Trade-offs

During my first year of university, I learned the term “dismal science” as a nickname for the discipline of economics. This has to do with trade-offs that seem intrinsic to the economic field and lead to zero-sum games with propositions like the Malthus population principle. That discovery didn’t make me too excited about the subject, but when I deepened the meaning of the word “deal,” things evened out.

The occasion came when writing a motivational letter to an internship program describing why I chose to study business and economics. Here I report the start of the letter:

The concept of “deal” has always fascinated me since when I was a little child: in fact, it is amazing seeing that when two parts are making a “deal,” both of them will gain from it.

This simple yet powerful idea is also at the base of the abundance mindset. The assumption is that the whole concept of society can be viewed as one in which the overall output is superior to the sum of the individuals’ one, where value is created.

Life is not a zero-sum game, and the options in front of a situation are always limitless. The actionable conclusion of this post was inspired by the MIT commencement speech by Marc Rober, and it is what he calls “to engage in some playful anarchy.” Often, our choices seem limited to only two opposite outcomes, and we can’t have both. But why not try to create a third one?

Why not?