<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Darwin And Economic Theory &#8211; CF Theater Blog</title>
	<atom:link href="https://cftheater.info/blog/tag/darwin-and-economic-theory/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://cftheater.info/blog</link>
	<description>http://www.cftheater.info</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 18 Jun 2017 16:54:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>Darwin And Economic Theory</title>
		<link>https://cftheater.info/blog/darwin-and-economic-theory/</link>
					<comments>https://cftheater.info/blog/darwin-and-economic-theory/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Frank Andres]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Jun 2017 16:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Mini Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Darwin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Darwin And Economic Theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Minibook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theory]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hippieelmo.users.sonic.net/blog/?p=259</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[amazon template=iframe image&#38;asin=B072VT2NLB] DARWIN AND ECONOMIC THEORY by Frank W. Andres © Copyright, Frank W. Andres, 2017. All Rights Reserved. This is a Minibook&#8230;Instead of expressing an idea and then&#8230;]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;">[amazon template=iframe image&amp;asin=B072VT2NLB]</p>
<p>DARWIN AND ECONOMIC THEORY<br />
by<br />
Frank W. Andres<br />
© Copyright, Frank W. Andres, 2017. All Rights Reserved.<br />
This is a Minibook&#8230;Instead of expressing an idea and then blowing the number of pages up, up<br />
towards three hundred&#8230;just so we can charge $25, as is currently the fashion&#8230; we are presenting the<br />
kernel of an idea&#8230;in the hopes that idea can be transmitted more rapidly and breakthroughs can occur<br />
now, not next century. There is a fifty percent chance that humanity will not make it through this<br />
century&#8230; it is important that we make as much progress as fast as we can&#8230;so as to avoid an untimely<br />
demise.<br />
Please visit our website&#8230;<a href="http://www.CFTheater.com">http://www.CFTheater.com</a><br />
Please give us your comments and ideas at Frank.Andres @Yahoo. com</p>
<p><strong>Introduction</strong><br />
So human beings are animals now. Darwin proposed it. Crick and<br />
Watson proved it is so. So we must live with this embarrassing fact.<br />
So what happens to economic theory? It doesn&#8217;t seem to have anything to do<br />
with any of this. In fact it doesn&#8217;t seem to have anything to do with real<br />
humans at all. Of course, there was the Church. I mean, there was the<br />
Middle Ages&#8230;Do you realize that many people say that this modern age<br />
began only very recently&#8230;like in or around the year 1922? And we think we<br />
are so thoroughly modern&#8230;in actuality many parts of our lives are ensconced<br />
in a medieval, dark age. Of course the real Middle Ages were so much more<br />
sinister&#8230;Yes, there once was much death&#8230;little hope. Our only hope was<br />
that we weren&#8217;t animals. That is we were “of God.” So if there was little<br />
hope here on earth&#8230;well, then for God&#8217;s sake there was hope in the baloney<br />
that the Church purveyed. I&#8217;m not saying there is no God&#8230;but that is a<br />
different minibook.<br />
So when universities emerged..science was mostly witchcraft at the<br />
beginning&#8230; the Church said that science was all well and good and fine&#8230;but<br />
be careful&#8230;.leave humans alone&#8230;for God&#8217;s sake, we need some hope&#8230;for<br />
something better&#8230;in some other world Thus economic theory was<br />
born&#8230;which has little to do with human beings.<br />
I am an economist, economic historian and a philosopher&#8230;Let&#8217;s see<br />
where all this imprudent thinking takes us.<br />
The Church and the Social Sciences</p>
<p><span id="more-259"></span><br />
The science of man and woman, otherwise known as the social<br />
sciences, comprises those disciplines related to the study of humans, to the<br />
aspects of their physiology that are unique to them&#8230;I mean, really unique to<br />
them&#8230;what we are talking about here is their exceptionally creative<br />
minds&#8230;and the world their creative minds have, well, created.<br />
At the present, the science of man and woman is floundering. Since the<br />
eighteenth century, economic and technological revolutions have transformed<br />
the Western world&#8230;they have brought a dramatic improvement in the<br />
standard of living for people in one-third of the world. Now man and woman<br />
are attempting to move farther, accomplish more for all of humanity&#8230;and<br />
monumental social problems are confronting them. These major social<br />
