/sci/ - Science & Math

You would not be too far off from the Pythagorean's idea of math.

Have you read Introduction to Arithmetic by Nicomachus? Interesting way to think about math.

How about THE ARITHMETICA? Now we're getting into old extant sources of pythagoreanism, that's for sure. Check out Proclus too.

This sort of stuff interests me greatly, I'm currently reading Ibn Al-Haytham OP.

>>9547860
When it turns out that it doesn't work, what then?

>>9547860
Math is actually not universal as a consequence of kurt gödel's incompleteness theorem.

>>9547860
If you read Marx's book called capital he lays quite a precise mathematical framework for communism. But he leaves out creative products and creative people entirely. Which in my opinion is the books major flaw. And he at one point considers the conversion factor from skilled labor to unskilled labor within his framework as linear. I don't think that transformation is linear as skills negate the wage debate all together when they are in demand.

I'm sure it is possible to pay a precise mathematical framework for an economic system. But within mathematics there would be no way to test it's effectiveness. After seeing communism and socialism tried time and time again without being able to produce the wealth which the Americans have. Capitalism is the strongest system, could there be a better one derived by mathematical means? I'm sure it can, and you would start in a similar way Marx did, but don't make his same mistakes.

>>9547860
>philosophy is predicated on mathematical principles
You've got philosophy and mathematics mixed up

>>9547860
>math is universal

prove it nigga

>>9547915
>humans are rational
>we do rational things
>if math wasn't universal it would be illogical to base knowledge on it
>becasue we based knowledge on math and because we are rational, then it is universal

>>9547920
Are you saying we can only support knowledge through rational deduction? What about empiricism?
>if math wasn't universal it would be illogical to base knowledge on it
>illogical
How can you logically base knowledge on something? Doesn't "logically" imply you already have some knowledge to begin with? (I.e. "illogical" isn't a priori.)

>>9547862
Can you make a flow chart or a list of recommendations i can screencap?

>>9547900
>After seeing communism and socialism tried time and time again without being able to produce the wealth which the Americans have.

The Soviets turned an agrarian society into industrialized in speed that has not been matched since. Not even by capitalism.

There are ALOT more factors than general economic system to consider when it comes to rating countries and their economies.

For example: the Soviets didn't have inter-continental "investing" the way American capitalists do. It's easy to gain riches quickly when you throw a little money at the Chinese who work for basically no pay with no workplace standards and get massive returns. The soviets didn't have that opportunity. But on the otherhand, the soviets had the opportunity to do away with the inefficient system where your job was whatever your parents had - so laborers were going wherever the work was best which made them more efficient. Instead of shoemakers' kids becoming shoemakers, they could focus on whatever the booming industry was.

At there's a million more examples. So the "communism" vs "capitalism" debate is pretty useless unless you get into specifics.

What I will say about capitalism is this. Capitalism has an inefficient layer built into it that communism only has when it becomes corrupted (like the Soviets did). The wealthy owners who sit at the top of the chain provide no labor, no value to society. They are takers and their profit is held above everything else. They collect wealth and pass it down to offspring. Society could be much more efficient if that inheritance was used to fund industry instead of sit in bank accounts, for instance.

>Capitalism is the strongest system

Be more specific. You mean it efficiently exploits an underclass? Sure. But could be more efficient.
But that is irrelevant to me anyway as I seek to eliinate underclasses/privileged classes. Fair economics is the only logical future.

>>9547920

>>9548684
>The Soviets turned an agrarian society into industrialized in speed that has not been matched since. Not even by capitalism.
And only 40 million people had to starve to death in the process

>>9548686
Pic related, it's me

>>9548690
Which pales in comparison to starvation caused by capitalist exploitation of poor countries.

>>9548935
They deserve it. The superior (white) nations developed more math so they deserve to take the resource to improve their mathematical knowledge.

>>9547920
>humans are rational
>we do rational things
>if X wasn't universal it would be illogical to base knowledge on it
>because we based knowledge on X and because we are rational, then it is universal
X can be any pseudoscience you want. Also, notice how its just "knowledge" and not "all knowledge"? Not all knowledge is based on math, or can be based on math.

>>9548935
And I guess communism would just keep everyone well-fed forever, wouldn't it?

>>9549560
I can't be any pseudoscience because they won't all come to the same results like math will.

>>9548935
>Have a rich nation whose resources are allocated in such a way (by the Jewish elite) that systematically starves Ukrainians and others en masse
>Have a poor nation in which people starve because there is little wealth to begin with
>The latter is somehow worse

I'm not an advocate for capitalism, but nigga please. Take the National Socialist pill already.

>>9549567
yes, why wouldn't it?
if you make everyone on this planet eat prison meals that is

>>9549567
That wasn't my claim was it? My claim was in response to someone saying that communism causes starvation.

The problem with discussing capitalism and communism is this. Some people are so attached to either end, they forego critical thinking to strawman the other side and play "gotchya."

It is a verifiable fact that exploitation of poor nations by capitalist countries has caused more starvation than communism has.

What you failed to grasp about my comment was that it was a ludicrous remark mocking the ludicrousness of the comment it responded to. It is not sufficient to say that <economic system> alone causes starvation, there is more to it than that.

>>9547860
>I can build government, which will be built on universal principles and therefore be the best form of government.

nobody will listen to you or care

not even saying this to be a dick, but like a trillion different political philosophies have been proposed and extrapolated on and maybe 10% of them are ever actually tried