Incentives

In times of economic difficulty we are all urged to pull harder to get us through it. It seems we are slow to take this on and we must have incentives.

If we are poor, the great majority, this is best achieved by reducing wages, cutting benefits and raising unemployment. That will urge us to greater effort.

If we are rich, the tiny minority, incentives mean higher salaries, dividends, bonuses etc for only if we get paid (lots) more will we contribute more. One law for the rich and another for the poor. What about democracy - government of, by and for the people - well at least the majority? Democracy sadly went the way of the Dodo. It is extinct. We now have plutocracy, government of the people, by the rich and for the rich. It does not need to be so. We are the majority and we can have our needs addressed.

This insight is not new or original but it is true and I thought I would share it with you. You know what to do to fix this.

Niall Ferguson

Poor man. He has been in thrall to the ridiculous right in the US for years, busily describing their useless evil doings as righteous and progressive. Anything they did was correct as long as it kept the masses in  check and made America safe for his rich paymasters. Now the masses have got themselves a president but not the one the right feared- think Bernie. What was poor Niall to do. He got in step and  put a brave face on it. Now he is stuck and to keep faith with the right wing plutocracy in the face of presidential meltdown he has jumped ship. Has he gone too soon? What if we get a no party coup by the president and his family? What will poor Niall do then poor thing?

Philosophy and Theology

These are essentially mutually incompatible activities, one for adults and one for children of all ages. On the one hand we have a purely thought base, rational exploration of  essentially unanswerable questions and on the other endless contorted thought based attempts to invoke a single implausible human artefact as the explanation of everything. Both are seriously if not fatally flawed. They both rely on argument with only perfunctory attention to experience. For a more useful though still imperfect method of comprehending the universe we require the method of science with observation and reason inextricably linked and sequenced. Where this fails there are those who would revert to philosophy or theology in a bewildering array of combinations to reveal order where sadly none may exist. Life as experienced by humans in intransigently casuistic. We need to accept that messy fact but continue with the method of science to see how far we can get. There is no other useful approach.

Science and Scientists

There is a curious confusion in the minds of many between these two entities - science as a method of inquiry with its consequent body of knowledge and the individuals who espoused the method of scientific inquiry and their attendant notions. A range of writers cannot it seems distinguish these. A number of "Histories of Science" have appeared by authors in this confused state which have distressed scientists in need of a history of science. What these confused authors give is some form of history of scientists. There accounts are replete with the contradictory and paradoxical doings of famous scientists much of which for a history of science is irrelevant "noise". It is of no concern to a scientist what his predecessors' views were on alchemy, astronomy, the bible or whatever. What is of concern is that the individual did some work which has proven to be of lasting value. How did he do it?

Soap Culture

Soap operas are a popular form and can bring enormous entertainment and more importantly support and education to their followers. centred on soap operas and presumably important to sustain dramtic tension and audience interest are the emotional aspects of assorted life situations. This emphasis on the need for emotional demonstration in a drama seems to have spread into real life to an enormous degree and not ina healthy way. We now have increasingly, on important issues in real life persons in the public eye being constrained to make public demonstrations of emotion which we must suppose they do not necessarily feel. At every tragedy we must its seems have tears and at every triumph cheers. Persons in public life cannot be expected to do this with more than a passing gesture to sincerity. And so public life becomes more of a charade daily. Today, for example we had a judge handing down sentences for murder and homicide having to pause and choke back tears. That is taking things too far. We all have our own feelings and those in the public eye cannot be expected

Science in difficulty.

In a range of unexpected places the integrity of science is under threat. The National Institutes of Health is chaired by Francis Collins who is some form of creationist, assorted science projects and communication channels are contaminated by money from the Templeton Foundation, Nature magazine is increasingly encouraging accommodation  with religionists, big money is spent on projects like Encode yet staffed by individuals lacking the necessary knowledge to direct or interpret their findings and the Royal Society, in addition to short listing unscientific works for its book prize has opened its halls to a range of speakers and lent its prestige to the promulgation of material which is distinctly unscientific. Let us be clear - the method of science is our most reliable guide to the production of useful knowledge and we debase it at our peril. The stakes are high - we need to resist these developments. Spread the word, deride despise defeat.

Politics v Government

These two activities are becoming incompatible. Politics is becoming a multimedia rich arm of the entertainment industry with success going to politicians who excel at that mass media frenzied fracas. We vote for media savvy people. Government on the other hand is a serious matter requiring a different skill set characterized by the ability to see and analyse problems and their possible solutions together wit a capacity to focus firmly on the task in hand and make substantial effort to get a useful result. While there may occasionally appear an individual who excels in both domains that is extremely unlikely. If we are to have good government we need to resolve this issue. Politics as a popular form of entertainment can continue happily away from such mundane concerns as truth reality or practicality as at present but to preserve us from these follies we need a new model of government involving well educated and trained individuals with talent directly relevant to the task in hand.
This unfortunate dichotomy has always been present but with modern media it is overwhelming and is now as serious a concern as the similar disjunction between religion with its rituals and supernatural beliefs which are of no significance to most of us and the practical issues of morality which directly affect us all.