Why is Econmics the Mother Logic of Science?
-> On doing science.

#1: Why is Econmics the Mother Logic of Science? Author: DanLocation: USA PostPosted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 7:55 am
5-15-18, 1st draft 3-12-18, 2nd 4-05-18, 3rd 5-10-18

First a definition of how scientists define "objective". That is why Nullius in Verba, "take nobodies word for it." must apply to anyone's claimed scientific assertions like mine.

Objective facts are created when two or more us can agree we see or measure the same things.
For example, scientific facts mean any of us can potentially verify them for ourselves.
A scientist or reporter must be a honest eyewitness to create scientific facts and real news.
Ergo, the facts in or implied by truthful statements are relevant and as accurate as possible.

Science is a maximization logic. Scientist try to maximize, make a perfect objective description of how the basic laws of how our universe work, logically ordered by the premise that causes always occur before effects with respect to ourselves.

Economics is the logical science that describes how a maximization logic works when you assume a universal measure of personal profit. Economics only problem is they don't know what "The objective measure pf personal value(profit) all life forms use to maximize their personal time alive.

Ergo, once the actual objective = see it for yourself measure of personal value is discovered, then Economics becomes the mother logic of science.

The Objective Measure Of Our General Welfare

This demonstration starts with a stringent criticism of how Economics is now practiced. This criticism shows that economists scientists can't do "objective" science, because they explicitly say economic actors(life forms) use a subjective = "can not see", measure of profit. Since personal own profit maximization is what drives economic analysis, then an admitted 'no objective measure of personal profit' means economists explicitly admit they don't do objective science, and worse, they do not make discovering what 'objective measure of personal profit' all life forms use, the fundamental quest for economic scientists.

Making this discovery is accomplished by showing that all life forms, usually unconsciously, try to maximize what keeps them alive and wealthy. When this "objective" maximizing blade of the shear of analysis is combined with an "objective" minimizing fixed input shear, then we can describe how any set of objective physical circumstances affect our time alive, both individually and collectively.

In short, We use exchange to minimize "the time we spend" to maximize the Goods & Services Exchanged(G&S XCed) that keep us alive and wealthy.

Some examples will be used to show how this scissors of analysis works in practice, and then I will apply this analytic tool to Earth's present set circumstances. It works as a mirror that shows us how we are doing at maximizing everyone's time alive via XC. Right now, some improvement seems possible and doable, given most of you want to be honest. That sounds like fun, doesn’t it?

Why can't economists claim to be scientists now?

They base economics analysis on a fundamental causal premise: We life forms are insatiable "own profit maximizers". Yet when you ask them what there measure of profit is they say, "It's subjective.". In short they do not know what objective measure of personal profit all life forms use to stay alive, and how they use it.

Economics theoretical structure of analysis gives a logical structure to "own profit maximization". But economists willful refusal to admit that they can't point at an objective way to measure personal profit is, in fact, an example of this measures use by unconscious(self-serving) insatiable own profit maximizers, PHDs as PHDs find it impossible to admit when they are wrong, God forbid!

With no "objective" common to all life forms "measure of profit", economists don't have to be accountable for their wrong predictions. They don't have to practice Nullius in Verba. In short, they are witch doctors, not scientists. You can't fix incomplete and wrong predictions until you admit when your predictions are wrong. In short, real scientists have to admit what they don't know before they can discover, through trial and error, the causal explanation that turns a "I don't know." into an "I now know." answer.

The fact that our economists, physicists, and mathematicians almost universally gloss over what they don't know is usually explained by, "He who pays the piper calls the tune.". By appearing certain they please the powers that be. However that is not how real science works.

However, once we can prove what "objective measure of personal profit all life forms unconsciously use to maximize personal profit, then This fact of human nature, unconscious pwn profit maximization, explains why Economic Science is the Mother Logic of Science.

The demonstration of this Objective Scissors of Analysis was first expressed in the early nineteenth century by David Ricardo when he stated clearly how the Law of Comparative Advantage worked.

It shows how any two or more competing life forms or groups of cooperating life forms can use exchange to maximize the Quantity of Goods & Services Exchanged while minimizing the fixed quantity of time alive they each have to obtain the G&S they each XC for.

As you can see for yourself, G&S XCed per unit time is objective as is the same fixed input amount of time alive per unit time as measured by the speed of light. (I just plugged us into e=mc^ didnt I.) i.e Profit now has an objective measure, the free time you create through exchange for the G&S you/we need to remain alive and hopefully wealthy. So now you are not an unconscious 'own time cost minimizer' anymore. By the way, none of you Phds better not have the gall to say you don't want to stay alive while getting paid to work in a warm soft spot.


-> On doing science.

All times are GMT

Page 1 of 1