Me:  Math is fine, thinking/theorizing is fine….especially if they are also accompanied by an awareness of the nature and signatures of paradigms and paradigm changes.

Here are the primary reasons why economists cannot seem to get beyond math and theorizing and do not/cannot see the new paradigm.

Macro-economics is only a recent discipline unconsciously designed to obscure and prevent solutions rather than solve them because:

1) The financialization of capitalism has been continual for its entire history and its coalescence was well under way before macro-economics came into being.

2) Private Banking/Finance enables the virtual monopolization of the means of survival for individuals and enterprise, and also enforces upon them its paradigm of Debt Only for the form and vehicle for the distribution of money.

3) As retail sale is the terminal end of the legitimate economic/actually productive process and Finance/money creation is increasingly post retail sale it is a parasite upon the rest of the legitimate economy.

4) Economists attempting to be dutiful scientists tend to ignore and/or reject concepts that even remotely reflect spirituality even though philosophically such concepts can be stripped of any supernatural or religious bias, and so they lack a clear and relevant philosophical concept of grace as in gifting/the free gift which, being in logical/conceptual opposition to the current paradigm of Debt/Burden Only, tends to obscure the new paradigm of Monetary Gifting.

5) Finally economic thought still adheres to a prejudice for employment even though technology has reduced the need for human effort and AI is more and more intrusively destroying both aggregate demand and the need for the input of human employment. There is nothing inherently wrong with employment as an economic factor of course and it still has a long way to go, though an ever decreasingly operant one, but positively acculturating leisure as in self chosen attentive purposeful activity is the healthy and intelligent route forward for economic systems and for humanity.

Paradigm perception and paradigm changes are deep and transformative events both mentally-conceptually and temporally, and thus require such fundamental openness and deep and incisive examination.

DT:  Good try, Craig, but where you say “unconsciously designed” you look to me like one of the “muddled students”.

Though I don’t agree with Craig’s (5) it is at (3) I seem him going wrong: still stuck in the same emprical paradigm as Frank, stil seeing exchange at moments in time as the be-all and end-all of economics. That surely is ‘micro’ rather than ‘macro’ economics.

Me:  I’m the one advocating the natural philosophical concept of grace….and also stuck in an empirical paradigm? No, I’m for the thorough integration of both empiricism and philosophy…and the thirdness greater oneness that such thorough integration of truths, workbilities, applicabilities and highest ethical considerations would create.

When one refers to the duality of TOTAL costs/prices in ratio to TOTAL actually available individual incomes they are talking about aggregates which is what macro-economics is about.

Economics is stuck in the figure-figure of gathering data and formalizing theory. It isn’t “into” perceiving paradigms old or new and hence by definition is shallow analysis. Even guys like Steve Keen whose brilliant de-bunking of DSGE and unconscious re-affirmation of Douglas’s monetary insight talks about paradigm change….but he doesn’t study historical paradigm changes to derive their signatures so as to recognize what a new one would be characterized by. Let’s talk about and study paradigms and paradigm changes here. It would be extremely enlightening.

A paradigm change is the ultimate radical human change, mentally and temporally. As our mental state and the temporal universe are opposites it is by definition an ultimate integrative event. Such a radical change is by definition temporally deep and mentally extraordinary. How much more radical a monetary change can you get than one from scarcity to abundance and from the monopolistic power of private finance to identification as an illegitimate economic business model?

To think paradigmatic-ally you have to dare to think in terms of opposites and inversions. Otherwise you’re only doing the legitimate but less integrative actions of gathering data or theorizing.

PP:  Any discussion where money is a stock is accounting, not economics. So saying we have or don’t have enough money is household accounting, or it’s business. Economics is about the flow of value and money in society as a whole. So if the flow works right people generate and exchange value, and as if by magic we have money to pay for it. If there’s no money, because it’s tied up or stuck in someone’s pocket, that’s a flow problem not an amount problem.

Me:  “Any discussion where money is a stock is accounting, not economics.”

The ratio of total costs/prices to total individual incomes as a moment to moment flow is a basic and insightful integration of accounting and economics.

