美国存在的一些社会问题

美国存在的一些社会问题
英文表达，越多越好

Part 1. Problems
Introduction
Abstract
The material in this essay is covered in a book, On the Preservation of Species [2], and numerous essays [3] including this one, which is really sort of promotional material for the book but, perhaps, too big to go into the book and not really necessary since most of this material is covered in greater detail in the book. If this essay results in someone reading the book, either because they like it or because they don’t like it, it will have served its purpose. Most of the claims made in this essay are proved in the book - at least as well as statements about human society are ever proved.
In Chapter 5 of the book [2], materialism (M) was defined to be “the belief, or any system based on the belief, that people should compete for material wealth or power and that material wealth or power may be used as a reward for achievement or good behavior or as a measure of success. Any system or belief that permits people to influence the amount of material wealth they themselves may consume or possess privately or power they may wield because of who they are (or who their parents are) or what they do or because of any aspect of their beings whatsoever must be classified as materialism even if competition is not involved. The term artificial economic contingency (AEC) is used to express the dependence of people’s economic well-being on factors other than the weather or so-called acts of God. We agreed that, since AEC and M are occurrence equivalent, i.e., they occur together or not at all, we may use either term. Elsewhere, we have used the initial M to stand for both.” [Note (11-9-97). Lately, I have reverted to the original term materialism and I have used the abbreviation M. Note (12-20-05). Earlier versions of this essay used the term competitionism (C) and decompetitionism instead of materialism (M) and dematerialism. The concept would be less obscure if all three terms (M, AEC, and C) could be used simultaneously in a new word, perhaps, such as “commatingency”.]
In private discussions with friends I have had a little difficulty getting people to understand what I mean by materialism and, especially, what a society would have to be like if it were to be free of materialism. Sometimes they think I want people to revert to barter, for example. The concept that you would not ask for anything in return for what you gave or did is really foreign to most people. Therefore, I have explained it in greater detail than I would have thought necessary. Lately (1994), I have struck upon the term artificial economic contingency to emphasize that in a natural economy, i.e., an economy without materialism and artificial economic contingency, wealth and power would be uncorrelated with anything to do with people. Thus, wealth and power would be equal – for all practical purposes. (For mathematicians, the derivative with respect to nearly everything would be zero. Of course, the derivative of wealth with respect to rainfall would not be zero, but rainfall is natural.) I hope I am not boring the reader, but this concept of economics is never taught in the schools or discussed in the media. It appears to be NEW – even though it is not. (I really think this is what the Jesus of the Gospels was trying to say, but he didn’t have the vocabulary and his audience would not have understood these words – in any language.)
Artificial economic contingency (AEC) and materialism (M) encourage people to try to make as much money as possible. This results in economic activity that consumes energy while providing a less and less satisfactory life for those who are not adept at or not interested in acquiring money. This has two undesirable effects that lead to all of the difficulties of society that are not inherent in AEC itself. The first undesirable effect is that our reserves of high-grade energy are being consumed at an alarming rate, which cannot continue indefinitely and which has attendant upon it the destruction of the environment roughly in proportion to the expenditure of energy. The second undesirable effect is that the processes by which money is accumulated create a larger and larger class of people for whom life is nearly unbearable. Some of these people will continue to perpetrate increasingly violent acts upon the segment of society that does not suffer from these circumstances and which they view as the cause of their problems and their enemy. Eventually, rich people will not be safe in their own beds.
In this essay, I will link the important problems in society to materialism, which is the cause of the violation of the moral axioms. This will provide a plausibility argument for the Fundamental Theorem, namely, that the abandonment of competition for wealth and power is a necessary and sufficient condition for sustainable human happiness. This essay might provide enough material for a short course.
I begin by summarizing briefly the basis of my philosophy. In my book [2] this is done more thoroughly and, in addition, most of my philosophical assumptions are listed. The theory of axiomatic morality laid out in the book is introduced next. We then see how a few of our problems can be traced to violations of our moral axioms. This might make more plausible the claim that all, or nearly all, of our problems are due to violations of the moral axioms. This material will be covered in greater depth in the book. In my essay “On the Work Ethic”, available in the companion volume to the book [3], a new theory of classes is introduced. We describe briefly in that essay how the work ethic effects the classes. It might be helpful to read “On the Work Ethic” at this point.
In the book, we find the author’s list of the defects of artificial economic contingency (AEC) or materialism (M). Immediately following, we read the objections of Marx and Engles [4] to Capitalism, as they predicted it would develop. The reader can compare Marx and Engels’ list to the author’s list now or whenever he wishes. (Capitalism embraces materialism. Actually, Soviet-style communism (state capitalism), while avoiding the most egregious excesses, encourages competition for wealth, power, and fame to nearly the same extent as does American capitalism.)
In this essay, we find a very useful short compact list of every social problem the author could think of at the time this was written. New entries are welcome. The plan is to catalog and classify these individual social evils in the book. In the companion volume [3] a number of complete essays on a few of societies greatest problems are presented. Most of these were written long ago. At the end of Part 1, I will argue that AEC (or C) is a good model of society and issue a challenge to competing models.
In Part 2 of this essay we discuss the general plan – to be implemented gradually – to solve society’s problems. A few specific examples are given concerning first steps. We shall have to watch very carefully for the “law of unintended effects”. If we try something on a limited basis, we must be prepared to retreat rapidly if it doesn’t work as intended. Regrettably, this will be a little like playing the futures market! In this essay, I list the problems that will have to be solved. In the book, I indicate how each problem might be solved. (The idea is to solve problems not ignore them!)
Philosophy
We wish to give our thesis a firm philosophical basis. We base our philosophy on our innate sense of aesthetics, our innate sense of reasonableness, and our acquired sense of utility. These are the basis for three moral axioms, one of which is respect for truth. Thus, we must define truth, which we do at length in the book but summarize briefly here as the congruence of (generalized) statements with events (defined relativistically). (In case you have forgotten, the other two moral axioms are respect for freedom and respect for the environment.)
Human rights are based on the three moral axioms and a number of derived morals. Justice is based on rights and morals. If the resulting derived theory satisfies the fundamental principles of aesthetics, reasonableness, and utility, we declare the theory consistent and stop there to avoid endless recursion. Additional philosophical assumptions are listed in the book and these too are tested according to the fundamental principles. It is hoped that the assumptions are acceptable to most people.
We borrow the theory of intrinsic motivation according to Deci and Ryan [5] to define happiness and to suggest that people will continue to do useful things without direct rewards due to the need to be effective. This is essential to prove the Fundamental Theorem. Also, the theory of emergy and transformity due to Howard T. Odum is employed in the proof of the Fundamental Theorem. This theory is discussed in some detail in “Thermodynamics, Emergy, And Economics”.
Since we believe that a component of human happiness is effective interaction with the environment, which might, in part, consist in developing a valid philosophy as determined by the tests of logic, aesthetics, and utility, this essay might be satisfying to read or write even if it has no chance to rescue the world from its slide into the abyss. Some people believe that success in life should be judged by the quality of one’s philosophy. (I believe that success in life should be judged by the quality of one’s philosophy and how little one consumes. That’s why ads that equate success with money and consumption are so infuriating or laughable – depending on my mood.)