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

Reply via email to