“Economics is about the flow of value and money in society as a whole.”

Actually its most basically about the flow of costs/prices and money in society in totality/as a whole.

“If there’s no money, because it’s tied up or stuck in someone’s pocket, that’s a flow problem not an amount problem.”

As the above costs/prices to individual income ratio is true as a continuing and inherent flow enlightened by doing the calculus/mathematics of flow on the cost accounting data the resulting scarcity ratio is both an amount and a flow problem.

When in doubt integrate…and keep on integrating.

…to earn the right to claim the initial greeting/salutation of “You’re welcome”.

Math is fine, thinking/theorizing is fine….especially if they are also accompanied by an awareness of the nature and signatures of paradigms and paradigm changes.

Here are the primary reasons why economists cannot seem to get beyond math and theorizing and do not/cannot see the new paradigm.

Macro-economics is only a recent discipline unconsciously designed to obscure and prevent solutions rather than solve them because:

1) The financialization of capitalism has been continual for its entire history and its coalescence was well under way before macro-economics came into being.

2) Private Banking/Finance enables the virtual monopolization of the means of survival for individuals and enterprise, and also enforces upon them its paradigm of Debt Only for the form and vehicle for the distribution of money.

3) As retail sale is the terminal end of the legitimate economic/actually productive process and Finance/money creation is increasingly post retail sale it is a parasite upon the rest of the legitimate economy.

4) Economists attempting to be dutiful scientists tend to ignore and/or reject concepts that even remotely reflect spirituality even though philosophically such concepts can be stripped of any supernatural or religious bias, and so they lack a clear and relevant philosophical concept of grace as in gifting/the free gift which, being in logical/conceptual opposition to the current paradigm of Debt/Burden Only, tends to obscure the new paradigm of Monetary Gifting.

5) Finally economic thought still adheres to a prejudice for employment even though technology has reduced the need for human effort and AI is more and more intrusively destroying both aggregate demand and the need for the input of human employment. There is nothing inherently wrong with employment as an economic factor of course and it still has a long way to go, though an ever decreasingly operant one, but positively acculturating leisure as in self chosen attentive purposeful activity is the healthy and intelligent route forward for economic systems and for humanity.

Paradigm perception and paradigm changes are deep and transformative events both mentally-conceptually and temporally, and thus require such fundamental openness and deep and incisive examination.

….create individual monetary freedom and systemic free flowingness….amongst many other additional benefits. Until someone can top that list of problem resolving and freeing policy effects….we’re fools not to jump on its bandwagon and get them implemented.

Ten plus years of theorizing needs to come to an end and policy and political action must begin.

Religion is the abstract formalization of spirituality and hence at least once removed from the direct experience of love and grace which are its deepest insights.

Steve Hummel 08/16/2018

…but policy and its effectiveness is where the rubber really hits the road for theory. Further, the depth of effectiveness to resolve problems for both the individual and commercial agents, in the broadest and most beneficial way of policy  is what determines whether a theory is worthy of consideration.

This is why the Theory of Wisdomics-Gracenomics is the best new theory out there and also why the policies of that theory are the new monetary and economic paradigm…..because they not only resolve problems for all agents they transform the entire character of the economy.

Wisdom has been a human study way before economics or even empirical science. It’s about consciousness and how to deepen it. Grace is wisdom’s natural pinnacle philosophical concept and conscious experience. Therefore an economics and science built upon wisdom undercuts and lifts those bodies of knowledge much more than they can do so on their own.

Me:  The answer of course is that we don’t need capitalism. However, if getting rid of it means eliminating the quite natural impulse to profit from one’s actions….we might wait a long time…like forever. That’s why we need the integrative thirdness greater oneness of direct and reciprocal monetary distributism.

KZ:  Craig, what’s makes you assume it’s a “quite natural impulse to profit from one’s actions?” This impulse is a cultural creation of recent origin. It did not exist prior to 3000 BCE. And has had a limited existence in the non-Western world.

Me:  I don’t buy that it (the natural impulse to profit/acquire/accumulate or even to want more) didn’t exist before 3000 BCE. Tribal leaders and even the rest of tribal members undoubtedly had these impulses and desires.

