The Constitution of Liberty F.A. Hayek http://www.amazon.com/The-Constitution-Liberty-Definitive-ebook/dp/B005G14LSU/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1374118266&sr=1-1&keywords=the+constitution+of+liberty 10 A very comprehensive inquiry into many aspects of liberty, ranging from the definition of "free" to the many problems of welfare states (read, all developed western countries). The density of knowledge and thoughts is very high. I personally found the third part, the part about welfare states, particularly interesting. This part has a closer relation to contemporary economic and political issues, and Hayek has 'unorthodox' positions on almost every such issue, 'unorthodox' in the sense that he on one hand disdains socialist policies, and on the other hand is ready to make concessions from 'fundamentalist' libertarism whenever reasonable, making this book subject to critiques from both socialists and libertarists. Joyfully I found Hayek's positions very unpredictable on contemporary issues. A Free-Market Monetary System and The Pretense of Knowledge F.A. Hayek http://www.amazon.com/Free-Market-Monetary-Pretense-Knowledge-ebook/dp/B005FR7FCO/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1374119439&sr=1-1&keywords=free+monetary+system 10 An article on competing monies plus the author's Nobel Prize speech. The former gave me more inspiration, since it articulated the criterion of a good money: stable in value (note: not in supply). It made me understand why gold, as well as Bitcoin, is not a good money. It also articulated the equivalence of measuring the value of money in gold vs. measuring the value of gold in money; the value of coins (which is determined by its demand/supply, not its metallic content); the idea that "gold standard is just a way to discipline money issuers (and is the only way under government monopoly)". The idea that government monopoly of money issuing is bad and competing monies are a solution are not new to me. The secone article despiced scientism in economics and other social sciences, which is an old topic to me (I hope I have had this article at hand when doing a philosophy of sciences class paper two years ago). Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty Daron Acemoglu, James Robinson http://www.amazon.com/Why-Nations-Fail-Prosperity-ebook/dp/B0058Z4NR8/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1374120333&sr=1-1&keywords=why+nations+fail 9 A fairly simple theory covering many phenomena about prosperity/poverty. The basic idea is that polical institutions determine economic institutions and the two determine economic performance. The theory is simple so much of the book is spent in story-telling. The chapter about China (Chapter 15) shows that the authors have a sober observation of China's "miracle" and a fairly accurate understanding of its essence. For this I give my trust to the authors and their theory. The Selfish Gene Richard Dawkins 10 See 'The Extended Phenotype' item. 8/2013 The Extended Phenotype Richard Dawkins 10 The most mind-blowing book I have read after the same author's 'The Selfish Gene', but the arguments in this book go sharper and deeper. The major ideas are:
(1) Germ-line vs. dead-end replicators.
(2) When we say "selection", we must always mean "selection on difference". when we say "selection of a gene", we must always mean "selection of a gene agains its allele".
(3) Extended phenotype. But "phenotype" is only useful when there could be difference/variance of the phenomenon caused by a gene.
(4) Parasites can be classified in exit/timing/distance dimensions, especially the first.
(5) Epigenetic view of development is better than preformationist view. One can only choose (Epigenetic, Darwinian) or (Preformationist, Lamarckian).
(6) The difference of "reproduction" and "growth" is the existence of a single-cell "bottleneck" between life cycles, which enables selection of development process and complex organs and organisms ("frequent returning to the drawing board").
(7) The constraints on adaptation perfection.
(8) Frequency-dependent selection.
(9) The length in the definitin of a gene can be arbitrary. Practically it's usually inverse proportional to the selection pressure.
Some minor ideas or curiosities:
(1) Out-laws and modifiers.
(2) "Extended germ-line".
(3) The importance of "cumulativity" of mutations.
(4) Five meanings of "fitness".
(5) Historically our intra-cell objects and much of our genome may be parasites. But that's not important. Ideas that I'm already familiar because of 'The Selfish Gene':
(1) Replicator vs. vehicle.
(2) ESS.
(3) Gene-centric view of selection.
(4) Extended phenotype.
(5) Single-cell generation "bottleneck".
(6) Meme.
(7) Selection of strategies.
(8) Manipulation and arms races.
I summarized several guidelines to think Darwinianly:
(1) When seeking explanation of an adaptation, always look for the "immediate" benefit of a gene. A "long-term" or "global" or "greater" good is no use.
(2) Alway look for "deferential" benefits and survival. There is no "absolute" good.
(3) Never draw any moral implication from Darwinian argument (or very cautiously do). There is still a big gap between Darwinian adaptation and human behavior.
8/20/2014