Matt attributes this capacity to reinvent primarily to the division of labour and the barter of the output of such labour. He quotes Adam Smith from the Wealth of Nations: ' The division of labour, from which so many advantages are derived, is not originally the effect of any human wisdom, which foresees and intends that general opulence to which it gives occasion. It is the necessary, though very slow and gradual, consequence of a certain propensity in human nature which has in view no such extensive utility, the propensity to truck , barter, and exchange one thing for another'. In short, we evolved because of division of labour. That came about , not because of a smart idea but the general human propensity to trade, barter...exchange goods with one another.
First have we really progressed. In all the pessimism we exude in our daily lives, it is easy to believe that we actually have not done much of that. Here is an example that would put that to bed .....Since 1800, the population of the world has multiplied six times, yet average life expectancy has more than doubled and real income has risen more than nine times. Taking a shorter perspective, in 2005, compared to 1955 - the average human being on Planet Earth earned nearly three times as much real money, ate one third more calories of food, and could expect to live one-third longer...If that is not progress, nothing is.
If that convinced you that this species has evolved , progressed - then we simply need to decipher why we did so, and then establish whether those reasons still hold good today, and vola - you have reason to be optimistic about the future ! Lets go back to Adam Smith and understand for ourselves what division of labour means. At its simplest level - it allows me, the man about the house to do the 'manly' stuff - ie tinkering about with the wires, drive the car and anything else that requires a better visual spatial orientation , while my wife does the cooking and looking after the daughter. Stereotype...probably, but lets save that criticism for later. If I had to cook, I would not be able to make a decent meal, would struggle to get good nutrition and would probably starve to death....pardon the hyperbole. If my wife had to drive, there would be murder and mayhem on the streets and the survival of the human species would be at risk...! In essence, we are both able to survive because we have divided our labour in a manner that is optimal. But hold it, just division of labour is not enough, we should also be willing to exchange the product of the labour with each other - else this would be of no good. I could keep driving and die of exhaustion without getting any food to eat....There is some debate over what came first, but prehistoric man evolved by exchanging goods with each other, one another - suppressing the somewhat innate desire to kill strangers as threats. This ended up generating time for him to be even better at what he was doing, selling his produce for higher real wages, and thereby improving the quality of his life - ie produce more children, feed them better, in short all the good stuff we have been doing for zillions of years.
Matt would have us believe that exchanging the products of our labour ( as we kept sub dividing it) was the primary driver to evolution. Any genetic change that came about was the result of that division of labour, rather than the cause of it. The question is , was that enough for the world to evolve or did it need anything else....It did, and that was for ideas to multiply...by which I mean that if my wife kept cooking the same boring daal /roti daily - life would get progressively boring, I would stop eating out of boredom and die....! However, if she innovated to make a nice matar paneer one day, followed by saaru and palya the next, then we would be really talking. That probably happened when my wife had had a full meal and was driven around enough (!), she ended up having some free time on her hands. She must have then experimented and came up with something that was slightly different from what she made the previous day....and so innovation happened. The key ingredients of innovation are therefore division of labour, barter and a changing environment (which there was plenty of, in those days). Once you had ideas in the head, then to put it in Matt's words - the ideas started having sex with each other - and produced more ideas....and humans were well on the path to evolution.
We come back to our original question. Ok, we have come this far. Why should I feel optimistic about going any further. Well, the key ingredients are still there. We have sub-divided labour to limit approaching infinity, global trade /domestic trade/trade with neighbours continues unabated and ideas abound, including the environment to sustain those ideas. Bottomline, dont be perturbed if the world's population is projected to go 9 billion and if the Chinese are expected to be driving another 400 m cars in the next 50 years, which at current rates of consumption /production mean that food production growth will not hold up and crude reserves will run out . We should feel optimistic that the human species will find new sources of energy to tap, new ways to enhance productivity of land, and as people find more avenues of entertainment, they will have less sex....or atleast with less intent to reproduce.
If this was not so rationally argued, and not so beautifully built on some very insightful data points, I would have dismissed this as just ' belief'. For the uneducated it is still that, the man who has not thought much about the issues, is optimistic that we will find a way out. Why - well because he has innate faith in his god. For the educated who has thought about these issues, it is very easy being pessimistic. Why - because on a daily basis the news media spews out more terabytes of bad news than has been generated in the previous million years combined. However, to be rationally optimistic - ie being educated about the issues , but still believe that there is reason to be optimistic - one has to read this book and then sit down and contemplate on the marvel of the human race, and a smile may just come to your lips.
Matt, hats off. If it was not you, I would have written this. The ideas were there in my head having sex with each other, the labour had been divided (my wife and me had agreed that I could give up driving for a few years, since we were using public transport) and I was all set, having exchanged my money for my imac....You just finished it first. Now for the next big book, someday .....
No comments:
Post a Comment