No. I am saying that the notion that those benefits necessarily make the world better is a value judgement that any scientists would run away from. And god almighty, do you really need me to run you through some of the catastrophic side effects of drinking? From alcoholism, domestic violence and the social cost of binge drinking in every town centre every weekend to the sheer cost of policing, the number of date rapes linked to alcohol etc etc etc.....
Spend a Friday night in Newcastle and give me a ring at 3 in the morning. Lets see whether your hypothesis is still so unshakeable....
"Plenty of strikers can score goals," he said, gesturing to the famous old stands casting shadows around us.
"But a lot have found it difficult wearing the number 9 shirt for The Arsenal."
No. There is no scientific basis to not enslaving black people or sending 6 year-olds down mines or up chimneys. Indeed, there were excellent livings to be made at it as I understand. They are things we chose to stop doing based on a set of ideas. Science had fùck all to do with it.
You are getting the fact that we have derived what we perceive to be happy outcomes (for us) from no longer doing these things mixed up with some sort of scientific proof of our cultural superiority, which is nonsense. The Romans used to enslave and kill millions and indulge in games that involved torture and bloodshed. Was the fact that they dominated the ancient world and were vastly technologically superior to their contemporaries therefore validate the extremely fùcked up nature of their society?
Last edited by Burney; 05-23-2017 at 02:48 PM.
I'm pretty sure you could come up with a scientific basis for outlawing slavery and sending 6 year olds down the mines. Or at least I wouldn't write off the possibility.
I would imagine you would attempt to measure an individual's contribution to society with respect to the number of hours worked over the course of their lifetime, the contribution that they might make if given equal opportunities in society etc etc. You could then measure the life expectancy of the average person with and without slavery and child labour and a use a fairly basic probability theorem to determine the contributions the slaves and children would have made. This would be offset against the advantages of cheaper labour amongst other things.
No idea what the conclusion would be but I'm sure this could be measured scientifically.
"Plenty of strikers can score goals," he said, gesturing to the famous old stands casting shadows around us.
"But a lot have found it difficult wearing the number 9 shirt for The Arsenal."