I for one don't think many of us would like a rational world. In fact the more rational our decisions it seems to me the more dangerous it becomes.
Take Darfur for example. If the Western World made a rational and scientific decision they wouldn't get involved.
It's not a economic market. There is no brownie points for us as they likely don't appreciate us being involved. We risk our lives to gain what thinking purely rationally and scientifically?
The troops are sent to this and so many other places based on what? The moral and cultural values we have -- not rational thinking.
Now we increasingly see the reluctance of countries to send troops anywhere. The reasoning is logical. These people aren't our problem. We have our own security problems with these religions if we get involved. There is no economic upside. There is a political downside both internationally and domestically.
Rationally we move the way I believe the Americans will soon turn for awhile. Protectionist and non-interventionist. The bodies will pileup like they did in Bosnia when Clinton was Pres and they will be loathe to intervene. That will be a logical and scientifically based decision. Back to the old days where the Americans will have to be directly attacked by a country before they will commit troops.
Frankly I think the easy way out has a lot of appeal. Basically as Western Nations we could ignore the rest of the world. Technically if they kill each other off it helps with overpopulation. Our values would scream at us but logically, scientifically and economically it makes sense. We could spend the time working on our own problems with drug abuse, poverty etc. Pull the troops, government workers out of everywhere. Leave only those who work to improve our economic opportunities. Again the savings could be put to helping our own problems with infrastructure etc. In every problem area we could speak sympathetically but not mean a word of it and do nothing regardless. We could sell arms to both sides and make a mint and again use that to improve our own air quality as one example.
We could also think scientifically and logically at home. Take prison sentences as an example. We take the time the person is incarcerated and balance it against execution. Then factor in the likely economic impact(they usually just end up back in jail so that should be minimal) and if it's cheaper to snuff them they presto decision made. Less trouble for our police forces and less of them which once again saves money. In healthcare patients would be given care based on their economic upside. The savings here would be astronomical.
These moral/religious/cultural values are getting in our way. They need to all be eliminated and decisions based simply on scientific, logical, economic thought. Wouldn't the world be a better place then?
I mean where is the downside.
|