CosmosStag ·
Many diversions that have been pursued by humans over the millennia could fit the general formula described above: spiritual quest, the pursuit of utopia, the construction of an AGI that will solve all problems. When Thomas Sowell says "there are no solutions, only trade-offs" (a good summary of the result of marginal utility theory, thus common to all modern economists), he directly challenges the basis for all such quests. The bias of our instincts seems to be saying that really there are pure solutions, and that the existence of a trade-off negates all transcendent value. On the one hand, "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch" is a truism that few would disagree with, but on the other, people seem to believe that the only lunch that makes life worth living is free. This theory of human motivations explains why economics is considered to be "the dismal science" rather than the most valuable science insofar as it explains to us how to maximize the wealth of our society. I liken socialists (who can be found on both the left and the right) to people who want to build perpetual motion machines who become angry when I tell them that they can't actually build one. Surely ones time better spent to try to invent something that is actually physically possible? Not necessarily, according to the theory that transcendent value, that which makes life meaningful, is inherently a quest for the impossible, and real things that involve trade-offs are not good enough.