Comment on Not a good sign

• supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Oh definitely, my issue with the concept of the Tragedy Of The Commons is not that shared wealth is not vulnerable but rather that the idea that humans innately cannot function in an environment while preserving and growing a shared commons without some kind of system of authoritarian control and violence actively preserving that shared commons is a deeply political, problematic and scientifically incorrect way of understanding people.

  source

  • HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    i dunno. the community garden run by the local MS-13 has the weirdest red drip system, but my begonias have never looked better.

    source
  • partial_accumen@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I would imagine a system you’re suggesting would first have to eliminate scarcity of resources. We certainly have the ability to do that with our technology today but choose not to do so. Wouldn’t it require a turn to benevolence by all involved in the society to achieve that? If so, that doesn’t sound like a likely outcome. What, in your opinion, would it take to escape the Tragedy of Commons that is likely to actually occur?

    source

    • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I would imagine a system you’re suggesting would first have to eliminate scarcity of resources.

      Provide evidence for this claim.

      I understand this has been established as our cultural intuition but it is a near axiomatic assumption that upon examination has very little evidence to support it, whether we look to the natural world or to human societies.

      source

      • HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Provide evidence for this claim

        i would imagine

        NO! You must prove the world in your mind to my satisfaction! Everything is an argument!

        Image

        source
      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Provide evidence for this claim.

        I can provide zero evidence. I’m trying to imagine a world where your proposal works. Scarcity elimination the best possible way I could come up with.

        I understand this has been established as our cultural intuition but it is a near axiomatic assumption that upon examination has very little evidence to support it, whether we look to the natural world or to human societies.

        If your proposal doesn’t need to eliminate scarcity, I’m even more interested in how it is done. Whats the secret sauce society-at-large has been missing?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • Live_your_lives@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I think you are overselling it’s incorrectness and so horseshoeing back around to being like the people who oversell it’s truthfulness. Yes, the tragedy of the commons is misleading if taken in isolation, but something being misleading does not automatically make it scientifically incorrect. Do you have direct evidence or an argument for why the tragedy of the commons isn’t the most likely outcome if the circumstances just so happen to match the assumptions Hardin made?

    source

    • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I think you are overselling it’s incorrectness and so horseshoeing back around to being like the people who oversell it’s truthfulness.

      I am not.

      Do you have direct evidence or an argument for why the tragedy of the commons isn’t the most likely outcome if the circumstances just so happen to match the assumptions Hardin made?

      Here you go

      boingboing.net/2019/03/07/scientific-fraud.html

      Even before Hardin’s ‘The Tragedy of the Commons’ was published, however, the young political scientist Elinor Ostrom had proven him wrong. While Hardin speculated that the tragedy of the commons could be avoided only through total privatisation or total government control, Ostrom had witnessed groundwater users near her native Los Angeles hammer out a system for sharing their coveted resource. Over the next several decades, as a professor at Indiana University Bloomington, she studied collaborative management systems developed by cattle herders in Switzerland, forest dwellers in Japan, and irrigators in the Philippines. These communities had found ways of both preserving a shared resource – pasture, trees, water – and providing their members with a living. Some had been deftly avoiding the tragedy of the commons for centuries; Ostrom was simply one of the first scientists to pay close attention to their traditions, and analyse how and why they worked.

      The features of successful systems, Ostrom and her colleagues found, include clear boundaries (the ‘community’ doing the managing must be well-defined); reliable monitoring of the shared resource; a reasonable balance of costs and benefits for participants; a predictable process for the fast and fair resolution of conflicts; an escalating series of punishments for cheaters; and good relationships between the community and other layers of authority, from household heads to international institutions.

      aeon.co/…/the-tragedy-of-the-commons-is-a-false-a…

      news.osu.edu/the-tragedy-of-the-commons--minus-th…

      news.cnrs.fr/…/debunking-the-tragedy-of-the-commo…

      landscapewanderer.link/tragedy/

      discardstudies.com/…/the-tragedy-of-the-tragedy-o…

      jacobin.com/…/tragedy-of-the-commons-garrett-hard…

      source

      • Live_your_lives@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        To be clear, I agree with you like 95% of the way, it’s that last 5% that I still think you are overselling and would like you to be more careful with.

        The problem is that Hardin’s argument simply isn’t much of a scientific one in the first place and is instead much more of a logical one. (I was being sloppy when I asked for direct evidence, so sorry about that.) Hardin made the massive assumption that people are wholly self-interested. If people are only trying to maximize their own share of the resources regardless of what it might cost others, then it is impossible to escape the competition that creates for the limited amount of resources that the commons provides. All of the examples and articles you’ve brought up attack that assumption and/or focus on the conclusions Hardin made based on those assumptions, but do nothing to actually disprove the fundamental argument behind the tragedy of the commons.

        source

        • -> View More Comments