The answer to America’s problems does not reside within its political machinery
Business schools in the United States of America are shutting in-residence MBA programs. Students in American High Schools increasingly are faring worse in Mathematics.
Mathematics is guardian of rationality.
Absent mathematics, man would continue to believe that the sun revolves around our planet Earth. It was mathematics that convinced the Wright Brothers that a machine conceivably could be made to fly — all they had to figure out was how exactly to design the contraption for overcoming of force of gravity. If America progressively is doing worse in mathematics, this implies atrophy of cognition in respect of what is feasible in the future, as such, feasibility of embarkment not on the right paths, but on the wrong paths — the paths that, figuratively, declare impossibility of a contraption that can fly. In presence of stated feasibility, that is, embarkment on wrong paths, clearly the future of America cannot be said not to be under threat. Presence of a threat is magnified by the fact that the teaching of mathematics in American High Schools now centers around applications of formulas — a recipe for capacity for memorization that does not do much for cognitions — that is, capacity for inferring that which is not obvious, the source of all truly innovative outcomes and progress within any society.
Cognitions are at their best when they are attuned to inferring of the non-obvious that constitutes progress for the future.
Business schools are supposed to be bastions for the teaching of rational decision making that is cognizant of behaviors of economic agents. In this respect, in-residence MBA programs emphasize importance of discussions, collaboration, and teams for effectiveness of functioning of business decision making and governance. The switch to virtual learning clearly is not advantageous to most robust functioning of MBA programs. We arrive then at constraining of what ought to be one of the most fertile contexts for enhancement of cognitions of current and future leaders in business and governance.
Alongside decline in in-residence MBA programs and loss of proficiency in mathematics, the positive developments in American society supposedly are: emphasis on coding skills, driverless cars, electric cars, driving for Uber or Lyft, or delivering for Amazon. Clearly, we arrive at only three sets of activities as defining the future: Apps, cars, driving, and loss of driving skills, because, in presence of ubiquity of driverless cars, 16-year olds become ineligible for driving licenses.
When the path into the future incorporates each of driving, loss of driving skills, and investment in cars, is it not clear that the economics of the future is confused, convoluted, inarticulate, and non-cognitive?
What then about skill sets that are implied in the supposed positives? Coders do what they are told, are not innovators. Driving for Uber or Lyft is a skill set, of which most 16-year olds are capable. While Amazon may require one, delivering for Amazon does not require a High School Certificate for either of effectiveness or efficiency.
The path into the future does not embed any demand for new technological skills that revolve around enhancement of cognitive decision making. Does this really portend a better future for the USA?
The summary of it all?
America is giving up decision making and cognition improving skill sets for ‘doing’ — coding, driving, delivering.
Equivalently, America is giving up ‘questioning activities’ for ‘doing activities that do not embed opportunity for asking of cognition-related questions’.
Whenever countries or kingdoms have arrived at such points, typically disaster looms just over the horizon.
Subsequent to forcing of Socrates to commit suicide — because they desired to put an end to his questionings — the Greek City States became colonies of Rome, a city that previously had been a colony of Greece.
Whenever a society loses capacity for, or desire for questioning, it is because it already is being taken over by some yet unknown force.
When the mob became arbiter of governance in Athens, the best Athenian General was sacked for losing a battle. The General promptly defected to Sparta, then helped Sparta defeat Athens, resulting in Sparta winning the war between the two Greek City States. Then came along Philip of Macedon, who defeated what was left and went on to rule the world.
It is lack of cognition that makes people interpret loss of a battle as loss of a war. When fighting only creates vulnerability, what exactly is point of a fight?
Subsequent to emergence of Constantine the Great as Emperor of Rome, Roman Senators refused to reform, refused to treat the common people better, refused to release them from serfdom that served their selfish whims and caprices, and whims and caprices of the rich. Constantine left them to their devices, went on to set up Constantinople and the Eastern Roman Empire in 325 AD = an empire within which serfdom was illegal, because all land farmed by the common people was considered owned by the king. In response, Constantine the Great only demanded that, in event of war, each family provide soldiers for the king’s army — typically one man per family. By 475 AD, alongside the Emperor of the Western Roman Empire, the Senators had been deposed by Visigoths. The Eastern Roman Empire would remain until 1454 AD.
When the rich oppose opportunity for reforms, it is because they are lacking in proper cognition in respect of possibilities that remain in the future, possibilities that, where robust, only ported danger and dislocation.
When Pompey refused to pay any heed to rumblings of its volcano, it only was because their cognition had been lulled into a false sense of security.
Given ills of American society are scientific and behavioral, that is, cognitive, not political, politics only is accentuating America’s ills. Trust in politics only is lulling into a false sense of security.
Out of frustration with penalties imposed by the Allies subsequent to the First World War, Germans abandoned their consciences to Hitler and began burning books. A country that up until then had been source of many great thinkers, philosophers, and mathematicians would go on to lose its way, and drag the entire world into carnage of war and destruction. Germany did indeed have an axe to grind, in sense that the impositions were draconian.
But how exactly is ‘Arian Supremacy’ the cognitive response to the problem?
After all, it was loss in a war (First World War), that is, absence of evidence for supremacy, that led to the draconian impositions in the first place?
The tell tale signs are there that America is losing its way. This loss of ‘the way’ is not political, is a societal phenomenon whose roots inherently are social, economic, and cognitive, not political. Politics is exacerbating the problem, not providing alleviation.
For concreteness, consider that a future whose hopefulness revolves around cars, driving, electric charging stations, and not driving clearly is not enervating, and more importantly, evinces underconfidence about what is possible in the future. Given enumerated agenda seem to be the only agenda on the table, politicians are feeding off of it, and building future policy on it, as such are funding progressiveness of the underconfidence. You see then that the problem inherently is cognitive, as such, social, economic, and mathematical, not political.
It is time that Americans take notice and begin to demand a scientifically formulated and cognitive — confident — path for the future, one that revolves not around agenda of corporations, but around welfare of individuals.