The invisible hand is a metaphor for how, in a free market economy, self-interested individuals operate through a system of mutual interdependence. This may apply to your Lucio Muñoz query, with respect to a golden Trojan paradigm.

Good day Stephen!

You are close, the traditional market thinking a la Adam Smith is an example of golden trojan paradigm.

But the question is made on purpose in general so you can go beyond traditional paradigm evolution thinking. The question is: What is a golden trojan paradigm?.

If you know why the traditional market thinking a la Adam Smith is a golden trojan paradigm, then you can generalize the definition so you can capture other examples.

So to arrive to the general definition you need to ask yourself, what makes traditional market thinking a la Adam Smith be a golden trojan paradigm? And then you can generalize.

I am introducing the golden trojan paradigm theory in my next paper focusED on WHERE THE OVER POPULATION PROBLEM 1776-1987 CAME FROM from the the structure of market dynamics and population dynamics point of view? to point out an issue those who assume that market dynamics and population dynamics are independent variable affecting system stability do not seem to care about, that independency assumption does not explain in one case or ignored in the other case THE ORIGIN OF THE OVER POPULATION PROBLEM.

What do you think then is a golden trojan paradigm?

Respectfully yours;

It is my guess only Lucio Muñoz that any golden Trojan paradigm in science has to cover the need of theoretical unification for a certain stage of cognitive human development, e.g. relativity in physics, evolution in biology, behaviorism in psychology. In this sense, the traditional market thinking a la Adam Smith did fit very well into the emergence of the industrial age, in terms of ideological unification.

______

Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.

Edward Abbey

Does this question relate to the problem of template thinking?

Nikolay Kryachkov You should ask Lucio Muñoz directly

Stephen, when a flawed paradigm is assumed to be a golden paradigm you have a golden trojan paradigm, which will allow critical issues to develop in plain sight slowly as you do not expect them, a process of ignoring them until you can not hide them takes place.

As you know, the corrective action is to place the flawed paradigm into the Thomas Kuhn's paradigm evolution loop to transform step by step the flawed paradigm into a golden paradigm and break that way the hold on the system the golden trojan paradigm had or has.

In the case of the traditional market, if you assume that a non-optimal market is an optimal market by externality neutrality assumptions you create a golden trojan traditional market paradigm that from 1776 to 1987 led to over population and environmental problems instead of leading to optimal pupulation dynamics and optimal system stability as expected by the traditional market optimality assumption under externality neutrality.

These ideas are within the paper I am about to finish on this issue to explain the origin of the over population problem 1776 to 1987.

I appreciate you took time to comment Stephen!

Good day Nikolay, in a sense yes. The question is made with template thinking in mind/expose it/communicate it as it relateds to development issues, but conjunctural template thinking, with the aim of getting external input or reaction to topics of my interest. With similar understanding of an issue or object and academic integrity it is possible to come out to a consensus on the applicability of a concept/idea and of the need update ideas in support for science-based evolution of ideas.

I usually ask questions about something, ideas or theories or concepts I am about to bring out to see how familiar those who follow my writings are with them to get a sense of what to expect when that something, ideas or theories or concepts come out as I intend those ideas to be shared and repeated in the future. I also used this opportunity to expand my ideas if needed or if possible, with the goal of sharing knowledge through positive academic interactions.

This concept of golden trojan paradigm and how it applies to the coming of the overpopulation problem and of environmental problems will come out in the coming weeks or months, and here I am seeing how readers would react when it is out there. In this case a non-optimal market was given as an optimal one and in the long term since 1776 to 1987 led not to optimal outcomes, but critical problems in the form of over population and environmental problems.

I do appreciate your comment, if you want to add more about template thinking as it relates to the question, please feel free to do it.

Respectfully yours;

Lucio

Thanks Lucio, I should think over that.

Wising you continued success Lucio Muñoz Your last input (1776-1987) has got it all in one; congrats !

Since its birth in XVII century political economy deals with non-equivalent exchange meaning bank interest-based currencies. And no paradigm shift to see. In this sense template thinking goes through all the economic doctrines we know despite the fact that nature doesn't know any analog of bank interest. Thus political economy (economics, etc.) isn't natural science and probably isn't science at all. If so, critical problems remain critical problems with no ways to solve.

Nikolay, to be able to see possible solutions to the traditional template thinking you described there you need to place yourself outside the box and look back at your template, if you can do that you maybe able to see that you have been or you are living in a trojan template, and if you know the structure of the trojan template, you know what you need to do to leave the trojan template behind. Otherwise, from inside the template, especially a trojan template, you can not see what to do to fix it/leave it behind....you only can see ways of managing the consequences of the working of the template,,,while the template continues to produce consequences.

If you ever have time, and read my work on paradigm evolution and sustainability thinking and you think from the point of view of the sustainability template you can find the solutions to the problems of your traditional template, a different solution depending on the priority you place on which consequences of the template you want to fix first...At worse, you may see ways to manage the consequences of that template....Thomas Kuhn said that among the threats to the growth of scientific knowledge he saw was THE DEATH OF IMAGINATION, and imagination outside the box is alive and the template problem has solutions if you dare to bring your imagination outside your template.