problems relate to the physical and psychological trauma of confining man<br />
and woman to an artificial, urban world; they relate to the constraining force<br />
of medieval institutions upon the explosion of their tools&#8230;and they relate to<br />
the increasing divergence between the rich and poor&#8230;These problems have<br />
metropolitan national, and global implications. Scientists say that humanity<br />
has only a fifty percent chance of surviving this century. Something must be<br />
done&#8230;It is difficult to do anything when the science of man and woman we<br />
are utilizing still resides stubbornly in the Dark Ages.<br />
The social sciences have disturbing problems. Let&#8217;s look at one such<br />
science &#8230;economic theory&#8230; to see what some of these problems are and what<br />
actions might be taken to solve these problems.</p>
<p><!--more--></p>
<p>What is Economics Theory?<br />
If man and woman are animals, then their behavior must be biological.<br />
Humans are unique among animals in that they make and utilize tools&#8230;<br />
routinely,&#8230; constantly. However, humans do not make tools for their own<br />
sake, they make tools in order to produce goods. The production of these<br />
goods and how these goods are distributed among members of a society is<br />
examined in the discipline of economics.<br />
In existing economic theory, it is assumed that man ad woman are<br />
different from other animals in possessing a more highly developed brain&#8230;<br />
perhaps even a “soul”&#8230; which is separate from and separates man and<br />
woman from all else in the Cosmos. It is maintained that man and woman&#8217;s<br />
actions cannot be predicted because the unique caliber of their intelligence<br />
(as well as the other-world nature of their “souls”) defies the forces of<br />
deterministic tendencies. Consequently, economic theory rests upon<br />
“eternal”, a priori laws, derived from what a hypothetical rational man or<br />
woman would do. Economic theory for humans as a whole is then derived<br />
from an aggregation of what many rational people would do. Upon this<br />
largely non-empirical base, a superstructure has been erected in which some<br />
empirical evidence has been incorporated. However, the entire theory has<br />
been severely influenced by the unique perspective upon which it is based.<br />
It may be difficult for someone who is acquainted with economic theory<br />
to imagine what relationship the existing theory has to biology, let alone how<br />
it could be placed completely upon a biological base. The existing approach<br />
is highly abstract and mathematical, and all calculations whether they are<br />
related to ships, sails, or sealing wax, are computed almost exclusively in<br />
monetary terms. Neither the physicist nor the biologist is concerned with,<br />
nor is scientific advance in general dependent, upon the examination of<br />
money.<br />
What has gone wrong here? What are we missing?<br />
What is Money?<br />
The thing is&#8230;animals do not have money&#8230;and the examination of their<br />
activities is fairly straight-forward. Man and woman have money&#8230;which has<br />
led to problems when their activities are examined.. So what is money? And<br />
exactly how does its presence tempt economists into examinations which are<br />
fraught with problems?<br />
In this minibook an exchange is defined to be a swapping of<br />
commodities between two producers which may or not result in both<br />
producers being satisfied. A transaction is defined to be an exchange or<br />
series of exchanges in which all producers involved are satisfied. To be<br />
satisfied means that a basic need is in fact met, and not merely that a promise<br />
has been given or that the means exists which guarantees that a basic need<br />
will eventually be met.<br />
So what is money? Money is a promise for a good. It can be used in a<br />
transaction when one producer does not have a good desired by another and<br />
use must be made of a medium of exchange.<br />
What is a medium of exchange? In a series of exchanges of goods,<br />
commodities may be received by producers which they do not desire to<br />
consume themselves. The producer of corn could swap corn for wheat that<br />
he desires. The receiver of the wheat may not really need it, but he is certain<br />
that he can exchange the wheat for shoes that he does need from another<br />
producer. Media of exchange are used because it is easier to find a person<br />
who has what you need than it is to find a person who both has what you<br />
need and needs what you have.</p>
<p><!--more--></p>
<p>So money is a promise for a good. Why does one say that? Well,<br />
money can be used in a transaction when one producer does not have a good<br />
desired by another and use must be made of a medium of exchange. Instead<br />
of giving a producer what he does not want in exchange for wheat I need..I<br />
