Mismatch between theory and practical reality
Name(s):
Over-commitment to theoretical propositions
Logical delirium
Ivory-tower theorists
Misguided advocacy of fashionable theories
Negative impacts of plausible hypotheses
Nature
Social initiatives may be undertaken, based on apparently coherent theoretical propositions, that in practice have significant negative consequences in society. Those committed to such propositions then argue that such consequences will diminish over time. The merit of such arguments may be unclear when the time scales are such as to be a significant proportion of the life times of those disadvantaged by the initiatives.
Claim
1. Governments arrogantly assume that they can control their economies and that they can dictate the value of their currencies. Speculators correctly assume that this is not a sustainable policy. As with the controversy over protectionism, a commitment is made to a plausible theoretical proposition which in practice is shown to penalize employment, working standards and the obvious well-being of the public. Although theory suggests that these difficulties are temporary and that eventually all will benefit to a greater degree than before, it is unclear exactly when such benefits will manifest.
2. Logical delirium, a speciality of the second-rate mind, is the humourless application of irrelevant theory to uncomprehended reality.
3. Progress does not consist in replacing a theory that is wrong with one that is right. It consists in replacing a theory than is wrong with one that is more subtly wrong.
4. The number of different hypotheses erected to explain a given phenomenon is inversely proportional to the available knowledge.
5. A mind all logic is like a knife all blade. It makes the hand bleed that uses it. (Rabindranath Tagore).
Counter-claim
The bigger the theory, the better.
Broader
Aggravates
Policy shock [in 3 loops]
Unrealistic policies [in 5 loops]
Aggravated by
Strategy(ies)
Type
(F) Fuzzy exceptional problems