Opportunity cost: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older edit
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
No edit summary
 
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|devil|}}{{d|Opportunity cost|/ˌɒpəˈtjuːnɪti kɒst/|n|}}
{{a|devil|[[File:Cake.jpg|450px|frameless|center]]}}{{d|Opportunity cost|/ˌɒpəˈtjuːnɪti kɒst/|n|}}


The potential advantages of taking ''this'' path one forgoes by taking ''that'' one. The principle underlying the proposition that one can’t ''have'' one’s cake, and ''eat'' it.
The potential advantages of taking ''this'' path that one forgoes by taking ''that'' one.  


The JC is fomenting a theory that somewhere the notion of the opportunity cost has been lost to modern discourse. The idea that you can be ''this'' or ''that'', or ''neither'', but taking any of these [[option]]s and enjoying its [[Fruits of the contract|fruits]] means forgoing the alternatives, and ''their'' [[Fruits of the contract|fruits]], is one that appears not to have occurred to those under the age of thirty.
The principle underlying the proposition that one can’t ''have'' one’s cake, and ''eat'' it.


This article is in grave danger of descending into a grumpy middle-aged tract, but starts with the news, in August 2021, that [https://marriagefoundation.org.uk/research/one-in-five-weddings-now-start-with-a-prenup/ one in five weddings now involves a prenuptial agreement]. Now the JC has no particular axe to grind about marriage — by all means, get married or don’t; see if I care — but more to the ''concept'' of what marriage is meant to be, at the outset: a ''permanent'' [[merger]] of social and economic interests. It may be that, along life’s rocky road, things don’t work out, but the aspiration to permanence must at least justify some meaningful commitment: the combination of resources for the intended betterment of all. That one or other party is disproportionately wealthy, or poor, one should deal with in one’s [[due dilly]] — [[aka]] “courtship” in the old days — ''before'' making the decision to marry. That decision is not meant to be one taken lightly. It is meant to be a life commitment — or sentence, depending on how you look at it.
The [[JC]] is fomenting a theory that somewhere along our faltering path to eudaemonia, the idea of the “opportunity cost” has been lost to modern discourse. The notion that you can be ''this'' or ''that'', or ''neither'', but not ''all of them at the same time'' — taking any of these [[option]]s and enjoying its [[Fruits of the contract|fruits]] means forgoing the alternatives, and ''their'' [[Fruits of the contract|fruits]], is one that appears not to have occurred to those under the age of thirty.


To look at it this way is the regard a prenuptial agreement as a desire ''to have one’s cake and eat it too''. It is to refrain from putting your [[skin in the game]].<ref>Rather, in this regard, like appointing a [[process agent]]: most metaphors don’t bear close examination.</ref> to refrain from drilling the holes in your longboats to stop your men running away.<ref>As, allegedly, did William the Conqueror upon making landfall at Pevensey. This knowledge has been with me since I was about five, and my authority for it is the Ladybird book about William the Conqueror, and as a result it might be entirely false. But it is a good metaphor. </ref>
===Analysts at the [[Vampire Squid]]===
You want to learn how to jam your stent into anything that smells of money ''on a nine to five''?<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/mar/18/group-of-junior-bankers-at-goldman-sachs-claim-inhumane-work-conditions ''Group of junior bankers at Goldman Sachs claim “inhumane” work conditions'']: The Guardian, 18 March 2021.</ref>  


===Analysts at the [[Vampire Squid]]===
Come now, Children of the Night. Would you read ''Faust'', if you thought the good doctor got to keep his soul? ''Das ist nicht der Deal''.
You want to learn how to jam your stent into anything that smells of money on a nine to five?
===The enlightenment cancelling the enlightenment===
===The enlightenment cancelling the enlightenment===
Kicking away the ladder is one thing: proposing to erase all records of one’s ascension up it, quite another.<ref>[[Hinterstoisser Traverse|Hinterstoisser and Kurz]], doomed climbers of the Eiger, might caution against kicking the ladder away, too. If things get sticky ahead, you might need it to get down.</ref>


Kicking away the ladder is one thing: proposing to erase all records of its ascension, quite another.<ref>[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andreas_Hinterstoisser Andreas Hinterstoisser and Toni Kurz], doomed climbers of the Eiger, might caution against kicking the ladder away, too. If things get sticky ahead, you might need it to get down.</ref>
The enlightenment has been a serial victim of erasure. The [[reductionist]] certainty that “all explanatory arrows point downward” — that there is a single unifying principle that governs the physical operation of the universe at all points, for all times; that all scientific disciplines are consistent and reduce, ultimately, to physics, is ''inferred'', entirely without evidence — how could there be any? — and is transparently an inheritance from Judeo-Christian orthodoxy.


