Firstly, we must convincingly demonstrate that only the Buddhist diagnosis of the human condition can give a sufficiently profound explanation of our ecological and social ills: Why, for example, is human kind turning out to be so suicidally destructive? This means that we must expose the inadequacy of the prevailing Social fallacy. This assumes that global problems are exclusively economic and political in origin and likewise that their remedy lies in the adoption and improvement of specific social systems. So-called underdeveloped countries, for example, can eventually overcome their problems by industrializing themselves into free market consumer societies.
Buddhism, however, maintains that although there are positive and radical social developments which 'can relieve much suffering, by themselves these will always ultimately disappoint us. This is because they will be distorted and shaped by the aggressive and acquisitive character of our deluded root human condition - Buddha's `Three Fires'. (This is the most striking lesson of the failure of the Communist dream of human liberation). Consequently, our analysis (or rather, our understanding) must begin with the nature of human beings themselves. Social structures and processes are indeed hugely important, but still nevertheless only secondary.
Buddhist Social thus returns social science to its existential roots. For example, it invites economists to consider its claim that acquisitiveness originates as much in the root insecurity and angst of the human animal as in its physical needs. This is illustrated alike by the flaunting conspicuous consumption of the wealthy ruling minority throughout history and by characteristic behavior in the affluent societies of the world.