Re: Extract from paper: The Paradox of Rationality vs. Integration

From: Chen Yixiong, Eric (
Date: Sat Aug 04 2001 - 05:34:00 MDT

> But doesn't the good ol' Enlightenment liberal framework deal with a lot of
> this stuff about social disagreement?

Do you have a URL showing exactly where they deal with this problem that I pointed out in the paradox? I don't think I had read anything about this yet.

<< Admittedly, there is then a "market" element in the way society develops, which some people don't like but I and most others here think is actually a good thing. >>

Note: When I write good here, I mean higher efficient in the sense of producing items at the lowest cost, and higher effectiveness in actually producing what people really want.

I don't like or dislike the market system per se. I do recognise the advantages and disadvantages of implementing such a system, and I don't think the way our current economical system which labels itself as "capitalist" works today would even approach a truly efficient one. From my vantage point, I would give it Grade 'D-', just short of 'E' and 'F'.

A good economical system would have to take into account the free flow of information in making and coordinating economical decisions. Our current economical system had failed dismally in this task. As a result, it also failed to reward or compensate those who had contributed to the common good (such as open-source contributors), penalise those who had damaged the common good (e.g. pollutors), optimise work based on interests and true ability instead of abstract, general and often inaccurate and misleading "educational qualifications".

We have silly things like "Intellectual Property" in our laws today, and lots of lots of laws of such a large amount that most could not afford the time to read and learn and yet get accused of despite their ignorance.

A good economical system would not need to appeal to emotions and impulse to sell its products, but on logic, reason and actual need. A good economical system would not worry so much about the quantity of spending, but more on the optimum quantity and quality of the goods it provides that people actually use. A good economical system would take into account wastage and disposal costs when producing something, and it will charge these costs to those who want these goods, not to everyone else. A good economical system would not have syndromes such as unemployment, unfulfilled employment and "materialistic" thinking. A good economical system would not need governments to control itself, nor would it have to experience cyclic variations of an extreme intensity.

Read some of the articles at for some concepts I share with the author there.

> You've told us frankly in another post that you're only 18 and at an early
> stage in developing your ideas. But you certainly write well, and you're
> obviously smart enough to have found the smartest list in town <grin>, and
> we have to talk about these things anyway... so welcome to the conversation,
> as far as I'm concerned.

Thanks for your housewarming. I hope I would meet a lot of interesting people with interesting ideas here.

> Your only problem is that a lot of us have been thinking about these things
> for many years. We may not have the answers you want, but we've probably
> assimilated a lot of theory and terminology which you may have to engage
> with quickly. Just ask if that causes a communication difficulty. And we'll
> do likewise if your concepts aren't obvious.

Well, I had read up a lot about transhumanism, though I admit that I had not read all the websites I visited due to the sheer amount of data. I still had not seen anyone address social issues in a coherent manner of setting up an actual pre-transhuman society and also of a transhuman society. Does any of you here want to point me to some nice, great, yummy URLs for my mind to devour? Oh yeah, I had also yet to see to read of anyone suggesting transhumanists should set up their own colony.

Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free address at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:01 MDT