I first heard of the Pareto principle in some Jordan Peterson video that my friends thought explained how nature works applied to humanity.
Turns out it's a self fulfilling prophecy.
But look at how shitty it works!
I used to think that Peterson was an asshole, but now I see that he's the guy that's so dumb that he believes in the pyramid scheme that we all know is total bullshit.
Yeah, it was pretty disorienting to hear friends go off on how deep and smart he was. Meanwhile, I thought it didn't make sense, that it was something artificial.... Hmm intuition of nature?
Anyway, found this from Sasha Latypova ( https://sashalatypova.substack.com/) a while ago and it explains what my friends experienced.. Also what many fell for with the COVID situation.
Intelligence that falls for social "spells".
"The evolutionary psychologist William von Hippel found that humans use large parts of thinking power to navigate social world rather than perform independent analysis and decision making. For most people it is the mechanism that, in case of doubt, will prevent one from thinking what is right if, in return, it endangers one’s social status. This phenomenon occurs more strongly the higher a person’s social status. Another factor is that the more educated and more theoretically intelligent a person is, the more their brain is adept at selling them the biggest nonsense as a reasonable idea, as long as it elevates their social status. The upper educated class tends to be more inclined than ordinary people to chase some intellectual boondoggle. "
Love this breakdown of the Pareto principle. I remember seeing that 80:20 book handed to people being groomed for management and then hearing them describe the theory as mathematical fact. People who consider themselves good Christians that attend church more than once per week have no problem believing that wealth distribution is some kind of natural law so long as a book backs up their notion.
The political associations with Pareto aren't recognized. He was appointed to the Italian Senate by Mussolini, which you would think might merit a mention in textbooks.
When I first started trying to understand the mechanism of how inequality got worse about 20 years ago, I looked up 80/20 to see its origin. The first reference I found was a folksy story about how Pareto had discovered it with beans in his garden, which makes it sound like it's a real law of nature. Then I found the other, more historically accurate references, which were him looking through records of ownership.
The whole problem for him then (as now) is that people blur nature and nurture, and mistake culture, social arrangements or technology for something inherent or essential. Lots of folks who are not wild about Darwin's science are great champions of Darwin as misapplied to society. It lets people ignore historical contingency, luck, accidents, and environment, and pretend that it is vital essence.
His entire framing of "Pareto efficiency" which is also used, is also pernicious nonsense. It has nothing to do with the efficient use of either money or resources. It defines efficiency as a system in which no one can be made worse off by a change. That means a system where the wealthiest owner loses anything at all is by definition efficient, and a system where everyone stagnates except the wealthiest individual is also efficient. That is not a definition of efficiency, it is a set of rules around distribution which defines reducing inequality as inefficient, and increasing it as efficient.
Bloomberg did a very detailed graphic and analysis of mobility up and down. It was based on a huge data set. It was showed that the American Dream was unrealistic. What parents you chose at birth determined your future.
TLDR: the wealthy can use a minuscule fraction of their resources to ensure all their basic needs, leaving the vast majority as disposable income with which they can, and always do, perpetuate their advantage.
Meanwhile the poor can only access the most inefficient means of living, much less progressing, which require the majority of their resources to even enable, not ensure, basic needs
I first heard of the Pareto principle in some Jordan Peterson video that my friends thought explained how nature works applied to humanity.
Turns out it's a self fulfilling prophecy.
But look at how shitty it works!
I used to think that Peterson was an asshole, but now I see that he's the guy that's so dumb that he believes in the pyramid scheme that we all know is total bullshit.
That's exactly the sort of stupidity Peterson would buy into.
Yeah, it was pretty disorienting to hear friends go off on how deep and smart he was. Meanwhile, I thought it didn't make sense, that it was something artificial.... Hmm intuition of nature?
Anyway, found this from Sasha Latypova ( https://sashalatypova.substack.com/) a while ago and it explains what my friends experienced.. Also what many fell for with the COVID situation.
Intelligence that falls for social "spells".
"The evolutionary psychologist William von Hippel found that humans use large parts of thinking power to navigate social world rather than perform independent analysis and decision making. For most people it is the mechanism that, in case of doubt, will prevent one from thinking what is right if, in return, it endangers one’s social status. This phenomenon occurs more strongly the higher a person’s social status. Another factor is that the more educated and more theoretically intelligent a person is, the more their brain is adept at selling them the biggest nonsense as a reasonable idea, as long as it elevates their social status. The upper educated class tends to be more inclined than ordinary people to chase some intellectual boondoggle. "
-Sasha Latypova
Ricky Jay the magician said his ideal audience would be Nobel Prize Winners, because they are so credulous.
Love this breakdown of the Pareto principle. I remember seeing that 80:20 book handed to people being groomed for management and then hearing them describe the theory as mathematical fact. People who consider themselves good Christians that attend church more than once per week have no problem believing that wealth distribution is some kind of natural law so long as a book backs up their notion.
Thank you very much!
The political associations with Pareto aren't recognized. He was appointed to the Italian Senate by Mussolini, which you would think might merit a mention in textbooks.
When I first started trying to understand the mechanism of how inequality got worse about 20 years ago, I looked up 80/20 to see its origin. The first reference I found was a folksy story about how Pareto had discovered it with beans in his garden, which makes it sound like it's a real law of nature. Then I found the other, more historically accurate references, which were him looking through records of ownership.
The whole problem for him then (as now) is that people blur nature and nurture, and mistake culture, social arrangements or technology for something inherent or essential. Lots of folks who are not wild about Darwin's science are great champions of Darwin as misapplied to society. It lets people ignore historical contingency, luck, accidents, and environment, and pretend that it is vital essence.
His entire framing of "Pareto efficiency" which is also used, is also pernicious nonsense. It has nothing to do with the efficient use of either money or resources. It defines efficiency as a system in which no one can be made worse off by a change. That means a system where the wealthiest owner loses anything at all is by definition efficient, and a system where everyone stagnates except the wealthiest individual is also efficient. That is not a definition of efficiency, it is a set of rules around distribution which defines reducing inequality as inefficient, and increasing it as efficient.
Bloomberg did a very detailed graphic and analysis of mobility up and down. It was based on a huge data set. It was showed that the American Dream was unrealistic. What parents you chose at birth determined your future.
TLDR: the wealthy can use a minuscule fraction of their resources to ensure all their basic needs, leaving the vast majority as disposable income with which they can, and always do, perpetuate their advantage.
Meanwhile the poor can only access the most inefficient means of living, much less progressing, which require the majority of their resources to even enable, not ensure, basic needs
If you’re not going to read, don’t comment.