Between instinct and reason, there's tradition. AH, Hayek. I remembered him all throughout this chapter. I'll explain further.

The Social Sciences goes through how complex societies are, and how the researchers in this field haven't acquired a good amount of knowledge, because they separate biology and psychology from human behavior. This is an incredible misunderstanding of human nature. After all, we're part of all this complex system called universe.

But the fact is, that society isn't either a purely deterministic system or a full culture product. It is an interaction of epigenetic rules and an evolving culture. (See Hayek hidden here somewhere?)

And it is amazing, how natural sciences have grown to reach social matters. Biology or psychology for instance, have found characteristics applicable to the society. These are proofs of consilience.

Then, he gets to the prediction topic. For this, he says that math can be made in order to measure certain things in society. Is that something that can be done? I'm of the people that think that society is far too complex... but what if? Would it be helpful?

For this, I'll claim (with help from Wilson) that in order to understand the complexity of society, we have to also understand the environment and our mind. For that, we should claim consilience.

There are some imperatives in our human nature such as categories of choice or rational calculation. Wilson even quoted our friend Daniel Khaneman (Thinking fast and Slow) on how we make irrational choices according to our heuristics and how we tend to make certain decisions according to time and avoiding risk.

This song is wonderful, it is a set of mixes made by different conferences of TED. Definitely, ideas in a song this way made me feel extremely happy. This types of lyrics are amazing! I like them a little more abstract though, but the goal... that is what I really liked.

Besides this video, we took time to watch others that told us a little of economic theory:

And a little of history of Nikolas Tesla and Che Guevara. It is extremely funny that wrong idea we have of certain people, such as Thomas Edison and Guevara. These people just became famous for reasons that aren't really true or legitimate. People using Che Guevara shirts, pretending to be rebels. People crediting Edison in all of the textbooks not considering that he wasn't the actual inventor of so many things.

Diego's morning meeting was great! I had so much fun, we saw so many different things. We had a little bit of everything.
First of all, he gave us some mathematical problems to deal with like doubling numbers or dododoubling them. (Yes, it's 3 times doubling a number). We received a prize if we actually did the problem and it was complex, I have to admit. At least I received one prize. Also, I notice my pupils where dilated. Haha, kidding, but I notice that some people gave up easily.

After this, we watched a little Hayek vs. Keynes. Rap. AMAZING. I love these videos, I would watch them again and again. (Notice the Bible joke)

After this, Dieguito was on fire! He brought us MPC cupcakes :) (but, we had to eat them like educated people)

We went to a conference that treated the topic of Charter Cities overseas. The rhetoric of the speaker was really poor and his presentation was certainly unappealing. I didn't get the excitement out of it and I got kind of frustrated. 

His argument was based in how, technically and politically it was possible to make a floating city. But his presentation wasn't bearable. He made estimates that got up to 200 years from now. (How can you do that!). Also, the legal procedures and other characteristics were weakly exposed.

The Freedom Ship could be a good reference. But I prefer this over a conference which was really boring. 

After reading Leonard E. Read's essay "How to Advance Liberty" I felt dazzled. According to Read, spreading the ideas of liberty is "a learning, not a selling, problem".

Throughout the text Read emphasizes on how masses are the ones who defines the course of society, and how the approach of the libertarian to the masses should be. For the libertarian thinkers tend to be close minded and omnipotent, their ideas can't be shared successfully. Pretending to be "Know it alls" can be a really dangerous weapon when sharing ideas.

Leonard Read mentions it's not a matter of marketing or a matter of getting into people minds like conquering someone's perspective.

That is what we got to discuss today with Alexander Mccobin, founder of Students for Liberty. 

Alexander commented he thinks he disagrees with Read because he believes that marketing is necessary to let the ideas of liberty be known. Alejo disagreed. The dialogue flowed interestingly since that.

Quotes like this went to the table:

"I wish to repeat that the strategy of achieving a free market economy -- or, the same thing, advancing liberty -- does not require "selling the masses," that is, bringing the "hosts of common men," or what Keynes called "practical men," into a state of comprehension. Were that the problem, I would have given up the ghost long ago.

So Read considers that one, by attracting others, can share authentically the ideas of liberty. I wonder if it is possible in a society where most of the people stand willful in nonage and are not willing to get out of that. Is isolation the best option?

Mccobin emphasized on how selling as Amazon.com could be one great example or analogy of how the ideas of liberty should be spread. I agree with that. When talking of the ideas, it would be more kind of a conversation. Out of that, one can invite the other to learn more about the ideas. The thing is, to shine one's own light. That sounds like Emerson.

"The fact that only one in hundreds of individuals encountered shows any interest in or aptitude for the free market or libertarian philosophy should be no cause for discouragement. This is simply a common blindness; there is yet no eye to see the subject; the blindness is the problem! Keep in mind self improvement and the related fact that the art of becoming is composed of acts of overcoming. The blindness, be it recognized, is an obstacle to overcome -- a stimulus to self-improvement. Reflect, for instance, on subterranean animals and those committed to the depths of the ocean -- living in utter darkness. They have no eye to see. What brings forth the eye? Why, light itself brings forth the eye!"

Besides, the dialogue went pretty well. We got to genuinely discuss and people was committed to the rubric. It was a wonderful experience!