can give the producer a “promise” that I will give a certain amount of corn to<br />
any person who gives me the “promise” in the future. This “promise” is<br />
“money.” Thus money is an interest free loan. A person must be<br />
compensated with additional goods, which are called “interest,” if there is an<br />
undue delay in the completion of a transaction. Money is an interest free<br />
loan because the producer of wheat is not unduly delayed in receiving the<br />
shoes he needs. In addition, the wheat producer is greatly convenienced<br />
because he does not have to carry corn around until he can find a buyer for it.<br />
Money is not a good. It represents a loan, a good promised and a<br />
promise is not a good. Always it is the availability of the commodity which<br />
will be given immediately to the bearer of the promise which makes the<br />
promise valuable and enables it to circulate.<br />
Two Worlds&#8230;Goods and Money<br />
At any moment in time, a unit of money is related to a particular<br />
incomplete transaction and is always related to a good. Money is not a<br />
medium of exchange. It is the goods the money represents, the goods which<br />
are promised, which are the media of exchange. It&#8217;s kinda like there are two<br />
worlds&#8230;one that is real and one that is just paper&#8230;moving in opposite<br />
directions.</p>
<p><!--more-->Let me break here for a moment. In all of the social sciences, there are<br />
two worlds. There is the real world&#8230;of animals&#8230;of the animals, man and<br />
woman, which the Church does not allow people to meet square on. Then<br />
there is an imaginary world created entirely by human&#8217;s minds&#8230;that is more<br />
than an arm&#8217;s length away from that real world. Humans are like the Wizard<br />
of Oz, trying to run a world with bells and whistles that are a long ways away<br />
from the world humans are trying to make better. Economics displays these<br />
two world very clearly&#8230;but every social science has these two worlds.<br />
This “two world” aspect is present in every part of our lives. Humans<br />
have created an artificial urban world that is not entirely compatible with our<br />
bodies. The world of the jungle which our bodies long for unfortunately no<br />
longer exists for us. We live in an artificial world created by our minds.<br />
Scholarship has this dual nature also. When we work in the social<br />
sciences&#8230;we are working in a virtual world..each social science has its own<br />
virtual world&#8230;what Jean Baudrillard calls “Simulcra”&#8230;”Simulation is no<br />
longer that of a territory, a referential being, or a substance. It is&#8230;the<br />
generation by modeling of a real without origins or reality: a hyperreal.”<br />
(Baudrillard, The Real and the Simulacra.) Baudrillard has announced that<br />
modern society is being controlled by corporations with their proliferation of<br />
goods&#8230;and the saturation of human&#8217;s consciousness with advertising has<br />
erased any remnants of a real world&#8230;This has left modern man and woman in<br />
a world that is artificial and virtual.</p>
<p><!--more-->The same is true for humans&#8217; scholarship. That is, one can continue<br />
Baudrillard&#8217;s thoughts in another way. In the social sciences humans are not<br />
animals. The social sciences have methodologies that are radically different<br />
from the natural sciences. The methodologies are different from each other.<br />
Each social science possesses its own simulacrum&#8230;Because of these<br />
simulacra of knowledge and methodology&#8230;humans are kept powerless in the<br />
face of immense world problems. The only way for this to be corrected is for<br />
scholarship to place humans on earth where they belong, as real, physical,<br />
animal beings. The problem and the solution for all the social sciences are<br />
very clear when one considers economics.<br />
In a series of exchanges among four individuals (A,B,C,D), there are<br />
two flows&#8230;one of money and one of commodities. A might swap money with<br />
B for shoes, B might then swap the money with C for wood. C might then<br />
swap that same money with D for clothes. Among the individuals money is<br />
moving in one direction and goods in the other.<br />
The money flow bears the same relationship to the goods flow as<br />
footprints do to a human. Footprints give an idea of where a person has<br />
walked, but they are not human. In the same way, the money flow is related<br />
to the goods flow and it can be used to gain information indirectly concerning<br />
the goods flow, but it is not a part of the goods flow.</p>
<p><!--more-->Money supposedly makes economics more accurate.. It gives us<br />
numbers that apply to all commodities. Transactions are documented in<br />
monetary terms by banks and so totals are easy to come by&#8230;whereas physical<br />
quantities are not so easily obtainable&#8230;However, there is a downside to using<br />
