Post by Ifeanyi Uddin (@IfeanyiUddin)

I was listening this morning to a news report on the military implications for Europe of a revanchist Russia with a disproportionately large spend on defence.

The young girl with whom I was listening gasped when an expert was quoted as saying that in order for Europe to dissuade Russia from invading new parts of it, it doesn't have to seek force equivalence with the U.S. It simply had to be better equipped, structured, and organised than Russia.

It was at this point that it struck me that “constraint optimisation” is not an intuitive concept.

You don't just grok it. You have to be trained to think in such terms.
Essentially, the challenge is: “You are trying to achieve the best possible outcome, but you cannot get everything you want because you face constraints (limits)”. The inability to interrogate limits (What prevents me from achieving the perfect outcome?) even after one has set one’s objectives, lies at the heart of poor governance in Nigeria.

A major failing of the left across the world, it presents itself in the belief that the nanny state can do anything it sets its mind to, resource limitations notwithstanding.

This tension between desirable ends, and limited resources sometimes presents itself as an ethical dilemma: A rogue train with 20 elderly people on board threatens to run into a kindergarten playground area; and you can only save one set of possible victims.

In trying to explain this concept to my co-auditor, this morning, I found the fable of the two wildebeests being chased by a lion particularly useful. The first, wildebeest thought the goal was for both of them to outrun the predator. The second one qualified the objective: “No. All I have to do is to outrun you”.

0 likes · 0 comments · 0 shares