Pierre Lemieux wrote:
>Yet, there are crazy ideas (defined as ideas that were once thought as
>completely unrealistic) that become accepted -- e.g., the earth is round,
>freedom of religion is not disruptive or, say, "the White Pine Tree Act was
>not strong enough".* Why these and not others? Do we have to resort to
>information-cacade explanations?
>
Unfortunately, I can provide relatively little on why _groups_ accept
certain ideas (e.g., I couldn't tell you why 'American colonists' thought
freedom of religion was important, but I could tell you why 'Thomas
Jefferson' thought it was).
The term 'information cascade' is a new one on me. If by that you mean,
"Intellectuals pick up on an idea, espouse it and clarify it, and the idea
'trickles down' to non-intellectuals," then I see no other alternative to
that explanation.
-JP
"And while all the good little boys and girls slept, the Invisible Hand went
from house to house, distributing the surplus wealth created by voluntary
transactions in a non-hegemonic division-of-labor market ..."
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