The enlightenment has been a serial victim of erasure. The [[reductionist]] certainty that “all explanatory arrows point downward”; that there is a single unifying principle that governs the physical operation of the universe at all points, for all times; that all scientific disciplines are consistent and reduce, ultimately, to physics, is inferred quite without evidence — how could there be any? — and is transparently an inheritance from Judeo-Christian orthodoxy.
You can’t have the certainty and orderliness of a prime mover from whom all things derive ''and'' get to do what the hell you want, ''and'' get to tell everyone else what the hell to think.  


Likewise, the liberal pluralistic disposition — also a function of the enlightenment (though, curiously, incommensurate with the reductionism it accompanied) — a product of the towering intellects of the enlightenment: men like Hume, Smith, Mill, Bentham and Darwin — were necessary conditions for growth of continental philosophy, post modernism and the critical theories who would now write this stale colonial tradition from history.
Likewise, the liberal pluralistic disposition — also a function of the enlightenment (though, curiously, incommensurate with the reductionism it accompanied) — a product of the towering intellects like [[David Hume|Hume]], [[Adam Smith]], John Stewart Mill, Jeremy Bentham and [[Charles Darwin]] — were necessary conditions for growth of continental philosophy, [[post modernism]] and the [[Critical theory|critical theories]] who would now write this stale colonial tradition from history. Look, knock yourself out: kick away the ladder, by all means — but be prepared for a cold night on [[Hinterstoisser Traverse|Death Bivouac]] if the weather closes in — but don’t pretend that wasn’t how you got there.


{{sa}}
{{sa}}
 
*[[Everyone is fighting a battle you know nothing about‎]]
*[[Change paradox]]
{{ref}}
{{ref}}

Latest revision as of 10:02, 7 November 2023

In which the curmudgeonly old sod puts the world to rights.
Index — Click ᐅ to expand:
The Devil’s Advocate
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

Opportunity cost
/ˌɒpəˈtjuːnɪti kɒst/ (n.)

The potential advantages of taking this path that one forgoes by taking that one.

The principle underlying the proposition that one can’t have one’s cake, and eat it.

The JC is fomenting a theory that somewhere along our faltering path to eudaemonia, the idea of the “opportunity cost” has been lost to modern discourse. The notion that you can be this or that, or neither, but not all of them at the same time — taking any of these options and enjoying its fruits means forgoing the alternatives, and their fruits, is one that appears not to have occurred to those under the age of thirty.

Analysts at the Vampire Squid

You want to learn how to jam your stent into anything that smells of money on a nine to five?[1]

Come now, Children of the Night. Would you read Faust, if you thought the good doctor got to keep his soul? Das ist nicht der Deal.

The enlightenment cancelling the enlightenment

Kicking away the ladder is one thing: proposing to erase all records of one’s ascension up it, quite another.[2]

The enlightenment has been a serial victim of erasure. The reductionist certainty that “all explanatory arrows point downward” — that there is a single unifying principle that governs the physical operation of the universe at all points, for all times; that all scientific disciplines are consistent and reduce, ultimately, to physics, is inferred, entirely without evidence — how could there be any? — and is transparently an inheritance from Judeo-Christian orthodoxy.

You can’t have the certainty and orderliness of a prime mover from whom all things derive and get to do what the hell you want, and get to tell everyone else what the hell to think.

Likewise, the liberal pluralistic disposition — also a function of the enlightenment (though, curiously, incommensurate with the reductionism it accompanied) — a product of the towering intellects like Hume, Adam Smith, John Stewart Mill, Jeremy Bentham and Charles Darwin — were necessary conditions for growth of continental philosophy, post modernism and the critical theories who would now write this stale colonial tradition from history. Look, knock yourself out: kick away the ladder, by all means — but be prepared for a cold night on Death Bivouac if the weather closes in — but don’t pretend that wasn’t how you got there.

See also

References

  1. ↑ Group of junior bankers at Goldman Sachs claim “inhumane” work conditions: The Guardian, 18 March 2021.
  2. ↑ Hinterstoisser and Kurz, doomed climbers of the Eiger, might caution against kicking the ladder away, too. If things get sticky ahead, you might need it to get down.
Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Opportunity_cost&oldid=80149"