-----Original Message-----
From: Barry Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Alan McGowen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tuesday, December 09, 1997 12:23 AM
Subject: Everything's on the table, or still in the closet?
>> >#2. That participants are willing to put everything on the table -- are
>> >willing to abandon any "belief" in the face of contrary scientific
evidence.
>> >This would include the "belief" that the right economic theories can
save
>> >us.
>
>Yes, everything should be on the table, but the table is finite. Success
>requires all the items on the list of necessary items. That includes
Apologies to all. I realized my comment was unclear when I subsequently
mentioned it to my wife and SHE didn't understand what I meant. <G>
It's phrase used when negotiating. "Everything on the table" means that
people are willing to abandon all previously held positions in favor of
more compelling ones. But we would use science instead of money to move
people.
I agree with Barry that we have to cut the baloney with Occam's Razor.
I liked Alan's comment about evolutionary economics. The ecol-econ crowd
has it half right by trying to account for the ecosystem, but they haven't
incorporated the new model of Homo.
Rather than work on evolutionary economics, I think we should start work
on "evolutionary politics". It's clear to me that the solution must be
found in non-money-based politics (coercion).
(Anyone on this list know anything about evolution? <G>)
Jay
