Complementing the EcoNoMy’s Science with the EcoIsOurs’ Profession

In addition to those two articles mentioned in the introduction, the access to four more articles referred in the comments are next:

Lightly editing by increasing the function of brackets, the original three comments for today August 31, 2018, are:

I wanted to write a comment under the Joseph E. Stiglish’s Jul 30, 2018, article “The US is at Risk of Losing a Trade War with China,” but it had [not to, but too] many comments already. That has been my experience with the great majority of articles that attract me, for example, in Spain’s EL País newspaper, which translated it as “EE UU y la guerra comercial,” with the subtititle “Trump tiene un problema, pero no es con China. Está en su propia casa: el escaso nivel de ahorro,” [delete “published by El Pais”].

Adding today’s numbers in brackets, next is a translation of my comment that I understand applies here as well: “How weird. The English version of this article currently has 144 [148] comments and this having passed 10 hours has only one [4 with mine]. Will it make sense to say that Stiglitz has a simplistic model of globalization and anti-globalization? Using Ockham’s Razor, I have been suggesting an up-to-date global conceptual model that divides globalization into bright and dark, and which calls DeGlobalization what Stiglitz’s calls anti-globalization. That changes the current situation in that we are missing the Bright Globalization to help emerge an institutional innovation, since the world is dominated by obsolete institutions of the Dark Globalization and its reaction with the DeGlobalization.

That comment was replied by MICHAEL PUBLIC on Aug 29, 2018, who wrote:

“I am with you that globalisation needs to be divided into dark and light varieties, as do many other grand concepts bandied around here. I caution against referencing Occum’s Razor as it in essence is a lazy principle — the world is as simple or complex as it factually is, no more, no less — to say that simple explanations are more likely to be true is in no way supportable.”

Then, I replied on Aug 29, 2018 with the following:

Thank you for trying. Before responding you in the last paragraph, these preliminary are useful to get a better picture. I have responded twice to VIVEK IYER, who has a comment here already. This is part of what I said to him the second time [under the Project Syndicate, Aug 27, 2018, article “Standing Up for the UN,” by DOMINIQUE MOISI].

My response is based on an emerging vocabulary as a result of using mainly the Heuristic (lessons learned) Methodology of Systems Architecting. If you go a bit deep into my first comment here, you will see that the UN ‘Sustainable Development Goals’ were developed by consensus under the Simplistic Globalization Model being used by economist of The Wealth of Nations, when they should be developed to help emerge institutional innovations under the Updated Global Conceptual Model of The Wealth of Globalization.

In one of your very valuable comments, on Aug 23, 2018, you wrote that ” In this field, as elsewhere, ‘the best’ is the enemy of ‘the good’ and talk of morality is the enemy of ethical pragmatics.” Next I repeat my selective response to you under that article where I only wrote one comment.

In the third paragraph of my comment [under the Aug 22, 2018, Project Syndicate, article “How to Prevent Winner-Takes-All Democracy,” by KAUSHIK BASU], which you can consider as a thought experiment, I wrote “This time I am questioning if the EcoNoMy science that centers its attention on The Wealth of Nations, might need to help emerge the EcoIsOurs profession, like Engineering has grown into Systems Architecting, to center the attention into The [W]ealth of Globalization, which give the opposite understanding on the meaning for the heuristic “‘the best’ is the enemy of ‘the good‘.” That opposite understanding to favor ‘the best’ is due to the Computing Big Shift that enables us to approximate to the Third Degree of Clarity given that the Printing Big Shift is limited to the Second Degree of Clarity.

The rule for selection of a framework is simple: the one chosen should have heuristic and learning power. The globalization and anti-globalization framework have no such heuristic and learning power as needed to address wicked problems. The Bright Globalization, Dark Globalization and DeGlobalization has the heuristic power that systems architecting tell us to, like, “simplify, simplify, simplify,” which in this case corresponds to “the principle (attributed to William of Occam) that in explaining a thing no more assumptions should be made than are necessary.“

Jose A Vanderhorst S

Written by

Hashtags on what I stand for: 1 “There is nothing so powerful as #TheWealthOfGlobalization whose time has come;” 2 #BrightGlobalization; 3 #SystemicCivilization

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade