A Tale of Authoritative Undecidability

By Marc Gauvin

Copyright © 6/10/2018
Reproduction expressly granted provided attribution is given and original link is provided.


Once upon a time someone disrupted the social theorists with some facts that they happened to have overlooked but couldn't accept because then they and everyone might realise that they don't have a clue about what they are talking about. So the social theorists agreed to disagree on everything except for the following dictum:

"Truth cannot be known other than for isolated trivia and for that reason it is delegated to simpleton scientists and engineers while the big decisions and complex problems are to be left to us social theorists for which we will avoid decidability at all costs, because that kind of nonsense is just for scientists and engineers and their isolated trivia. Oh and yes, we will invent a pseudo science called economics to put order out of our inherent disorder while keeping everything comfortably undecidable."

Subsequently, the social theorists bamboozled the public, divided it and pitted it against itself over a vast range of theories and proposals eloquently spoken in undecidable logic, about all no one can know about including themselves but that must be decided! Thus,  using hindsight for foresight they dictated the "will of (the) people" to the scientists and engineers as to how they are to implement their simplistic isolated trivia as long as it was in the most economically undecidable fashion possible.

This gave way to fantastic undecidable achievements so unprecedented that they quickly out grew their resource base and unleashed wonders such as atomic energy/bombs, depletion of resources, destruction of the environment, evermore refined tools of killing and torture (doubling as entertainment), destruction of culture and any particular way of life, mass communication/surveillance, compelling, unfulfilling and addictive entertainment, and many more undecidable wonders,  and of course, the systematic suppression of any spontaneous uncomfortable decidability other than that related to engineering and scientific trivia.

The key players in all this marvelous "progress" thought they were making great headway by a phenomenon invented in economics called profit. Profit was the most amazing invention only possible if we maintain undecidability of course, those genius economists got that right! You see the invention was what made  their particular unit of value measure so unique from all other measures in the universe, defined (undecidably) so as to incorporate into all "measures" of value and merit, a component that just happens to be entirely disassociated from any value or merit and not only that,  it had the fantastic capacity to compound as a function of itself.

The engineers and scientists at first were skeptical,  until they remembered the comfort of undecidability so ingenuously built into everything on purpose.  But more important than that, if they ever even implied that economics should be decidable they weren't going to get any of those magic units!

Then suddenly the social theorist realised that without at least the semblance of decidability they could not enforce anything in a way everyone would accept without bludgeoning them,  so they informed the Judiciary that just happened not to study science, engineering or economics, that they should have decidability.

And so here we are, we can continue with this nightmare in comfortable undecidability or we can show the judiciary that economics needs to be decidable or at least its unit of value and merit must be,  because that is the only way their decisions can be judiciously decidable.




Break out of  "The Money PSYOP" and give your kids

a future they can be proud of you for by supporting the MSTA


Additional information