money to describe economic interactions. The truth is&#8230; using money leaves<br />
the economist with a theory that is partial as well as static. Existing<br />
economic theory is partial because it focuses only upon individual exchanges<br />
involving money for goods. The flow of money makes no sense&#8230;money<br />
flows from the butcher, the baker, to the candlestick maker. In analyses of<br />
money flows, knowledge concerning who produces what, where, when is lost<br />
in the aggregation of money exchanges to reach a total which is meaningful<br />
to us called Gross National Product (GNP). The GNP for the year can be<br />
compared with the GNP of previous years to tell, if inflation is deleted, to tell<br />
if an economy is growing fast or more slowly. This number, the money<br />
represented by GNP, seems to be accurate and meaningful, but the whole<br />
interrelationship of goods and their production and distribution in space and<br />
time is lost as well as the whole raison d&#8217; etre for the exchanges which are<br />
observed.</p>
<p><!--more-->Second, existing economic theory is static. It stops the flow of goods in<br />
order count up&#8230;money which changes hands during a certain time is<br />
compared with the amount of goods exchanged during the same period of<br />
time previously. Stocks of money must be compared with stocks of goods<br />
because there exists no one-to-one relationship between a dollar bill and<br />
goods beyond one exchange between two people. Thus, existing theory is<br />
limited because it can only view the economy in snapshots, not in a<br />
continuous, dynamic examination of commodity flows.<br />
This point of view which is primarily medieval in origin, separates<br />
economics from biology. It separates humans from power&#8230;power to change<br />
the world efficiently, directly for the better.<br />
The Science of Everything<br />
We must build a new economic theory. Well, all the social sciences<br />
must be rebuilt&#8230;and when they are they will all have the same methodologies<br />
as the natural sciences&#8230;.When all sciences have the same methodologies..we<br />
shall have a Science of Everything&#8230;all the disciplines will be able to talk to<br />
each other&#8230;help each other&#8230;plus the methodologies employed by the natural<br />
sciences are more powerful to begin with.<br />
So exactly how can Adam Smith become Darwin?&#8230;Pretend that you are<br />
an alien from outer space&#8230;you notice human habitation on earth as you<br />
approach for a landing&#8230;How would you describe human society<br />
scientifically as you descend? Well, first of all, one could not see money&#8230;nor<br />
does one have to even know about money&#8230;You just look at trucks and trains,<br />
steel and hemp and young people in the mall. The major human<br />
configuration on earth is that of the metropolitan area. Thus humans have<br />
evolved backwards from the primal band of the ape, which they lived in until<br />
the great agrarian empires arose some 3,000 years ago. Thus man and<br />
woman with their tools have drastically changed the fabric of their lives. The<br />
metropolitan area can be compared to a multicellar organism such as a mold,<br />
which grows outwards contiguously over time. The metropolitan areas from<br />
the perspective of a satellite grow outwards contiguously as population<br />
increases. The examination of man and woman in their cities can be made as<br />
a scientist would examine molds. Biologists are not developing indifference<br />
curves and isoquants in their study of ant hills. They are not counting money.<br />
Much description work regarding the structures of metropolitan areas and<br />
activities is presently being done in the field of economic geography.<br />
In order to test the power of a biological perspective upon the<br />
investigation of man and woman&#8217;s economic behavior, I attempted to make<br />
population projections in metropolitan areas utilizing the knowledge we have<br />
molds and how they grow and expand. For example, U.S.G.S. quadrangle<br />
maps were found for the Los Angeles metropolitan area in 1906. An<br />
isochronic map was developed with lines depicting distances traveled in<br />
every direction from the urban core during equal periods of time. Population<br />
figures were available for every decade from the U.S. Census from 1910 to<br />
1965 for the Los Angeles area. I calculated the area consumed by population<br />
added each decade to the area that population occupied in 1906, as indicated<br />
on the quad maps. Then I placed these areas consumed by population in a<br />
contiguous manner from the industrial core outwards in every direction,<br />
utilizing the isochronic map. The expansion of the population projected for<br />
the year 1965 was then compared with what had actually occurred. Projected<br />
results were within five percent of what had actually happened. Analogies<br />
