Finalized course selection

Semester I

Games and decisions

The economics of property rights

Microeconomic theory
Macroeconomic theory
Philosophy of the sciences

I must say something about the last course, since I don't expect to enroll in that initially. My choice in the first place was Basic Mathematics III, which is an extension of the I and II courses I took in last year. I dropped that because of the sick of mechanical calculation. Then I turned to the Mathematical Economics, which is taught by Joseph Wu, an old friend of Cheung, always mention Steven's stuff in class. Due to this special attribute, I should have no reason to reject his course. However, a careful revise of the credits requirement force me to do so. There must be at least 24 credits for inter-faculty courses. Which implies, not only economics courses, other finance, acounting, marketing, and business-realted courses, are not counted. After realising this nearly drive me crazy, luckily, I finally found a place worth staying.

"Incompatible" answer

"Last lecture, a student asked an interesting question concerning about the satiation effect of the indifferent curve in the perfect substitute and perfect complement case. Is he here now? Please raise up your hand." He then looked around.

I did so, and everyone stared at me.

He approached me and asked quietly, "have you got the answer now?" Without a second of thought, I replied, "no".

He then drew two diagrams, let me reproduce here,



That is his final answer so far, I don't quite agree with him, what do you think?

Satiation

"What will the Indifference Curve look like if satiation is added into the perfect substitute or perfect complement case?"

During the break of today's Micro theory lecture, I asked.

The lecturer thought for 30 seconds and said,

"Sometimes, in economics, some concepts are incompatible."

I got back to my seat. He was walking slowly around the stage, seemed to be contemplating.

My name

Byron:

Instead of being an obedient technician solely for the sake of power or money, an intellectual should always try to be a "trouble maker". Challenging dogmas, exposing lies and pointing out injustices, under the cloud of the necessary and unpleasant consequence of being "unpopular", and in some circumstances the threat of imprisonment or death.

That's the hidden reason for me to call myself --- outlaw, I seldom tell others except I feel that he shares a similar view. Nearly all people I met asked why I choose such a bad word to be my name, apparently, they are very far away from being an intellectual. Although I am also one of them, at least I have observed the way, and used an implicit method to tell those intellectual around me, my belief --- aware of the suffering before going to challenge the dogmas.

I must thank byron for the lines quoted above. I myself should have no chance to write in such a clear way to explain my thought.