|
|
#31
08-26-2007, 05:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: If you are an evolutionist . . .
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] . . . then you should be an anarchist. Do you see why? If you aren't, I don't think you really understand evolution, or else you have an inconsistent worldview in which you have failed to apply the lessons learned in one field to the other. This works both ways, by the way. You creationists still have my blessing to be statists. gogogogo. [/ QUOTE ] statism evolved from anarchy [/ QUOTE ] i was playing around with a few different responses to the question but i like this one so i'll just /sign. 
|
|
#32
08-26-2007, 05:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If you are an evolutionist . . .
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I believe in evolution because from what I've learned in school (which wasn't a whole lot) the theory seems consistent, can be observed empirically and I have no reason to doubt it. I don't believe in anarchy as a proper political system because I want to protect the stupid and the weak (just because). The resulting economic inefficencies are just the costs for the protection of said less priviledged individuals. Why is this inconsistent? [/ QUOTE ] Whenever you have "just because" as part of your reasoning you're conceding that your ideas aren't consistent. [/ QUOTE ] There is no ultimate goal for humans. Saying that it is our goal to maximize anyone's utility is just as valid as saying that we should help stupid and weak people to reach a certain standard of living at the expense of everbody else's utility. That does not make me inconsistent, just willing to act inefficiently.
|
|
#33
08-26-2007, 06:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If you are an evolutionist . . .
whats a good book about evolution and anarchism in simple terms for leisure reading?
|
|
#34
08-26-2007, 07:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If you are an evolutionist . . .
|
|
#35
08-26-2007, 08:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If you are an evolutionist . . .
[ QUOTE ]
If you are an evolutionist . . . . . . then you should be an anarchist. Do you see why? If you aren't, I don't think you really understand evolution, or else you have an inconsistent worldview in which you have failed to apply the lessons learned in one field to the other. [/ QUOTE ] An embarrassingly idealistic post. I recommend cutting your losses now and stop bumping this thread.
|
|
#36
08-26-2007, 08:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If you are an evolutionist . . .
"statism evolved from anarchy"
Evolution, like the progress of humanity, is not a solid line, but rather a case of two steps forward and one step backwards. Statism is like the child born without a nose; it is a tragedy of "random" mutations.
|
|
#37
08-26-2007, 09:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If you are an evolutionist . . .
I'm an "evolutionist" and an anarchist, and understand your point Borodog. However, I can't quite get on-board here.
Sure, I agree that the mechanisms in evolution which produce complex, seemingly "designed" organisms are similar (or let's even say equivalent) to the action of the free market. Nevertheless, that identification doesn't justify accepting the truth of the latter *because* the former is true (or the converse). Each must be justified independently. It is in general fallacious to make political or economic conclusions based upon scientific theories. (That doesn't imply the former shouldn't be approached rationally via the scientific method, however.) I'm an ACist because (I claim) it follows from man's natural rights, which in turn follows from man's nature. That argument holds regardless of the biological origin of our species. I disagree with the implicit utilitarianism in your argument. Yes, the free market "works," but that is not why I'm in favor of it.
|
|
#38
08-26-2007, 09:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If you are an evolutionist . . .
[ QUOTE ]
"statism evolved from anarchy" Evolution, like the progress of humanity, is not a solid line, but rather a case of two steps forward and one step backwards. Statism is like the child born without a nose; it is a tragedy of "random" mutations. [/ QUOTE ] value judgements on evolution are a mistake. Nor is there any backwards and forwards. chez
|
|
#39
08-26-2007, 11:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If you are an evolutionist . . .
[ QUOTE ]
Then ask how many of them have thought deeply about it. [/ QUOTE ] This is why I wasn't taking part in this thread. I consider myself pretty on the ball wrt evolution and I'm certainly not an anarchist. But then you could just trot that out that little gem "You haven't thought enough about the other part." and where can the discussion go from there? I've said in the past that you can have this kind of condescending color to some of your posts where it comes off like you think that you're the only person that have given these topics any real thought. There are certainly large similarities between evolutionary theory and economics. However, many people that make these analogies use only a few aspects of evolutionary theory. There's a lot going on there that they seem to minimize that does not fit the rigid logic (maybe the realpolitik of evolution?) that they see. I've joked with you before about your damned physicist logic and I think it's your training as a physicist that gives you this view. I think AC works fine theoretically with a constrained set of information - much like certain evolutionary ideas do. However, when you look at the evolution behind our species' behavior, potential constraints, and evolution's "dirtiness" in getting to a solution for a problem (should have that in quotes too) then I see problems occurring. [ QUOTE ] No offense, but I think the subject is just beyond you. [/ QUOTE ] This is unfair. I would say I have had some of the more serious, and occasionally ugly (although I think we've gotten much better) disagreements with Phil153, I think he's very intelligent and educated and I get a lot out of his posts - even when I disagree with them. Even the posts that I think he's most wrongheaded make me re-evaluate and defend my position - which I find very useful. At no point (that I can recall - there may be a heated or drunken post or two out there somewhere) did I just dismiss the debate with something like the above. What are we here for anyways?
|
|
#40
08-26-2007, 12:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If you are an evolutionist . . .
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] . . . then you should be an anarchist. Do you see why? If you aren't, I don't think you really understand evolution, or else you have an inconsistent worldview in which you have failed to apply the lessons learned in one field to the other. This works both ways, by the way. You creationists still have my blessing to be statists. gogogogo. [/ QUOTE ] statism evolved from anarchy [/ QUOTE ] Indeed. So what? This is another comment that clearly misses the point.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