The question is how can we best integrate such into our technologically advanced culture so as to create the maximum freedom for the individual, the maximum social cohesion and the best environment for human self actualization.

KZ: Craig, there is no evidence the kind of individualism you’re describing was a part of human cultures prior to the Western Enlightenment. And it’s still a rare part of non-Western cultures even today. Although here it is becoming more common as Western cultures influence non-Western cultures. And, there’s no evidence tribal leaders or members had these “impulses” prior to the invention of agriculture by humans about 10,000 years ago and with it the invention of cities, economics, and eventually capitalism. Tribal leaders were concerned with preserving the tribe. Tribal members were involved in meeting the needs of the tribe. Humans who failed in this work were generally ostracized or even killed as defective. Monarchs and religious leaders acted the same. The cultural artifact of individualism is quite dangerous for humans since it threatens the cohesion and discipline that preserves and protects human cultures and societies. Witness the disorder that continues to plague the US from the assertion of absolute individualism during the Reagan revolution.

Me: Since we can’t jump into a time machine and observe them it’s not possible to know. I would say that human cultural evolution is the interaction between partially conscious individuals and their environment. As grace is the quintessential natural integrative and highest ethical human concept and experience it is the concept that will both resolve problems (a problem being defined as simply the conflict of postulate-counter postulate) and enable us to attain and maintain better social agreement as well.

KZ:  Craig, it’s a lot more complex. Culture is created in the interactions of humans with everything, including one another. But then the culture thus created is used to evaluate and direct other interactions. Which then does the same, over and over. Grace is an element of western cultures, but generally not others in the world. The same with the notion of ethics. Compare western ethics with Confucius. It’s revealing.

Me:  Grace as I define and understand it isn’t just western. It’s human in its most basic sense, that is to one degree or another conscious, self aware. Grace, the state of grace is flow, free flowingness. Why? Because it’s human consciousness aware of and focusedly at one with the temporal universe which being of time also flows freely. Here’s the formula for the experience of grace as I most basically define it:

[ (present space x present time) <–> self awareness-consciousness itself ]

It’s an integrated duality within an integrative trinity-unity-oneness.

It’s an utterly integral and natural experience and because of its basic-ness and naturalness the conceptual and experiential aspects of it are applicable to any problem personal or systemic. Grace is a gift of the cosmos, an abundant gift. Vis economics and money systems it is an abundant gift of money insightfully and intelligently implemented at strategic places and times that will result in individual monetary freedom, systemic free flowingness and as I have enumerated here many times resolves the two most chronic problems of modern economies monetary scarcity and inflation. And a lot more “knock on” problems as well. It’s that powerful and applicable a concept.

KZ:  Craig, interesting. But can you cite some examples of grace as part of Chinese or Russian culture?

Me:  Generally speaking China and India being influenced by Hindhuism, Buddhism and Taoism tend to stress the passive-internal-love-“standing in the light” aspect of human spirituality. Russia is similar in its serf soul kindness resignation concept. Their processes of consciousness unveiling/self actualization are similar in every culture but again they stress this passive aspect.

Western spirituality arose out of and mixed with this perspective, but with Judaism and then Christianity it tended to express the act/action aspect of love, namely grace. This present time-extroverted perspective is likely why the west picked up science and technology more actively and progressively than the east.

Regardless, human history at its most basic level is an increasing expression of its self awareness-consciousness itself….or in our current wonderfully productive scientific culture its re-discovery.

KZ:  Craig, I recognize that humans created all these spirituality notions. Including Christians. We’re on the same page there. What I’m having trouble with is the notion human history is “an increasing expression of its self awareness-consciousness itself.” Or, per your comment, “re-discovery.” I just don’t see any historical evidence that humankind is moving the direction you describe, except of course for a few unusual (perhaps even dysfunctional) humans.

Me:  “I just don’t see any historical evidence that humankind is moving the direction you describe, except of course for a few unusual (perhaps even dysfunctional) humans.”

