Based on Socrates’ argument that the good life is
determined by wisdom, or utilizing intellectual humility in acknowledging one
doesn’t know what one in fact doesn’t, one can solve the tragedy of the commons
by ensuring objective, rational methods structure a wise, sustainable free
market system; in that no entity claims to know better than the other on what
to produce, how to produce it, and how, to whom, and in exchange for what to
distribute it. In doing so, the markets will evolve to reflect a growing consciousness
of the collective effect on our natural resources. Furthermore, this would
eliminate the welfare state and help to solve the geometric expansion of human
population, a major contributor to the tragedy of the commons.
If
a free market system were to be implemented, it would certainly fit Socrates’
criteria for a wise system of economics. As he states: “I might perhaps fancy
myself wiser than other men, - that whereas I know but little of the world
below, I do not suppose that I know”, therefore wisdom is simply the
acknowledgement of those things not known and not able to be known. Free market
economics governs by the same reasonable and rational policy, by stating that
it is impossible to know what to produce, when, how, and how much to produce,
and for what cost the finished product should be sold for. Furthermore, free
market economics states that laws of supply and demand hold the rational reigns
of the market, for they are the only entities that “know” the aforementioned
qualities to objective pragmatic perfectionism; whereas man can only speculate,
guess, and eventually simultaneously be incorrect and unwise in Socrates’ view.
With free market economy comes an extremely small and economically resourceless
government. Thus, no government would be able to afford supporting the poor and
unable through the welfare state. In doing so, the economic system would
instill an ideal postulated by Garrett Harding in The Tragedy of the Commons,
“If each human family were dependent only on its own resources; if the children
of improvident parents starved to death; if, thus, over breeding brought its
own "punishment" to the germ line--then there would be no public
interest in controlling the breeding of families.” Therefore, overpopulation
would be regulated over a period of time and through “parental responsibility”
(Commons) eventually abolished by the wisest entities; also referred to as
supply and demand. In other words, if a Darwinian system were reinstated, the
population would react in a negative correlation over a period of time due to a
scarcity of goods and resources, and therefore the lessening of a desire for an
additional life to support. According to the same rules, as scarcity overcomes
a limited amount of resources, the price of goods would increase, causing a
lessening of demand from aforementioned lessening base of consumers in reaction
to price increases, and therefore a lessening of demand to produce and a lesser
supply. Conclusively, this would limit exclusively privatized natural resource
use without any top down interference from an unwise higher body, imposing its
authority as a statement of supposed wisdom. As a result of less demand for a
decreasing supply of finished goods, more people would have time to do as
Socrates deems is the path of access to the good life: “the greatest good of
man is daily to converse about virtue” and to avoid the tragedy described as
“the life which is unexamined is not worth living”, rather than sell their
labor as a product to the market that enslaves them to other, non-inherently
valuable products.
In
objecting to these points, one could propose that the labor market will be
taken advantage of by producers and distributors without government bound
minimum wage and labor laws. As a negotiator for one’s own worth, and an
ever-limited labor pool, these entities would have to pay a mutually agreeable
amount for reasonable work; furthermore, laborers would ensure their work was
of competitive quality. An additional objection may be that some essential
goods shall not be privatized: water, for example. This proposed system would
ensure that quality of water remain as high and the price of water would remain
as low as allowed by Darwinian population control, further satisfying the Tragedy
of the Commons. Finally, in saying that government control is to be trusted
more than private entities, it can be said that private entities themselves
would not be in control of markets, rather market forces whom know best
(because they know nothing at all, only how to react to real circumstances)
would fuel this system. It’s impossible to corrupt a thing that is not a
thinking thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment