5 ms·

It's actually capitalism that has stagnated scientific progress. Initially capitalism revolutionizes production by liberating it from the backwardness of feudal

It's actually capitalism that has stagnated scientific progress. Initially capitalism revolutionizes production by liberating it from the backwardness of feudalism, establishing division of labor, science over church, automation, etc. But after a long process of development, capitalism becomes a fetter on scientific discovery. It requires a permanent underclass which is never able to develop their talents. So most humans are trapped doing repetitive and mind-numbing work. Like Stephen Jay Gould said of Einstein there's a: "near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops" Also capitalism is generally focused on short term profit rather than projecting long term social needs. This is a major reason we're sprinting toward climate catastrophe when the technology exists to overcome it. Capitalism cannot put the resources and manpower available to work solving the glaring needs of our time. This is the main reason there is scientific (also cultural) stagnation.

buscoquadnary 4y ago
Wow and here I thought most people hadn't read the communist manifesto. I agree with your vision, obviously once we replace capitalism with socialism run by a dictatorship of the proletariat then the organs of the state will quickly devolve into obselescene and will will all live in a stateless classless atheist communist utopia. BTW: how is that Lysenknism working out for you now that you are free from the shackles of capitalism.
jeffreyrogers 4y ago
There are more scientists now than ever before. I don't see how what you're saying fits the facts. There is probably more funding available for research that has little expectation of ever leading to anything economically significant than at any time in the past.
- misterbishop 4y ago
  The pocket change invested in serious scientific research by capitalist-run foundations proportionally increases with the wealth of those capitalists. That it grows is not impressive. What would be impressive is if these foundational social forces were disrupted.
  - bumby 4y ago
    Although it's declining for a variety of reasons, a relatively large amount of research is publicly funded within the United States.
- cauch 4y ago
  The fact that progress exists does not technically constitute a counter-example. Maybe in a parallel world, where capitalism does not exist, the progress is 10x faster, or the funding is 10x more important. Maybe the capitalism needs some progress, so needs to invest in it, but has also as effect to cut the roots that would generate more progress. Or maybe not. My point is just that I don't think that what you point out does not really prove anything.
  - mach1ne 4y ago
    I'd like to add that the number of scientists is not a relevant metric either, though it is a variable.
brutusborn 4y ago
If that is the case, why did all the golden ages of science occur under capitalism? Why didn't modern commumist societies produce greater scientific progress than the capitalist world?
- mistermann 4y ago
  I think it's plausible if you think of it in periods or "waves".....Capitalism may indeed be superior entirely, or it may only be superior up until a certain point, and then once it reaches a certain level of power (political/regulatory/cognitive capture) it could cause certain levels of progress to stagnate...and if adequate capture and ~censorship of information production & distribution has been accomplished, people may never be able to realize the position the system has assumed (or, some may notice, but their messages may be censored or disbelieved).
- misterbishop 4y ago
  It's a tautology. The whole idea of a "golden age" is premised on liberal/enlightenment values which were brought to life through the revolutionary transition from feudalism to capitalism. There are no modern communist societies.
  - bjornsing 4y ago
    > There are no modern communist societies. Not for a lack of trying…
    - misterbishop 4y ago
      on the part of the capitalist counter-revolution as well
- cauch 4y ago
  I'm not fan of communism, but was not the first man in space from a communist country? I agree that progress is more impressive under capitalist countries (and that capitalist countries have other very useful advantages, such as not having gulags), but I rather feel that the reason was rather that capitalism was very well positioned to grab the low hanging fruits before the others (and also that, due to our position, we see the progress of capitalism as more impressive as the ones from renaissance, antiquity, ... while maybe, relatively, the step was more impressive at the time)
thereddaikon 4y ago
Ah yes, because the communists were good to the environment right?
- thinkmcfly 4y ago
  We should go roll around in the mud at the Hanford site. It's the most healthy soil!
- jacob171714 4y ago
  I don't think he mentioned communists anywhere in his comment.
  - thereddaikon 4y ago
    They are using communist rhetoric and talking points. You don't have to explicitly say it for to be obvious what side you are playing for.
rented_mule 4y ago
Every system of government has its own local optimum for each thing a society does. No system of government has a monopoly on the best local optimums across the board. Whenever any given state becomes too dogmatic about adhering to one system of government, things will be limited by that system. The ideal is to approach different issues more dynamically by using approaches best fit for each issue. Take space for example (a mix of science and engineering). The Soviets made the first giant leaps because the size of the investments and types of returns (national security, political, national pride, etc.) only made sense at the state level. That scared the US into its own state level program: "...this Nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth."[0] Once the state level investment cleared enough of the obstacles, profit motive emerged that starts to let private industry take a larger role in advancing the state of the art [1]. This mix has played out exceptionally well is smartphones. It's hard to imagine anything other than private industry profit motive creating or advancing smartphones to where they are today. But without connectivity, smartphones would merely be a feature phone with iPod functionality.[2] It's just as hard to imagine private industry cooperating enough to create the foundation of that connectivity... the internet. The steps of ARPANET -> commercial internet -> smartphone are part of an amazing example of the power of mixing state and industry programs for the parts of the problem they are best at. "Socialism" and "capitalism" working together for an outcome that has transformed how we go about our daily lives. It requires true leadership to make these different approaches fit together. Dogmatic arguments about these kinds of systems makes it even harder to get the next great examples. The best system is the one that finds a way to balance the best of each of the other systems in a way that is good for the population at large. ---- [0] https://www.jfklibrary.org/node/16986 https://www.jfklibrary.org/node/16986 [1] https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/aerospace-and-defense/our-insights/r-and-d-for-space-who-is-actually-funding-it https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/aerospace-and-defense/ou... [2] https://www.azquotes.com/quote/147207 https://www.azquotes.com/quote/147207
rory 4y ago
Capitalism: focused on short term profit Also capitalism: invests billions in Tesla at a p/e ratio that implies a payback period longer than a millennium
- bumby 4y ago
  Or more generally, Economics: expecting rational behavior from irrational apes

buscoquadnary 4y ago

Wow and here I thought most people hadn't read the communist manifesto. I agree with your vision, obviously once we replace capitalism with socialism run by a dictatorship of the proletariat then the organs of the state will quickly devolve into obselescene and will will all live in a stateless classless atheist communist utopia. BTW: how is that Lysenknism working out for you now that you are free from the shackles of capitalism.

