koala-1

koala-1
The Pen is mightier than the sword, but the Pen must sometimes move the sword against corruption if the corrupt are not moved by the pen.. An idea without an implementer is useless. "The Rulers do not carry the sword in vain"Rom 13:4

Sunday, January 5, 2014

Descarte's 'Certainty Principle'. 'Cause and Effect', and Will your next vote count?

Renee Descarte, from whom we have inherited "Cartesian Coordinates", believed that all knowledge could be reduced to a predictable mathematical equation.  The same cause in Paris, Hamburg or the South Pole, would have the same measurable effect, outcome, result, when considered by a rational 'enlightened' mind, in all locations.

Descartes was a child of the budding philosophical En'dark'enment (as I prefer to call it), and "reason" was running free and wild like a thoroughbred foal that has just found it's galloping legs on beautiful Spring morning. Unfortunately for humanity, Descartes was wrong, plain wrong, well...half wrong. He was correct when it comes to things like physics, but not where social behavior and attitude are concerned. You cannot reduce human attitude to a consistent quadratic equation.
This was the most fundamental of flaws in the failed enlightenment, that supposed that three different rational people will approach the same well described problem and arrive at the very same conclusion or solution. BZZZZZZZZ *wrong*.

Some interesting illustrations were used to try to persuade people of the truth of this assertion, which was grounded in what they termed "The Natural Law" ..that moral code which is obvious to all mankind. Such as... "show me a person who will beat his mother after she  has given  him delicious food"... "Show me a society where it is considered ok to take the property and produce of someone else?"    The expected obvious answer was...."none" So from this is derived the "same problem same solution" idea based on natural moral law.

But here is where this falls apart with a massive blowout on the highway of history. It's certain that all societies would look down on a child beating into his mother after she gives him food,  (unless it's 'Raymond' with his wifes cooking!)  The opposite can be true of competing tribal societies or simply highly developed and ambitious nationalistic societies.  In the middle east, in Asia, in Aboriginal Australia, the concept of 'tribe is right' which is a loose translation of "might is right" prevails. One tribe 'A'  thinks it has a manifest destiny to occupy the land of tribe 'B' and chase them away. Success in such an exploit is highly rewarded, not frowned on.

Stone the crows.... are you blind?  Strike me lucky, this stuff is kindergarten of life level for the broadly educated.  The only way a rational person would not see this huge problem with trying to tie down sociology to mathematical certainty are people who have been brainwashed into having a tribal mentality towards people who disagree with them!  One mans cleared up back yard is another mans 'environmental devastation and habitat destruction'!

The same applies to the sticky political subject of economic policy. Keynes or.. the Austrian appoach? Advocates of both approaches seem rigidly determined not to budge a millimeter away from their passionately proud positions. Both sides have the same facts available, but seek to resolve them in an entirely different way. Keynesians say "Borrow and spend our way out of this recession." Austrians bugle back "If we don't spend only what we have, it will be our last post!".  It's beyond the scope of this entry to give a detailed account of Keynesian vs Austrian Economic theory, but you can google them and investigate!  Keynes though did not have a great deal of formal economic education and for half his life lived as a promiscuous homosexual and the second half as a committedly monogomous heterosexual after marrying a Russian ballet dancer. The phrase "doesn't know if he is coming or going" comes to mind.

With Keynesian economics, you would find it valuable to look at the 'multiplier' factor he concluded would be the result of implementing his methods. But you should also look carefully at the 'source' of his suggested borrowings and compare that with the political reality of such scandals as the 'Khemlani affair' that got Prime Minister Gough Whitless being given the royal hobnailed boot of  "not on my watch" by the Governor General who sacked him.

During 1975, the Whitlam Government attempted to raise a loan of approximately US$4 billion. The money was intended to be used to fund a number of natural resource and energy projects, including construction of a natural gas pipeline, the electrification of interstate railways and a uranium enrichment plant.

This was Keynesian Economics without Keyne's key advice. -Borrow from withIN your country, not outside. *Gong*....It would have produced only short term politically expedient gain, for a long term disastrous debt mountain. (In Labor thinking that's not a bad thing, because while they know it will cost them office for a term, the pain that the new government has to inflict on the nation to fix their stuff up makes the new blokes on the political block look like Satan incarnate, which then can give the Labor mob a reason to hurl devastating attacks at them for "lacking compassion, being heartless scrooges and destoyers of jobs" (see ***)


The way things are going in local councils, it seems that the 'screw you, -my way or the highway' is as loud from the Green mafia and Feminazi's as it is from their opponents.

How do we resolve these things? I suppose balance is the key but Greens are not known for their moderation and tolerance. I detect also an element of Hindu pantheism in their pseudo religious elevation of 'nature' to the level of defacto prime minister.
In the absence of moderation, discussion and compromise, the only solution will probably end up being by the box of bullets - oops..I mean 'ballot' box.



 ***  I have some thoughts on this, still developing, and probably scary in their current form, but I believe we must leave behind in the garbage tip of failed political systems our current adversarial approach.





No comments:

Post a Comment

Please make comments here. Vulgarity or namecalling will not survive the moderator. Reasoned argument alone will survive.