I've long thought the same. UVs are making their own tradeoffs (however un-or-semi-consciously), but in microcosms and on accountability nodes where any consequences can be distributed across a network, or alleviated by fuzzy "futures" (which are, again, sold with 100% confidence).
The similarities to the prototypical "confidence game" are unavoidable. In fact, I think this describes the same phenomenon. And it does explain the persistence, when we realize that expenditures of confidence are essentially a money printer that goes brrrrr in the head. Strangely, at most nodes in your very professional and scientific graph, the UV is ackually acting more economically(!) than the CV. But if we charted it through time along with rolling cost factors... yeah, we're screwed.
Reminds me of some of the stuff John Carter has been writing about recently re left brain/right brain. In a left-dominated society, everything is a system... quantifiable, measurable, therefore, solving the problems humanity faces is akin to solving a complicated math problem. But reality is messy and complicated, hence the "no solutions, only tradeoffs" bit. As Jesus said, "The poor will always be with us."
As I've been pontificating on monarchy lately, this strikes me as an argument for monarchy over democracy: Where democratic politicians enthusiastically espouse the unconstrained vision and say things that feel good to get elected, the King, or leader, or whatever, can tell it like it is, and tell everyone who's not on board to fuck off.
" Not all subjects hit that point, though; something like car repair is enough of a closed system that high certainty of how to fix something is possible. For most sociological questions, however, things get pretty far to the right of that graph, and most real experts say “Well, dealing with the problem will look something like this, but we can’t promise a specific outcome and we really need to be on the lookout for unintended consequences and be ready to change direction if things go bad.”
Annnnnnnd we're back to my favorite hobby horse--technocrats/UVs mistaking complex problems for merely complicated ones.
I've long thought the same. UVs are making their own tradeoffs (however un-or-semi-consciously), but in microcosms and on accountability nodes where any consequences can be distributed across a network, or alleviated by fuzzy "futures" (which are, again, sold with 100% confidence).
The similarities to the prototypical "confidence game" are unavoidable. In fact, I think this describes the same phenomenon. And it does explain the persistence, when we realize that expenditures of confidence are essentially a money printer that goes brrrrr in the head. Strangely, at most nodes in your very professional and scientific graph, the UV is ackually acting more economically(!) than the CV. But if we charted it through time along with rolling cost factors... yeah, we're screwed.
Reminds me of some of the stuff John Carter has been writing about recently re left brain/right brain. In a left-dominated society, everything is a system... quantifiable, measurable, therefore, solving the problems humanity faces is akin to solving a complicated math problem. But reality is messy and complicated, hence the "no solutions, only tradeoffs" bit. As Jesus said, "The poor will always be with us."
As I've been pontificating on monarchy lately, this strikes me as an argument for monarchy over democracy: Where democratic politicians enthusiastically espouse the unconstrained vision and say things that feel good to get elected, the King, or leader, or whatever, can tell it like it is, and tell everyone who's not on board to fuck off.
Why do I feel like 'naive realism' is just an insult pretending to be a diagnosis?
" Not all subjects hit that point, though; something like car repair is enough of a closed system that high certainty of how to fix something is possible. For most sociological questions, however, things get pretty far to the right of that graph, and most real experts say “Well, dealing with the problem will look something like this, but we can’t promise a specific outcome and we really need to be on the lookout for unintended consequences and be ready to change direction if things go bad.”
Annnnnnnd we're back to my favorite hobby horse--technocrats/UVs mistaking complex problems for merely complicated ones.