Applied Philosophy – 5 – Conclusion

In the 1st post of this series, I argued that philosophy is difficult. In the 2nd post I illustrated this with the example of Raymond Niles’ article on the poor application of property rights to the electric grid in America. In my 3rd post I argued that the phenomenon of specialization makes the world ever more complex. In my 4th post, I argued that capitalism is politically unstable and that even preserving it (let alone establishing it) requires sustained effort. In this post I want to draw on these observations (and some others) to determine the course of my future blogging efforts.

First, I should clarify that the purpose of this blog is primarily political. While I am interested in understanding philosophy for my own sake, I am not particularly interested in blogging about it. I blog because I consider it the only medium to reach other interested individuals. As an attempt at expanding the audience of this blog beyond Objectivists, I recently joined the desicritics.org portal. Two of my three posts there so far, have generated lengthy comment threads. This has convinced me that it is possible to engage in meaninful debate via the blog-comments medium. It has also convinced me that while the real world has started resembling the fictional world of Atlas Shrugged in many ways, people have not yet started asking “Who is John Galt?” – i.e, they have not resigned to fate yet (The same conclusion could be drawn from the success of Obama’s campaign about hope and change). People are still interested in debating fundamentals. The pragmatism on display everywhere is not total.

The bad state of the world today is primarily a result of the difficulty of philosophy and the failure to apply it properly. It is certainly possible and necessary to find the right answers and convince enough people of them. It is easy to look at the world and become a cynic, to believe that improving it is impossible. But inaction will mean a loss of several things that one takes for granted today. The phenomenon of specialization is not reversible. The incredible complexity in the world economy cannot be unraveled. There is no escape from this enormously entangled world. It is not practical to pursue one’s own interests and remain unconcerned about the direction the world is heading in, especially for those who are young today. If the trend continues, there will be no opportunity left to practise those interests. For all their wrong ideas, the collectivists have one fact right – we are all in this together.

Considering the above, I intend to start two series of posts on this blog. One that addresses some of the most common misconceptions and mischaracterizations of Objectivism and another that explores intellectual property rights.

Specialization – Applied Philosophy – 3

In an essay titled “Why Nerds are Unpopular?”, Paul Graham writes that life in elementary school is warped and savage because it is isolated from reality and identifies specialization as the reason for the isolation.

“Teenage kids used to have a more active role in society. In pre-industrial times, they were all apprentices of one sort or another, whether in shops or on farms or even on warships. They weren’t left to create their own societies. They were junior members of adult societies.

Now adults have no immediate use for teenagers…
The cause of this problem is the same as the cause of so many present ills: specialization. As jobs become more specialized, we have to train longer for them…”
(Emphasis added)

Specialization and trade are the primary mechanisms of human progress. Todays industrial societies and the incredibly complex global economy would be impossible without specialization – without men who spend most of their lives working in a narrow field. Specialization has given us the sophisticated gadgets we use in our daily lives, the means to communicate with people across the globe, the opportunity to excel in our chosen careers. Specialization has given artists the time needed to create works of art and others the opportunity of enjoying them. Specialization has given sportsmen the time needed to perfect their skills and others the opportunity of being inspired by human perfection. In short, specialization has given us most of the things that we value in life.

Specialization has also caused innumerable problems. Specialization has made it very difficult for young people to make an informed choice of career or to change a choice of career once made. Specialization has made it difficult for people to adjust to economic changes. Specialization has created complex chains of dependencies among people. Specialization has made it difficult for people to understand fields other than their own. Specialization has made it difficult for anyone to understand the broader picture – the workings of the world. Specialization is atleast partly responsible for the large number of fallacious beliefs held by mostly reasonable people – particularly in economics and politics. Specialization is partly responsible for today’s rampant pragmatism – the lack of respect for abstract ideas and philosophy.

Perhaps the single biggest problem caused by specialization is the problem of knowing what to believe outside of one’s chosen field. Men have evolved a number of mechanisms to solve this problem – peer reviewed journals and techincal associations in science, the concepts of degrees and certifications in education, the concept of branding in advertising, independent rating agencies in industry, efforts like wikipedia, government regulatory bodies for everything, etc. While some mechanisms work better than others, it is clear that there can be no complete solution. The body of human knowledge is so vast and varied that it is impossible for anyone to establish trusted authorities in every field. The mixed success achieved in solving this problem is an important reason for the general lack of respect for abstract ideas and general principles. It also raises (well founded) questions about whether the entire system can sustain itself without directed effort. But the questions cannot be answered without abstract ideas and general principles, i.e without philosophy. Contrary to popular belief these are not merely questions of economics. They cannot be answered without an understanding of the nature of man, the function of his reason, the nature and structure of his knowledge and the reasons for his motives.

Specialization is a natural phenomenon. As long as men deal with each other, they have to trade. And as long as they trade, they will choose to spend their time on that which they are best equipped to do. In the absence of a catastophic disruption, a society will continue to grow in complexity. A system that constantly increases in complexity cannot be sustained without directed effort. Without that effort or with wrong efforts a catastrophic disruption is inevitable. Anyone who believes that the economy will continue to prosper irrespective of the social and political system is deeply mistaken. As the level of specialization continues to accelerate, the need for the right philosophy becomes ever more crucial.

%d bloggers like this: