The ultimate objective of economic development within the Cartesian Newtonian conceptual framework, is saturation of human wants. Even though capitalism, socialism and mixed economy, propound different methods and the resultant different socioeconomic models, their ultimate objective is the same. Raw materials and energy resources, obtained from nature, have to be used in technologically feasible and economically optimal ways, to generate goods and services, in ever increasing quantities, for ultimately saturating human wants. The three economic systems differ only in the mode of distribution of these goods and services. Whereas a capitalist economy depends on a free market mechanism, a socialist economy gets this job done through a public distribution system and the mixed economy uses a judicious mixture of these two modes. The activities required for this objective consist in searching for newer and newer sources of a variety of natural resources, developing newer and ever more efficient technologies, supported by the basic sciences and through them, improving the efficiency levels continuously and obtaining the suitable distribution systems for reaching the ever increasing flow of goods and services to the end consumers. This is what the present economics is all about.

Human wants are unlimited, they recur and also increase with an increased availability of expendable resources. Compared to the wants, the expendable resources available to the consumers are scarce. Hence, we have to scale our wants and grade them according to their relative urgency and intensity and choose among the alternative uses of the scarce economic resources, so that the maximum possible wants are satisfied within the limited budget. This, in short, is the statement and the solution of the so called economic problem, generally accepted all over the world today.

A basic question, which has to be asked here is “Is the conceptual framework, wherefrom this interpretation of economic rationality has emerged, universally and eternally true?” Even the conceptual framework of the physical and natural sciences (the so called ‘hard sciences’), developed by René Descartes and Sir Isaac Newton, has undergone a near total transformation with the Einsteinian revolution, around 1920. How can the so called soft sciences, like Economics, claim their Cartesian Newtonian conceptual framework to be both universal and eternal, when the technoeconomic and psychocultural environment in the world has undergone a total metamorphosis? Prima facie reasons seem to be,

1. the global forces whose vested interests are hinged on this conceptual framework, are economically and militarily invincible in the today’s unipolar world and

2. the proponents of this framework for the social sciences today are either ignorant of the ghastly consequences of this framework on their own children or they do not care about it.

The disastrous consequences of the Homo economicus syndrome and the consumerism, unleashed by it, are bound to destroy the life on this planet very soon and any corrective measures to be taken cannot be postponed even by a smallest measure of time. We have to realise that it is literally a now or never situation that we are facing.

The only workable solution of this problem is the change in our outlook towards nature and the society. Today, under the influence of the economicism, that we learnt with modern economics from the West, we have forgotten our traditional attitude of reverence for nature and society, as the manifest forms of the Ultimate Reality. It is time we have regenerated this attitude, for ours as well as our children’s survival and wellbeing.

Society is not only a social mechanism created for performing some collective activities. It is a complex organisation, consisting of many component organisations (like family, community and nation), which together have saved our species from the cruel principle of natural selection, encouraged division of labour and specialisation, which continuously increased productivity and also permitted even the handicapped people to lead an honourable life. It is because of the society that we prevail over the other animal and plant species, in spite of such a fragile physique and a total absence of any natural gift, like strong claws and sharp fangs. Specialisation led to the explosion of knowledge and the availability of all the comforts that we enjoy today. If the society were not to be formed, human species would still have been scavenger animals, living purely by escaping (not fighting) the predator animals. A well-functioning society is an essential prerequisite of civilization.

Similarly, the human society draws from nature food, fodder, firewood, fertilisers, minerals, many industrial raw materials and medicines for its use. The only mechanism which possesses the exclusive capacity to convert solar energy into matter is plants. Plants hold the groundwater and make it available during the non-rainy seasons. Plants absorb the CO2 and provide Oxygen required for sustenance of life. It is high time, we have realised that nature existed for millennia before human beings appeared on the earth and will exist (probably more happily) even when we kill ourselves through destroying the life supporting cycles, through our irrational objective of economicism, aiming at saturating our wants through consumerism. Second, want saturation is a self defeating process because, wants multiply with an increased availability of resources.

Hence, our traditional wisdom repeatedly exhorts people not to be driven by economicism, consumerism and want saturation. A verse from Brahmapurana (XII 41) articulates this in a very effective way.

The entire available stock of rice, barley, gold, animals and women in the world will not be sufficient for satisfying the desires of even one man (let alone saturating them). Knowing this for sure, a wise person is not enamoured into chasing want gratification.

Do we need to comment on these words of wisdom, particularly relevant for today’s homo sapiens sapiens?