Summary
This book argues that adult bachelors are detrimental to the Commonwealth because they do not fulfill the natural law's command to "Increase and Multiply." According to this argument, bachelors, like "drones in a hive," benefit from the labor and sacrifices of others without contributing to the nation's strength or support. They are considered minors who should be governed by their parish, as they are not "good Commonwealth's-Men" without families to defend and propagate the kingdom.
The text proposes that laws should prioritize the community's advantage over individual interests, drawing parallels to economic regulations like prohibiting East-India silks to support domestic weavers. It advocates for a "Levelling of Marriages" as a reasonable societal structure, suggesting that individuals with different combinations of wit and money could be matched. The ultimate takeaway is that the state can and should implement measures to encourage marriage and procreation for the collective good, potentially through taxation or other legislative means.
Key concepts
- Increase and Multiply — The natural law's command that humans reproduce, considered essential for the strength of the kingdom.
- Levelling of Marriages — The idea that societal structures should facilitate equitable pairings of individuals with complementary attributes, such as wit and money.
- Commonwealth's-Man — An individual who actively contributes to the well-being and strength of the nation, primarily through procreation and support of the community.
- Magna Charta of Nature — The inherent laws of nature, such as reproduction, to which humans are bound and whose violation has consequences.
From the book
Parson's Toll-book, and there is an End of the Matter. _Politica._ It is even so; but it is a cursed wicked Way of Wedding; it
The Scripture says (I think it is in the Sixth of _Genesis_, and the
Devil's Brother-in-law, and so they are matched into a very fine Family. _Sophia._ Truly, Sister, I am apt to think, God Almighty has nothing to
Popular questions readers ask
- In your own words, explain the concept of "ordered monotonicity" for abstraction hierarchies, and illustrate why this property is crucial for guaranteeing that an abstract solution's structure remains invariant during refinement.
- The algorithm's only inputs are the problem space definition and the specific problem. How does tailoring the abstraction hierarchy to a "particular problem" contribute to the reported reduction in search space and shorter solutions, compared to a generic or manually designed hierarchy?
- Consider the implication of an abstraction level that "ignores all preconditions involving door." What are the potential risks or challenges of solving a problem in such an abstract space, and how does the 'ordered monotonicity' property ensure that the refined solution remains valid and effective despite these initial simplifications?
- The text states the method can reduce search space from "exponential to linear in the solution size." Explain, as if to a novice, how the ability to "hold the solution in an abstract space invariant" directly contributes to such a dramatic efficiency gain.
- If the 'ordered monotonicity' property were *not* satisfied, what specific problems might arise during the refinement of an abstract solution, and how would this undermine the overall benefits of using abstraction in problem solving as described?