the lunar and solar calendars so that they knew he first Sunday after the first full moon after the first day of Spring. They knew to expect the Second Coming and so they projected Easter out hundreds of years... and their predictions were wrong by half a day by 1350...But they knew that and they devised new theoretical models (more epherents).
They suggested "impetus" in physics. It was not correct, but it was better than the ephemeral tendencies of Aristotle. They knew that Saturn is about a billion miles from the sun. They knew that. And when they got the astrolabe from the Arabs they were overjoyed.
Alchemists isolate new "elements" such as antimony; and they differentiated "sulphur" from other "earths". It was not the atomic theory, but they were lightyears ahead of the Romans.
We have brandy - brandywine: burned wine - because they sought the essence (spirit) of the substance and distilled it, seeking the quintessence. The word "gas" comes from "ghost" because the "spirit" was isolated and identified.
You may laugh... but in a few generations, scoffers will put down Feynman for his "half advanced" diagrams.
You seem to accept Ayn Rand's "For the New Intellectual" without critical reflection or investigation. I did, too, for many years. However, while researching the Great Medieval Fairs of Troyes - and publishing an article about them - I discovered a world of splendor not appreciated by doctinaire Objectivists. Would I want to live back then? Of course not! But neither would I want to live in 1914 with its diphtheria and typhoid and polio and people who did not shower every day.
I ask you to show me the theology of Christ that would support those actions. You cannot, because it does not exist. You want to confuse the actions of men with a theology of God. That is the fundamental problem with your analysis.
The position/consensus papers of these organizations are all based on Scientific Research Results that recent Global Climate Change is Man Made
To be specific.
Harry M
To suggest any relation between capitalism and christianity is to disregard all evidence and logic, but that is fine because Christians have faith.
More on the Dark Ages and the evils of Christianity; note how christians burn books that contradict with their point of view and how they kill people who disagree with their point of view - sure that is about individualism. http://www.hermes-press.com/DAtruth.htm
"John Locke was raised in a believing household and retained an appreciation for Puritan themes his entire life. Kim Ian Parker’s The Biblical Politics of John Locke describes his intense and lifelong fixation on holy writ. During an age of extreme religious passion and partisanship, John Locke came to his position of religious tolerance through much effort. It was not Locke’s initial reaction to the question of religious liberty, but a conclusion he assumed after much thought and exposure to other ideas, as well as real-life experience. Locke was also deeply religious, considering himself a Christian, and undertaking a lifelong study of theology and biblical commentary."
So one could say that the moral foundation that Locke had as a consequence of being a religious person shaped and formed his other thinking. Thus, even if I were to wholeheartedly agree with you about Locke (and I don't disagree that he was a major influence), I can also say that Christianity was a 2nd order influence - and perhaps even a primary influence if one rightly assumes that it was the morality of Christianity that directly was embedded in the philosophy of Locke.
Locke provided the moral framework for capitalism, not christianity, which can only be credited with creating the dark ages.
Nasa has been caught multiple times fudging data and this has been pointed out by their own scientists.
The AMA is a political organization with hard left tendencies. They provide no credibility. I think the same can be said of the Am Ped Assn.
Most of the original scientists on the first IPCC have said AGW is nonsense or overblown.
Science is not about consensus or authority it is about facts and logic. When one side consistently lies about the data (facts) you can be assured they are not interested in science.
“Christianity was the first school of thought that proclaimed the supreme sacredness of the individual. The first duty of a Christian is the salvation of his own soul. This duty comes above any he may owe to his brothers. This is the basic statement of true individualism.”
-Ayn Rand, Letter to Reverend Dudley
Thus, the saving of one's soul (the soul being the ultimate ownership of oneself) is akin to egoism.
Your understanding of Christianity is just wrong. The whole basis is that God created man with free-will. It ours to choose how to live our lives. He merely identifies that there are consequences for those choices. Atheists seem not to want to acknowledge the consequences, which, in my opinion, leads to the ultimate evil - myself over all others.
How do you figure that Christianity gave us the dark ages? Seems to me it was the Goths who took advantage of the moral decay of the Romans (brought on by moral relativism due to a lack of a significant moral code - yes, Constantine turned to Christianity, but the moral decay throughout the roman empire had caused too great a decline brought on by excessive deficit spending - sounding familiar?).
Have you read Augustine or Aquinas? Regardless of what you think of what they believed, you cannot say that they were without reason.
For how this pertains to capitalism, see my response to K above.
Specifically, I'm not interested in the few, far out opinions expressed.
The American Assn for the Advancement of Science is the basic American scientist Professional organization, That includes all Scientific subjects. 166 years old, 127,000 worldwide membership. AAAS has held a position of man made climate change since 2006.
http://whatweknow.aaas.org/
Additionally, NASA has taken the position of Man Made Climate Change.
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-conse...
They back up that position with hundreds of Scientific Organizations around the world that concur.
Those organizations include:
Am Med Assn
Am Inst Physics
Am Chem Soc
Am Inst Biological sciences
Am Pediatrics Assn
Am Soc Microbiology
You can keep the fringe opinions
Harry M
Harry M
Load more comments...