Definition of Economics

As the year begins I am shortening my definition of economics. The one that has been on the sidebar is fine but there is no point in keeping it if I can say the same thing in fewer words.

Economics is the study of how self interest manifests through the human race. 

To that much can be added, but that is the essence of the discipline because self interest is part of every human interaction. If it wasn’t, our species would have become extinct eons ago. For everyone who loves their mother, you wouldn’t be here to love her if she had not on balance put herself first. She would not have lived long enough to give birth to you.

An economics professor might say it can be described  as limited resources versus unlimited wants. My definition is the correct one. The others leave out non financial transactions such as trading freedom for comfort. In trading freedom for comfort, money does not necessarily change hands and is seldom does. This is actually the most common transaction that is made withing the human race. Economics is concerned first with survival of the species and self interest is the guiding incentive.

The mush is not necessary and I leave it out. There is nothing untrue about official definitions of economics. They are just lacking in scope and thus fail to consider the most basic elements that are the true root of causation.

This entry was posted in Daily Comments and tagged on by .

About Fantasy Free Economics

James Quillian independent scholar,free market economist,and teacher of natural law. Who is James Quillian? Certainly I am nobody special, Just a tireless academic and deep thinker. Besides that, I have broken the code with respect to economics and political science. Credentials? Nothing you would be impressed with. I am not a household name. It is hard to become famous writing that virtually no one in the country is genuinely not in touch with reality. But, if I did not do that, there would be no point in my broking the broken the code. If you read the blog, it is easy to see that there are just a few charts, no math and no quantitative analysis. That is not by accident. Given what I know, those items are completely useless. I do turn out to be highly adept at applying natural law. Natural law has predominance over any principles the social science comes up. By virtue of understanding natural law, I can debunk, in just a few sentences , any theory that calls for intervention by a government. My taking the time to understand the ins and outs of Keynes General Theory is about like expecting a chemistry student to completely grasp all that the alchemists of the middle ages thought they understood in efforts to turn base metals into goal. Keynesian theory clearly calls for complete objectivity. Government can only make political decisions. Keynesian techniques call for economic decisions. So, why go any further with that? Fantasy Free Economics is in a sense a lot like technical analysis. Technical analysis began with the premise that it was impossible to gain enough information studying fundamentals to gain a trading advantage. Study the behavior of investors instead. Unlike technical analysis, I don't use technical charts. What I understand are the incentives of different people and entities active in the economics arena. For example, there is no such thing as an incentive to serve with life in the aggregate. In the aggregate, only self interest applies. It is routinely assumed otherwise. That is highly unappealing. But, I am sorry. That is the way it is. I can accept that because I am genuinely in touch with reality. Step one in using Fantasy Free Economics is for me to understand just how little I really know. A highly credentialed economist may know 100 times what I do based on the standard dogma. Compare the knowledge each of us has compared to all there is to know and we both look like we know nothing at all. There is always more than we don't know than what we do know. I am humble enough to present myself on that basis. Why? That is the way it is. I am not bad at math. I have taught math. What I understand is when to use it and when to rely on something else. Math is useless in natural law so I don't use it. While others look at numbers, I am busy understanding the forces in nature that makes their numbers what they are. That gives me a clear advantage.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.