Thomas Schelling: Circles Are Not the Norm

By -
"There was time when wise people thought the planets should revolve in circles. When observations showed incontrovertibly that they did not, the question was asked, "Why not?" People tried to figure what kept the planets from displaying perfect circles. In the end it was realized that, in accordance with the laws of motion and gravitation, there never had been any reason to expect circles. Circles were not the norm; ellipses were.

"When we ask why the 'free market' in [giving] Christmas cards doesn't lead to optimal exchange, the answer is that it is not a market and there was no reason to expect optimal results in the first place. The free market, when it works, is that special case of knowledgeable voluntary exchange of alienable commodities. Only some ellipses are circles." -- Micromotives and Macrobehavior, p. 33

Comments

  1. John Goes6:57 PM

    http://www.palisson.com/angelique/first-year/first-US-trip/EatingTheMenu.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob Murphy8:18 PM

    "Only some circles are ellipses."

    Did he get mixed up there, or would it have ruined the poetry of his argument to say the correct statement?

    (I.e. all circles are ellipses, only some ellipses are circles. In the spirit of his argument, I think he could've ended up, "Only sometimes are the ellipses actually circles.")

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah8:55 PM

      No, the transcriber screwed up. Fixed now.

      Delete
  3. Abhi M.8:22 PM

    "Only some circles are ellipses." Is that a typo? Surely it's only some ellipses are circles?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Lorenzo4:11 AM

    Look on the bright side -- you have smart, observant readers ... :)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more