2 ms·
Yes. The market lens is deeply distorting, frequently obscuring more than it illuminates. You can try to shove anything involving scarcity into the economic an
by _jal 7y ago
Yes. The market lens is deeply distorting, frequently obscuring more than it illuminates.
You can try to shove anything involving scarcity into the economic analysis framework. And doing so might tell you something interesting! But it frequently will say nothing about other major aspects.
Taking a strictly biological view of relationship formation is just as valid. And doing so might tell you something interesting! But...
For some reason, a lot of folks get econ brain worms and start discounting other modes of analysis. It is really too bad; economic analysis has a lot of non-obvious insight, but ends up frequently being blinkered.
- luckylion 7y ago> Taking a strictly biological view of relationship formation is just as valid. What would that look like?
- stuxnet79 7y agoFrom the gene-centred view, it follows that the more two individuals are genetically related, the more sense (at the level of the genes) it makes for them to behave selflessly with each other [1] [1] Richard Dawkins - Selfish Gene (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene)
- luckylion 7y agoWouldn't that still fit nicely in a market concept? Considering it as a market with options (in this case: different degrees of relatedness?) where every actor tries to optimize their success works well with the valuation of options being defined by an external metric.