I’m writing a novel. It’s a project that has taken years because the novel is simply the vehicle I have chosen to explain some ideas that I’ve had for a long time. The ideas are incomplete, and because of this, the novel is also incomplete. Still, explaining the key concepts should be easy enough.
First up is “the Monarch Fallacy”. Here it is in a nutshell:
Assuming we are rational beings interested in our own self-interest above all else, is it better to try to gain power over others by preventing them using the very tools which we ourselves used to gain power (rationality, access to good data and enlightened self interest) or is it better to promote these tools so that others may obtain them and become more powerful themselves?
In short, if we are perfectly selfish, rational humans, should we act like medieval monarchs and try to set up a society where power is concentrated and strive to be at the top of the hierarchy, or should we seek to give as many people the power that monarchs have, even if it means a decrease in the *relative* power we hold over others?
The Monarch Fallacy says that to do the former is irrational. The reason is simply explained by analogy: compare a medieval European monarch to an average European today, the average European is, in almost every way, better off. The monarch has a lower life expectancy, no access to good healthcare, no aircraft, no Internet, no ipads, movies or any of the other goods and services which are commonplace in this era.
Furthermore, the monarch is unable to simply demand that his peons create these things because they are simply unable to do so. The ability to invent truly new things requires a certain amount of freedom and openness of thinking that cannot exist in a world where an absolute monarch obtains and holds on to power. The reason for this is that the very act of holding on to power requires the monarch to act to subjugate the thoughts and actions of his peons lest they rebel.
Replace aircraft, movies and the internet with space elevators, life extension drugs and other technologies that haven’t even been conceived and you’ll see why it’s just as important today to reject the idea of aiming for an increase in relative power for an individual rather than an increase in absolute power for society as a whole.
Indeed, we should strive to help as many people become rational, self-interested, informed individuals as possible since not only will an increase in such people bring a direct gain to us (more interesting people to talk and work with, more new inventions and overall a better life for us) but by promoting the virtues of rationality, self interest and access to good, untainted information to make decisions we can protect ourselves from would-be modern-day monarchists using these people as peons in a bid to gain power over us. Without peons (duped into acting against their own self-interest through bad information or flawed reasoning), these mini-tyrants are powerless.
In short: the optimal thing for a perfectly selfish person to do is to help other people as much as possible and work to create a society that exists for the betterment of all. 🙂