|
|
#11
07-11-2007, 01:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Idle musing
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Why is it wrong when one man kills another? It's just one lump of atoms bumping into another one, and atoms don't have morality! There are no true people, just collections of atoms. Ergo, there is no morality. Tell me what's wrong with that argument and I'll tell you what wrong with the AC one. [/ QUOTE ] its wrong because its not what we want, atoms don't care. [/ QUOTE ] This implies that you aren't AC, right? Either way, for the record, are you AC? Do you subscribe to AC doctrines/ideas? Do you think it is good? Can you (& are you willing to) defend it? [/ QUOTE ] It you're correct and [ QUOTE ] its wrong because its not what we want, atoms don't care [/ QUOTE ] implies I'm not AC then I'm not. I think you're wrong about the implication. I have medium strength AC leanings but don't think it's stable. Edit: but if we assume its stable, I'll have a go at defending it. What's the problem? chez 
|
|
#12
07-11-2007, 01:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Idle musing
[ QUOTE ]
- There are true ant colonies - There are no such things as microprocessors, only individual diodes - There is no such thing as the brain, only neurons Collectives do indeed exist because people can interact and form agreements to achieve things that are otherwise impossible. Just like neurons and ants and microprocessors. It's called Emergence [/ QUOTE ] This was dead on to my first thought. Can an AC person respond? Im curious as to whether or not the belief attributed to them in the OP is correct, and, if so, how exactly the argument goes.
|
|
#13
07-11-2007, 03:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Idle musing
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] - There are true ant colonies - There are no such things as microprocessors, only individual diodes - There is no such thing as the brain, only neurons Collectives do indeed exist because people can interact and form agreements to achieve things that are otherwise impossible. Just like neurons and ants and microprocessors. It's called Emergence [/ QUOTE ] This was dead on to my first thought. Can an AC person respond? Im curious as to whether or not the belief attributed to them in the OP is correct, and, if so, how exactly the argument goes. [/ QUOTE ] What is it you think is the case that ACers deny? they are not denying there's any such thing as society. chez
|
|
#14
07-11-2007, 03:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Idle musing
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] - There are true ant colonies - There are no such things as microprocessors, only individual diodes - There is no such thing as the brain, only neurons Collectives do indeed exist because people can interact and form agreements to achieve things that are otherwise impossible. Just like neurons and ants and microprocessors. It's called Emergence [/ QUOTE ] This was dead on to my first thought. Can an AC person respond? Im curious as to whether or not the belief attributed to them in the OP is correct, and, if so, how exactly the argument goes. [/ QUOTE ] What is it you think is the case that ACers deny? they are not denying there's any such thing as society. [/ QUOTE ] Pretty much exactly what was laid out in the OP. Can a collective group of individuals 'act'?
|
|
#15
07-11-2007, 03:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Idle musing
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] its wrong because its not what we want, atoms don't care [/ QUOTE ] implies I'm not AC then I'm not. I think you're wrong about the implication. I have medium strength AC leanings but don't think it's stable. Edit: but if we assume its stable, I'll have a go at defending it. What's the problem? [/ QUOTE ] The point of this thread was that AC claims that groups can't act, only individuals can act. When you say "its not what we want", you are claiming that a collective group can have a certain desire, which would presumably imply that the group could also "act" on that desire. I'm not disagreeing with you, but if the OP's claim is correct (that AC claims a group cannot have a common "act", or presumably a common desire), then your statement implies that you are not AC. My understanding is that AC claims are founded on property rights, not "desires". Again, implying that you are not AC.
|
|
#16
07-11-2007, 03:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Idle musing
[ QUOTE ]
My understanding is that AC claims are founded on property rights, not "desires". Again, implying that you are not AC. [/ QUOTE ] I claim they are the same thing. An AC society is one in which no-one forces you to do stuff with your property that you never agreed to. There's a real theoretical difficulty about what is your property but in practice I doubt its a big problem (apart from stability which we're ignoring). I think the rest is just confusion. If you think society has some value in its own right i.e. it may not matter how bad things are for individuals if the society thrives, then that's incompatible with AC but I don't agree with that idea, does anyone? chez
|
|
#17
07-11-2007, 03:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Idle musing
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] - There are true ant colonies - There are no such things as microprocessors, only individual diodes - There is no such thing as the brain, only neurons Collectives do indeed exist because people can interact and form agreements to achieve things that are otherwise impossible. Just like neurons and ants and microprocessors. It's called Emergence [/ QUOTE ] This was dead on to my first thought. Can an AC person respond? Im curious as to whether or not the belief attributed to them in the OP is correct, and, if so, how exactly the argument goes. [/ QUOTE ] What is it you think is the case that ACers deny? they are not denying there's any such thing as society. [/ QUOTE ] Pretty much exactly what was laid out in the OP. Can a collective group of individuals 'act'? [/ QUOTE ] Its just two ways of describing the same thing. A group of people acting individually in a scenario where their actions interefer can be described as a collective act. chez
|
|
#19
07-11-2007, 04:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Idle musing
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with the statement that individuals can only act as individuals and not as a collective. I also think this is a completely meaningless statement that offers zero backing to any ACist argument. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this. People can act as individuals with a collective goal in mind, but I don't see how people are acting as one. They might agree to make complementary actions, but they are still making individual choices.
|
|
#20
07-11-2007, 04:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Idle musing
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] My understanding is that AC claims are founded on property rights, not "desires". Again, implying that you are not AC. [/ QUOTE ] I claim they are the same thing. An AC society is one in which no-one forces you to do stuff with your property that you never agreed to. There's a real theoretical difficulty about what is your property but in practice I doubt its a big problem (apart from stability which we're ignoring). I think the rest is just confusion. If you think society has some value in its own right i.e. it may not matter how bad things are for individuals if the society thrives, then that's incompatible with AC but I don't agree with that idea, does anyone? [/ QUOTE ] I desire to breathe clean air. Who should I talk to about that (i.e. where is the owner, and who should I pay to make sure it's clean)?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
