Fault line between abundance and scarcity cuts across many disciplines

One of the most fundamental questions that humans have faced throughout history is whether we live in a world of abundance or scarcity. This question has profound implications for how we organize our societies, economies, and politics. I will explore the philosophical fault line between abundance and scarcity that cuts across many disciplines, like economics (capitalist vs. statist), politics (liberal vs. conservative), and ethics (utilitarian vs. deontological).

Abundance is the belief that there is enough for everyone, that human creativity and innovation can overcome any limitations, and that cooperation and sharing are the best ways to achieve prosperity and happiness. Scarcity is the belief that there is not enough for everyone, that human needs and wants are always greater than the available resources, and that competition and hoarding are the best ways to survive and thrive.

Economics is one of the fields where the abundance vs. scarcity debate is most evident. Capitalist economists argue that free markets, private property, and individual incentives are the best mechanisms to allocate scarce resources efficiently and generate wealth. Statist economists argue that markets are prone to failure, inequality, and exploitation, and that public ownership, planning, and regulation are the best mechanisms to distribute resources fairly and ensure social welfare.

Politics is another field where the abundance vs. scarcity debate is influential. Liberal politicians advocate for individual rights, freedoms, and opportunities, believing that people can achieve their potential in a diverse and tolerant society. Conservative politicians advocate for social order, stability, and security, believing that people need to conform to a common culture and tradition in a hostile and dangerous world.

Ethics is yet another field where the abundance vs. scarcity debate has implications. Utilitarian ethicists propose that the moral action is the one that maximizes the happiness or well-being of the greatest number of people, assuming that there is a common measure of value and a way to aggregate preferences. Deontological ethicists propose that the moral action is the one that follows a universal rule or duty, regardless of the consequences or preferences of individuals.

As you can see, the abundance vs. scarcity debate is not only a factual question, but also a normative one. It reflects not only our understanding of reality, but also our values and goals. It shapes not only our actions, but also our identities and worldviews. Therefore, it is important to be aware of this debate and critically examine our own assumptions and beliefs.