>>'cause you should never apply the laws of physics and
>>chemistry to our social constructs, the analogies just won't
>>bend to fit eh.
>
>they do in some instances. check out game theory or just watch
>a beautiful mind. that dude's whole premise was that certain
>socio-economic factors can be quantified and predicted based
>on certain mathematical models. or for that matter, check out
>Aasimov's "Foundation" series...it's fiction but its ideas are
>baseed on sound, if speculative math

Half the world's problems might have been solved if people stopped mixing fiction up with fact (Beautiful Mind was BASED on a true story, but that doesn't make the movie real). You can't possibly try to tell me that sound math can be speculative at the same time can ya?

My objection is simple: the laws of thermodynamics do not inevitably mean that no struggle is worthwhile, that's all. I'll put the challenge this way: Show me a social example that fits the equation G=H-TS (G being Gibb's Free Energy, H being Enthalpy, T being temperature and S being entropy), and I'll take it all back. And I don't mean find substitutes for the variables, I'm talking about a literal interpretation of the laws of thermodynamics at a macro-scale. Too petty? Maybe? But my point is that just because one relationship has the same mathematical description (y=a-b*c in this case), doesn't mean that they're the same (Don't get me started on social darwinism).

Now I'm a free-wheeling cat, horrifically cynical but at heart an optimist, and I refuse to believe the whole "It'll never work, so why bother trying" argument....Imagine if slaves and abolitionists thought like that? Or if Nelson Mandela had gone "Well, it might mean hard work, and I can't guarantee that we'll end apartheid"? Given that you can't guarantee that your children will grow up to become perfect adults, does that mean we should just turf 'em out if the going gets to tough?

If it didn't involve hard-work and a sturggle against a bleack outlook, it'd probably be sorted by now, but that's not to say it's not worthwhile trying to improve the lot of everybody doesn't it?