Re: Cheerful libertarianism

From: Steve Davies (Steve365@btinternet.com)
Date: Tue Sep 09 2003 - 08:13:08 MDT

  • Next message: Brent Thomas: "re: Beanstalk"

    > > Anders Sandberg <asa@nada.kth.se> said:
    > > > Apropos some of our earlier discussions, here is a good essay by David
    > > > Brin. Replace "libertarian" with "transhumanist" and you get a
    powerful
    > > > exhortation:
    > > >
    > > > http://www.techcentralstation.com/102802A.html
    > > >
    > > > (long version at http://www.davidbrin.com/libertarianarticle1.html)
    > >
    > > Brin write:
    > >
    > > "The fundamental premise of classical liberalism is an assumption that
    > > people are basically rational and wise.
    > >
    > >
    Samantha's response

    > Actually, original "liberalism" is built on the assumption that you can so
    > limit the legalized power of others over yourself as to not need to worry
    > overly much about how rational or wise others are.
    >

    Well yes but is my response, I'm closer to Anders and Brin on this. The
    above is a true, succinct statement of the political essense of classical
    liberalism but I think that political argument assumes the rationality of
    the majority. If the majority are not rational then the political project of
    limiting the legalised power of others over oneself would not be
    practicable. The sensible strategy would be to pursue power so as to protect
    yourself. I think one of the two fundamental questions that divide people in
    modern times is "Can you trust people to decide things for themselves?"
    Classical liberals would say yes because people are broadly rational, learn
    from mistakes, have access to knowledge that others do not (such as knowing
    what they most value) while others would either say no you can't trust
    people because they are ignorant/emotional/culture bound/gene driven or
    whatever or that there is some revealed good way of living that should trump
    people's subjective choices. The hidden premiss of the latter argument is
    that there is an elite (the expert professionals in Brin's analysis) who
    know better than the rest of us what's good for us. I'm reminded of what
    Gladstone said when asked to define liberalism "Trust the people". (The full
    version was "Liberalism is trust in the people tempered by prudence, Toryism
    is mistrust of the people tempered by fear")

    Steve Davies

    > > But I do not think people in all cultures operate wisely and rationally.
    > > Cultures endorse behavior, and some cultures are not very rational.
    > > Therfore, some cultures do not operate very well at all. For example, I
    do
    > > not think there are any rational cultures in Africa, as far as I can
    tell.
    >
    > Classical liberalism is not concerned with "cultures" or any other
    collective.
    > It is concerned with individuals and keeping them free to follow their own
    > designs.
    >
    > - samantha

    Couldn't agree more. There's a lot of sloppy thinking going on about
    'cultures' these days, often with the unspoken assumption that culture is
    destiny.

    SD



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Sep 09 2003 - 08:25:20 MDT