it is perhaps best to be historical evidence / mathematical logic based rather than 'assumption based' (btw, what a concept, 'assumption based' - :0)
for by the former protocol, one can better action programs for free-lunch extraction, especially from those who go by the latter routine, resulting in a practical good
the latter method? theories are wonderful, but if not actionable w/i context of observable evidence and mathematical logic, is just entertaining chatter, per your observation, to be replaced by more amusing chatter.
what good are theories if they are not actionable? well, i suppose they are better if they do not lead you to the wrong actions. but theories cannot lead us to any actions at all when fails given historical evidence and by mathematical logic.
the whole issue about demographic crisis pre-supposed fewer folks or more old folks is worse, and both are open to strong challenge, but only by non-groupthinkers amongst the crowd.
suppose i posit a theory that says:
(i) fewer people is better, as long as they are more able people enabled by more technology
(ii) ageing is an economic opportunity
one can so easily work out the math to back up the theory, and then simply watch japan for evidence of same. how is that for non-groupthink?
the trouble w/ group-non-thinkers is that they cannot know what they do not know, by definition |
