Optimistic Molinism

Some Molinists claim that a perfectly good God would actualize a world that is salvifically optimal, that is, a world in which the balance between the saved and damned is optimal and cannot be improved upon without undesirable consequences. I argue that given some plausible principles of rationality, alongside the assumptions Molinists already accept, God’s perfect rationality necessarily would lead him to actualize a salvifically optimal world; I call this position “Optimistic Molinism.” I then consider objections and offer replies, concluding that Optimistic Molinism is undefeated (for now) and merits further exploration.

An Optimal World Portfolio on the Eve of World War I: Was There a Bias to Investing in the New World Rather Than in Europe?

The geographical distributions of French and British foreign investment portfolios differ markedly before World War I. Did French portfolios favor European investments just as British portfolios favored “New World” assets? Should economic rationality have encouraged investors to invest widely in the “New World” rather than in Europe? Combining Modern Portfolio Theory and a new data set comprising assets listed on the Paris and London Stock Exchanges, we show that investing in the “New World” did not yield higher returns than investing in Europe. The “European preference” of the Paris Bourse and, by extension, of French investors was not inefficient.

The Relationship Between University Rankings And Outcomes Measurement

This paper examines the relationship between university ranks and outcome measurements. Many students select the university that they will attend based on these rankings In this paper the rankings conducted by two studies are examined. U.S. News and World Report rankings are based upon measures of the quality of input, retention while in school and other measures. A new group of rankings are based on the output performance of universities. Jalbert, Rao and Jalbert (2002) rank schools based on the extent to which the school places its graduates in top CEO positions and the salary that they receive when in these positions. In an optimal world, input rankings should correspond with output rankings. This paper examines the extent to which these rankings track each other and the sensitivity of rankings to changes in methodology utilized.