Yes, that’s because even though wisdom has always been there for humanity to progress with….for the last 5000 years the paradigm of Debt Only as David Graeber has nascently discovered has never allowed civilizations to do so. And the only way for that to happen is to awaken to the new monetary and economic paradigm of Direct and Reciprocal Monetary Gifting. It’s THAT important that this awakening occurs. A new monetary and economic paradigm will be the biggest progressive event for the species since the change from Hunting and Gathering to Agriculture, and because the coalescence of Finance’s monopolistic paradigm has so stressfully integrated into human life and its systems the end of it with the new paradigm will have many “knock on” effects for humanity’s other systems and culture…exactly as occurred when agriculture changed everything.

Dysfunctional humans?

JB:  Craig, a nice summary. My question, however, is to WHOM these characteristics are projected. Notice the continual violence between Muslims & Hindus in India, or Muslims against one another most anyplace in the world. Throw in some racism & America’s Southern Baptists stand convicted of heinous crimes against their Jesus. Aren’t we a joke as a species, even if we are “nice” to those in our own particular group?

Me:  James,

This is a recent personal quote from my blog:

“Religion is the abstract formalization of spirituality and hence at least once removed from the direct experience of love and grace which are its deepest insights.”

All of these conflicts, violence and religious stupidities are a direct result from this fact combined with obsessively conflicted dualistic thinking and the failure to instead practice wisdom-spirituality whose thirdness greater oneness is the contemplation and self actualization of love in action also known as grace.

Just another reason to accomplish the new paradigm so that we can acculturate leisure which will make creating the first contemplative society much easier and much more likely.

KZ:  Craig, in other words, you can’t identify any historical evidence either. Dysfunctional human = human impaired by lack of clear awareness or delusions.

Me:  Ken,

“Craig, in other words, you can’t identify any historical evidence either.”

I go by the obviousness of a zen saying: “Wherever you go, there YOU ARE. In other words the omnipresence of self awareness-consciousness itself, even if missed, forgotten or invalidated is and always has been there.

The experience of self awareness-consciousness itself is not a delusion.

KZ:  Craig, still no evidence. And as a clinical therapist, I’ve witnessed self-awareness as delusion. It can and does happen.

JB:  Craig, I appreciate our discussion. My take on it in action is between the believers & others. Switzerland has refused citizenship to a Muslim couple who would not shake hands with well- wishers of other genders, nor allowed a Muslim child to continue in school untill he shook his female teacher’s hand. Where does grace enter when one relgion has practices prohibited to it, but demanded by another?

Me:  Ken, The experience of self awareness-consciousness ITSELF is not a delusion. Obsessive-compulsive dramatization of religious dogmatism or some other un-integrated, unhealthy problem is not self awareness-consciousness ITSELF.

James, the answer is grace as in understanding and tolerance….and if aggression or violence attends intolerance it is grace as in morality and the return to rational order. The concept of grace is not just airy-fairy niceness, it also includes the recognition of and optimal handling of outnesses. Being love in action It recognizes all realities accurately, effectively and ethically and deals with them in the same manner.

Cultivating grace/graciousness is not only not an impediment to clear thinking and observing….it’s the very best way to be able to see things honestly….without being negatively effected by them.

Lying is habitual and conscious with the current political crew and that’s why nothing will change economically except to get worse. Habituation is also generally true regarding current economic thinking, and awareness of the current monetary and economic paradigm of Debt Only is nearly entirely UNconscious. That’s why even the heterodox are unable to think truly oppositionally to it and realize the new paradigm.

All we need to enable humanity to better evolve from homo economicus to homo sapiens and self actualize a more balanced viewpoint on money is awaken to the new paradigm of direct and reciprocal monetary gifting. The pinnacle concept of wisdom is grace-graciousness which is the universal personal and temporal solvent, and grace as in gifting/the free gift is its relevant and reflective monetary and economic expression.

Will monetary gifting resolve your problems? In sufficient quantities it’ll certainly resolve your monetary problems and it will also enable everyone to emerge from the quantum foam of stress and distraction that monetary scarcity and economic austerity that the current paradigm and system enforces  on probably 95% of the populace.

Think about it.