I appreciate your comment.

Respectfully yours;

Lucio

Just sharing newest article by me, you may find some interesting food for thoughts in it about clean market transition friendliness

Sustainability thought 178: Environmental pollution management markets versus environmental pollution reduction markets: Which one is environmentally clean economy transition friendly? Why?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381698009_Sustainability_thought_178_Environmental_pollution_management_markets_versus_environmental_pollution_reduction_markets_Which_one_is_environmentally_clean_economy_transition_friendly_Why

Just finished the paper and ideas on the golden trojan paradigm, sharing here title and abstract of draft paper as food for thoughts

Sustainability thoughts 187: If markets were optimal in 1776, then where did the 1987 overpopulation problem come from? Can the dependency theory and the golden trojan paradigm theory explain this?

By

Lucio Muñoz*

* Independent Qualitative Comparative Researcher / Consultant, Vancouver, BC, Canada Email: [email protected]

Abstract

Adam Smith's gave us in 1776 an optimal perfect market paradigm that was supposed to maintain optimal impacts on population dynamics and system stability, but by 1987 the world was facing an over-population problem and a pollution problem. In other words, the traditional market paradigms turned out to be a golden trojan paradigm as it allows for critical problems to develop through time while expecting optimal outcomes, and this distortion get amplified and made extreme by the market dynamics and population dynamics independency assumptions, which hold that they do not affect each other when affecting system stability. We seem to know where the pollution problem came from the point of view of the assumption of market dynamics and population dynamics independence, but not where the population problem came from. And this raises questions such as If markets were optimal in 1776, then where did the 1987 overpopulation problem come from? Can the dependency theory and the golden trojan paradigm theory explain this? Among the goals of this paper is to provide answers to those questions.

Key concepts

Optimal market, optimal traditional market, distorted market, distorted traditional market, optimal system stability, environmental problems, population dynamics, market dynamics, traditional market, dynamics, negative system stability impact, positive system stability impact, overpopulation problem

Dear Lucio, can you add something to the essence of my previous comment about political economy, not to my personality?

Nikolay, my comment was not personal, it was aimed at the template in your mind if that is the political economy, then my comment applies to that template. If you think from inside the political economy template is hard to see solutions, which is consistent with your comment that the template problem has no solutions. But I said that if you were able to think outside that template and look back you may see solutions at a higher-level template.

But keep in mind, sometimes when solutions to template problems are pointed ouf BY OUTSIDERS or those outside the template box, they may not be welcome by the status quo template.

-------------

Nikolay, your original comment technically was not directly related to the question as you did not try to answer the question, but even thought I do not interact when comments made do not relate directly to the question I tried to politely tell you my detailed view.

My apologies if you felt it personal, but it was not my intention to make feel like that.

Let’s leave it here then Nikolay

Respectfully yours;

Lucio

Okay, dear Lucio. Perhaps everybody here knows what "distorted knowledge" is (I'm not sure that my understanding is the same), but as far as I remember debates at Knowledgeboard.com 15-20 years ago the standard definition of "knowledge" wasn't created by insiders/islanders (discussion was open). And then he used my elaboration. It was interesting to watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fRjtAK66as

Good luck!

Nikolay, are you familiar with the scientific paradigm evolution loop of Thomas Kuhn/1965 in the structure of scientific revolutions, where the insider/the one inside the status quo box hangs on as long as he/she can with the ideas of the previous paradigm until there is academic consensus that usually an outsider/ONE THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX pointing out problems and solutions is right and paradigms shifts from the old template/paradigm to the new template/new paradigm takes place. Under paradigm shift the INSIDER KNOWLEDGE becomes old knowledge and it is left behind or it must be adjusted as the new paradigms requires new ideas and/or updated knowledge........When paradigm shift takes place, there are what I called paradigm shift knowledge gaps that needs to be closed so the new template/paradigm works as expected.

If you are not familiar with Kuhn’s thinking, that can be a good reading when you have time.

I will leave it here as this is going outside the scope of this question.

Respectfully yours

Familiar. What is knowledge in this case?

Sorry, Nikolay, I will leave it here. Let's politely move on.

Respectfully yours;

Lucio

My doubts are caused by the unresolved problem of knowledge (in my opinion).

Nikolay, if you read the comments I made to you respectfully in response to your query about template thinking carefully, you will see that what you call “unresolved problem of knowledge “I call paradigm shift knowledge gaps” or you can call then template shift knowledge gaps such as those created when shifting from perfect traditional market thinking to perfect green market thinking as the knowledge base of the traditional market DOES NOT WORK in green markets....

This is my last reply to your comments Nikolay as they are not directly related to the question here: What is a golden trojan paradigm?

I do appreciate the time you took to comment.

Respectfully yours;

Lucio