5 ms·
That may have sounded profound but it comes off poorly because it gets the theory of evolution completely wrong. Success is the differentiator that allows for
by sunir 8y ago
That may have sounded profound but it comes off poorly because it gets the theory of evolution completely wrong.
Success is the differentiator that allows for the selection part of natural selection. Also evolution cannot “grind to a halt” because it is an outcome of thermodynamics.
Evolution isn’t a metaphor. It is still the underlying physical process even in selection of political systems.
- jahaja 8y agoDid I though? Success is the differentiator post-mutation. If mutation itself ceases due to the prerequisite, evolution does too. But why do you feel the need to read and dissect an analogy so literally in the first place? It's not the point.
- Sacho 8y ago> If mutation itself ceases due to the prerequisite, evolution does too. But then your reply doesn't make sense. Here's what parent said: > There are plenty of attempts to think about other systems, implement them, and advocate for change. They all lack something important: success. That part would imply that mutation is happening, just unsuccessfully. If you wanted to disagree with that, then your analogy was just confusing.
- jahaja 8y agoGiven what I wrote in my original comment I interpret the reply as standard status quo apologetics and implying that success needs to be a prerequisite. Then the analogy seems appropriate no?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- sunir 8y agoIt’s not an analogy. Evolution is the actual process. No ifs ands or buts about it. There are myriad attempts to try alternatives to some ideal “market economy”. From Venezuela to Burning Man to Wikipedia to China to Japan to Romania to the Canadian wheat board. What succeeds, lives.
- jahaja 8y agoOk, given your replies I can only conclude that I should never use an analogy in a reply to you ever again. You've read everything literally and run away with it. The only thing I was attempting to say is that the random mutation phase is a part of evolution and that can't have a success prerequisite. This was intended to say that one can't require previous success to be a prerequisite to political and economic ideas.
- sunir 8y agoWhat I am conveying to you is that your misunderstandings of evolution are causing you to say things that are illogical pretzels. Evolution is such a beautiful, elegant discovery. It underlies so much behaviour in the universe, from biology to politics to economics to culture. If you insist on calling it an analogy--even though it is in fact the reality of the situation, which is just one more example of you misunderstanding it--your use of it is faulty, and so your "analogy" is failing. And towards the overall point, there are plenty of competing ideas and executions to the market economy. While I sustain none are succeeding, many adventurers in this field would disagree. While you just don't seem to know about them, perhaps you could take this conversation as a call to action to go search for the many groups working on testing different economical models and go join them. It could be fun!
- jahaja 8y agoThis is your second reply to where I explain what I meant with regards to evolution without you enlightening me about what's wrong but instead go on about evolution in some sort of spiritual awe. But you're not done there. After you've decided to overrule that the author of the analogy used it as an analogy you extrapolate that since I'm not following your evolutionary wanderings I'm clearly ignorant of politics and economics altogether. What the hell?