Subject:
|
Re: Why the founding fathers limited government scope (was Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 14 May 2001 14:25:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1202 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > If you read around a bit. You'll find that libertarians did try to set up
> > their own nation (in the 70's I think). I think it was called the Minerva
> > Project(?).
>
> Minerva is but one of many failed attempts. They go to prove Larry's claim
> that there is an impermiable barrier to entry. Unfortunate.
I know that this isn't what you or Larry meant, but the statement above is
indicative of another thing many people see as a problematic quirk of
Libertarian philosophy. That is, if a system didn't work, it didn't work:
a) because of an impermiable barrier (ie: "it would have worked, but people
didn't let it work")
b) because of improper implementation (ie: "it would have worked, but it
wasn't executed correctly)
c) because of some flaw in the existing system, but certainly not because of
a flaw in the proposed system (ie: "it would have worked, but something
in the existing system interfered with it")
To claim that the failure of a system is proof that the system works is like
the famous experiments intended to detect psychic phenomena. None were
detected, of course, so the proponents of psychic phenomena declared that
the results were muddied by the presence of "negative psychic energy." That
is, byt failing to prove the existence of psychic phenomena, the experiment
proved the existence of psychic phenomena.
Other claims follow the route that failed attempts at Libertopian
structures failed because they weren't real Libertarian structures. This,
too, is problematic, since it's non-falsifiable, rather like a previous
debate here:
a) "Christians have been responsible for some terrible wrong-doings."
b) "Oh yeah? Name some."
c) "The Inquisition."
d) "Well, they weren't real Christians."
e) "Witch burners."
f) "Well, they weren't real Christians, either."
In other words, if a system fails, it can't be a Libertopian system, because
Libertopia would have worked. Circular and non-falisifiable.
Again, I know that this isn't what you and Larry intend to say, but when
proposing an alternative system, it is imperative that that system be
presented in a way that doesn't conjure images of pseudo-science or
charlatanism.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
246 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