from biology and the utilization of methodologies used in biology will be<br />
powerful ways to examine man and woman&#8217;s economic behavior.<br />
The thing that unites the production and distribution of all goods is the<br />
expenditure of energy. Instead of counting up money&#8230;count up energy<br />
expended&#8230; in every activity. If you look at the United States at night from<br />
the perspective of a satellite&#8230;one see dots of light&#8230;the patterns of light show<br />
the metropolitan areas where most people live and expend energy&#8230;the<br />
patterns of light show the expenditure of energy directly! Economic theory<br />
should be the study of these patterns of light&#8230;patterns of energy&#8230;these<br />
metropolitan areas and their interaction. Once the functioning of healthy<br />
metropolitan regions is understood, then diagnoses of disease can be made<br />
and remedies formulated. More difficult may be phenomena related to the<br />
fact that Homo sapiens is only a one part of the macro-organism&#8230;we are<br />
enmeshed in our own tools; we are parasites in our own tool organism&#8230;<br />
however, priorities within the organism must be ranked with respect to what<br />
is most beneficial for man and woman. For example, it may be part of the<br />
metropolitan region organism&#8217;s normal functioning to have recessions, slums,<br />
inflation, and other phenomena which may have tremendous adverse effects<br />
upon man and woman embedded within it. If this is the case, behavior which<br />
is normal for the organism may have to be altered to ameliorate the<br />
discomfort of man and woman. Such amelioration may involve a trade-off<br />
between short-run discomfort of human beings and medium and long-run<br />
gains created by the cyclical growth of tools for these same human beings,<br />
whose lives are caught in these tools.</p>
<p><!--more-->The trend that is hoped for is for man and woman&#8217;s lives to be made<br />
better every day; however, there are agonizing short-run problems such as<br />
those involving minorities, Third-World backwardness, as well as the basic<br />
incongruity of man and woman living in a world that is incompatible with the<br />
needs of their bodies. Scientists can be biologists looking down from<br />
satellites as they would examine an ant hill&#8230;they can see what is causing<br />
problems and fix the situation&#8230;instead of just looking at a bunch of numbers<br />
and curves and guessing wildly what the problems might be and attempting<br />
to fix things in a monetary way. Problems will be more easily solved when<br />
all disciplines are utilizing the same methodologies and can more easily work<br />
together to change the world for the better.<br />
This brings us to the concept of the Science of Everything&#8230;as I say, if<br />
each of the social sciences are placed on a biological base, they can talk to<br />
each other. They can work together easily in solving world problems. Also<br />
the social sciences can then talk to the natural sciences easily, which will lead<br />
automatically to solutions for things like global warming. Instead of a theory<br />
of everything which seems to be some sort of mathematical equation which<br />
will solve all problems on earth&#8230;which seems unlikely&#8230;we need a Science<br />
of Everything with all disciplines&#8230;the science of man and woman in concert<br />
with all the biological sciences which in turn are consistent with the physical<br />
sciences&#8230;all on the same page&#8230;addressing world problems in a concerted<br />
powerful way.<br />
Hopefully, man and woman will be able to extricate themselves from<br />
the progeny of their minds&#8230;from their tools&#8230;within a generation or two.<br />
Then they will be able to resume a lifestyle more consistent with their<br />
physiology, as humans and machines begin to occupy separate geographical<br />
locations&#8230;that is, soon cities will be fully automated and fully connected<br />
such that only a handful of people will be able to run an automated city that<br />
produces all the goods for a given region. People then will be free to live<br />
more with nature and work more creatively in their living pods made from<br />
membranes fabricated by DNA. In the meantime, recognition of the fact that<br />
the activity within the metropolitan region is a biological activity, should<br />
allow the science of man and woman to develop investigative procedures and<br />
medial remedies which will be effective in reducing the torment of this<br />
transition urban stage in human history.</p>
<p>For a more detailed examination of this whole topic, see my book, Man<br />
and the Cosmos&#8230;The Science of Everything&#8230;available from Amazon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://cftheater.info/blog/darwin-and-economic-theory/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
