How to resolve conflicts between first principles from different disciplines?

Ha, this is actually a very interesting question, showing you've thought deeply. It's not complicated; I'll give you an analogy, and you'll understand.

You can imagine the "first principles" of different disciplines as the "legends" on different maps.

For example, you have a physics "topographic map" in your hand. Its first principles (like universal gravitation, conservation of energy) tell you how high the mountains are, how deep the water is, where there are cliffs, and where there are rivers. This map is extremely precise, describing the most fundamental rules of the world.

At the same time, you also have an economics "commercial map." Its first principles (like supply and demand, marginal utility) tell you where the business districts are, where the residential areas are, which roads have the most foot traffic, and where it's suitable to open a store.

Now, here's the problem: you want to build a house somewhere, and the "advice" from these two maps conflicts.

• The "topographic map" says: This land is a swamp, the foundation is unstable, don't build!
• The "commercial map" says: This land is the future city center, with huge foot traffic, build quickly!

Whose advice should you follow?

You see, that's how conflicts arise. So, what should you do in this situation?

1. First, ask yourself: What exactly is my "problem"?

What are you most concerned about?

• If you just want to build a safe house, then the physics "topographic map" is the absolute authority, and you must first solve the foundation problem.
• If you want to make a profitable business, then the economics "commercial map" points you in the right direction, but you must play within the rules allowed by physics. You might need to spend a lot of money to deal with the swampy land, rather than simply ignoring it.

So, the first step in resolving conflict is to clarify which domain your current core problem belongs to. For a problem in a specific domain, prioritize using that domain's "map."

2. Don't let them fight; let them cooperate.

The first principles of different disciplines are usually not in an adversarial "you're right, I'm wrong" relationship, but rather a hierarchical one, like "who is the foundation, and who is on the upper floor."

• Physics is the base; it dictates the fundamental laws governing everything in the universe, and no one can bypass it.
• Chemistry, built upon physics, studies how molecules and atoms interact.
• Biology, in turn, built upon chemistry, studies what life is all about.
• Psychology, economics, sociology, and so on, built upon biology (humans as carriers), study human behavior and group phenomena.

It's like building a skyscraper: you cannot violate universal gravitation (physics), but how you specifically design the house—whether it's Gothic or Chinese style—that's a matter for architecture and aesthetics (upper-level disciplines).

So, when an economic principle and a physical principle seem to conflict, it's highly probable that the economic phenomenon must occur under the constraints of physical laws. For example, economics might say we can have infinite growth, but the second law of thermodynamics (entropy increase) in physics tells you that in a closed system, this is impossible; resources will eventually deplete. At this point, you realize that the "infinite growth" model in economics has a scope of applicability and preconditions; it cannot violate more fundamental physical laws.

To summarize:

Simply put, resolving this kind of conflict involves two steps:

1. Consider the scenario: Figure out what your current most pressing concern is, and let the corresponding discipline be the "protagonist."
2. Differentiate layers: View these principles as rules at different levels. Lower-level rules (like physics) are the "operating environment" for upper-level rules (like economics, psychology). Upper-level rules can be brilliant, but they cannot "break" the underlying environment.

So, next time you encounter such a situation, don't get tangled up in who's right or wrong. Instead, ask yourself: "What stage am I on right now? Who sets the rules for this stage?" Once you figure that out, it will all become clear.