Why haven't the scientific method been used to arrive at the optimal societal/economic/political structure?

because the truth gets oppressed if the powerful dislike it.

Optimal as in what? Everyone lives in comfort free to pursue whatever ambitions they have? Or killing most of world population and making the survivors eat powdered insects for the sake of resource efficiency? Or computers enslaving humanity and building more advanced machines forever?

>Everyone lives in comfort free to pursue whatever ambitions they have?
Utopia
>killing most of world population and making the survivors eat powdered insects for the sake of resource efficiency?
Pretty close to the Soylent Green plot
>Or computers enslaving humanity and building more advanced machines forever?
The Matrix, this is my stop as long as I can control the simulation

ITT: Y'all motherfuckers need the scientific method.

Science isn't just a motif or a culture of nerds.
It involves the formation of theories starting with observation, then hypotheses, which are tested through rigorous experimentation involving a control group.
We really can't do that with societal/economic/political structures.
We can't make another whole isolated world economy and see what happens when we raise or lower minimum wage, for instance.
And that's why economics will always be politically motivated opinion, and not a science.

>Pretty close to the Soylent Green plot
No, overpopulation was the central plot feature of Soylent Green.

So black people are the truth?

Or the truth is a black neogender trans grill dragonkin.

Read Hume. First part of a Treatise on Human Nature is an explanation as to why the scientifc and empirical methods dont apply to those things.

>few guns
k
>few teeth
lol k
>few slavs
No. there were a shitton of slavs.

That was the idea behind the neo-Kantians and the Marburg School of the early-1900's. They morphed gradually into several groups - the scientific managerialists, the Frankfurt School, and the neoconservatives, while others split off and went with existing ideologies like Marxism.

Only relevant post of the thread.

The Nazis tried but their science was bad. And they got their asses kicked by everyone else. Hopefully we can build an AI that will kill our leaders and optimize humanity.

>And that's why economics will always be politically motivated opinion, and not a science.

Hey you were almost right

>optimal
what is being optimized?

You have to gain people's consent for it to work and most people are not well versed in these matters if they aren't already completely brainwashed by demagogues.

You might as well ask why everyone isn't an accountant or a dentist.

are you powerful?

their science brought us to the moon

Because politics is driven mainly by emotions and deep rooted atavistic desires.

Yes even the ones made by "totally technical dudes" who are just using "objective truth" and are totally "scientific and not emotional".

So basically, when someone says "trust me, my idea is objectively the best for everyone" he's just looking for one more way ot deceive everyone else into the path that favors him and his group.

That's why politics will always be emotional, humans are emotional from the very beggining , politics is like art, were very VERY far from isolating all the factors required to predict it in a deterministic way.

Because different people have different, and sometimes totally opposite, definitions of what the optimal societal/economic/political structures would look like

But what if their definition is objectively wrong and they just don't know it.

Picture this, a civilization in which everyone could be a handsome young person that has lots of sex with handsome people of their prefered gender and lots of meaningful friendships and satysfying hobbies.

That is something that would be objectively enjoyable for 100% of all, just engineer all towards that.

Some people may have distorted world views because they didnt experience that when they were young, and they just adjust their world views to rationalize their loss.

It's just like idiot philosophers arguing that some people don't live to be happy, nevermind them, FORCE the lifestyle that is objectively known to be pleasurable and nice on everyone and soon enought no one will complain.

It's like those retarded sci fi dystopian fantasies in which people being happy by drugs is shown in a negative light.
like today, stupid liberals argue that "ohmygod were a totally consumistic materialistic society ancient greeks with no smartphones must have had a much better time"

LEL, LITERALLY OBJECTIVELY NO, anyone has the mediums to live in a pretechnological society yet no one does it, because some things are just objectively better than others

because unfounded ideologies and more popular

>and
are

How would you use the scientific method to test which government is the best? You'd have to take a homogeneous country, split it in two, and implement two different government systems by force. It would obviously be impossible to get approval for such an experiment, and the few accidental cases (e.g., Germany during the cold war, Korea) are just ignored by communists. I don't think this problem is unique to communists, either. No matter what the results say, the losing side will just get butthurt and nitpick because politics is the new religion.

The perfect idea already exists, we just need proper technology.

Because ethical shit
It's also the reason science isn't allowed to do cool experiments

>just engineer all towards that.
>just wave a wand and make it happen

What if you don't have enough resources to uphold this? What if certain subsections believe they are less attractive than others? You can't control social happiness based on what you like.

You're projecting your optimal society onto what others might like.

One's optimal society might be slave labor to work towards a greater good, and another person's optimal society might be for everyone to relax with no labor and live freely.

The idea here is that there is no way that you can find the system to keep EVERYONE happy.

tl;dr you're retarded and should keep your retardation at /pol/

none of those things are objective

>some things are just objectively better than others
No, go back to /v/ you fucking brainlet

Because we can't.

The optimal style of living for humans are hunter-gatherer tribes. We're too far gone to return to that.

>optimal societal/economic/political structure
optimized for what? crafting shoes? Probably some sort of theocracy centered around an omnipotent shoe deity. Where the economy is based on how many shoes an individual had made and how luxurious the shoes they craft. Once an individual had proven them self to the all knowing shoe. That they had mastered creating a type of shoe, they go through the ceremonial shoe promotion; to craft grander shoes.

>Few teeth
Can confirm. Slave here and I was born without quite a few teeth.

Slav*

>What is dialectical materialism

this.
For anyone interested in this topic, read "Maps of Meaning" by Jordan B Peterson. Very insightful into psychology etc.

Because the meaning and interpretation of an utopia is different for everyone.

I mean we kinda are in a way. The worst systems for governance either collapse or are replaced by better systems. We used to have kings now. We moved past that to democracy. We gave communism a shot and it fails and we arent trying that again. Life gets slowly better over time.

This is why I also prefer to have the earth divided into numerous countries that all try to reach the optimal system their own way. That way we can test a lot faster and it's a lot more difficult to fail in a way that destroys the whole human civilization in progress. Sucks for the ones who aren't lucky enough to be born in a place where the society is at least somewhat functional though.