I am interested in what you say about efficiency v humanism. Surely, if you make the target of society the maximum and fairly distributed happiness of the population, then humanism together with sensibly regulated markets and level playing field international trade will be more efficient at getting there than unregulated local markets together with international market barriers. The drive for economic growth in society at the expense of loss of wellbeing is promoted by politicians that either do not have the best interests of the whole population at heart or who are misguided. Take the western democracies as an example, there are plenty of resources to feed, shelter and give the basic necessities to all but there are many people living in poverty. The market is a useful tool to efficiently generate enough resources to enable all citizens to live without need. I am saddened that western governments let the markets run wild and do not regulate their excesses.
ua-cam.com/video/XkkvilMFp2M/v-deo.htmlsi=ny_MbapSzWmoo8Gz&t=209 A significantly insignificant (at least from the pov of today's topic), but I'm not sure that's the opposite. Perhaps the more the freshmen study, the less certain they become, too. (At least hopefully!) Furthermore, personally, I do find it frustrating and rather burdensome that in this day and age people expect you to have an opinion about everything. And people, in general, do have an opinion (whether it is informed or not) about just about everything. "Oh, I read somewhere public figure X got charged with assault or something, the guy must be a total monster" for example. Would it be too much of a leap to suggest this might lead to a sort of inflation of academic expertise?
Yes! If I understood you correctly, yes, I think this is a huge problem! And the modern means of communication and social media apparently exacerbate it even more!
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Introduction to Political Philosophy Course by Alexander Koryagin: ua-cam.com/play/PLB4w-p0WTsoLNmg8yYbucBczABaQash7C.html
Great talk.. Very interesting points to think about
🔥🔥🔥
I am interested in what you say about efficiency v humanism. Surely, if you make the target of society the maximum and fairly distributed happiness of the population, then humanism together with sensibly regulated markets and level playing field international trade will be more efficient at getting there than unregulated local markets together with international market barriers. The drive for economic growth in society at the expense of loss of wellbeing is promoted by politicians that either do not have the best interests of the whole population at heart or who are misguided. Take the western democracies as an example, there are plenty of resources to feed, shelter and give the basic necessities to all but there are many people living in poverty.
The market is a useful tool to efficiently generate enough resources to enable all citizens to live without need. I am saddened that western governments let the markets run wild and do not regulate their excesses.
ua-cam.com/video/XkkvilMFp2M/v-deo.htmlsi=ny_MbapSzWmoo8Gz&t=209
A significantly insignificant (at least from the pov of today's topic), but I'm not sure that's the opposite. Perhaps the more the freshmen study, the less certain they become, too. (At least hopefully!) Furthermore, personally, I do find it frustrating and rather burdensome that in this day and age people expect you to have an opinion about everything. And people, in general, do have an opinion (whether it is informed or not) about just about everything. "Oh, I read somewhere public figure X got charged with assault or something, the guy must be a total monster" for example. Would it be too much of a leap to suggest this might lead to a sort of inflation of academic expertise?
Yes! If I understood you correctly, yes, I think this is a huge problem! And the modern means of communication and social media apparently exacerbate it even more!