3 ms·
It's indeed an ideological reply, because for someone with a libertarian approach (like - me), the slowdown seems to match quite well the rise of the welfare st
by guylhem 14y ago
It's indeed an ideological reply, because for someone with a libertarian approach (like - me), the slowdown seems to match quite well the rise of the welfare state.
"the world has willingly retreated from a culture of risk and exploration towards one of safety and regulation" - that says it all.
The competing ideology (let's say "progressive") cares about stuff like equality (ex: affirmative action) or safety (look at what you did as a kid, and what is allowed today) while most libertarians and conservative care about efficiency and freedom.
Some equality and safety might be a god thing - but I worry much more about efficiency and freedom - a part of which is scientific progress.
There's some basic differences here and there, but that is IMHO the core difference.
- mindstab 14y agoPart of me wants to debate this, point our correlation does not equal causation and ask for better evidence. (yeah, I know, cheap attempt at last word) But ultimately we probably won't be persuading each other and at this point the debate is useless. I've pointed out my problems with the article, and together we've at least distilled the problem people like we will have with the article (well stated by guylhem). I don't think much more progress can be made :) My critical reasoning and logic prof from Uni always said that logic is a fine thing for enhancing discourse but if you start with different world views, different axioms, no amount of logic can bridge that, it's just a tool for fixing smaller disputes. Thank's at least for more concisely summing up :)
- guylhem 14y agoThanks for your understanding. I don't want to push any ideology or debate on this - I just see a weird trend that other people seems to notice too, and I'd like to understand what is happening, regardless of whose ideology is used to explain that.
- tlb 14y agoWelfare may discourage ambition among the low- and middle-classes, but I don't believe it affects scientists or inventors. No one is debating the choice between living off welfare or solving the world's problem, and thinking "if welfare was just a bit cushier I could stop inventing".
- guylhem 14y agoLet's talk about scientists and inventors - especially the world changing ones that are so rare. What if it had some effect? I mean, something small - but non zero? What if it did reduce their drive just enough that it made their rarity almost identical to an absence? Answer- we don't know. So far, the welfare state seems to have increased scientific output, but maybe there's a limit and too much welfare will damage it. (Think about Einstein on welfare with enough money not to care- would he have spent time as a patent office clerk? How important was this stint in becoming himself? What effect does it has on others?) We just don't know - maybe because the welfare state is too recent. With 50 more years, maybe we will notice differences? I'm only speculating - I'm not sure there is any answer. It's just something that bothering me a lot.