jeffreyrogers 4y ago

There are more scientists now than ever before. I don't see how what you're saying fits the facts. There is probably more funding available for research that has little expectation of ever leading to anything economically significant than at any time in the past.

misterbishop 4y ago
The pocket change invested in serious scientific research by capitalist-run foundations proportionally increases with the wealth of those capitalists. That it grows is not impressive. What would be impressive is if these foundational social forces were disrupted.
- bumby 4y ago
  Although it's declining for a variety of reasons, a relatively large amount of research is publicly funded within the United States.
cauch 4y ago
The fact that progress exists does not technically constitute a counter-example. Maybe in a parallel world, where capitalism does not exist, the progress is 10x faster, or the funding is 10x more important. Maybe the capitalism needs some progress, so needs to invest in it, but has also as effect to cut the roots that would generate more progress. Or maybe not. My point is just that I don't think that what you point out does not really prove anything.
- mach1ne 4y ago
  I'd like to add that the number of scientists is not a relevant metric either, though it is a variable.

brutusborn 4y ago

If that is the case, why did all the golden ages of science occur under capitalism? Why didn't modern commumist societies produce greater scientific progress than the capitalist world?

mistermann 4y ago
I think it's plausible if you think of it in periods or "waves".....Capitalism may indeed be superior entirely, or it may only be superior up until a certain point, and then once it reaches a certain level of power (political/regulatory/cognitive capture) it could cause certain levels of progress to stagnate...and if adequate capture and ~censorship of information production & distribution has been accomplished, people may never be able to realize the position the system has assumed (or, some may notice, but their messages may be censored or disbelieved).
misterbishop 4y ago
It's a tautology. The whole idea of a "golden age" is premised on liberal/enlightenment values which were brought to life through the revolutionary transition from feudalism to capitalism. There are no modern communist societies.
- bjornsing 4y ago
  > There are no modern communist societies. Not for a lack of trying…
  - misterbishop 4y ago
    on the part of the capitalist counter-revolution as well
cauch 4y ago
I'm not fan of communism, but was not the first man in space from a communist country? I agree that progress is more impressive under capitalist countries (and that capitalist countries have other very useful advantages, such as not having gulags), but I rather feel that the reason was rather that capitalism was very well positioned to grab the low hanging fruits before the others (and also that, due to our position, we see the progress of capitalism as more impressive as the ones from renaissance, antiquity, ... while maybe, relatively, the step was more impressive at the time)

thereddaikon 4y ago

Ah yes, because the communists were good to the environment right?

thinkmcfly 4y ago
We should go roll around in the mud at the Hanford site. It's the most healthy soil!
jacob171714 4y ago
I don't think he mentioned communists anywhere in his comment.
- thereddaikon 4y ago
  They are using communist rhetoric and talking points. You don't have to explicitly say it for to be obvious what side you are playing for.

rented_mule 4y ago

Every system of government has its own local optimum for each thing a society does. No system of government has a monopoly on the best local optimums across the board. Whenever any given state becomes too dogmatic about adhering to one system of government, things will be limited by that system. The ideal is to approach different issues more dynamically by using approaches best fit for each issue. Take space for example (a mix of science and engineering). The Soviets made the first giant leaps because the size of the investments and types of returns (national security, political, national pride, etc.) only made sense at the state level. That scared the US into its own state level program: "...this Nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth."[0] Once the state level investment cleared enough of the obstacles, profit motive emerged that starts to let private industry take a larger role in advancing the state of the art [1]. This mix has played out exceptionally well is smartphones. It's hard to imagine anything other than private industry profit motive creating or advancing smartphones to where they are today. But without connectivity, smartphones would merely be a feature phone with iPod functionality.[2] It's just as hard to imagine private industry cooperating enough to create the foundation of that connectivity... the internet. The steps of ARPANET -> commercial internet -> smartphone are part of an amazing example of the power of mixing state and industry programs for the parts of the problem they are best at. "Socialism" and "capitalism" working together for an outcome that has transformed how we go about our daily lives. It requires true leadership to make these different approaches fit together. Dogmatic arguments about these kinds of systems makes it even harder to get the next great examples. The best system is the one that finds a way to balance the best of each of the other systems in a way that is good for the population at large. ---- [0] https://www.jfklibrary.org/node/16986 https://www.jfklibrary.org/node/16986 [1] https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/aerospace-and-defense/our-insights/r-and-d-for-space-who-is-actually-funding-it https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/aerospace-and-defense/ou... [2] https://www.azquotes.com/quote/147207 https://www.azquotes.com/quote/147207

rory 4y ago

Capitalism: focused on short term profit Also capitalism: invests billions in Tesla at a p/e ratio that implies a payback period longer than a millennium

bumby 4y ago
Or more generally, Economics: expecting rational behavior from irrational apes