Michael S. Lorrey wrote:
> > It's interesting to consider that greater knowledge of
> > how societies function, assuming such knowledge is
> > obtainable, implies a higher degree of centralisation.
> > It's also worth noting that greater freedom may well
> > come from government-centred solutions as opposed free
> > market solutions.
>
> Why would either of these assertions have any basis?
A trivial example: Not every possible product is released
into the marketplace to compete; a large number of potential
product designs are dismissed or not even considered. An
increase in the intelligence or knowledge of the product
designer(s) would result in a greater number of designs
being dismissed or not considered before production.
An increase in knowledge about the marketplace results in
the centralisation of decision making in the design process.
Consumers making purchasing decisions cannot necessarily use
the same knowledge to their advantage. The same is true of
knowledge about society, which by necessity must be formed
from a centralised perspective. Purposeful design, if
possible, will always be superior to spontaneous order (if
it isn't designed, it's badly designed).
A society purposefully designed (and therefore "governed")
for freedom will offer greater freedom than an anarchy.
BM
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:32 MDT