We must beware of the Great Mind Fallacy, which proposes policies that can be effectively administered only by a Great Mind possessed of knowledge and motivations no actual human being possesses.--Otteson
Are we a species that finds emergent qualities as we move along? Are new elements appearing in us since we became farmers and social? Is marriage an emergent phenomenon?
One curiosity we seem to have developed is our assumption that fictional or legendary great minds are easily identified and available. We see more than Christ in our neighbor, we see Lincoln in our leaders.
Relying on qualities that humans have not developed yet is very reminiscent of relying on energy sources to replace carbon that have not been developed yet. This is an optimism and faith much stronger than simple meliorism, it requires a confidence in almost messianic intervention. In a recent interview Lonberg, a guy whose argument over the problems of the earth and its people centers upon allocation of resources not limitation of them, says that right now wind and solar power is responsible for 0.6% of the world's energy and, in 2040, it will be responsible for 3%. So, if we make carbon power go away, what will be the substitute? If, on the other hand, the problems we face are so severe that carbon power must be crushed regardless of the consequences, how will the deprivation be distributed?
The management of scarcity might be seen as the basic function of economics but its end-point is military.
Are we a species that finds emergent qualities as we move along? Are new elements appearing in us since we became farmers and social? Is marriage an emergent phenomenon?
One curiosity we seem to have developed is our assumption that fictional or legendary great minds are easily identified and available. We see more than Christ in our neighbor, we see Lincoln in our leaders.
Relying on qualities that humans have not developed yet is very reminiscent of relying on energy sources to replace carbon that have not been developed yet. This is an optimism and faith much stronger than simple meliorism, it requires a confidence in almost messianic intervention. In a recent interview Lonberg, a guy whose argument over the problems of the earth and its people centers upon allocation of resources not limitation of them, says that right now wind and solar power is responsible for 0.6% of the world's energy and, in 2040, it will be responsible for 3%. So, if we make carbon power go away, what will be the substitute? If, on the other hand, the problems we face are so severe that carbon power must be crushed regardless of the consequences, how will the deprivation be distributed?
The management of scarcity might be seen as the basic function of economics but its end-point is military.
No comments:
Post a Comment