There have been 2 contemporary theories about love and friendship which has dominated not just the BOLLYWOOD but also the life of common man like you and me.
While one states that “ek ladka aur ladki kabhi ache dost nahi ho sakte; aur agar hain to jald hi unko pyar ho jayega” Theres another school of thought which states “sabse achi dosti sirf ek ladke aur ladki ke beech ho sakti hai naa ki 2 ladko ya 2 ladkio me” and before I can actually support a view I get bombarded with a ton of empirical evidences, supporting both the schools of thought. The source of empirical result is both the reel and real life. I mention reel life because of the very fact that they play a pivotal role in propagating the 2 thoughts in the society around us.
Theses 2 theories are just like any other economic theory. Both have a strong empirical backing and there exists a huge population to believe in both the views. It is also more of a forecasting based on past experiences and a mathematical model of theory of probability and element of risk and return. Just like the economics theories have their own geographical spread and separate spheres of influence the 2 theories I am talking about have their own electorates. While the first one is more concentrated in small towns and cities, the latter is more acceptable in metros. Just like we have a traditional theory of economics and also a modern view; the 2 theories also can be segregated into traditional and modern views. Being a student of economics I very well understand that there’s something very unique about each and law of economics. “The above law holds well only by keeping other things constant. There’s a very special word for the same “ceteris paribus”. Well our contemporary law is also applicable when we study it with a given parameter and keep all other factors constant i.e. Ceteris Paribus. And not to forget the laws are applicable with 100% efficiency only in ideal conditions. For non economists let me clarify IDEAL CONDITION is the one which is most desirable and but more importantly, which never exists.
Every day when we read the newspaper, we find a post event analysis of economists who very wisely comment on and explain the reasons of the failure of the market or non applicability of the theories and forecasts they made some time back. And this exactly the way one can safely comment and explain reasons of failure of the 2 theories of love and friendship which I am talking about. You see in real word the market (social) mechanisms are very dynamic and volatile and it depends on various other factors. So it’s actually difficult to say what kind of relationship a boy and girl will share in days to come.
This is all what is taught in economic laws when you are in an undergraduate degree. Lets move a little high and talk of advanced theories and tools to define and comprehend them. We talk of (multiple) regression analysis and degree of correlation (r2). Discussing the various parameters
Involved in the regression analysis of the law is beyond the scope this text, rather and human being alive. I have been taught to regress only to some 4 or 5 variables in economics. However this theory would require a multiple set of parameters to be regressed. Also the degree of correlation among the variables is also dynamic and not static and it varies with change in time and other internal and external agencies. So I won’t get into the minute details of the multiple simultaneous equations which could be possibly formed in this regard.
Restricting my pseudo analysis of the 2 laws, rather theories, I would give a swift end to the same. To me it varies with every person, every society, and time horizon along with a list of other internal and external metabolism. In my case I sincerely advocate the second theory as my best friend happens to be a lady and I am not in love with the same lady. However I would also state that this may not hold true for me, the next time or for any of the readers. As always is written below every economics article, I too would prefer to mention, “The write is a student of management and view expressed are personal”
(And more importantly it wasn’t meant to hurt sentiments of the people of any fraternity.
Was only trying to learn the art of establishing analogy and through light on the pervasiveness of economics)